Orly Taitz: Dismissal of Other Birther Suits Helps Me

[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by George Larson II and WashIndependent, TMC Member Feed. TMC Member Feed said: Wash. Independent: Orly Taitz: Dismissal of Other Birther Suits Helps Me: Orly Taitz, who rea.. http://bit.ly/2fGYt4 [...]

Hey David, Check your links.

Where did you get that quote from?

This came directly from Orly's website and she actually filed it in Judge Carter's court this morning according to her. It's extremely difficult to read on her website since the items she copies and pastes into her blog entries won't format properly once posted.

Probably here. It's on page 2 of Barnett, et al. v. Obama, et al.

Orly’s argument:

The plaintiff in Berg was seeking Declaratory and Injunctive Relief under Article 2 Section 1 Natural Born Citizen and under 42 USC §1983, seeking determination of eligibility for presidency of Barack Husein Obama. In his opinion judge Sloviter finds that though the election is over, the court has jurisdiction to hear it as it “fits squarely” as an issue “capable of repetition yet evading review”.Merle v US, 351, 3d 92,94 (3d Cir 2003) Based on this argument there is Article 3 jurisdiction to hear the case as long as the plaintiff can show standing with specialized injury.

—– — — – - –

The footnote from the Berg decision referenced above:

Although the defendants argue that this point is moot because the election is over, we consider the issue because “[t]his controversy, like most election cases, fits squarely within the ‘capable of repetition yet evading review’ exception to the mootness doctrine.” Merle v. United States, 351 F.3d 92, 94 (3d Cir. 2003).

— — —

The problem is, Carter never ruled that any of the claims were moot. He dismissed them based on other considerations.

Social comments and analytics for this post…

This post was mentioned on Twitter by TWI_news: Orly Taitz: Dismissal of Other Birther Suits Helps Me http://bit.ly/3Qko5P...

I wonder if she learned to set up and run a web site from the William Howard Taft School of Used Dreamweaver Knock-offs.

Ummm, they haven't been LAUGHED out of courtrooms. Bergs was dropped for lack of standing, as it STATES in the ACTUAL article you posted. DUHHH

HULLOOOO…Orly was told she had standing, but not jurisdiction. So, put the two together, or in others words saying that if Berg were representing Orly's client, where HE WAS…he WOULD HAVE had standing!

We will get your man, eventually!

a reason for you to get out of bed, Liar—good for you!
It'll never happen though.

Put the two together and you get an invalid argument that's been slapped down by judges in multiple states. FAIL.

If you mean my ex-husband, you're welcome to him.

Orly was told she had standing

Where? By whom?

Orly misspelled the President's middle name!

“In his opinion judge Sloviter finds . . .”

That's not all. Judge Dolores Sloviter is, last I checked, a woman.

Uh oh. Orly's $20,000 in sanctions hasn't been paid. I thought you hatched a grand plan for birfers to send money directly to Judge Land.

Another birfer fail!

I've lost count. 57 cases lost?

Birfoons = EPIC FAIL ! ! !

FrontPage 98.
The era of dancing hamsters, putrid color schemes and website font vomit.

Maybe you could get the US Marshals to swing by your ex's for you after their done with Orly, ellid.

Even better, lock your ex and cornylies into her basement till the next election…kill all the power and let them hide. You know, that old 2 nuts with one stone…let them drive each other battier!

Has a case been dismissed on merits? No. Cases have been dismissed on issues of jurisdiction and standing. I think Orly Taitz, erred in her wide range of targets. Had she focused on Obama, alone then DOJ might not be in play, and other branches and agencies might have been more able to cooperate. A writ of quo warranto, filed in the DC District Court DCDC, is needed, and may be in the mill, by Strunk. Maybe a 3-judge panel and a special prosecutor, is needed. Look for the case USA v. OBAMA on the calendar at DCDC.

Please see http://www.theobamafile.com.

Nope, after the Indiana ruling you folks are just shooting more blanks. Your only avenue is now Congress. I encourage you to call and write all the republican congressmen…they're your only hope now. I also hear they are having secret town hall meetings this month, so you should try to get into them and hold those pubs to the fire. They really need your votes, since they're no longer interested in any other opinion on anything, so you can use that to get your way. Good Luck!

That's okay the Obama has used other spellings himself & other Social Security Numbers and even other citizenships.

Why should we look at more forgeries and wild unprovable accusations? What good is that going to do? Maybe you should start giving all this information to the republican congressmen…they're your only hope now.

I'm selling Tea bags. :)

Everything there has already been debunked. FAIL.

Wrong. Orly Taitz, OTOH, has been spamming this and other boards under at least three handles. I wonder why she's so afraid?

Great idea! Thanks!

The cry goes out from Princess Orly: “Help me, Obi-Wan Bachmann. You are our only hope.”

But the comic value is priceless.

I heard your tea bags are so small that no one can find them, let alone pay good money for them.

Into the mind of Gerry Nance.

http://www.facebook.com/people/Gerry-Nance/1570…

Yes. You need to call them immediately. And call them every hour until they speak with you. If you indeed care about this issue so passionately, as you claim, get on the ball because at this point you have dropped the ball.

Have a Joy Joy Day, Gerry.

Orly Taitz is also using the name “Obly Taitz” as authoritatively proven by court records:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/22373193/Mustang-Orly

Orly's case has no merits. Judge Carter could tell that once he actually had a chance to listen to Orly's rhetoric. And with her additional filings, I wouldn't be surprised if he also thinks that she borders on delusional as Land did.

STEVE ANKENY AND BILL KRUSE, Appellants-Plaintiffs,

vs. ) No. 49A02-0904-CV-353

GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF INDIANA,
Appellee-Respondent.

APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT
The Honorable David J. Dreyer, Judge
Cause No. 49D10-0812-PL-55511
November 12, 2009

OPINION – FOR PUBLICATION

Read:
http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/111209…

Note: Failed to state a claim. See Footnote 14-15
———
This is good since it means the SCOTUS will need to redefine in the USA what is a native, citizen, or NBC, and those eligible to be POTUS.

The Indiana ruling is great news for those who advocate illegal immigration, and the dismantling of the US borders, so all of the World's poor and illiterate, can come and live in the USA, drink the water, suckle tax teat, and get a free education and lighting in their airconditioned homes.

Thank you USA tax payers, now work hard, and pay more taxes, until the Middle-Class disappears. Turn the USA into a wealthy upper-class and a poverty lower caste, then watch how the wealthy fly away to run their corporations offshore, tax free.

The Declaration of Independence from the British, was canceled on January 20, 2009, — 232 years, 6 months, 17 days after it's birth. Ironically, it was surrendered to the British, to a person named Barack Hussein Obama II.

I know you afterbirthers don't realize that you lost as much as the birthers. You may be in denial, but when it sinks in, I hope you enjoy a beer or two. We are all “We the People”, no longer in power over our government.

No, we are actually looking forward to a more responsible government after the 8 wasted years of the Bush administration. Or, did you forget how badly he and the pubs ran our country into the ground?

Do you think that SCOTUS will ever hear that case? Not a chance.

Dream on, big boy.

My bad. Congress will have to define citizenship.

At least Bush did not grant amnesty to the 30 million illegal aliens in the USA.

Just wait for it. Bend over, apply generous lubrication, and wait.

It may hurt a little at first, but you'll have to get used to it.

LOL :)

How many did Reagan grant? AFAIK Obama hasn't granted any amnest either.

NOT_AXJ,

Have we been introduced?

I find your behavior immature and disrespectful.

Well, what do you know, they've already done that! Or, did you think we'd gone over 200 years without defining it?

1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1401.html

Another obvious fact that borderraven knows nothing about. How do you people expect to remove a sitting president if you won't even take the time to learn our laws and constitution? LOL

No, we haven't been introduced, but I know who you are. As far as you finding my behavior immature and disrespectful, who cares?

Orly told herself that she had standing.

Have we seen each other across the street?

Would you care to meet?

Realistically, we haven't been in power of our country for quite some time.

If things don't get better by 2012, then Obama will lose any bid to win another term and we'll have another president that a certain section of citizens won't like. And the wheel will go round and round. Things change. You had better get used to it. Those that live in the past never gain.

Wow, NOT_AXJ, how many offers for dates do you get from the blowers? They must really like your company. Remember to protect your privates, they are quite enamored with them.

You are the sort of American who gives the rest of us a bad name.

Obama hasn't granted any amnesty to anyone. You have also nearly doubled the estimated number of undocumented aliens.

Disgusting.

And I find your racism and lies disgusting.

Jim,

I think borderraver was responding to you when he wrote:

“Just wait for it. Bend over, apply generous lubrication, and wait. It may hurt a little at first, but you'll have to get used to it.”

And borderraver told me he is selling tea bags.

borderraver = male prostitute?

He's using TWI's blog to arrange hook-ups?

Yep. Gerry has been sleeping on the job. Bush and the Republicans were more concerned with eroding our rights and fighting wars than they were about protecting the borders.

Yeah, and he's trying to make a date with NOT_AXJ, makes you wonder doesn't it. Strange place to look for a date.

Apparently, with the statement of:

“Just wait for it. Bend over, apply generous lubrication, and wait. It may hurt a little at first, but you'll have to get used to it.”

Gerry has had some experience. I wonder if he uses Vasoline or KY? Maybe he hasn't been using the right lube?

Sorry. I'm one of the agents assigned to monitor your activities. I don't think my superiors would approve.

AAAAAAAAAHHH!!! My EYES!!!!!!!

I've probably seen you at science fiction conventions, staring fixedly at the grainy vampire movies while dribbling Doritos down your FIAWOL-festooned shirt and muttering vaguely about Heinleinian politics.

What, not your Star Wars action figure collection?

I wonder if she’s been submitted to portalofevil.com yet?

Keep your perverted, closet fantasies to yourself, Nancee boy.

You're a disgrace.

Been there. It's full of the typical lies and delusions of traitorous birfers.

Try obamaconspiracy.org instead, Commie Red.

Or ethics considering the accusations of adultery, suborning perjury and extortion. It also looks like her delusional followers are supporting her lavish lifestyle which would probably be of great interest to the Internal Revenue Service.

The Queen of Birferstan is unraveling.

Arrogant, little pissant.

LMFAO ! !

Classic.

Classic.

You should demand that everyone is kicked out of the U.S. who is not exactly like you. Then, you can't be accused of being a flaming bigot.

And after all, it's not like this country is a melting pot founded by people escaping religious and political persecution.

Are you going to set fire to Ellis Island as a symbolic act of your proud jingoism?

At least one Orly follower is disillusioned about Orly not paying her sanction. From Orly's Facebook wall.

Donna MorgantiI – thought this was paid through/by Orly's supporters. I, personally sent her money to help with this.

Can you imagine? It starts as one and they tell another and each tells another and another and another. It's called the snowball effect.

Yes, this is the guy that calls himself borderraven. Nice to have a face to go along with the moniker.

yeah, when they find out what their money REALLY went to, the choir could turn on Orly. Why hasn't she been using that money for getting more data from Hawaii? Why hasn't she used that money to get records from Indonesia, Kenya, Mars (as someone wrote Judge Land)? No, more important to make sure her gigolos and boy toys are taken care of…no biting though! Wonder if an IRS audit is in her near future?

From a friend, “I just finished reading the decision–

Vattel favored the argument that Natural Born Citizens shared both the
requirements of parentage and geography.

The court put no weight on the Vattel two-parents-as-US-Citizen requirement
for Natural Born status– but only on the geographical location [thus
jurisdiction] of the parents at the time of birth, even for illegal
aliens—

[By this court's interpretation, two illegal-alien parents, or one
illegal-alien parent, can give birth on US soil and the child is a
"natural born" citizen. Dual citizenship ro foreign incumberances mean
nothing.]

Based on this decision it is even more crucial for us to know WHERE
Barack Obama was born– in Hawaii or elsewhere—

If there is no validated birth record on US soil, then this decision
will favor the interpretation that BHO is NOT Natural Born”

No Ellis island has good architechure, but I would consider recycling the Statue of Liberty. That's 179,200 pounds (81,300 kilograms) of Copper at $3 per pound for about USD $537,600.

Even better would be a group of her supporters becoming an ex-group of supporters and suing her to get their money back. Probably would never happen but it would be nice. I'm sure someone from the IRS is aware of her and PayPal reports earnings on their money market to the IRS of account holders. If she's audited, it will only be a part of the Obama conspiracy.

That was the minority opinion from the Supreme Court. This was argued with Attorney (aka Oily Titz) last night in length in another comment section. You have nothing here.

I am not a lawyer, but it seems to be Orly Taitz, DDS, Esquire, who is in error when she claims the dismissed appeal helps her clients, since the words would only seem to apply to challenges filed before the election. Orly's clients failed to file until after the election and after Obama was actually sworn in. Mootness because elections move faster than courts is not the same creature as mootness because the case was filed too late for any legal remedy.

From page 6:
“We consider first the District Court's holding that Berg's status as a voter did not provide him standing to challenge Obama's candidacy.* [Blah, blah, blah, voters don't get injured]

* Although the defendants argue that this point is moot because the election is over, we consider the issue because “[t]his controversy, like most election cases, fits squarely within the 'capable of repetition yet avoiding review' exception to the mootness doctrine.” [citation omitted]“

He was born in Hawaii. Now, the crucial thing you need to do is contact all the republican congressmen…especially the ones that ran the latest fiasco on capital hill. They're getting real desperate now, they need something to break loose from the minority. You, with your 2.5 million strong blower contingent, could swing the next election. They need your vote now more than ever…you can use that. Call every one of them and pledge to help if they'll help you with your cause. Especially, call the RNC chairman…he can tell you the ones that are scared of blacks. Those can be your first converts to blowerdom.

Jim,

8 USC 1401provides a formula for defining a US “citizen”. Nothing more. It does not distinguish between, citizen*, national*, native, natural born (POTUS-eligible), or dual-citizen.

What Congress needs to do, is to take from English Common Law and from the Law of Nations, all that is best for the USA, and form it into a concise set of definitions.

There is no definition of NBC, it needs to be defined as “a child born to two USA citizens on USA soil.”

Children should be the nationality of the father.
Dual-citizens should be the nationality of the father.

There needs to be an end to the “Anchor Baby” loophole, since illegal aliens, tourists and business travelers, are transient aliens. Children born to aliens (CBTA) should not be automatic USA citizens.CBTA should be the nationality of the father.

*8 USC 1101 defines alien, citizen, national, but not native.

Someone named 'naturalized citizen' enquired about how it was Orly Taitz obtained her degree from an online diploma mill.

This is how it happened:

naturalizedcitizen 45 minutes ago
Where did you get the idea about on-line diploma mill – from comrade trentino's rants?

==========

Actually, Orly, we got it from your own website.

You were too stupid and unqualified to gain admission to an accredited law school; instead, you went to an online diploma mill called The Taft School, recognized as a law school by no one.

Here's what the Taft School says at its own website:

“The Distance Education and Training Council (http://www.detc.org) is a non-profit section 501(c) (6) educational association located in Washington, D.C. It was founded in 1926 to promote sound educational standards and ethical business practices within the correspondence field. The independent nine-member Accrediting Commission of the DETC was established in 1955.”

NOTE: “within the correspondence field.”

Since then, they have gone on to award themselves meaningless 'credentials' from other trade associations for correspondence schools.

Here's what the State Bar of California says on its website: “Taft Law School is an unaccredited law school in California.” Unaccredited, Orly. Do you understand what that means?

SOURCE: http://calbar.ca.gov/state/calbar/calbar_generi…

Orly, you are a quack, incompetent to enter an accredited law school in California. Just ask the State Bar.

SOURCE, AGAIN: http://calbar.ca.gov/state/calbar/calbar_generi…

And that's how the world knows about Orly's on-line diploma mill.

Thanks for asking!!! We appreciate it!!!

14th Amendment (8USC1401): “1. All persons born or naturalized in the
United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the
United States…”

If, big IF, Barack H. Obama II, was “born in the United States, and subject
to the jurisdiction thereof;” he is simply a US citizen, on his mother's side.
But, it takes two persons to make a baby, and those two people are subject national “personal” jurisdictions.

Using Boolean logic as it is applied to digital electronics helps to visualize
the process.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic_gates
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:LogicGates.svg

The first part of the 14th Amendment “All persons born or naturalized in the United States” is an “OR GATE” meaning either of the attributes “born in USA ” or “naturalized in USA” meet first qualification.

http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/04108.png <<< OR GATE
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/04101.png <<< AND GATE

The second part of the 14th Amendment “and subject to the jurisdiction
thereof”, begins with an “AND GATE” meaning what follows applies to
either of the two previous qualifications.

There are three main types of judicial jurisdiction:
personal (personam),
territorial (locum), and
subject matter (subjectam).
Jurisdiction, in this sense refers to “personal” and “territorial” authority one or more nations has over the person, according to, national laws and international treaties, concerning travel, migration, extradition, etc. Jurisdiction, can be determined by what nation a person owes allegiance to. A minor cannot give consent, therefore from birth the jurisdiction of the minor, is determined by the jurisdiction of both parents. Jurisdiction, may be determined from point of discovery. For instance a child under age 5 discovered abandoned, will have a place of”birth” listed as a description of the location and circumstances surrounding discovery.

There is no definition of NBC, it needs to be defined as “a child born to two USA citizens on USA soil.”

Why does it “need” to be defined as such. There is already a definition for a natural born citizen. It is a child born within the United States regardless of parents' citizenship.

Just because birthers want does not mean birthers get.

Boring, again. SCOTUS says there are only 2 types of citizens. Natural born and naturalized. You making up a third exists only in your mind.

The term “Unaccredited” refers to college credits toward a college degree.

Since Orly Taitz' goal was to become a practicing lawyer and not a career college student, she took a shorter route.

rpenner, you may remember Obama had to take the Oath of Office twice, since the first time was flubbed.

First Oath flubbed http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=274_VdeckAU
Orly Taitz filed Keyes v Obama complaint 01 at 3:26pm PST (6:26 PM EST) Tuesday January 20, 2009

http://www.scribd.com/doc/16443502/Keyes-Compla…

Obama retook the Oath of Office at 7:35pm EST on Wednesday January 21, 2009

ellid, “racism”?

How do you infer “racism” from me?

Perhaps you are experiencing guilt over you misguided loyalties, to oh let me guess, Mexico.

You're kind of trying to polish a turd, aren't you Gerry?

You're kind of trying to polish a turd, aren't you Gerry?

The flub was due to John Roberts not to Obama. It doesn't matter anyway, the first time counted. They just wanted a clean reading of the oath.

Damned, Gerry. You're spewing the same crap that Attorney did last night. You have nothing to post here that is new, do you?

This is the definition of accredited:

To recognize (an institution of learning) as maintaining those standards requisite for its graduates to gain admission to other reputable institutions of higher learning or to achieve credentials for professional practice

Orly went to a school that isn't ABA Accredited. That means that their reputation does not hold up to the standards of a real law school. They don't have standards for getting in either. That's why Orly chose Taft.

You can't polish a turd.

The latest on Orly's motion to reconsider. The defenses response:

http://ia301521.us.archive.org/2/items/gov.usco…

Orly's Facebook wall is a fountain of information. This is a good read….

http://www.scribd.com/doc/22520254/RIVERNIDER-v…

SCOTUS interprets the intent of Congress. If Congress passes law or amendment, the SCOTUS follows Congress.

Damed, NOT_AXJ. You can't contribute anything but crap. You post nothing. At least I got facts and input, while waste bandwidth and space.

You THINK you have facts but you don't. Your post on what unaccredited means was a real gem.

Don't flatter yourself, Nancee boy. You're an idiotic, demented, paranoid, bigoted birthtard just like your hero, James Von Brunn.

Look in a mirror if you want to see a pathetic piece of crap.

Like you, irrelevant.

And yet, you're still a babbling idiot. Go figure.

I actually took time to read Gerry's post. Thank you Mr. Science for the explanation of what a natural born citizen is. Too bad that it doesn't fly.

Wow, that's pretty ignorant, even for you.

Exactly right. And still, nincompoops like border and Orly will squeal about it for years.

Dear God, somebody needs to take the pump out of his rearend before he explodes!

Gerry must think you are a 9 year old boy or something.

Gerry must think you are a 9 year old boy or something.

“Boolean logic” does not apply to the law. Sorry about that, old sport!

Um, Gerry? Almost every state REQUIRES students to graduate from a law school that has been properly accredited by a special accrediting agency before they are allowed to sit for the bar exam. California is the only one that I'm aware of that allows students from a correspondence school like the William Howard Taft School of Law Named for the Fattest Chief Justice of the Supreme Court, while Vermont occasionally allows people to apprentice at law firms.

Your ignorance is making you look ludicrous.

Not mention that LEGALLY he was President beginning at noon on Inauguration Day regardless of whether he took the oath of office or not.

And yes, Roberts flubbed the oath because he was nervous. The President clearly knew the correct wording and was surprised that the Chief Justice didn't.

And would that friend be an overly made up California dentist who took a phony law school correspondence course to defend herself against malpractice suits?

You are a vile excuse for sentience.

Bullshit. There are hundreds, perhaps thousands of cases where the Supreme Court overturned a law duly passed by Congress. The most recent example that springs to mind is the discrimination suit brought by Lily Ledbetter, where the Court imposed a standard of proof on the plaintiff that the authors of the anti-discrimination legislation (some of whom, like Ted Kennedy, were still in office) had never envisioned. It took *another* law to address the Court's decision.

You really are an ignoramus, aren't you?

Why, of course I’m Mexican. It’s well known Union County, Pennsylvania, where my ancestors first settled in the 1750s, is part of Chihuahua.

*rolls eyes*

Ignorant, racist, and *stupid*. You really are a piece of work, aren’t you?

Why, of course I’m Mexican. It’s well known Union County, Pennsylvania, where my ancestors first settled in the 1750s, is part of Chihuahua.

*rolls eyes*

Ignorant, racist, and *stupid*. You really are a piece of work, aren’t you?

Wrong again. Why don’t you go back to Possum Lodge?

Wrong again. Why don’t you go back to Possum Lodge?

Oily's face is a fountain of lies, deceit and stupidity.

And I hear she drives a Lincoln hard.

Nancee boy makes up crap as he goes. Typical birthard bigotry and delusional stupidity.

Easy.

“The Indiana ruling is great news for those who advocate illegal immigration, and the dismantling of the US borders, so all of the World’s poor and illiterate, can come and live in the USA, drink the water, suckle tax teat, and get a free education and lighting in their airconditioned homes. ”

Your arrogance, xenaphobia and irrational, paranoid hatred betrays you. If you didn’t have your head up Lou Dobb’s ass, you might get some fresh air.

Easy.

“The Indiana ruling is great news for those who advocate illegal immigration, and the dismantling of the US borders, so all of the World’s poor and illiterate, can come and live in the USA, drink the water, suckle tax teat, and get a free education and lighting in their airconditioned homes. ”

Your arrogance, xenaphobia and irrational, paranoid hatred betrays you. If you didn’t have your head up Lou Dobb’s ass, you might get some fresh air.

Make that xenophobia. I’ll buy spell check from my next DOJ check. And a new, brown shirt.

Make that xenophobia. I’ll buy spell check from my next DOJ check. And a new, brown shirt.

You must be thinking of Orly Taitz’s assistant Charles Lincoln who was convicted of a felony and disbarred for using a fake SSN.

You have fleas, hypocrite.

You must be thinking of Orly Taitz’s assistant Charles Lincoln who was convicted of a felony and disbarred for using a fake SSN.

You have fleas, hypocrite.

“African Press International is supposed to support Africans and African-American view,” she reportedly said. “It is strange that API has chosen to support the racists against my husband. There is no shame in being adopted by a stepfather. All dirt has been thrown onto my husband’s face and yet he loves this country. My husband and I know that there is no law that will stop him from becoming the president, just because some American white racists are bringing up the issue of my husband’s adoption by his stepfather. The important thing here is where my husband’s heart is at the moment. I can tell the American people that my husband loves this country and his adoption never changed his love for this country. He was born in Hawaii, yes, and that gives him all the right to be an American citizen even though he was adopted by a foreigner .”

This entirely explains how The Great Usurper was able to apply to and attend college as a foreign student, how he was able to visit Pakistan(apparently as an Indonesian), and exactly why he has paid over a million dollars to keep his records concealed. The Birth Certificate is only the tip of the iceberg with this guy and hundreds of people are culpably complicit. It also explains why his birth records in Hawaii were amended-for adoption.

Now is the time to fly our flags upside-down until The Great Usurper-Obama releases his Birth Certificate and college records and comes clean about his citizenship. Barack Obama is clearly an illegal-alien & has no business even running for U.S. President.

Your reply is absurd.

An accredited law school offers courses, labs, libraries, faculty, moot court, written assignments, articling opportunities, guest lectures from distinguished attorneys, judges, and justices, and hands-on apprenticeship with skilled and practicing lawyers.

An unaccredited, online law 'school' offers nothing of the sort. It is equivalent to attending the University of MacDonald's and taking a degree in Hamburgerology.

Consider: if you had the brains to take a law degree at Stanford Law, would you choose Taft Law? If you were smart enough to enter Boalt Hall, would you enter Taft Hall? If you were bright enough to be admitted to Hastings, would you choose Taft?

Why choose a phony, unaccredited law school when — if you have the intellect — you could choose a real law school?

The answer is obvious. Orly Taitz is not very bright, not very skilled, and not very articulate. She chose an unaccredited law school because no real law school would have her.

The only “shorter route” she took was to avoid law school altogether — because she couldn't keep up, she couldn't compete, and she'd never graduate in a million years.

Thanks for asking!

It might be added that, in a real law school with real professors, students are regularly challenged to improve their skills of writing, analysis, presentation, and intellectual rigor.

This is why they have actual classrooms, actual assignments, actual grades, and actual learning.

Orly Taitz, soon to be disbarred for her dishonesty and incompetence, managed to slither past all of that.

Raving Boarder admits that she clearly preferred NOT to be challenged; instead, she chose a kind of 'remote viewing'.

She is one of the most preposterous, ill-equipped and unsuccessful 'lawyers' of the early 21st Century. Has she ever won a court case? A traffic ticket? Jaywalking?

Given the bizarre nature of her 'causes', she never will.

Now, if Orly had gone to a REAL law school.. but that would require her to have an IQ greater than 87 on a hot day.

Clearly, she doesn't.

Why do you defend this bozo? Is she really the best you've got?

Are you sober? Your comment made no sense at all.

“While waste bandwidth and space.” Huh?

Ha ha. Nicely copied. You don't understand a word of it, which is just as well.

It doesn't actually make any sense anyway.

Flying a distress signal when there is no actual emergency is a crime in many jurisdictions, you know. Even if it isn't at Possum Lodge, it sure is going to piss off the local cops. I wonder if they'll make you pay the cost of all the emergency calls they make in vain because someone thought you actually had an emergency?

Just asking.

Sorry, but hoaxes aren't considered evidence of anything. Ditto forgeries.

None of which is true except in your delusional mind.

Your real name is Jon Douglas West, isn't it?

What’s amazing about birthtards is that they think they can come into these commentary areas of a blog about Orly and defend her in anonymity. If you visit enough blogs, eventually you’ll see them post something with their moniker as well as sign their name with their post. Also, they all have certain writing styles. Leonard McCauley, the guy that wrote the letter to Judge Land challenging him to ‘fisticuffs’ in front of the court house posts here under the name of oldmagicman666. At least I am fairly sure about his moniker. There is no doubt about Gerry Nance.

I have a sign as big as the flag which boldly demands Obama's Birth Certificate and a homemade gravestone painted gray with the letters USA RIP 7-4-1776 to 1-20-2009

If it isn't true why are you so worried about it? Afraid “Don't Ask-Don't Tell” won't get lifted?

Well, good for you! I'm sure you're very proud of yourself.

Do you need a flow chart?

None of us are worried about it. We're only here to amuse ourselves because all of your delusions are hysterically funny.

Your comparison by using digital electronics doesn't apply here. But thanks for your 'lesson' Mr. Science.

By the way. You write you have a sign as big as the flag. To which size of the U. S. Flag are you referring to? The size of those little flags people put on their radio antennas or something the size that is flown over the White House?

Initially I was very proud of Obama for being a contender in the presidential race but I became ashamed of him when he smugly stood with his legs wide apart and his hands folded in front of him, pointed downward as if praying to the devil, while Governor Richardson & Hellary Clinton stood solemnly with their right-hands over their hearts during the National Anthem.

What separates the birthers from the Obots and afterbirthers, is that the birthers are focused on a goal, and can backup what we say with facts; while the afterbirthers are easily distracted and continuously unfocused, making the afterbirthers perfect tools for the takeover of America.

I pose this two-part question: Do afterbirthers own firearms and have they served in the US military?

What separates the birthers from the Obots and afterbirthers, is that the birthers are focused on a goal, and can backup what we say with facts; while the afterbirthers are easily distracted and continuously unfocused, making the afterbirthers perfect tools for the takeover of America.

I pose this two-part question: Do afterbirthers own firearms and have they served in the US military?

RedGraham, I agree the USA is in a state of distress, and sinking rapidly into a sea of poverty, but Obama needs to keep the Obots online, and castrate any media opposition, so the truth is hidden.

Someone named 'naturalized citizen' enquired about how it was Orly Taitz obtained her degree from an online diploma mill.

This is how it happened:

naturalizedcitizen 45 minutes ago
Where did you get the idea about on-line diploma mill – from comrade trentino's rants?

==========

Actually, Orly, we got it from your own website.

You were too stupid and unqualified to gain admission to an accredited law school; instead, you went to an online diploma mill called The Taft School, recognized as a law school by no one.

Here's what the Taft School says at its own website:

“The Distance Education and Training Council (http://www.detc.org) is a non-profit section 501(c) (6) educational association located in Washington, D.C. It was founded in 1926 to promote sound educational standards and ethical business practices within the correspondence field. The independent nine-member Accrediting Commission of the DETC was established in 1955.”

NOTE: “within the correspondence field.”

Since then, they have gone on to award themselves meaningless 'credentials' from other trade associations for correspondence schools.

Here's what the State Bar of California says on its website: “Taft Law School is an unaccredited law school in California.” Unaccredited, Orly. Do you understand what that means?

SOURCE: http://calbar.ca.gov/state/calbar/calbar_generi…

Orly, you are a quack, incompetent to enter an accredited law school in California. Just ask the State Bar.

SOURCE, AGAIN: http://calbar.ca.gov/state/calbar/calbar_generi…

And that's how the world knows about Orly's on-line diploma mill.

Thanks for asking!!! We appreciate it!!!

I never measured either but like most birthers I bought my flag at Walmart and have to hook it to the cord on my flagpole before raising it. I never take it down now but it must be at least 30x38ish to 3x4ft. The sign is painted over an old Ron Paul yardsign & I used a spare patiobrick to make the gravestone which is placed upright. One of my neighbors thinks I'm a kook, one agrees with me and the other don't seem to give a darn. It's my yard. I live in the country and the highway is half a mile from the pole so really few people see my act of defiance. Some of my in-laws give me grief. I'll take it down once we see the BC & college records.

I have two handguns, one rifle and a two shotguns – one over under 12 gauge Browning and a pump 12 gauge Remington.

I proudly served in the U. S. Navy from December 1980 until March 1992 as a fire controlman on an Aegis class cruiser after my completion of advanced electronics training in Great Lakes, Illinois.

Your 'truth' is delusional and hence, not news worthy.

Well, now. We DO have proof that you're one of the People of Walmart.

If you were to watch the ACTUAL video and not just look at the photo, you would see that this was a deception spread by a disillusioned racist.

And the hits just keep coming! Another order against Orly Taitz from the U.S. District Court in The Southern District of Florida for a fraudulent filing and asking Orly to show cause as to why Orly should not be sanctioned. Response required by November 27, 2009.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/22528724/DOC-21-River…

It's just hearsay really but I bet over 90% of us berftards shop at Walmart, are white, eat meat, and did not attend an Ivy League college.

My respect for you just quadrupled and I no longer think you are a complete idiot. How old is the pump?

The Remington pump was given to me as a Christmas gift when I was in High School, so about 34 years old. My pride and joy is the Browning. Something that I keep in its bag and clean frequently. There is no other firearm made as well. It's the only shotgun I use for pheasant and quail hunting. When I go duck hunting, I use the pump because we usually go 'pond jumping'. I don't like crawling up the back of a dam with the Browning.

The rifle is an old Remington 30-06 that I used for deer hunting many years ago and was my dad's before it became mine. I have a Glock 17 and an old Smith & Wesson .38 special.

Why do you think I'm here? I'm a member of the NRA. I'm what would be called a Reagan Republican. Probably for different reasons than you. You don't trust the government – at least I think that's why you're here and against Obama. There are certain aspects of the government I don't like. Sure, there's corruption at all levels. I'm here defending Obama because I'm tired of all of the crap that goes on after elections. I was initially a 'truther' and followed all of the conspiracy theories against Bush. I suppose I finally woke up and realized that none of it was true. I didn't like Clinton when he ran for office and voted for Perot. Perhaps had I voted for the original Bush, Clinton wouldn't have won – who knows. But then I saw how the hypocracy in Congress turned against Clinton and there were more important issues to deal with than to sacrifice Clinton. If the worst thing they could come up with was Clinton getting a BJ in the Oval Office – well it was a total waste of tax dollars.

Now, people refuse to recognize Obama as our President even though he was legally elected by a large landslide. He is being blamed for the bail out when in fact, the bill was actually signed by Bush. The debt hasn't gone up under Obama. It went up under Bush. Over time, I've learned to get my news and information from multiple sources and not just those that reflect my political views. And I get angry with my own friends that ARE racist in their dislike of Obama. Regardless, they're my friends. I respect their opinions and they have learned to respect mine.

Oh! And I just find it ludicrous that some Russian immigrant has come into the picture as the leader against Obama. She took up arms with some of the sleaziest individuals with Manning being one of them. For someone that prays that Obama will die, I find that just sickening. This woman deserves everything she's going to end up with because she is one of the biggest hypocrites there is.

FYI. I do my grocery shopping at Walmart. I just make sure I'm reasonably dressed as I do not want to end up in one of those photos on that website.

You know, I didn't have any idea who I was going to vote for in this last election when we were still in the primaries. When I saw that photo of Obama, I was probably as disgusted as you were. And then I saw the actual video and saw it was taken out of context. But, I still wasn't for Obama or even Hillary and was leaning more toward McCain until he picked Sarah Palin as his running mate. It took me a lot of time to begin to respect Obama. Not for his passionate speeches but more so from reading about him and the FACT that he had it a lot tougher growing up than I did and he beat the odds. He's achieved more in his short lifetime than I have in my longer lifetime and he had many more obstacles to get where he did than I.

Whoops! So much for extremists like you trying to stereotype, eh Ravin'?
“backup what we say with facts”—–I'm still laughing over that one.
Red says we are ruled by a “mysterious international brotherhood”
'facts are funny things' —R Reagan

look closely at your Walmart flag. “made in China” is the inscription you'll find there.

That is the stock-in-trade of racists and other extremists: twist the truth out of shape; only then can it serve the purposes of such liars and unAmericans

I'm worried
worried for Red's neighbors & loved ones

Kinda like the infamous still-shot in which BO ‘appears’ to be dissing the Pledge of Allegiance (mentioned elsewhere on this thread) but the reality is completely otherwise as confirmed by a video of the event. The extremists cling to these perversions of the facts ’cause it’s all they’ve got. Too bad, because I’d rather spend my time engaging in responsible, adult critiques of the Obama Admin—but there’s no grownups to dialogue with on the Obama-bashing side…

I pose this two-part question: are all birfers dumber than a broken can opener, and do they wear their tinfoil helmets to bed at night?

You mean that true COLB that's been available to be viewed online for over a year. That truth?

I find it hilarious that a man who has written two books about himself is accused of “hiding something.” I guess it makes sense when you consider that the birfers can't read.

Is that why Beck constantly cries like a little girl?
He has no testicles?

“…she reportedly said”
LOL
you Berfers are a non-stop laugh riot!

Dear Birthers:

Tell us more about the “mysterious international brotherhood” that Graham the Red has described.

Are you part of it? When do you meet? How does one join? How much does it cost? May we pay in your rubles?

We must know!

I'm sure your neighbors greatly appreciate this. All they need to do is tell visitors to look for the house owned by the lunatic.

I'm white, eat meat, and attended a Seven Sisters college. Fortunately, the above gave me the intelligence to see how ridiculous the birthers are.

The transvestite in the hot pants and wig is my definition of Cosmic Horror.

How nice, that you base your vote on an out of context clip from a much longer video.

I've supported repeal of DADT from the beginning. It has nothing to do with smears against the President.

May I remind folks that, over a day ago, someone calling herself 'Attorney' was busy posting here?

Among her many mad accusations was one that caught our attention. According to 'Attorney', 39 members of the “Federal Judiciary” were monitoring these boards, armed with search warrants for our IPs, and ready to jail us for alleged violations of the Hatch Act. Immediately.

Curious about this bizarre assertion, we asked 'Attorney' to name EVEN ONE of these 39 Federal judges. Not three. Not two. Not all 39. Just ONE.

Well, more than a day has rolled by and, guess what? Yet another insane birther has flown the coop. This lie-by-night parasite zooms in, lays lies, and flies away again. Not one name was provided. No evidence. No proof. Nothing. Just another ridiculous lie.

Anyone notice a pattern?

These cretins will say anything, lie about anything, make anything up, invent panels of fictitious Judges, forge Kenyan birth certificates, suborn perjury, purport to act on behalf of clients who have already fired them, claim to know the names of “paid DOJ bloggers”, insist on a “mysterious international brotherhood” that actually runs the world, and do anything else it takes to keep their egos stoked with self-importance.

These cretins are caught with their lies and forged documents time and again, and seem to imagine that the world takes them seriously.

The world does not.

'Attorney' has been caught telling another whopper, as was 'Ernie', 'Graham the Red', 'AXJ Rocks', 'Naturalized Citizen', 'ObamaCorn', and so many other con men before them.

Guys, face it: your track record is so horrible, so laughable, so provably false that you should really enter another line of work.

Perhaps running an online, unaccredited law school? That would be good for you. Good luck!

Uh, Gerry, old sport…given the physique suggested by the impressive number of chins in that picture on your Facebook page, I'd really really really like to see a non-Photoshopped copy of your military service record, preferably notarized by someone who is not related to you. Refusal to produce such will lead me to believe that not only are you a poorly educated bigot, you are a hypocrite and a chickenhawk as well.

As to whether you own guns or not – let's just say that I'm glad I still have my great-grandfather's old shotgun in case you and your other friends from the Wolverines decide to show up in my peaceful, all-American little town. You see, we don't like traitors up here in New England, and the way you mouth off, you'd last about five minutes in town meeting….

The one who “don't seem to give a darn” is probably terrified of you and all the other members of the 107th Fighting Keyboarders showing up and yelling insults at him/her.

Sorry, but the law isn’t a computer program no matter how many times you rear up on your ickle pink pitty-paws and scream.

Um, Gerry? The Declaration of Independence isn’t the law of the. It’s our legal justification for seceding from Great Britain. The Constitution is the law, and it seems to be working a lot better now than it was under Bush II.

And oh yeah – the President is a natural born American citizen, not a subject of HM Elizabeth II. Just thought you should know that.

They're talking about the Bilderberg group when it comes to the 'brotherhood' or at least that's what I'm assuming. There's an almost 2 hour video on YouTube. Pretty compelling in the beginning but then they really go off the deep end. It is the mother of all conspiracies.

Damn! I was hoping it might be the Learned Elders of Zion, they of the Protocols fame.

You just gotta know these birthers are anti-Semites, too.

Tell me more about the Secret Eskimos. Are they related to the Hidden Esquimaux of Ramalamadingdong?

Who told you?? Has Orly been blabbing again? Something must be done about that loggorhaeic woman. She's just too much.

The Secret Eskimos are cousins to the Hidden Esquimaux of Victoria, B.C. In their secret caves they plot the overthrow of the “mysterious international brotherhood” to which that traitor Graham the Red has referred — too often for his own good.

The Secret Eskimo/Esquimaux are leading the search for the Secret Birthplace of Queen Orly Herself. Some say it was in Black Mombaville. Others say it was a CIA lab in Virginia. Still others think she that was actually born in an echo chamber operated by Bell Labs.

Don't worry, my friend — the truth will come out!! Soon the world will know where the Queen of All Birthers was really born.

It may not be entirely clear WHY she was born…

Barack Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya. His cousin, Raila Odinga, the Prime Minister of Kenya, ORDERED the Ministry of Immigration, under which records of births and deaths are maintained, to seal the record. It should also be noted that the birth certificate proffered by Orly Taitz as evidence is not genuine. Obama's height and weight measurements are given in pounds and inches. Kenya, formerly under British rule, uses the metric system. There is, however, an authentic birth certificate for Barack Obama in Kenya but no minister will certify is out of fear of losing his job or something much more.

Onus probandi.

Look it up, lying piece of paranoid crap. You're a disgrace, birfoon.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH News Release
GOVERNOR _________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CHIYOME LEINAALA FUKINO M.D. DIRECTOR
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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.”
###

So… the lunatic Orly Taitz is wrong, but you're right.

So… “There is, however, an authentic birth certificate for Barack Obama in Kenya but no minister will certify it out of fear of losing his job or something much more.”

Uhh, sorry, Mr Snail, but HOW do you know this? What is your evidence? Where is your proof?

And, uhhh, Mr Obama was born on 4 August 1961 — according to you, in Mombasa KENYA.

Mombasa was at that time part of Zanzibar, and did not become part of Kenya until 12 December 1963.

As usual, your ridiculous lies catch up to you faster than you can imagine.

We understand why you have dumped the ridiculous Orly overboard, but why do you continue with her lies?

You wrote, “Barack Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya.” This is false, Snaily. REMEMBER: Mombasa was part of Zanzibar at that time.

You even tell lies about your lies. Pitiful.

And you are nuts. As has been said many, many times, Mombasa was not a part of Kenya at the time of the presidents birth, so he wouldn't have been born there. The real birth certificate is on file in the Hawaiian Department of Health, Vital Statistics, and has been since August 8, 1961, four days after he was born there. President Obama didn't even have contact with his Kenyan relatives until he became an adult. He obviously had his birth certificate in order to have an American passport, with which he traveled not only in his youth but after reaching the age of majority. You all need to give it a rest. You are wrong and will be considered another nut job if you keep pursuing this crazy conspiracy crap. If you have any sense left, abandon this foolishness before you become one of them- A birther!

I missed that one. Which one was it posted on?

Or any college at all. The all-white part we believe.

So… the lunatic Orly Taitz is wrong, but you're right.

So… “There is, however, an authentic birth certificate for Barack Obama in Kenya but no minister will certify it out of fear of losing his job or something much more.”

Uhh, sorry, Mr Snail, but HOW do you know this? What is your evidence? Where is your proof?

And, uhhh, Mr Obama was born on 4 August 1961 — according to you, in Mombasa KENYA.

Mombasa was at that time part of Zanzibar, and did not become part of Kenya until 12 December 1963.

As usual, your ridiculous lies catch up to you faster than you can imagine.

We understand why you have dumped the ridiculous Orly overboard, but why do you continue with her lies?

You wrote, “Barack Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya.” This is false, Snaily. REMEMBER: Mombasa was part of Zanzibar at that time.

You even tell lies about your lies. Pitiful.

Evening, YMBJ. I really enjoy your posts. Sardonic, truthful, to the point, and immensely patient.

Orly, posing as 'Attorney' wrote, 2 days ago,

“39 currently active members of the FEDERAL JUDICIARY have been actively monitoring this blog tonight. Warrants for “I.P.” addresses were issued days ago. You DOJ paid liars are being investigated and you will soon be indicted for violating the “Hatch Act”. You have posted absolutely nothing but lies and very feeble attempts at misdirection. Indiana courts rulings have NO bearing on federal law.”

Completely nuts, of course.

It appears about p3 on the postboard, “Rare Non-Orly Taitz Birther Smackdown”, one of the more fun ones.

'Attorney' seems to have disappeared. Do you also suspect that these are ALL Orly herself, defective grammar, narcissism and sheer nuttiness prevalent in every birther posting? They certainly sound like her.

Judging by the vast turnout (was it 4 people? 7?) at her FOX protest, it seems possible. Anyway, thanks again for your relentless efforts to induce a moment of insanity into their disordered fantasies.

I post while waiting for lines in our lab to finish testing. Good way to spend the time, yes? Night, and thanks again.

I missed that one. Hey, for all of you out there that know the truth of the matter- that our president is a natural born citizen and quite eligible to be our president- got a question for you. How many of you heard those various Oily interviews and comments she made where she was exhorting the military and “citizens” to take up arms against the government? I heard her say it several times but I haven't found them now that I'm looking. Hate going to her site, it screws with my computer. You never know what you might get into when you start looking at these sites. I seriously think this woman and some of her clients could be dangerous. After the tragedy last week at Ft. Hood, I think they are going to be paying closer attention to those who seem to have an ax to grind. I found her comments on Ft. Hood to be offensive, ignorant and downright stupid. She doesn't even know who the victims are- calling them all young boys- when men and women lost their life that day. Though I don't think you can no call those old enough to go to war – young boys or young girls.

Check out 2008 Presidential Election under Politics on topix.com and you'll find some familiar birfer squawkers. There's one thread on the BC that's circa 70,000 posts.

Not a single word of the above is true. Why do you hate America so much that you're willing to spread lies about the President?

Thank you for confirming my fears. I have laid in a year's supply of grains and beans and rice, plus canned goods, plus a fresh flint for my great-grandfather's fowling piece and a good supply of shot and powder. The SE/Es will not take my .4 acre of paradise! It will remain a sovereign piece of the USA!!!!!!

Rightly so, but don't tell Orly or she will come a-stealin'.

At least it keeps them off the streets, and we won't find too many ankle bracelets cut off and lying around.

She is clearly a subversive and enemy alien. After being disbarred, she will almost certainly face deportation proceedings.

I appreciate your response and I am sorry if facts or another opinion offend you.

FYI, I was asked by attorney, Philip Berg, prior to the election to see if it was possible to obtain a certified copy of Barack Obama's birth records in Kenya, assuming his birth in that country was not just grist for the “paranoid” rumor-mill. I was asked because of my business relationships with many of Kenya's ministers over the past thirty years. The information I was given was conclusive, the problem, as I indicated in my posting, was the current Prime Minister, Raila Odinga, is Barack Obama's cousin and he ordered the file sealed.

I also provided this information to Orly Taitz and was astounded when she produced a “not so genuine” birth certificate, which does not even remotely resemble a Kenyan birth certificate of the 1960's.

As far as Dr. Chiyome Fukino's statement, it is impossible for me to comment one way or the other.

I appreciate your response and I am sorry if facts or another opinion offend you.

FYI, I was asked by attorney, Philip Berg, prior to the election to see if it was possible to obtain a certified copy of Barack Obama's birth records in Kenya, assuming his birth in that country was not just grist for the “paranoid” rumor-mill. I was asked because of my business relationships with many of Kenya's ministers over the past thirty years. The information I was given was conclusive, the problem, as I indicated in my posting, was the current Prime Minister, Raila Odinga, is Barack Obama's cousin and he ordered the file sealed.

I also provided this information to Orly Taitz and was astounded when she produced a “not so genuine” birth certificate, which does not even remotely resemble a Kenyan birth certificate of the 1960's.

My reference to Mombasa was because that is the name of the province, today.

If you say so.

I appreciate your response and I am sorry if facts or another opinion offend you.

FYI, I was asked by attorney, Philip Berg, prior to the election to see if it was possible to obtain a certified copy of Barack Obama's birth records in Kenya, assuming his birth in that country was not just grist for the “paranoid” rumor-mill. I was asked because of my business relationships with many of Kenya's ministers over the past thirty years. The information I was given was conclusive, the problem, as I indicated in my posting, was the current Prime Minister, Raila Odinga, is Barack Obama's cousin and he ordered the file sealed.

I also provided this information to Orly Taitz and was astounded when she produced a “not so genuine” birth certificate, which does not even remotely resemble a Kenyan birth certificate of the 1960's.

As far as my political leanings are concerned, it makes no difference to me one way or the other. If I were a journalist I would merely be reporting the facts as I know them. On the flip side, would you have said the same if it was George Bush or John McCain?

Where is the long form birth certificate – the one Obama mentioned in his book?

No one is offended by inadvertent error. All are offended by calculated lies, deception, and mis-direction.

Without qualification or explication of any kind, you flatly declared, “Barack Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya.” This is plainly false.

You must now admit, according to your Bergesque theory, that Mr Obama was born in Mombasa City, which is an island (like Manhattan, like Montreal), in Mombasa District. Some years AFTER Mr Obama's alleged birth there, it was ceded by Zanzibar and became part of modern Kenya's Coast Province.

But let's pretend that's what you meant.

You now have the problem of PROOF. Where is your evidence? Where is your documentation? Where are your witnesses? Do you have a single fact to support anything?

Given the notorious history of the birthers, with whom you have so foolishly allied yourself, NO ONE BELIEVES A WORD YOU SAY.

PROBLEM: Mr Odinga is an ethnic Luo, born in Maseno, Nyona Province, nowhere near Mombasa.

PROBLEM: his parents were Jaramagi O Odinga and Mary Juma. There is no relationship between these people and Mr Obama.

PROBLEM: “In a January 2008 BBC interview, Odinga asserted that he was the first cousin of U.S. president Barack Obama through Obama's father.[28] However, Barack Obama's paternal uncle denied any direct relation to Odinga, stating “Odinga's mother came from this area, so it is normal for us to talk about cousins. But he is not a blood relative.”[29] Obama's father came from the same Luo community as Odinga. [28]” [WIKIPEDIA]

Your story doesn't add up, is flatly denied by his father's brother (paternal uncle), and your version carries NO DOCUMENTATION.

PROBLEM: you claim to have been a businessman of 30 years' standing in Kenya. PROVE IT. For whom did you work? Where? When? Doing what? Why? Do you have photographs? Contracts? You are affiliated with known liars and crackpots, and thus have an additional burden of proof.

CONSIDER: I worked for 30 years with your father, Mr Sneller. I know for a fact that your biological father is actually Jerry McKenzie. To protect your family and your mother's reputation, the Registrar of Records (your paternal uncle) secretly caused your birth records to be destroyed. In their place were substituted the documents you now use today, and which provide your SSN and your passport.

Sorry to be the one to break the news, Jeffrey.

PROVE me wrong.

And remember, by your standards, all I need to do is say it.

No one is offended by inadvertent error. All are offended by calculated lies, deception, and mis-direction.

Without qualification or explication of any kind, you flatly declared, “Barack Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya.” This is plainly false.

You must now admit, according to your Bergesque theory, that Mr Obama was born in Mombasa City, which is an island (like Manhattan, like Montreal), in Mombasa District. Some years AFTER Mr Obama's alleged birth there, it was ceded by Zanzibar and became part of modern Kenya's Coast Province.

But let's pretend that's what you meant.

You now have the problem of PROOF. Where is your evidence? Where is your documentation? Where are your witnesses? Do you have a single fact to support anything?

Given the notorious history of the birthers, with whom you have so foolishly allied yourself, NO ONE BELIEVES A WORD YOU SAY.

PROBLEM: Mr Odinga is an ethnic Luo, born in Maseno, Nyona Province, nowhere near Mombasa.

PROBLEM: his parents were Jaramagi O Odinga and Mary Juma. There is no relationship between these people and Mr Obama.

PROBLEM: “In a January 2008 BBC interview, Odinga asserted that he was the first cousin of U.S. president Barack Obama through Obama's father.[28] However, Barack Obama's paternal uncle denied any direct relation to Odinga, stating “Odinga's mother came from this area, so it is normal for us to talk about cousins. But he is not a blood relative.”[29] Obama's father came from the same Luo community as Odinga. [28]” [WIKIPEDIA]

Your story doesn't add up, is flatly denied by his father's brother (paternal uncle), and your version carries NO DOCUMENTATION.

PROBLEM: you claim to have been a businessman of 30 years' standing in Kenya. PROVE IT. For whom did you work? Where? When? Doing what? Why? Do you have photographs? Contracts? You are affiliated with known liars and crackpots, and thus have an additional burden of proof.

CONSIDER: I worked for 30 years with your father, Mr Sneller. I know for a fact that your biological father is actually Jerry McKenzie. To protect your family and your mother's reputation, the Registrar of Records (your paternal uncle) secretly caused your birth records to be destroyed. In their place were substituted the documents you now use today, and which provide your SSN and your passport.

Sorry to be the one to break the news, Jeffrey.

PROVE me wrong.

And remember, by your standards, all I need to do is say it.

No one is offended by inadvertent error. All are offended by calculated lies, deception, and mis-direction.

Without qualification or explication of any kind, you flatly declared, “Barack Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya.” This is plainly false.

You must now admit, according to your Bergesque theory, that Mr Obama was born in Mombasa City, which is an island (like Manhattan, like Montreal), in Mombasa District. Some years AFTER Mr Obama's alleged birth there, it was ceded by Zanzibar and became part of modern Kenya's Coast Province.

But let's pretend that's what you meant.

You now have the problem of PROOF. Where is your evidence? Where is your documentation? Where are your witnesses? Do you have a single fact to support anything?

Given the notorious history of the birthers, with whom you have so foolishly allied yourself, NO ONE BELIEVES A WORD YOU SAY.

PROBLEM: Mr Odinga is an ethnic Luo, born in Maseno, Nyona Province, nowhere near Mombasa.

PROBLEM: his parents were Jaramagi O Odinga and Mary Juma. There is no relationship between these people and Mr Obama.

PROBLEM: “In a January 2008 BBC interview, Odinga asserted that he was the first cousin of U.S. president Barack Obama through Obama's father.[28] However, Barack Obama's paternal uncle denied any direct relation to Odinga, stating “Odinga's mother came from this area, so it is normal for us to talk about cousins. But he is not a blood relative.”[29] Obama's father came from the same Luo community as Odinga. [28]” [WIKIPEDIA]

Your story doesn't add up, is flatly denied by his father's brother (paternal uncle), and your version carries NO DOCUMENTATION.

PROBLEM: you claim to have been a businessman of 30 years' standing in Kenya. PROVE IT. For whom did you work? Where? When? Doing what? Why? Do you have photographs? Contracts? You are affiliated with known liars and crackpots, and thus have an additional burden of proof.

CONSIDER: I worked for 30 years with your father, Mr Sneller. I know for a fact that your biological father is actually Jerry McKenzie. To protect your family and your mother's reputation, the Registrar of Records (your paternal uncle) secretly caused your birth records to be destroyed. In their place were substituted the documents you now use today, and which provide your SSN and your passport.

Sorry to be the one to break the news, Jeffrey.

PROVE me wrong.

And remember, by your standards, all I need to do is say it.

No one is offended by inadvertent error. All are offended by calculated lies, deception, and mis-direction.

Without qualification or explication of any kind, you flatly declared, “Barack Obama was born in Mombasa, Kenya.” This is plainly false.

You must now admit, according to your Bergesque theory, that Mr Obama was born in Mombasa City, which is an island (like Manhattan, like Montreal), in Mombasa District. Some years AFTER Mr Obama's alleged birth there, it was ceded by Zanzibar and became part of modern Kenya's Coast Province.

But let's pretend that's what you meant.

You now have the problem of PROOF. Where is your evidence? Where is your documentation? Where are your witnesses? Do you have a single fact to support anything?

Given the notorious history of the birthers, with whom you have so foolishly allied yourself, NO ONE BELIEVES A WORD YOU SAY.

PROBLEM: Mr Odinga is an ethnic Luo, born in Maseno, Nyona Province, nowhere near Mombasa.

PROBLEM: his parents were Jaramagi O Odinga and Mary Juma. There is no relationship between these people and Mr Obama.

PROBLEM: “In a January 2008 BBC interview, Odinga asserted that he was the first cousin of U.S. president Barack Obama through Obama's father.[28] However, Barack Obama's paternal uncle denied any direct relation to Odinga, stating “Odinga's mother came from this area, so it is normal for us to talk about cousins. But he is not a blood relative.”[29] Obama's father came from the same Luo community as Odinga. [28]” [WIKIPEDIA]

Your story doesn't add up, is flatly denied by his father's brother (paternal uncle), and your version carries NO DOCUMENTATION.

PROBLEM: you claim to have been a businessman of 30 years' standing in Kenya. PROVE IT. For whom did you work? Where? When? Doing what? Why? Do you have photographs? Contracts? You are affiliated with known liars and crackpots, and thus have an additional burden of proof.

CONSIDER: I worked for 30 years with your father, Mr Sneller. I know for a fact that your biological father is actually Jerry McKenzie. To protect your family and your mother's reputation, the Registrar of Records (your paternal uncle) secretly caused your birth records to be destroyed. In their place were substituted the documents you now use today, and which provide your SSN and your passport.

Sorry to be the one to break the news, Jeffrey.

PROVE me wrong.

And remember, by your standards, all I need to do is say it.

Poor Mr Sneller: let's look at your avatar and pal, Philip Berg.

“Berg was successfully sued for legal malpractice by former clients on whose behalf Berg had neglected to file a response to a complaint in an ERISA lawsuit, resulting in a default judgment being entered against the former clients.

Berg responded by bringing into the malpractice suit the plaintiffs in the ERISA action on a claim of fraud upon the court. The ERISA plaintiffs moved for summary judgment—which was granted after Berg failed to respond to the motion—and then moved for sanctions against Berg. Berg again failed to file a response.

On June 2, 2005, U.S. District Judge J. Curtis Joyner granted the motion for sanctions, finding that the fraud claim was “was inadequately pled, not grounded in fact, time-barred, and utterly irrelevant to the pending malpractice action against him.”

Observing that an attorney's signature on a complaint constitutes, among other things, a certification that the signer has conducted a reasonable inquiry into the grounds for the claim asserted, the court further found that “even the most limited investigation would have revealed that [Berg] had no standing to raise such a claim.” The court also found that Berg's claim was motivated by a “desire to harass” and “delay litigation.” The court fined Berg $10,000 and ordered him to attend six hours of ethics training.[5][6]

“While Berg is often referred to as the former “Deputy Attorney General” of Pennsylvania, he was merely one of many such deputy attornies general; indeed at the lowest level, Deputy Attorney General I, Berg's level, there were more than forty such office holders.” [WIKIPEDIA]

“facts or another opinion”LOL I can see that these 2 things are interchangeable to you jeffrey!
McCain was subject to scrutiny about his eligibility—–for about 2 minutes!
Your little fairy tale about Mombasa City doesn't offend, Berfer postings long ago wore out their ability to offend due to outrage od.
Your posting is quite tame and downright quaint next to the unspeakaly disgusting, hate-filled & racist crap we see here every day. Bask in the effluvium of your fellow travellers

Poor Mr Sneller: re your new friend, Philip Berg.

He is the crackpot who believes that Pres Bush CAUSED the destruction of the World Trade Centre at 9/11. Do you believe this?

“In 2004, Berg filed a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) lawsuit on behalf of a World Trade Center maintenance worker against President George W. Bush and others alleging that the Bush and certain government officials conspired to bring about the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center.[3] The federal district court dismissed the suit.”
[WIKIPEDIA]

Do you, Mr Sneller, actually believe that our President would (somehow) arrange to destroy three major structures in our nation's greatest city?

We understand that you guys have now dumped overboard the laughable and lying Orly Taitz. She is a narcissistic nut. She embarrasses even you guys, and that takes a lot.

But you choose the equally goofy Mr Berg? The guy who thinks that Pres Bush blew up the Twin Towers?

Are you nuts, too? What is the matter with you people?

You don't have to get a warrant for my IP: I will personally shove it up your wazoo, Orly, that you may have it with you always.
Getting more pathetic by the minute

“boldly demands…”
“my quest”
RedGraham is the biggest sack of pathetic I have run across in a while—-kinda like you “boldly demand” a bigger portion of hash browns down at Denny’s on Senior Day?

Hi CJ: I thought that's where Orly's 'warrants' came from!

Judging by the latest missives, it is fun to see that some of the birthers now seem to be dumping Orly overboard, and moving on to the ridiculous Philip Berg (who believes George Bush caused the destruction of the Twin Towers), and/or the aptly-named Gary Kreep.

These people are such wanton idiots.

PS: I enjoy your postings, very much.

You mean the long-form birth certificate that has no legal validity whatsoever, and that does nothing to prove his natural-born citizenship beyond what the COLB has already proven? If that's the one you're referring to, it's in Hawaii where it's supposed to be.

I have no information other than what I posted, which is the reason Philip Berg, Orly Taitz, et al, have not succeeded.

On the flip side of your response, if I said the same about George Bush or John McCain, would your response have been the same?

Jack Nicholsen said it best: “You can't handle the truth.”

Of course! In the rational universe here on our planet, we expect proof, evidence, documentation, fact.

You have offered nothing. Zero. Zip. You affiliate with lunatics, and appear miffed that we don't believe a word you say. Surprise!

By the way, I liked your biological father very much. Your birth name was Jeremy Livingstone McKenzie. I believe that the 'Livingstone' reflects your true family ancestry.

Please do not ask for proof of any kind. Just take my word for it.

Hey Jeremy: Please learn how to spell. You're as bad as the lunatic Orly.

Correctly, it is Jack Nicholson. And he is only an actor.

His words were written by Aaron Sorkin, in the screenplay to which you refer. You birthers have a hard time distinguishing reality from fantasy, don't you?

And you wonder why we don't believe a word of your nonsense?

In the rational universe here on our planet, we expect proof, evidence, documentation, fact.

You have offered nothing. Zero. Zip. You affiliate with lunatics, and appear miffed that we don't believe a word you say. Surprise!

By the way, I liked your biological father very much. Your birth name was Jeremy Livingstone McKenzie. I believe that the 'Livingstone' reflects your true family ancestry.

Please do not ask for proof of any kind. Just take my word for it.

In the rational universe here on our planet, we expect proof, evidence, documentation, fact.

You have offered nothing. Zero. Zip. You affiliate with lunatics, and appear miffed that we don't believe a word you say. Surprise!

By the way, I liked your biological father very much. Your birth name was Jeremy Livingstone McKenzie. I believe that the 'Livingstone' reflects your true family ancestry.

Please do not ask for proof of any kind. Just take my word for it.

By the way, I liked your biological father very much. Your birth name was Jeremy Livingstone McKenzie. I believe that the 'Livingstone' reflects your true family ancestry.

Please do not ask for proof of any kind. Just take my word for it.

What other “facts” from Obama’s books are worthless? LOL

I do not affiliate with anyone on this issue, and I am certainly not miffed at your response. You have every right to be skeptical. I found the assignment interesting, which is the reason I pursued it, and like you, require facts over fiction — which is the reason I called out Orly Taitz, who was negligent in her use of a bogus document to support her allegations. You are also right in your assertion that there is no proof, which was the reason Philip Berg asked if I could obtain a “certified” copy of Obama's birth records. If it cannot be certified by a ministry official, there is no way to prove its authenticity. Obviously, if I had a certified birth certificate (not a photo copy of the original) I would not be having these e-mail exchanges with you. FYI, if I had been asked to obtain the same or similar documents for John McCain during the election, and there was some doubt as to his qualifications to run as President, I would have done the same.

What's wrong with actors?

You misspelled my middle name.

A general observation.

Shortly after there was some kind of hiccup here and my posts were removed in addition to my inability to post, the 'conversation' here was just a little more civil than it was prior. I was probably the worst offender when it came to bad language and insults.

I've tried to remain a bit more civil but have realized that I am starting to lean my posts to be less civil. I like the conversations that go on under these blog posts. This is probably the most active comment section for any blog there is.

I am going to try to be more civil. That's all I'm saying. People all have opinions just as they have assholes – me included.

It wasn't that long ago that I did jump on board to thinking Bush knew something about 9/11. I followed Berg like a stupid sheep. The people here that are against Obama are wrong in my opinion but they have the right to express their opinion. I hope they would realize that they're wrong. There's just no way I can lean their direction.

My main reason for posting here is because I dislike Orly. She is a certifiable nutcase and I think she really should be put in a mental hospital. Maybe a couple of months in 'Trembling Pines' is what she needs. And I will make this last observation. Charles Lincoln is no longer working with her and has posted some things on Orly's Facebook that leads me to believe that she is a really bad attorney – not that I needed to be convinced.

I'm going to continue to follow this 'saga' as it continues and I will comment when I feel justified in doing so. Do not be surprised, birthers, if I feel like beating up on you once in awhile. Especially when you make outrageous allegations against Obama.

I will use the process of elimination to come up with the definition of NBC. There are only few possibilities:

a) naturalized citizen
b) born a citizen (includes foreign born children of US citizens)
c) born in the US (includes children of illegal aliens)
d) born in US of citizen parents (most strict definition)

Option (a) was included in this list just for the sake of mentioning all types of paths to citizenship. It is obvious that it does not satisfy the requirement of citizenship at birth.

Options (b), (c) and (d) describe citizens at birth.
The option (b) is the least restrictive of those.

In 1790 US Congress passed a law (An Act to Establish An Uniform Rule of Naturalization) that extended the “natural born citizen” status to foreign born children of US citizens. Five years later, the law was repealed and replaced with the one that declared foreign born children of US citizens to be citizens.

The early Congress made a clear distinction between the terms “Natural Born Citizen (NBC)” and “citizen at birth”.

This clearly indicates that option (b) is not the definition of an NBC.

What is the meaning of the word “natural” in the NBC phrase? Could it be a restriction on place of birth, thus described by option (c)?

The problem with definition (c) is simple: it qualifies children of illegal aliens to be POTUS.
In his letter to Washington, John Jay asked for a “strong check” that a foreigner could not become a commander of US military. He suggested the use of phrase “NBC”.
The idea that a child born in the USA of illegal immigrants would qualify to be a Commander in Chief, is clearly absurd and opposite to the original intention for eligibility requirement.

By showing that options (a), (b) and (c) are not correct, only option (d) remains.

NBC = born in the USA of citizen parents.

This is also the only definition that is bulletproof in a sense that nobody has any doubts that such citizens are NBCs.

It clearly satisfies the original intention about national security since such citizens do not have dual loyalties at birth. In addition, this is the only definition that follows the law of nature – no man-made laws are needed to determine the citizenship at birth for such person.

When Bush 'stole' the 2000 election – and yes, I truly believe he stole it – I was really angry. I remember 9/11 like it was yesterday. I got up and went to my computer. On my main news page, there was a photo of one of the towers that had been hit by an airplane. To me, it looked like it had been it my a small aircraft, so I wrote it off as some pilot just had a heart attack or went to sleep on autopilot. Right before I left to go to work, I had the television on and saw the other airliner hit the second tower. And I didn't go to work that day. I sat and watched the whole drama.

Yes, when I saw the Phil Berg had brought suit against Bush, I was all excited. But over time my thinking changed. Was Bush responsible? I doubt it. At least not directly. HE WAS responsible for not doing something with the intelligence he received. Especially when Rice went on television and said there was no way they could anticipate such an attack – especially after that summit they had attended and the security had taken into consideration that attacks could be carried out by aircraft.

So, I was once nuts because I believed in Berg. I do not believe Obama is a usurper. Having served in the military, I took my oath to protect the Constitution of the United States seriously. The military personnel that are jumping on Orly's bandwagon are traitors in my opinion. The majority of the active duty are merely using this excuse to shirk their duties. I am thankful for what the military gave me. I received a good education and not once did I ever question my orders. If you can remember back in the mid 80's when we kicked Libya's ass, I was there.

I'll just write this. Sneller, you're FOS.

NC. You're beating a dead horse. If you're trying to convince one of us anti-birthers, you're not achieving your goal. This has all been discussed and disputed. SCOTUS would come up with the same decision as the Ilinois appeals court and probably will since that lawsuit will most likely be appealed. Your definition of NBC is WRONG. But go ahead and post it as much as you want. You 'sound' like a broken record.

That's because “YOU CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH” – Jack Nicholson (Actor)

Nothing like the movie A Few Good Men. One of my favorites.

I have misspelled a few names here myself. I referred to Manning as the one that prayed for Obama to die when I knew it was Wiley. So, we all mess up once in awhile.

And the original play that trent referred to. I didn't see the play. Just the movie.

1) Bush “stole” election!?
New York Times paid for the recount (according to Gore's request) to be completed and concluded that it wouldn't have made a difference.
It is also very likely that Nader had siphoned off enough votes from Gore to ensure Bush's victory.

2) Obama's eligibility?
A real leader (commander in chief) would not leave the troops wondering about his eligibility. If soldiers are asked to risk their lives, it should be a trivial request that their CiC proves the eligibility. He should be the one to voluntarily disclose necessary information, to make sure that those under his command have absolutely no doubts about legitimacy of their commander. Instead, Obama is fighting for dismissal of eligibility lawsuits.
A real leader would behave differently.

Unlike 9/11 conspiracy theories, the “birthers” could be proven wrong by showing Obama's long form birth certificate (which would indicate Kapiolani as birth hospital). What do we have instead – Kapiolani removed letter from Obama from their web site when asked about its authenticity. It does not make any sense.

It very clear to me that you cannot debate the arguments. It is much easier to attack the messenger.

The arguments have been debated. Since you've yet to win one of them somehow they are conveniently forgotten in favor of the next crackpot theory.

Sorry, I missed that e-mail. Anyone who would wish personal injury to another is either immature or has a mental disorder. It all comes down to the ballot box, don't you agree? If a President does a good job during his first term, he will be re-elected. If not, he won't. Personally, I don't care who is President as long as the opposite party controls the House. That way, the President can shoot hoops, there are no extreme agendas one way or the other and the country can move forward in slow, deliberate baby steps.

My agenda:

Term limits;
Elimination of pork barrel spending;
Balancing the budget;
Waylon Bennett healthcare reform bill;
Enforcement of current immigration laws (i.e. card check, et al);
Payroll tax holiday;
Tax cuts across the board, including capital gains to 15%.
Re-instatement of the Glass Steigel (sp?) Act and other controls to prevent another “too big to fail” disaster.

I guess you can say I am an independent conservative. As for my father — he was the finance chairman for the Democratic Party during the '70's and 80's, and his name was Sneller.

Exactly, Jeff: You can't handle the truth.

Barack Hussein Obama is the legitimate 44th President of the United States of America.

Both were great! I guess we have something in common.

Never said he wasn't. If the voters like his policies next time around, he will have a second term. If not, he won't.

As usual, you are focused on attacking the messenger.

How about the message: How do we verify that COLB, posted on the “factcheck.org”, proves Obama's Hawaiian birth.

1. Hawaii DoH has not released the index data for registration number 10641. What is there to hide? Repetitive requests from citizens have been ignored by DoH in violation of their state laws.

2. Why does the COLB say “Filed by Registrar” and not “Accepted by State Registrar”?

Manual describing the use of these phrases on Hawaii birth certificates is hidden from public, in violation of Hawaii state laws.

3. Simple requests from DoH to confirm the issuing of Obama's COLB on June 6, 2007 have been ignored. This information has been made public by “factcheck.org”. The DoH would not confirm it. How do we explain their behavior – after all, everything about Obama's Hawaiian birth is legitimate, right?

I have stated my case – can you find any faults in the logic used to make a conclusion that NBC = born in the USA of citizen parents?

The purpose of the ad hominem reply is to save time.

When the man in question is plainly an obsessive, a conspiracist for whom EVERY answer (no matter how plausible) is simply further 'evidence' of an even deeper cover-up, and when every Q asked has been answered 100 times already — then sometimes it's just most humane to shoot the messenger, and put him out of his misery.

I speak allegorically, of course.

You are a nut. NOTHING will ever satisfy you. It is the nature, the burden, and the curse of your life. Get used to it.

You will never get better.

No.

YOU did.

It's a habit of yours.

Indeed!

The purpose of the ad hominem reply is to save time.

When the man in question is plainly an obsessive, a conspiracist for whom EVERY answer (no matter how plausible) is simply further 'evidence' of an even deeper cover-up, and when every Q asked has been answered 100 times already — then sometimes it's just most humane to shoot the messenger, and put him out of his misery.

I speak allegorically, of course.

You are a nut. NOTHING will ever satisfy you. It is the nature, the burden, and the curse of your life. Get used to it.

You will never get better.

Yes.

Your arguments are tendentious lunacy.

You are a nut.

Get used to it.

Yes.

Your arguments are tendentious lunacy.

You are a nut.

Get used to it.

Much better.

See: getting it right isn't really that hard… is it? A good lesson for all birthers to learn; mind you, if they did, they'd have nothing to screech about.

Definition of a natural born US citizen: clear and unambiguous according to Title 8 of the US code, Section 1401. The law says what it says.

Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?

The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.” But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.

Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are “citizens of the United States at birth:”

•Anyone born inside the United States *
•Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
•Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
•Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
•Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
•Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
•Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
•A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
* There is an exception in the law — the person must be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.

Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President.
http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html

I did not. I said he was born in Kenya, according to his birth records. I have no idea whether or not that would make him ineligible to hold the office of President, given that his mother was an American citizen. It seems to me that would be up to the courts to decide, and it appears that decision has been determined by several courts.

Here's what it's like for the sane people on this board to deal with the nuts, the loons, the conspiracists… in other words, the birthers.

They will never, EVER be satisfied. It is the nature of their fetish that they CANNOT be satisfied. Every fact is simply proof of an even deeper cover-up. Their lunacy is a bottomless pit.

CONSIDER: the great mathematician, Nobel Prize winner, and skeptic, Lord Bertrand Russell, was once giving a public lecture on astronomy.

He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy.

At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said, “What you have told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant turtle.”

Lord Russell asked, “What is the turtle standing on?”

“You’re very clever, young man, very clever,” said the old lady. “It's another turtle!”

“And what,” asked Lord Russell, “is THAT turtle standing on?”

“Easily answered,” said the old lady. “It’s turtles all the way down!”

Ahhh, crackpots.

Hmm…I'm going to have to say that the Indiana Court of Appeals did it better. They actually cited to LOTS of legal authority, such as the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent, in order to make a bulletproof argument as to why their definition of natural born citizen is the correct one.

Is there a reason that you didn't cite to any legal authority, such as case law, statutes, or the Constitution in coming to your opinion?

Here's what it's like for the sane people on this board to deal with the nuts, the loons, the conspiracists… in other words, the birthers.

They will never, EVER be satisfied. It is the nature of their fetish that they CANNOT be satisfied. Every fact is simply proof of an even deeper cover-up. Their lunacy is a bottomless pit.

CONSIDER: the great mathematician, Nobel Prize winner, and skeptic, Lord Bertrand Russell, was once giving a public lecture on astronomy.

He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy.

At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said, “What you have told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant turtle.”

Lord Russell asked, “What is the turtle standing on?”

“You’re very clever, young man, very clever,” said the old lady. “It's another turtle!”

“And what,” asked Lord Russell, “is THAT turtle standing on?”

“Easily answered,” said the old lady. “It’s turtles all the way down!”

Ahhh, crackpots.

Here's what it's like for the sane people on this board to deal with the nuts, the loons, the conspiracists… in other words, the birthers.

They will never, EVER be satisfied. It is the nature of their fetish that they CANNOT be satisfied. Every fact is simply proof of an even deeper cover-up. Their lunacy is a bottomless pit.

CONSIDER: the great mathematician, Nobel Prize winner, and skeptic, Lord Bertrand Russell, was once giving a public lecture on astronomy.

He described how the earth orbits around the sun and how the sun, in turn, orbits around the center of a vast collection of stars called our galaxy.

At the end of the lecture, a little old lady at the back of the room got up and said, “What you have told us is rubbish. The world is really a flat plate supported on the back of a giant turtle.”

Lord Russell asked, “What is the turtle standing on?”

“You’re very clever, young man, very clever,” said the old lady. “It's another turtle!”

“And what,” asked Lord Russell, “is THAT turtle standing on?”

“Easily answered,” said the old lady. “It’s turtles all the way down!”

Ahhh, crackpots.

Nothing, except perhaps that they bewilder the naive and gullible.

No doubt you think Orly Taitz is actually a qualified lawyer.

Perhaps you though Heath Ledger was actually a gay cowboy?

I'm sure you see what I mean, if you can handle the truth.

.

Here's something I don't understand.
Aside from the illogic of two broke young people travelling halfway around the world while she was extremely pregnant, why Mombossa?
Barack Obama's Kenyan family lives in Western Kenya on shores of Lake Victoria. Mombossa is on the southeast coast of Kenya, over a thousand miles from the village where Obama's kin live.
And why would Obama Sr. take his young bride to give birth in a city that was not only a thousand miles away from his family, where it is unlikely he knew anyone, but was not even part of Kenya? He would likely have needed a visa just to get in. And there's no evidence that Mrs. Obama had a passport at that time, since there is no evidence she had ever left the country before. How would she have gained admittance to Zanzibar without a passport?
Also, it's well-known that Mr. Obama Sr. already had a wife and two children in Kenya, and it's certain that Stanley Ann Obama knew nothing about the first Mrs. Obama since all the couple's friends in Hawaii swear that they didn't know about his other family. Is it believable that a man would take his new bride home to meet the other wife that she didn't know about? Why would any man willingly walk into that hornet's nest?
In addition, there is a witness, Barbara Nelson, who discussed President Obama's birth on Aug.4, 1961, the day he was born in Hawaii, with the doctor who delivered him. She wrote to her father about the event, and later was one of President Obama's teachers at the Punahou School.
Considering that anyone born on American soil is a natural-born American citizen, I really don't see what all the fuss is about.

Ahhh, welcome young man!

I gave up a while ago. You are absolutely right, and it won't change a thing. These nuts absolutely adore spinning in circles. Let them rattle on. No one who is part of the REAL world takes these wackos seriously, and neither should you.

Look at it this way, if you know where the insane asylum is, you wouldn't want to visit, unless you knew someone inside. If you didn't, you wouldn't go there.

Leave them their idiotic rants, it'll amount to nothing, anyway.

Sorry, but I don't understand your response.

I don't know Orly Taitz, and I don't know anything about her qualifications. I forwarded information to her at the request of another attorney.

He was in the movie.

The Statesmans Year Book 1950

KENYA COLONY AND PROTECTORATE.

Government. The Kenya Colony and Protectorate extend, on the
Indian Ocean, from the Umba River to Dick's Head, and inland as far as Lake Victoria and Uganda. The protectorate consists of the mainland dominions of the Sultan of Zanzibar, viz., a coastal strip of territory 10 miles wide, to the northern branch of the Tana River; also Kau, Kipini and the Island of Lamu, and all adjacent islands between rivers Umba and Tana, these territories having been leased to Great Britain in 1895 for an annual rent of 10,000, since raised to 16,000. The colony and protectorate, known as the East Africa Protectorate, were, on 1 April, 1905, transferred from the authority of the Foreign Office to that of the Colonial Office, and in
November, 1906, the protectorate was placed under the control of a
Governor and Commander-in-Chief and (except the Sultan of Zanzibar's
dominions) was annexed to the Crown as from 23 July, 1920, under the
name of * The Colony of Kenya,' thus becoming a Crown Colony. The
territories on the coast rented from the Sultan of Zanzibar became the Kenya Protectorate. In 1908 foreign consular jurisdiction in the Zanzibar strip of coast was transferred to the British Crown.

You aren't a messenger. You're a lunatic and a bigot.

Asked and answered, repeatedly. You are wrong according to both the Constitution and the law.

Please do something useful with your time, like volunteer at a halfway house.

#1 – beyond the purview of this discussion.

#2 – the only soldiers who wonder about the President's eligibility are the ones Orly Taitz, Phil Berg, Andy Martin, and other seditious individuals have encouraged to file lawsuits against the Commander in Chief.

See Kerchner v Obama. The logic and the law is on my side. You can do your own homework and find the faults in it.

Or you could just recite the same crackpot bullshit again. That seems to really sway the judiciary.

So you're just trolling. You'll die angry and lonely and miss all the cool stuff that way, but its not my life.

Assuming a Kenya birth:

At the time Obama was born, 8 USC 1401, would have read:

“The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United
States at birth:

(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years…”

IOW 19 years old. Ann was 18 years old at the birth, just 3 months short.

Not sure what you mean — “trolling.”

FYI, I am neither angry or lonely, and I have more than my share of cool stuff — you would know that if you did an internet search.

I wouldn't know. The information was given to me over the telephone. Do you really care? I don't.

” The territories on the coast rented from the Sultan of Zanzibar became the Kenya Protectorate. In 1908 foreign consular jurisdiction in the Zanzibar strip of
coast was transferred to the British Crown.” — The Statesmans Year Book 1950

Mombasa Island is connected to the mainland by a strip of land. Google Maps

They were married February 2, 196, on Maui, as students, they had a school break until late September. Kenya was economical, and affordable. He wanted her to meet his family. Mombasa had the better hotels, views, airport, etc., but who knows, they could have traveled to Eastern Kenya, visited relatives, then to the coast to leave. But, they got caught in third trimester, and couldn't. No problem, the birth could be registered with the consulate or on return to Hawaii.

“NBC = born in the USA of citizen parents.”

Note the plural, because a child born to a citizen (singular) parent, and an alien world-wide, is a dual national.

And the Indiana appeals court on page 17, footnote 15 “We reiterate that we do not address the question of natural born citizen status for persons who became United States citizens at birth by virtue of being born of United States citizen parents, despite the fact that they were born abroad. That question was not properly presented to this court. Without addressing the question, however, we note that nothing in our opinion today should be understood to hold that being born within the fifty United States is the only way one can receive natural born citizen status.”

An inconclusive answer, even neglecting a later decision by SCOTUS in Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939), where two naturalized citizens birthed an NBC, in the USA.

Steve_X, the Indiana Court of Appeals did not define natural born citizen.

Would you mind quoting where they did?

“* There is an exception in the law — the person must be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.”

If “jurisdiction” was enforced, the children born to tourists, drug cartel soldiers, illegal aliens, and persons trafficked in as sex slaves or surrogates, wouldn't be granted US nationality.

How about requiring “owing allegiance to the USA” as a requirement for NBC?

I do not need to cite more than two laws from 1790 and 1795 that clearly indicate that early Congress made a distinction between the “natural born citizen” and “citizen at birth”.

The rest of the discussion is focused on the original intent for inclusion of NBC phrase into Constitution.

There is no court case that explicitly define the NBC. It is not needed – the only definition for which no man made law is needed for interpretation is the one that says “born in the USA of citizen parents”.

Any other definition involves debate – references to court cases, man-made laws. It stops being a “natural born citizen” and becomes a “born a citizen” definition.

I have not seen anything but personal attacks from you.
Why don't you use your brain and rebut my arguments. I don't think you are capable of doing it.

You are switching arguments because you are not capable to find a flaw in my logic for defining NBC.

Did you read my post carefully?

Early Congress made clear distinction between phrases “natural born citizen” and “citizen at birth”. Therefore, you cannot simply make an assumption that two are the same and proceed to cite a law that defines who the citizen at birth is.

In addition, framers of the Constitution could have specified the phrase “citizen at birth” as part of the eligibility requirement.
Hamilton proposed to use the phrase “born a citizen”. It was not adopted. Instead, the proposal described in John Jay's letter to Washington to include the “natural born citizen” was adopted.

Was that case debated on merits or dismissed on standing issue?

It is obvious that you cannot find a fault in my logic. Thank you for playing.

If you are going to come to our country from some Third World backwater, at least do America the simple courtesy of deploying our language (its norms of spelling, syntax, and grammar) correctly.

You should have written, “… because you are not capable of finding a flaw…”, OR, “you are incapable of finding a flaw…”

Learn the distinctions between and among the infinitive, transitive and intransitive forms — if you can.

You are beyond hopeless in terms of your fetishistic obsessions. There is no cure for your disorder. However, we are willing to help you with your English.

Everything else you have to offer is, well, goofy. No one takes you seriously, even for a moment.

Ha ha.

What does it make you when you cannot make a logical argument to show the flaw in my thinking: nut squared?

None of the questions from my previous post have been answered. It is a fact that Hawaii DoH would not confirm that COLB was issued to Obama on June 6, 2007.

If they are not willing to confirm it – there is no reason to trust Joe Miller (factcheck.org) who says that document is genuine.

You are switching arguments because you are not capable of finding a flaw in my logic for defining the phrase “natural born citizen”.

Your questions are of no consequence. Your analysis is of no value. Your conclusions lack all validity.

Your fetish is so all-pervasive that you seem genuinely surprised when normal people do not share it.

Please listen carefully: NO ONE CARES WHAT YOU THINK. You birthers are utterly discredited. You trade in forged documents, absurd scenarios, and disinformation. You are foreign subversives who are busy trying to undermine American democracy.

I would, however, be interested in reading your other fact-based posts: yours about black helicopters, space aliens, the Island of Lost Monkeys, and the Seventeen Cities of Cibola.

Now those would be fun! Your current mania? A total bore.

Orly Taitz is clearly a seditionist. In her own name she has filed documents encouraging desertion, refusal to follow orders, and unlawful flight from military obligation.

After she is disbarred, she will be tried for sedition.

When found guilty, she will be deported to her native Russia, and be given a hero's welcome by the KGB, whose cause she so willingly serves.

None of the questions I asked require foreign documents to prove Obama's birthplace.

You have no intellectual honesty to debate the issue on merits. That is why you act like Obama's guard dog, barking at anyone who dares to ask eligibility questions.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!! NC, you're so funny!!! You take your opinion over SCOTUS and the constitution and complain about someone else's intellectual honesty? The only thing you've got is BS, you might as well give it up!

Another Obama guard dog barking?
That is all you've got – no intellectual honesty or capability to discuss the issue.

Look at the my post up the thread – it is about verification of COLB. Can you address a single point?

Um, Gerry? Kenya wasn't exactly a vacation spot for young white women in 1961, especially one in the late stages of pregnancy. This little thing called the Mau Mau Uprising sort of made it, you know, *dangerous* for non-natives. Or didn't they teach you that in whatever pathetic excuse for college you attended?

Once again, FAIL.

You really can't read very well, can you?

Done repeatedly by me and others in many, many threads. Have you called Pepperdine yet?

He's done so repeatedly in other threads. You, however, stop responding as soon as anyone rebuts your arguments and switch to another thread.

Give it up, Orly. You're wrong, and no matter how much you yell and scream and kick your heels, Barack Obama will still be natural born, and still President.

Oh, have you called a law school yet? If not, why not? And what about those 39 judges? Got any names yet? If not, why not? And why won't you answer any question that's put to you except by changing the subject and whining?

Just asking.

Your ignorance of basic civics is appalling, although not as bad as your bigotry.

What logic? All you've done is repeat the same easily debunked talking points over and over again. Not only that, you've refused to call a law professor who could explain *why* you're wrong.

Not only ignorant, but willfully ignorant. Pathetic.

The birth certificate has been verified, repeatedly. Refusing to accept it in the face of assertions by the Hawaiian government, a contemporary account of Obama's birth, two birth announcements in Hawaiian newspapers, and the opinion of judges and legal scholars shows a profound lack of intellectual honesty or the ability to admit that one is wrong.

Give it up, Orly. All the sophistry in the world won't change the election.

Once again, irrelevant. The President was born in Hawaii.

Put up or shut up.

I think NC has dementia. We've constantly rebutted and we're tired of the same thing being posted time and time again.

The problem with you birfers is that Obama provided a Certificate of Live Birth. He already provided the proof. The proof has been confirmed by the State of Hawaii. So, give it up. You have no legitimate argument.

I agree. She should be tried for sedition.

What nonsense. Everyone knows that the world is a flat disk that rests on the backs of four elephants.

It's the elephants who ride the back of the turtle.

The turtle doesn't stand on anything, he simply swims through space.

You are the one with no intellectual honesty…or any knowledge of our constitution and laws. So, have you started working on the pub congressmen? They’re the only hope you have now. The courts have this silly little thing about following the laws and our constitution, unlike you, NC. So your only hope is the pubs. Time to get to work.

Baased on B'raving's definition, tourists, drug cartel soldiers, illegal aliens, and persons trafficked in as sex slaves or surrogates, could come to the U.S. and rape muder and kill U.S. Citizens at will because they wouldn't be subject to U.S. jurisdicition.

On the otherhand, it would also mean that tourists would not be protected from rape and muder while in the U.S. as well.

Interesting legal theory, BR. Go try it out. . . .

more psuedo legal nonsense from someone who is bat excrement crazy.

From the Court of Appeals in Indiana:

Page 17

Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States [] natural-born citizens.”

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/111209…

Well, for your amusement, Judge Land has started to add interest to Orly's sanction, about $72 a day it sounds like…

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/story/91005…

Guess the blowers are going to need to dig deeper into their pockets…Orly NEEDS YOU!!!

Charles Lincoln has apparently dumped Orly as well.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/22567277/11-12-2009-C…

(not to mention the potential problems that affadavit may cause Orly in the Cal-Bar)

See NOT_AXJ's response below mine.

Are you truly that stupid that you didn't even bother to READ the case that you disagree with so much? At least naturalizedcitizen read the case before he talked about it; he's still entirely wrong about the definition of natural born citizen, and his “legal authority” consists solely of his own opinion and Swiss philosophy, but at least he tried.

You…you're just sad. Stick to teabagging

I wonder if that interest gets compounded?

You know, that's really got to hurt. . . .

Perkins versus Elg confirmed Elg to be a natural born citizen even though her parents were Swedish nationals.

From Perkins v. Elg:

The court below, properly recognizing the existence of an actual controversy with the defendants [307 U.S. 325, 350] (Aetna Life Ins. Co. v. Haworth, 300 U.S. 227 , 57 S.Ct. 461, 108 A.L.R. 1000), declared Miss Elg 'to be a natural born citizen of the United States' (99 F.2d 414) and we think that the decree should include the Secretary of State as well as the other defendants. The decree in that sense would in no way interfere with the exercise of the Secretary's discretion with respect to the issue of a passport but would simply preclude the denial of a passport on the sole ground that Miss Elg had lost her American citizenship.

I believe the biggest problem birthers have is their inability to understand this:

A natural born citizen is a person born in the United States or to two U. S. Citizens if born overseas. A naturalized citizen is one who has been given citizenship to the United States and not born in the United States. There is a difference, though SCOTUS has not definitively addressed the terms.

Orly doesn't pay, she'll get impounded. Nice cell with a view of 4 walls.

The birfers want to see the first turtle's birf sertifikat.

I was tempted to rebut NC (again), but he has become predictable, therefore boring, therefore not entertaining. I vow to ignore him.

The fact is Congress used the term “natural born citizen” only once, in 1790, and has never used it again in the citizenship laws. NC provides us no history (e.g., record of legislative debates) to explain why Congress dropped the term in 1795. No court is going to accept NC's assumption as to why Congress made that change, absent such legislative history — NC's opinion, surprising as it may be to NC, just isn't enough. Moreover, the use of the term “natural born citizen” in the 1790 Act was only with reference to the children of U.S. citizens born abroad. Congress never purported to provide an inclusive definition of “natural born citizen.” For example, Congress never said that a person born in the U.S. is a “natural born citizen” or that a person born in the U.S. of one or two citizen parents is a “natural born citizen.” The courts simply won't find the record of congressional enactments in 1790 and 1795 persuasive with regard to defining who is and who is not a natural born citizen.

Lincoln and Orly were running a scam. Lincoln is still running it. He gets people in foreclosure to sign over their property to him. It's not completely clear how a home owner that has a mortgage can do this without the consent of the bank but it is apparently the way the Chucky boy can then fight against the mortgage company, pro se, without being an attorney. During the time he's doing this, he can do anything he wants with the property except sell it. Live in it, rent it out… The end loser will be the people that signed their property over the Lincoln in hopes that he can stop the foreclosure. He will ultimately lose and they will lose as well.

“Dr. Taitz is perfectly fluent in five languages but English is not one of them.”

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

That and law.

borderraving has ignored that simple paragraph and instead reads their footnotes to continue his assertion that Obama is not natural born. But in his assertion, he cites Perkins v Elg where the Supreme Court decided that Elg was indeed a natural born citizen even though her parents, who were born in Sweden, took her back to Sweden when she was a child. Her father renounced his naturalized citizenship here.

I am ignoring your Pepperdine question and similar others because they have no relevance to the topic being discussed.

You got the idea from trentino about me being Orly, and I did not want to burst your bubble.
The best you can do is to waste the bandwidth on this page.

Fact is us birthers could be satisfied with just two things: The Original Birth Certificate & release of all college records.

Do you realize that the mere fact of changing the words from “natural born citizen” to “citizen” has significance?

Early Congress made a distinction between the two terms.

To a person with an open mind, this eliminates “citizen at birth” as possible definition of NBC. It does not define NBC, but reduces possible definitions.

You do not need any additional laws or cases to eliminate “citizenship at birth” as definition for NBC.

Do I need to draw a picture for you?

I am not Orly. I gave you enough clues to realize that. That is why I ignore your questions addressed to her.

You would have to find her guilty. Would it not lead to discovery process that “lord Obama” is trying to avoid?

Oh, B.S. Your problem is that a black man is in the white house.

Nothing will satisfy you until that situation changes.

Fact is blowers would just call the BC fake and don't have any need for college records. Instead, blowers need to contact every congressman who are “friends” with Orly on her facebook page. They are desperate for the “fringe” vote, so they need you to get re-elected. Michael Steele can give you the names of the ones that are “afraid” of blacks…they'll be your prime backers. Then, Congress can use it's power to get the information you want. Courts will never do it for you, they have this thing about following the law and constitution. So, congress it is for you. Good Luck!

Another Obama's guard dog…

Try debating a single point.

Were the parents naturalized US citizens at the time when baby was born? Was baby born in the USA?

Your posts don't make any points. It's just your opinion. And, as you've proven time and time again, your opinion has no basis in law or the constitution. You need to go after the pubs in congress now, they're your only hope…since the courts have this thing with following the the laws and constitution of our country and not the uniformed opinions of someone who doesn't even like our constitution.

NC: “You do not need any additional laws or cases to eliminate “citizenship at birth” as definition for NBC.”

That's correct, because “citizenship at birth” was the exact idea our forefathers had…as stated in the Indiana Appeals opinion. No further laws needed and Obama is our legal president. Thanks for the help in pointing that out for us NC.

Ha Ha Ha.

Try arguing that in front of a Judge.

“But your Honor, I know why they made the change in the law in 1795. Well, no, I can't cite any legislative history, but I have a master's degree and I know.”

You know nothing about the law, you have no legal training, you've never argued a case in front of a judge.

Go away.

Done with your idiocy.

You're entitled to nothing. Your delusions are irrelevant.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
News Release
LINDA LINGLE
GOVERNOR
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CHIYOME LEINAALA FUKINO M.D.
DIRECTOR
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release: July 27, 2009 09-063
STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii 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.”
###

Are you nuts?

“Could” be satisfied? “Could”?

You won't be happy til you have gotten rid of our first black President. Period. Nothing will ever disguise, nor ever dissolve, your fundamental racism, and your contempt for democracy.

NO ONE BELIEVES YOU.

Meantime, your lunatic leader is going to have to sell her dental chairs, and then (thank you, God!) face disbarment for her incompetence, and deportation for her sedition. Can't come soon enough.

We sane Americans will be satisfied with just those two things.

That and using a fake SSN got him convicted of a felony in Texas and disbarred.

Fake SSN? Oh, the irony.

Don't confuse Nancee boy's little pea-brain with facts.

The citizenship of Elg's parents is immaterial to the finding. Read the ruling. Her NBC status was based on the earlier SCOTUS ruling in Wong, which determined that anyone born on US soil regardless of citizenship of the parents is a natural born citizen. Look at the cite.

And then all the other turtles, too.

Is there no end to their madness?

And Mothra? How do the birthers explain Mothra?

We demand answers!

I'll pay for the décor.

Pictures of Michelle O and the girls should do quite nicely.

Who cares? You are an obsessive nutter.

Apparently all the nonsense has P.O.d the judge in that case. After Orly wrote him

http://www.scribd.com/doc/22497192/DOC-19-River…

He has issued a show cause order for the plaintiffs to explain possible fraudulent filings.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/22546059/RIVERNIDER-v…

To give Orly the benefit of doubt, I suspect the CEL is behind most of the fraud, but I don't rule out her being aware of it before hand in spite of what she claims.

How's this for a definition of Orly's sedition?

Section 3
Whoever, when the United States is at war, shall willfully make or convey false reports or false statements with intent to interfere with the operation or success of the military or naval forces of the United States…

Something about her efforts to prevent members of the military from reporting for duty under the pretext that Mr Obama was actually born in Zanzibar? Ring a bell?

After Orly is disbarred, then comes the sedition trial. After that? Deportation to Russia, and a hero's welcome from the KGB.

There is also the complete lack of evidence that the Obamas ever made any such journey. No passport records, no witnesses, no evidence that Barack Obama Sr. knew anyone in that part of the country, which after all was over a thousand miles from where he was born and raised.
It's not like they were tourists. They were broke college students with no disposable income to speak of .
Also the idea that a pregnant 18 year old girl would voluntarily leave her mother at such a time is laughable to any woman.
And of course there is the fact that there's plenty of easily verifiable evidence that President Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii, just as he has always said.
Born in the USA, he was born in the USA!

Quote:
————————–
I will use the process of elimination to come up with the definition of the phrase
“natural born citizen” (NBC). There are only few possibilities:

a) naturalized citizen
b) born a citizen (includes foreign born children of US citizens)
c) born in the USA (includes children of illegal aliens)
d) born in the USA of citizen parents (most strict definition)
——————————

You do understand, don't you that b) and c) of the above are exactly the same.

If you are born in the U.S., you are a citizen, regardles of who your parents are.

That is quite clearly defined in the 14th amendment.

BTW, don't think that the Judge in Florida won't sanction your ass as well. Certainly the Riverniders may have a valid lawsuit against you and chuckles.

Trent, unfortunately, the U.S. is not at war.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!! NC, you continually crack me up! You really do need to get your legal information from somewhere else other than Orly or WND.

Here’s an interesting point.
A few years ago some anti-immigration congressmen wanted to amend the Constitution to prevent the children of illegal immigrants born in the USA from having natural born citizen status.
This proposal proceeded from the fact that any child born in this country, with the narrow exception of the child of a diplomat, is a natural born citizen.
Now these same people are claiming that there are two classes of people born here: citizens and super duper extra American citizens.
Typical of the Right. Whatever is convenient for them must be the truth.

We'll get Charles Lincoln III, Esq, to talk about Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Al Q'uada. That should keep her busy…

Seriously? Is that your game? Do you really see yourself as some kind of holy martyr?

Birth certificate was released over a year ago. College records are not relevant to citizenship since the President was born in Hawaii to an American citizen.

No kidding. I rebutted his point of “John Jay’s letter to George Washington” in depth and at length, with links to historical sources, last week.

He’s gone right back to citing that letter as if it proves his point. I think we should just refuse to respond to any further posts by NC. NC’s arguments go around and around in predictable circles.

Also, given how restrictive pre-1965 immigration laws were, it's possibly that Obama Sr. was legally prohibited from leaving the United States until he completed his degree. Has anyone researched this topic?

I’m not the one listing irrelevant, erroneous citations over and over and over and over and over again. I’m also not the one advocating the overthrow of a legally elected President because a nut with too much mascara has come up with a ridiculous legal theory to disguise her bigotry.

ellid, what’s really funny is when you point out to them that:

“We’re not the ones who are more willing to follow a White Russian than a Black American citizen.”

“We’re not the ones trying to overturn the Constitution to save it.”

“We’re not the ones calling everybody who disagrees with us traitors.” (as Orly does)

“We’re not the ones citing Vattel when old English Common law (which is what our constitution and laws were based on) doesn’t say what we want it to.”

And so forth and so on.

I especially like NC saying he doesn’t want to go to a law professor because he knows the professor will tell him what he doesn’t want to hear…especially when Orly and WND are so much better sources. LOL

Indeed and indeed!

You have given no clues beyond poor grammar and repetitious posts. Based on those, you’re either Orly Taitz or someone who thinks just like her.

Who is this Lord Obama person? Sounds like a character from a bodice-ripping romance novel to me.

Do the turtles have college records? I want to see their long-form birth certificates AND their college records. Then I'll be satisfied!

(Unless, that is, any of the turtles had a Kenyan father. Then the birth certificate doesn't even matter, because they can't be natural born turtles if their fathers were Kenyan).

But none of this applies to white turtles.

Imagine that! I didn't know RuPaul was a birfer!

Exactly so!

Especially the part about the WHITE turtles. (Shhh… don't tell the birthers. When they are named for the racists they are, they get all huffy and puffy. It's a sad sight.)

Thanks,

Trent

What? You thought their fetish began and ended with Mr Obama! Hardly.

The birthers are no less interested in cross-dressing, Dorothy's red shoes, and the sex tapes of Carrie Prejean.

Gotta hand it to the birthers… their sickness knows no bounds.

Just wait til Orly's sedition trial starts up. We'll soon find them blaming the entire US Army… no. Wait. That's been done.

Mothra is a magical and mythical beast that lives in the mountains of Uberwald.

So, Orly, how do you intend to respond to the latests Show Cause Order?

Your ex-lover Chuck has roped you in to his little hell.

Where does she say that the original birth certificate confirms Hawaiian birth?

You need to put both of her press releases next to each other and read both to get the idea of language used to mislead the US public. In the first pres release ahe mentioned the original birth certificate but did not say anything about Hawaiian birth.

In the second one (quoted in your post) she mentions Hawaiian birth but she also mentions original vital records (plural) which gives her wiggle room. How many documents are there to support the Hawaiian birth. We do not know.

The second press release (July 2009) was issued just few hours after the resolution by Congress saying that Obama was born in Hawaii. Was this resolution used as a cover for Dr. Fukino's public statement?

If Obama was indeed born in Hawaii, why would DoH refuse to confirm that the COLB (image posted on factcheck.org) was issued to Obama on June 6, 2007.

Why would DoH refuse to release the index data for registration number 10641. This violates Hawaii state laws that make index data public.

Why would DoH refuse to make public the manual describing the “Filed by Registrar” vs. 'Accepted by State registrar” which would explain the meaning of the COLB?

If your interpretation of Dr. Fukino's statement is correct, there would be no need for DoH to hide tha data that is (according to Hawaii state law) in public domain.

And finally, for each of Dr. Fukino's statements I will quote you three statements by Colin Powell, George Tennet and other government officials who claimed that Iraq had WMDs and the case was “slam dunk”. Powell even went to UN and showed pictures of “storage sites”.

We do not need to invade the foreign country to verify Dr. Fukino's words. It would be sufficient if we could force the DoH to follow Hawaii state laws.

Give it up NC, Hawaii says he was born there and no amount of your usual BS is going to change that. Now, have you started on Congress yet? They're going to be your only avenue now. Make sure to call, write, and e-mail them every single day. They are your only hope now. Michael Steele will be happy to give you a list of congressmen who, like you, are scared of a black man. Contact him every hour until he gives you those names.

Are you stupid or cannot read a simple statement?

This is not debate about CITIZENSIP.

“Read the ruling.”

This you can be sure NC will not do. NC asks questions. NC does not do research, even when led by the nose to the sources he seeks. When corrected, he changes the topic or fails to admit his error. And then after a day or two, he goes back to posting the same errors. This circle of ignorance has no end because NC cannot bear for it to end. He seems to take a perverse pleasure in futility. My assumption is that he is an extremely lonely person, and he would rather we make fun of him than ignore him completely. Being denounced by us gives his life meaning, perhaps the only meaning it has.

Many of us have suggested that he take action, instead of just whining. For example, if he truly believes that President Obama has committed Social Security fraud by using a SSN that was not legally issued to him, NC could file a complaint with the Social Security Administration. I’ve provided him a link to do so, numerous times. I doubt he has done it. He is impotent. All rage, no action.

I think that you are misquoting the ruling. Put the exact quote you used to reach this conclusion and we can debate it.

WKA case confirms that children born in the USA of permanent resident parents are CITIZENS. It does not define the NBC.

——————————–
In the second one (quoted in your post) she mentions Hawaiian birth and used phrase “original vital records” (plural) which gives her wiggle room. How many documents are there to support the Hawaiian birth? We do not know.

————————————–

“original vital records” (plural)

This is the proper use of the term for a native English speaker.

You might say: “the original record” but not “The original vital record.”

“Vital Records” (plural) is the common term, and in fact, depending on how their databae is set up, may infact be an accurate description of the record orginization.

NC: “Pay attention to me! Pay attention to me! I’m giving you clues! I know that you are all on this blog just so that you can guess my secret identity! Look at my clues!”

Sure it is, the constitution only recognizes 2 kinds, natural born and naturalized. So, you have to create a third out of thin air. So, where does the law or constitution mention this 3rd type of citizenship you're making up?

Hawaii DoH is violating their own state laws.
That tells me all I need to know about “truthfulness” of Dr. Fukino's statements.

No, they're violating your and some of those 3rd rate lawyers you read's interpretation of their state laws. No crime in not following someone who doesn't know or practice law in the State. Meanwhile, the Hawaii AG is perfectly fine with how they've handled things. If they are breaking the law, that's who you need to contact…although it will just amuse them as to how little you truly know.

If ever he needs a really good attorney…

The proper word is “original birth certificate”. Original vital records phrase is not as specific – it could indicate multiple records including amendments to birth certificate. It does not pinpoint the source of claim for Obama's Hawaiian birth.
As a native speaker you should know that.

I use Dr. Fukino's first press-release as a guide to deciphering her words. The October 2008 statement is clearly designed to mislead the public. That is why I am not willing to give her the benefit of the doubt on how to interpret the July 2009 statement.

We can verify her statement using legal ways – if we could force the DoH to comply with Hawaii state laws and release public domain documents.

from Wong Kim Ark:

The first section of the second article of the Constitution uses the language, “a natural-born citizen.” It thus assumes that citizenship may be acquired by birth. Undoubtedly, this language of the Constitution was used in reference to that principle of public law, well understood in this country at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, which referred citizenship to the place of birth.

How did the state manual describing the steps in handling birth registration become a secret document?

Why is it that doH would not publicly explain the meaning of phrases 'Filed By Registrar” vs. “Accepted by State Registrar”?

The index data for registration number 10641 is public data. They refuse to release it.

Keep you head in the sand.

Boring. So, you ever going to get a new act? Especially when you have to keep lying.

We need to make sure that those turtles naturally-born turtles and not just turtles at birth. Vattel says that there's a BIG difference between the two, as only a natural-born turtle is allowed to stand on another turtle's back and support the earth.

I am not inventing a citizenship class.
There is only one citizenship. All citizens are equal in their rights and responsibilities. You are describing various paths to citizenship.

Natural Born Citizen phrase appears only in the eligibility requirement for POTUS – nowhere else in the Constitution. It is a security measure that prevents a foreigner from being elected as a commander of US military.

Early Congress made a clear distinction between phrases NBC and “citizen at birth” as I have described in my first post.

I'm confused.
I've been looking at my birth certificate and it doesn't even say “birth certificate.”
It says “Copy of a Record of Live Birth” instead. And it lists the town I was born in, but not the hospital! It also lists my parents' birthplaces, but no racial information is provided. It gives the doctor's name, but is utterly mute on the subject of whether the “certificate” was “filed” or “accepted.” And it's really short. It doesn't look like a “long form” at all, just about half a sheet of typing paper. I mean I got a social security number, a passport, a driver's license, and several jobs using it as identification. Was that wrong?
Am I a citizen? A secret Kenyan? Should I start packing for Mombossa?

It is far from certain that the U.S. Supreme Court will hear the case. To begin with, the Indiana Supreme Court has discretionary jurisdiction over any appeal from the Indiana Court of Appeals. In other words, the Indiana Supreme Court could decide that they don’t want to hear the case. If they agree with the decision of the Court of Appeals, the very well may decline review.

The U.S. Supreme Court also has discretion whether to review an appeal (Writ of Certiorari) from the Indiana Supreme Court. If the decision from Indiana is that Barack Obama is a “natural born citizen,” I expect the U.S. Supreme Court would decline review, for at least the following reasons:

(1) The decisions of the Indiana Supreme Court and the Indiana Court of Appeals provide binding precedent only for other lower Indiana state courts. Thus, the Indiana Court of Appeals decision does not affect anyone’s ability to raise the “natural born citizen” issue in other jurisdictions, including in any federal court.

(2) Granting review could create an extended period of uncertainty regarding the status of the President, and SCOTUS threatens its own legitimacy if it is seen as undermining a sitting President and his ability to head the Executive Branch and serve as Commander-in-Chief.

(3) The Consitution already provides a method for dealing with a sitting President: Impeachment. For the same reason other federal courts have stayed out of this issue, I think the U.S. Supreme Court will as well.

Oh my gosh, I just realized my “birth certificate” doesn't even give my birth weight, time of birth, eye color, or religion. Oh no!

There are no lies in my previous post, just simple facts.

It is up to you if you want to keep your head in the sand and pretend that these facts do not exist.

No, it's up to you if you want to keep your head in the sand with your a$$ stuck up in the air for anyone to kick. We have Obama as the legally elected president.

You know? You're right.

We'll have to tell Orly, quickly, before she's disbarred.

And then deported.

Well there you go again.

NC doesn’t need no stinkin’ cases.

NC doesn’t need no stinkin’ statutes.

NC has NC’s opinion.

NC needs nothing more.

Except, the constitution states:

“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States,”

sounds to me like they accept Citizens and not the special one you want to create.

Translation:
Citizenship can be acquired by birth. The principle is illustrated by the example of an NBC.

The last sentence says that a person born in the USA is a CITIZEN.

There is no definition of an NBC in the quote you provided.

WKA case confirmed that children born in USA of resident parents are US citizens. It does not define the NBC phrase.

Are you white? If so, don't sweat it.

If you are not white, I think it is time you had “The Talk” with your parents. Apparently you are actually an adopted Indonesian Muslim.

Quote the complete sentence then make a comment on it.
The second part that you conveniently omitted describes the grandfathered clause used by several of first presidents. They could not be natural born, that is why they had to make a privision for citizens, at the time when Constitution was adopted, to be eligible to run for POTUS.

That option has long ago expired.

“Natural born” is a security measure that restricts the pool of eligible citizens who could command the US military.

It was rather obvious that Chucky and Orly had parted ways — all the evidence anyone needed was her “Motion for Reconsideration” filed with Judge Carter. Complete gibberish — written exactly how Orly speaks. It is fascinating to see just how dreadful Orly's own work is, without her disbarred paralegal ghostwriting for her.

You are mad that a non-lawyer, with clear logical thinking could prove you wrong.

The example I used: the change of words used in laws from 1790 and 1795 destroys the Indiana Appelate Court opinion.

It clearly says that early Congress did not consider NBC to be the same as citizen at birth. No amount of language twisting and “lawyering” can change that simple fact.

What other cases do you need to show the simple truth?
This is an early Congress speaking. They knew better what the meaning of the NBC phrase was, when written into Constitution, than some judge 100 or 200 years after the fact.

If you used the John Jay’s letter as a guidance – there is no possibility to go astray as to what the intention of the NBC phrase is.

Not according to Bush.

The only problem is that you are not seeing the word “ELIMINATE” in my previous post.

The language used by Congress in change of law (1790 to 1795) is sufficient to eliminate the claim that NBC = “citizen at birth”.

Are you running for the office of POTUS?
Was there any report of you being born in three different countries and two different Hawaii hospitals?

If the answer to both of the above questions is yes – than we need to verify your claim of USA birth.

You rebutted nothing.

You could not provide any other source for including the phrase NBC into Constitution. As far as I know John Jay’s letter is the only one.

Your argument was that letter does not explicitly say what the phrase means.

The letter provides the MOTIVATION for inclusion of the NBC phrase into Constitution: A “strong check” that a foreigner would not be elected to be a commander of US military.
Basically, it is a national security measure.

Combine it with the early Congress’ redefinition of 1790 law (NBC is not the same as “citizen at birth”) and you get very close to what the NBC phrase means.

Include the opinion of John Bingham, the writer of the Section 1 of the 14th Amendment…

Nope, it isn’t. Otherwise there would have been a definition for it. You making one up doesn’t count.

By “report” do you mean credible information backed up by actual evidence, or just some stuff somebody big fat made up?

Actually, I’ll believe SCOTUS before I’ll believe someone who doesn’t know or understand our constitution…

From KWA

” Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord Coke in Calvin’s Case, 7 Rep. 6a, “strong enough to make a natural subject, for if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject;” and his child, as said by Mr. Binney in his essay before quoted, “if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle.”

Amazing how you think you know more than SCOTUS and have to BS around them to try and make a BS point.

Yea. I remember what my original BC looked like. It was small and black with white lettering. It had all of the relevant information that the birthers are asking from Obama now. However, I haven't seen it for a long time and I needed to get another so I ordered one from the Dept of Vital Statistics in Kansas. Lo and behold. I received a certificate of live birth. Looks pretty much like what Obama posted in June 2008.

NO. The parents weren’t naturalized. Only one. Yes, Elg was born in New York City.

So, how are you going to twist this, NC? Are you going to amend your contention and say that POTUS qualifications only require ONE parent that is naturalized.

YOU BIRTHERS ALL NEED TO READ AND COMPREHEND THE DECISION.

You are SO RIGHT!

You’re making things up NC. Both Wong and Elg were considered by SCOTUS to be natural born since they were born here in the U.S. It didn’t matter if the parents were citizens. Wong would have held up more than Elg in a birther’s mind because his parents stayed here. In Elg, her parents moved back to Switzerland and her father renounced his naturalized citizenship. SCOTUS determined that because Elg was moved to Switzerland when she was a minor AND she had not renounced her citizenship that she was still A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

“The October 2008 was clearly designed to mislead the public”.

On which planet do you reside NC? Why don't you conspiracy theorists go jump off a cliff. You'd be doing society a HUGE FAVOR.

NC. You were obviously kicked in the head by a butterfly when you were a kid. Hope the damage clears up one day but it's doubtful.

Orly is fluent in Klingon but not English.

I say we get her a bunch of Kenyan music that she has to listen to during her stay.

Unfortunately for the birthtards, if the ‘pubs’ get control of Congress, they’ll have to change the laws regarding natural born citizens. It won’t help them, though. Obama is a natural born citizen according to the law right now.

I know, but they need to start working on the pubs NOW!!!
They need to get inside everyone who’s running for a congressional seat’s campaign committee…especially the ones that are running locally. They need to show the pubs that they are right. Their answer lies with the Pubs!!! Make sure to film all the secret town halls the pubs are doing next break…we want to make sure they’re doing it like the pubs WANT them to act at town halls. LOL…that would be ironic, wouldn’t it?

You’re right, bearclaw. SCOTUS probably would never hear the case because there are so many more important issues to deal with.

I'm going to ask the court to show some DEEECENCY and INTEEEGRITY.

no you wouldn't. it'll never end with you birthtards.

Oh Charlie! Oh Charlie! DON'T BITE! HAVE SOME DEECENCY AND INTAAAGRITY. DON'T BITE!

After reading the Perkins v Elg, it doesn't even matter if Obama's mom was a citizen. Natural born = born in the U. S. and has stood to date. It is possible for illegal aliens to have children and they can one day be president. If the child is born out of the country and both parents are U.S. citizens, then the child is natural born. Amazing what can be found by actually reading the opinions from past cases in full and not just pull out parts that adhere to the way I would think.

Obama's sister gave two different accounts of his birth: Queen's hospital and Kapiolani. “snopes.com” reported both birth hospitals. Do you goup them under the “big fat” category? Are they credible enough?

Numerous newspapers reported Obama's birth in three countries. You cannot group all of them into anti-Obama camp.

We do not need to guess. All we need is the lawful public information to be released by DoH; index data for number 10641 would be a good start.
The DoH would not confirm that they issued a COLB on June 6, 2007 even after repeated requests from US citizens. What would be your guess about the reason for such DoH behavior?

Well, if I want to one day run for President, then I am SOL based on what you want. I had to get a replacement for my BC and the State of Kansas sent me a Certificate of Live Birth that was printed out of a laser printer. The relevant info it shows is that I was born in Lawrence, Kansas, and the date I was born and my parents' names.. Doesn't even show the time I was born, hospital, or doctor.

Finally. Something that explains Orly and the birthers…

http://current.com/items/91442946_the-stupid-vi…

Quote her October 2008 statement and show us where it confirms Obama's hawaiian birth. It does not.

Obama's sister couldn't have remembered Obama's birth since she was younger. Get a life, moron.

The war in Afghanistan is considered a war. In times of war, sedition is a serious crime.

You have to trust your own brain when processing information. I could care less about personal insults from people on the web.

I consider personnal attack posts as “badges of honor” since you have no “ammunition” to disprove my logic.

You're wrong.

More than enough information has been given to prove you're wrong. There's no since in repeating it as you consistenly repeat the same posts over and over and over and over and over and over and over…

Orly didn’t have a very good Friday the 13th…

And a visit from the Imam each week.

In WKA court specifically mentioned that they ruled on citizenship only.

In the Elg case, parents moving back to their native country after the child was born in the USA did nothing to change the NBC status of their child AT BIRTH. That is the short interpretation what the SCOTUS said.

You need to read my post at the beginning of this thread. It is very important to consider the motivation for inclusion of NBC phrase into the Constitution. John Jay’s letter clearly provides that insight.

Correction. Elg’s parents were from Sweden. Been a long day.

More like lies and a simple mind.

She could remember stories about family's history. My younger sister clearly knows the place of my birth, which is different from the place where she was born.

What I am trying to say in this thread is this: there is enough suspicion about Obama's birthplace since there are so many different reports (even from family members).

His birthplace needs to be verified. It is a perfectly reasonable request. When faced with uncertainty, we cannot blindly believe what somebody says.

Obama's sister did no such thing. Obama's birth in three countries has not been alleged at all. We already have confirmation of where he was born. Case closed.

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!! NC, again you're so BSing funny!!! His birthplace was verified and you can't BS your way around it! Give it a BREAK!!! LOL Congress is the only way to go. The courts prefer laws and constitution over NC nuts delusions! Sorry, that's just the way it is. LOL

Do it – don't chicken out!

You have not responded on the substance of the COLB issue discussed on this thread.

Afraid of debate based on merits?

Depends NC. We have to measure what we're debating. Can you properly and legally define what a birth certificate is? If not, we can't debate because you have no understanding of what you're debating. Please respond ASAP.

Obama's sister interview published in 2004 mentions Queen's hospital. The “snopes.com” had it on their page until this year.

There was an article published by the Honolulu Advertiser about Iraq war veteran who was running for the Congress seat in Chicago. She attended the high school in Hawaii. Journalist in that article mentioned that both Obama and this lady had a common thing (foreign birth). She was born in Thailand.
The article was debated on this blog few months ago. It was subsequently changed by the Hololulu Advertiser.
Scrub Scrub, Scrub…

BWAHAHAHAHA: NC: “I've got no proof of it but somebody said there was some article not nice to Obama…can't find it so it had to be erased/changed/beamed to outer space.” LOL Oh boy, you're losing it now NC…what's next? Orly rising out of the ocean with a copy of Mein Kampf to lead you into battle? Bwahahaha!!!

This thread discusses the COLB as shown on “factcheck.org”.

There are legal ways to verify it as I mentioned at the top of this thread in a response to a post by “Make The Pie Higher ” (quoting the July 2009 press release statement from Dr. Fukino).

“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen.”

BWAHAHAHAHA: The best way to verify and the legal way, is with the issuer. BONG!!! You are an idiot loser and remind me of an act on the Gong Show!

“…if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle.”

The sentence does not define a “natural born citizen”.

Compare your quote with the following:

A peanut butter sandwich is as much a sandwich as a jelly sandwich.

It does not make the peanut butter sandwich equal to jelly sandwich.

Legend (for those to slow to understand the above):
sandwitch = citizenship
peanut butter = born in country
jelly = natural born

Finally, the SCOTUS in WKA explicitly mentions that the ruling is related to Wong’s citizenship.

Repeated direct requests from US citizens to DoH, to confirm that they issued Obama's COLB on June 6, 2007, have been ignored.

How do you BS around this fact?

NC wrote: “I think that you are misquoting the ruling.”

I am doing not such thing, of course, not even in dispute, By saying that you demonstrate you have not read it for comprehension but for confirmation of your bias.

NC wrote: “Put the exact quote you used to reach this conclusion and we can debate it.”

SCOTUS cited the Wong case to establish the Elg was a US citizen from the moment of her birth. You should have known this.

NC wrote: “WKA case confirms that children born in the USA of permanent resident parents are CITIZENS. It does not define the NBC.”

It does of course, to a degree just as Bingham. Wong established that being born on the soil of a nation, as had been English common law, makes you a natural born citizen of that nation regardless of your parentage (unless they were diplomats or invading armies).

You are repeating the same statament as shown on top of the thread.

The first statement issued in October 2008 is very instructive to understand her communications with public.

OMG…THAT'S IT. Every citizen MUST BE allowed to know when every BC is issued. To not tell that fact must be a crime!!! Oh Boy! You got them on the run now NC. Best now to hit them with the number…then they can see the delusions of your mind. Courts don't like BS, nc…try congress. The pubs are full of them.

In Ankh Morpork, the best attorneys are zombies.

Mr. Slant has been dead for 300 years and is considered one of the best.

Obama was born in the Kapiolani Hospital. It is called Queen's Hospital by the locals because it was started by Queen Kapiolani. I did one minute of research to find that out.

Unnecessary bullshit. The birth certificate was released and verified over a year ago.

No excuses, old sport. Call Pepperdine or shut up.

Unnecessary since the statement by Dr. Fukino already verified the birth certificate. You would know this if you had better reading skills. Might I suggest a class at your local citizenship center, or is that too socialist for you?

Um, Orly? Or whatever you’re calling yourself today? Neither “badges of honor” nor “ammunition” need to be in quotation marks. You really need to improve your language skills if you’re going to post this much, since right now you come across as all but illiterate in English.

Yeah, but they don’t have sewers. Vetinari is really falling down on the job when it comes to sanitation.

And the beat goes on, and on, and on, and on, and on….

Trent is right. Turtles all the way down.

http://web.archive.org/web/20060207151627/the.h…

Pay attention to the following excerpt:
“…Both were born outside the country — Obama in Indonesia, Duckworth in Thailand — and graduated from high school in Honolulu — Punahou and McKinley, respectively…”

I did a Google search too:

The Queen's Medical Center
1301 Punchbowl Street, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813

” A Brief History
The Queen's Hospital, now called The Queen's Medical Center, was founded in 1859 by Queen Emma and King Kamehameha IV. …”

Kapiolani Medical Center For Women & Children
1319 Punahou St, Honolulu, HI 96826

Repeated requests from dozens of people have been ignored by DoH.

These are not requests for birth certificate: just a confirmation that a COLB was issued (as shown on factcheck.org).

It is already a public information – why is it that DoH refuses to confirm facts publicized by Obama's campaign?

You are either naive or stupid.

Parse Dr. Fukiono's statement from 2008 and tell us where is it that she confirms his Hawaiian birth.
Her statement was widely used as a “proof” that State of Hawaii verified that Obama was born in Hawaii.

The DoH would not respond to repeated requests to confirm that COLB was issued to Obama on June 6, 2007

You admitted of being a “truther”.

Hold your horses!

The naturalization laws in the past tied wife’s naturalization with her husband’s one. When husband became a US citizen, his wife automatically became citizen as well.

http://www.sdhistory.org/arc/naturalizationarchives/naturalization_records.htm

“…An Act in 1855 allowed alien women to acquire citizenship by marrying a United States citizen, or upon his naturalization. A woman’s citizenship was directly tied to that of her husband. Women and children automatically received naturalization upon the husband or father’s naturalization. In 1907 a law was passed that took citizenship away from women if they married alien men. In 1922 women’s citizenship was considered separate…”

Read the ruling: no definition of an NBC.

Which statement from the ruling do you interpret as such?

There once was a lawyer named Orly
Whose practice was going quite poorly,
'Til Charles rolled ov'a
That blond from Moldova
And they're linkin' their briefs, “Bite me sorely!”

NC won’t give up unless people stop responding to him. He posts 40-50 times per day, which is pretty good evidence that he is unemployed and lives alone. Apparently, arguing — and pretending that he wins every argument — gives him a sense of purpose in his sorry, stunted life.

We’ve all seen every variation on NC’s arguments — we know exactly what he is going to say, and it basically all boils down to “NC is right because NC’s opinion is based on NC’s unassailable opinion.” We aren’t going to get anything new from NC by continuing to argue with him. Let’s try ignoring him. Maybe, just maybe, he will find a new hobby.

They have confirmed everything. Various individuals and organizations have checked with Hawaii DoH, as stated in the articles at factcheck.org and other places. The problem is, the department has been overwhelmed by people calling. They have been unable to do their regular work. The head of the department gave her final statement on the matter, as quoted above, and I would be willing to bet she has told staff in the department to not answer anymore inquiries into the matter. They have things to do other than answer the many individual callers/drop-ins that want to ask the same question. It is like you, and many like you, refuse to believe unless you get the answer personally. You don't want to take any one's word on it. Even the director of the department. Chances are she is a republican, as the governor is a republican, and they have a tendency to appoint people in their party to department head positions, but even if she isn't, she has no reason to mislead the public. You cannot possibly believe that their is a conspiracy to hide where he was born that encompasses even the heads of departments for the state. I don't see what would be gained by it- what's in it for them. Makes no sense. Why do you refuse to take her word? Why do you refuse to understand they just can't keep taking calls about this subject? Why can't you just accept that the president is as he has always said, a natural born citizen, born in the state of Hawaii? Why do you think he would try to fool the world, just to be president? It is the most thankless job in the world. You get all the blame and little of the credit. Even a young healthy man like the president is showing the strains of the office already- and he hasn't even been in a year. The last thing he needs is for you and your cronies to continue this futile quest for something you will not ever find. Anything truthful and definitive that says the president was born anywhere other than where has always been stated- In Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961.

Basically, by “report” NC means:

(1) Anything that has ever been printed in a newspaper with unsourced information identifying Obama as having been “Kenyan-born”, Indonesian, or a space alien (except, of course, for the vast majority of stories, which accurately identify Hawaii as Obama's birthplace, and the vital statistics birth information published in two Honolulu newspapers in August 1961);

(2) Anything he can cut and paste from WND, AXJ or any other wingnut website;

(3) Anything his hero Orly Taitz has written;

(4) Anything his hero Chucky Lincoln has written for his hero Orly;

(5) NC's own opinions, no matter how many judges have disagreed with NC.

It is hilarious that NC can't accept a certified Certificate of Live Birth from the State of Hawaii but has no problem with the concept that Obama could be born in three different countries.

Yes, NC will cite the article, without mentioning that the journalist who wrote the article has admitted that he didn't do appropriate research about Obama's birthplace, and he has subsequently published articles clearly identifying Obama as having been born in Hawaii.

But this is the key to understanding NC. NC doesn’t mind being attacked. NC believes that NC wins every argument. What would destroy NC is being ignored. It would diminish his sorry little life. Can we try ignoring him? He will, of course, accuse all of us of being chicken, and not being able to answer his brilliant arguments. But we have seen what he spews, and we don’t need to keep disproving his arguments again and again. Let’s try ignoring him, and see what happens.

Did you read my post?
The DoH refuses to release the PUBLIC data. Not Obama's data, not DoH's data but public one.

Why is it difficult to:
a) Release a statement confirming that DoH issued a COLB to Obama on June 6, 2007,
b) Release the index data for registration number 10641,
c) Provide a link to State Manual describing filed “Filed By Registrar” vs. 'Accepted by State registrar”?

Put these on the government web site, let us see it.

The DoH is VIOLATING Hawaii state laws by refusing to provide this information to public. If there was nothing to hide, why would they behave in such way?

Kapiolani hospital is mighty shy of publicizing the letter from the White House (sent in January 2009). Soon after journalists started asking questions about its authenticity, the letter was pulled down from their web site. Are they not proud of the fact that a US President was born there, LOL?

You didn't read my post. They have done all of that they are required to do, many times over. They have stopped doing it. I think they probably made sure they were able to set a limit at some point. They have been inundated. Evidently, there are people out there with all the information you seek. It would seem that it didn't give them what they wanted so they don't want to share it and prove the point that he was born there. As far as confirming the date they issued the Certificate of Live Birth, perhaps they don't keep track. I asked my state because I had just obtained a certified Certificate to replace my misplaced certificate. They said they don't keep track of each one they issue, but because they are stamped with the embossed seal and dated, you only have to look at the certificate. My new certificate says “filed” just like the presidents. It has basically the same info on it. I know where I was born- of that there is no doubt. Same type of certificate as his but not like the one I misplaced. Sufficient proof for drivers license, passport, social security and all other governmental uses.

What don't you get about the fact the department has been slammed with people all seeking the same kind of information and that they can't continue to meet that demand and do their real daily work? It is the Hawaii Department of Health, not the Obama Department of Health. There are other people they have to serve. When you combine that with the fact that people are asking for a lot of info they are not entitled to receive, you can't blame them for stopping. This has gotten past the point of ridiculous.

Its a statement from a duly appointed official of the state of Hawaii. Not a statement from some crackpot racist hiding beneath an Internet alias who’s theories have had a judiciary track record rivaling the 2008 Detroit Lions.

“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen.”

Hey, some of us like hitting the racist pinata.

You don’t understand. For a narcissistic personality like Orly, It’s all about her and damn everyone else.

And the mouth breather will cite Snopes when convenient to her delusions and censure Snopes when it's inconvenient.

Notice a pattern?

So, snopes.com is suddenly an acceptable source!

Great!

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcerti…

Case closed.

I was very precise and said that Obama's birth was reported in THREE different countries. I did not make it up.

It is obvious that reporters made a mistake. The question is: who is telling the truth.

Obama's story should be trivial to verify. It has been anything but trivial because of the behavior of Hawaii DoH.

For me it is a clear indicator that they are covering for Obama.

You don't get the point do you?

I cited them because they are friendly to Obama and even they reported two different hospitals.

They did not have the motivation to lie in the first place. Somehow their reporters got confused as well.
Only recently Obama chose Kapiolani as his birthplace.
That is why we see articles mentioning other places of birth.

Yeah, they tend to do that when jerks won't accept the truth, Obama was born in Hawaii. Can't blame them though, we've seen how delusions are more important to NC than the truth.

You are twisting my words because you cannot fight the arguments.

If Obama was born in Kapiolani, it should be trivial to verify. Repeated requests to DoH to confirm the issuing of COLB to Obama on June 6, 2007 have been ignored.

How do you explain that fact? Yet, we are supposed to believe Joe Miller (factcheck.org) who has been proven wrong on some claims regarding Obama's citizenship.

Fight what arguments? That you know more about the law and constitution than SCOTUS? That you won't leave DoH alone to do their job? That you believe BS is more important than actual case law? That you live for Orly and WND? BWAHAHAHAHA!!! The argument is well settled, Obama is our legal president and sitting in the WH.

Your last post is full of LIES.

Index data for registration number 10641 has not been released.
State manual describing the process of handling birth certificates has not been made public.

If they do not keep track whether a COLB is issued and when (which I doubt), the DoH could simply say so. Yet they are silent when asked to confirm the June 6, 2007 date shown on Obama’s COLB.

Information I mentioned is in public domain. I am not talking about the original documents, just the DoH index data and state manuals.

How many statements from government officials (much higher ranked than Dr. Fukino), claiming that Iraq had WMDs, do I need to post here for you to get the point?
People can say things that are not necessarily true.

It is about verification of Dr. Fukino’s words. There are legal ways of doing it.

Afraid of possibility that Obama is lying about his birthplace?

And a Kenyan newspaper article from 2004 is a great source of information, but vital statistics announcements in two Honolulu newspapers in August 1961 must be part of the 48 year coverup plot of the Obots.

NC: (stamping feet) “YOU LIE!!! If I don’t get what I want then everybody is a liar!!!”

Whenever NC starts getting out of her comfort zone, every one else is a liar. BTW: index data released, Obama born in Hawaii. BWAHAHAHAHA!!! You are so delusional NC.

Well, NC managed to find the article that he alleged was scrubbed! Will miracles never cease! NC must have developed some stunning birftard “unscrubbing” method. NC doesn't explain any reason that an American mother and Kenyan father, living in Hawaii, both students without any money, would travel to Indonesia to have a baby. But I guess that just shows that NC will believe anything in print except the truth.

But what NC won't note is that the same Honolulu Advertiser journalist, Will Hoover, later did his research, wrote that Obama was born in Honolulu, and wrote the following:

“Fringe theorists who insist Obama was born in Kenya are left to ponder how two independent Honolulu daily newspapers and the state Department of Health could be part of conspiracy half a century ago to thwart the truth about the future president of the United States.”

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081…

I'm sure NC will accept the veracity of that article, given that it is by the same writer and published in the same newspaper.

Orly doesn't know people are making fun of her on her own website. Some posts that she let through…

1.Hugh G. Rection
November 12th, 2009 @ 9:17 pm
You make us all rise to the occasion!

1.Harry Chancre
November 14th, 2009 @ 4:56 am
Flaccid words are cheap. Orly needs donations more than praise.

1.Mike Hunt
November 14th, 2009 @ 4:18 pm
I get all tingly when I consider the vastness of your commitment to your adopted country. Please, don’t ever fail us in your quest for truth, Orly.

1.Wayne Kerr
November 15th, 2009 @ 5:08 am
True American Patriots appreciate the enormous effort Orly is putting in to her quest to reveal the man behind the curtain. Please keep up all the hard work!

You owe me a monitor clean up. LOL

Well, NC, I guess you had better head on over to Kenya and Indonesia and start going through their birth records to confirm what you seem to believe. Hope you have fun.

The burden of proof is on you and your fellow birfers. No one here that believes Obama is the President has to prove anything and it is apparent that you're not going to get the answers you desire here either.

I allege that Obama was born on Saturn.

There, now you have thre countries and one planet.

be sure to get the proper visas if you intend to do legal research. This is “Work” and tourist visas won't do.

“original birth certificate?”

You do realize that the “original” paper copy has not existed in over 40 years, don’t you?

Produce Maya's interview.

A reporter's mistake in a story not even originating from Obama? That all you got? If I found an article in which a reporter mistakenly wrote that Bush was born in Texas, would that create an actual controversy?

You really have nothing at all here.

The attribution of Elg’s status to the precedent set by Wong. READ the ruling; look at the cite.

In Wong, SCOTUS found him to be a NBC. You have it backward; while true that SCOTUS has never defined the entirety of who can be a NBC (for instance, the jury is out on John McCain) it has consistently included classes of citizens who ARE, and that includes people born on US soil no matter what their parentage, including Obama, Elg, Wong, etc.

Snopes is not “friendly to Obama,” it is “friendly to the truth.” You interpret truth as unfriendly to your cause. That's revealing.

Obama did not “choose” Kapiolani only recently.

For me it is a clear indicator that you suffer delusions.

Hawaii HAS verified it. More than necessary. Cae closed.

Naive? No. Stupid? Sorry, but they don’t let stupid girls into old fogey institutions like Smith. Too bad the same can’t be said for the William Howard Taft School of Law for Crazed Moldovans with a Mascara Fetish.

Dr. Fukino said, in plain English (no, Orly, not Moldovan or Hebrew or whatever other language you’ve mangled this week), that she had seen the records verifying that the President was born in Hawaii and thus was natural born. Just because you, who still use the sentence structure of a foreign tongue because you haven’t bothered to learn proper English, don’t understand it doesn’t mean that native English speakers have the same problem.

He was born in Hawaii. Get over it. And while you’re ate it, call Pepperdine.

Thank you for bringing us the highlights, so we don't have to visit Orly's website!

I'll have to have my monitor cleaned by the person that posted the link on Orly's Facebook wall.

Missed one. It's the original post to which the above are the replies:

Posted on | November 12, 2009 | 4 Comments

Dick Zinormus Submitted on 2009/11/12 at 2:02am
Orly,

You are my inspiration when I’m feeling down. I think of your cause and it makes me very happy.

Keep up the good work

I doubt NC would go to Kenya. The country is, I hear, run by black people, something NC finds deeply offensive.

To be fair, Stephen Colbert has noted that “the truth has a well-known liberal bias.”

No need for it. There are lawful ways to check Hawaii documents.

You now that DoH is hiding the truth – that is why you do not address their behavior but trying to ridicule those questioning it.

Yep, the best and most legal way is to have the issuer verify that the person was born there. Wait, Hawaii did that, guess you're SOL again, NC!

No, DoH is telling the truth, you just don't like it. BWAHAHAHAHA!!! So, whenever someone disagrees with your delusions you call them a liar with no proof but your opinion. LOL. And, Obama is still our legally elected president.

There is an article published in 2004.

Google it and you will find an interview with Obama's sister.

Again, this is not a proof of his birthplace – it just illustrates that he has been less that truthful about it in the past.

Or his sister, who wasn't around when he was born, doesn't know. BWAHAHAHAHA!!! And it illustrates the desperation of NC, non-evidence is more important than evidence that NC DOESN'T LIKE!!! Thanks for pointing out that you have no interest in the truth NC. We appreciate that. LMAO

Then why haven't you done it? Rather than come in here, where we want to make fun of Orly and birthtards, you prefer to continue to post the same questions that have been answered. If you come here thinking you're going to sway someone over to your side, then you're wasting your time.

I don't need to offer any theories or explanations of Obama's foreign birth.

All I need is an official proof that COLB was indeed issued by DoH on June 6, 2007.
This is a trivial request and you've been dancing around it.

How about releasing the index data for registration number 10641?

Those requests do not require any “crackpot” theories about Obama's birthplace. peiople are asking for a lawful verification of documents allegedly issued by the DoH.

Yet “snopes.com” reported thwo birth hospitals.

I am just asking, which one is it? Let the DoH confirm the COLB posted on the “factcheck.org”.

Why are you people worried about the request? It will just confirm Obama's claim, will it not?

Declaration of Orly Taitz

I solemnly swear under penalty of perjury that the following are true and correct statements: On November the 13th, 2009 I have contacted the attorneys of record on the case via e-mail, requesting to schedule a meet and confer conference on November 16, 2009. On November the 16th I have called twice and left two messages for the assistant US attorney David DeJute, asking him to call me back as soon as possible in order to schedule a meet and confer conference. I was not able to schedule such conference with the US attorney’s office.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/22624428/KEYES-BARNET…

——————- ——————– ———————–

WAAA, WAAAAA, WAAAAA, . . . No one will talk to me. . . . WAAAA, WAAAA, WAAAA.

Then, he must have been born in Hawaii, since you have no proof to point to him being born anyplace else. Thanks for clarifying that you now agree. We appreciate that. LOL

Obama's foreign birth was registered based on an affidavit from a relative.
The registration is automatically reported to the newspapers.

This theory can be easily verified. We need a state manual from Hawaii explaining the status field on his COLB: “Filed by Registrar”.
It could indicate that initial registration did not have enough required evidence and it was not “Accepted by State Registrar”

Prove it. Although we all know that you can't. BWAHAHAHAHA!!!
BSing again NC? Got no proof except your wild theories? Poor thing. LOL

How many statements from government officials (much higher ranked than Dr. Fukino), claiming that Iraq had WMDs, do I need to post here for you to get the point?
People can say things that are not necessarily true.

Naive or Stupid – which category do you belong to?

The birthtards’ record of losses in court makes the 2008 Detroit Lions look like Super Bowl Champions.

Orly and NC are seeking spots in the Futility Hall of Fame, alongside Bigfoot hunters.

Naive or stupid? You’ve got them cornered NC.
Naive: Only believe what you read from Orly and WND. Totally unwilling to read full SCOTUS opinions or law.
Stupid: Make up lies to fit your needs. Ignore verified facts. Believe you know more about the laws and constitution than SCOTUS. Yep, you’ve got naive and stupid all wrapped up in yourself. BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

NC claim: ”Obama's foreign birth was registered based on an affidavit from a relative. The registration is automatically reported to the newspapers.

Was this so called affadavit registration done at the hospital or at the DOH offices?

Yes, a reporter's mistake is all NC has. And the reporter subsequently wrote:

“Fringe theorists who insist Obama was born in Kenya are left to ponder how two independent Honolulu daily newspapers and the state Department of Health could be part of conspiracy half a century ago to thwart the truth about the future president of the United States.”

http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081…

NC is a “fringe theorist,” based on the very source NC cites.

I'm so glad we have that cleared up.

Prediction: NC will soon shift to the argument: “but his father was Kenyan so he can't be a natural born citizen anyway.”

This is a pattern with NC, sort of birthtard biorhythm.

This is for NBC,
The COLB posted on the internet is a copy of the one produced by the DoH of the State of Hawaii upon request by a party with standing according to Hawaiian law: Barack Obama himself. This COLB is all the evidence of his birth required by state law, federal law and the Dept. of State.

The fact that you don't accept it is YOUR problem. It is NOT a constitutional crisis. It is YOUR problem. It is not a threat to your liberty, it is YOUR hang-up.

No talk of Vattel or foreign birth certificates or misleading or mistaken news reports trumps the Hawaii produced COLB. No talk of “filed” versus whatever matter at all. No newspaper articles or translated phone interviews or letters of John Jay.

This is the bare bones fact of the matter. No amount of belly-aching or arguing will change any of that.

Here is the only way you can prove what you believe. You must uncover irrefutable evidence of wrong-doing or mismanagement in the Hawaii bureaucracy that controls the vital records in question. To be precise, you must uncover direct and physical proof of the falsity of the COLB provided by the State of Hawaii.

Your repeated claims that all you need to see is the long form and this “10641″ or whatever number you harp on is a red herring. It is an excuse for you to continue unabated in your erroneous believe. The State of Hawaii will not submit the document to anyone without standing, per the laws of their state enacted prior to these nonsensical shenanigans you call defense of freedom.

You have no evidence, none. Nothing that amounts to anything more than conjecture, hearsay or outright forgery. Valid proof is what is required in logical debate and our court of laws.

The longer you continue to hold on to your believe in the face of overwhelming evidence, the more cause people have to call you ignorant. I mean that in the strictest definition of the word: you are ignoring the facts. The longer you continue this charade, the more you open yourself up to the mental damage that accompanies cognitive dissonance.

These are the facts.

Two planets: Earth and Saturn!

Honestly, the birftards accuse us of making Obama into some sort of “savior,” but they are the ones who seem to believe he is supernatural — the first person ever born in three different countries.

NaturalizedCitizen is well past the point of concern about incipient brain damage. NC lives to be tarred and feathered. Apparently, it is better than being ignored, which pretty much sums up the rest of NC's existence.

Her email to “the attorneys of record” probably ended up in their spam filters, along with the email ads for cheap Viagra, penis enlargement, and knock-off Rolex watches. Pretty good company for Orly.

Being the butt of jokes is an existence? NC must live a terribly lonely and useless existence, then. Because nobody would hire such an imbecile to do a real job that required real cognizant skills.

That's why she kept getting those dental malpractice suits

I wonder when we're going to hear from Mike Rotch or Jack Meoff?

Hey, the President admitted himself last year that he's from Krypton!

Pay attention to the CORRECTION the Honolulu Advertiser issued almost immediately:

http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2006/Jan/08/ln/FP601080334.html

OH NO, They’ve been SCRUBBED! Obama got to them too! OMG all is lost for NC! LMAO.

You have shown intelligence in past debates about various court cases.

When I see you resorting to the same ridicule tactics like few other mindles Obots on this blog, it tells me volumes about COLB verification.

You cannot defend the behavior of DoH and both of us know it.

Was it the similar type of confirmation like the one used by Colin Powell and George Tennet about WMDs in Iraq?

OH poor NC…all confused again. We aren't here to defend DoH from a third-rate conspiracy theorist who hasn't a clue about our laws or constitution…we're here laughing at your childish attempts to prove her wrong. BWAHAHAHAHA!!! She needs no defense from us because you've got nothing, and keep proving it!!!

No, actually the intelligence department had nothing to do with it. BWAHAHAHAHA!!! Now you’re really getting desperate, comparing a BC to WND. Really, can’t you come up with something better than BS?

Do you trust everything said by a politician?
Obama's COLB posted on “factcheck.org” can be easily verified.

Joe Miller (“verification czar” from factcheck.org) never verified whether the registration number, shown on the document they posted, indeed corresponds to Obama.
Without it – how can anyone believe that the image posted on the web is a true representation of DoH records? That is the significance of the request for index data associated with number 10641. Again I am not talking about the actual birth certificate, but the index data (name, gender and vital event) associated with the number 10641.

According to Hawaii laws, index data is public information – any citizen has standing to ask for it.

Ask yourself why is it that DoH would rather violate the State law than release it? It is a trivial request (if Obama is telling the truth).

We live in a country of laws (that is what we have been told). A lawful request for public data should not be ignored by a government agency.

“I consider personnal [sic] attack posts as “badges of honor” since you have no “ammunition” to disprove my logic.”

That is a quote from NC, earlier on this blog. “Tar and feather me. I enjoy it.” NC has quite a collection of “badges of honor.” Over 1100 posts on TWI, and only five posts that got a “like” response.

Just like clockwork…Mrs. Conspiracy is back with no proof. BWAHAHAHAH!!! BTW, why do you keep bringing up the index data…you've been told multiple times it was released? Is it because it doesn't say what you want to so therefor DoH employees must be liars? What's even funnier is YOU complaining about someone else following laws when you haven't a clue except what you read on 3rd-rate lawyer blogs. That is not the best source you fool!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

Yeah, I like best the claim that she's using “logic”. BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

Direct quotes form SCOTUS opinions against NC's BS…yeah that's going to be a real tough choice. LMAO!

It is not a claim.
It is a theory based on the practice of handling birth certificates in another state. If the original submission does not have the necessary proof, the registrar files the submitted documents and asks for additional ones.

It can be easily verified – we need the DoH to release the manual, which describes the status field shown on Obama's COLB document: “Filed by Registrar”.

What is the meaning of that phrase? My theory is that the initial documentation was not sufficient to register his birth in Hawaii, that is why the COLB status does not say “Accepted by State Registrar” as shown in other COLB documents issued by the DoH.

The manual describing these two phrases has been hidden from public. According to Hawaii state laws the manual is a public document and should be posted on a government web site.

The latest example of logic, from an NC post within the hour:

“It is not a claim.
It is a theory based on the practice of handling birth certificates in another state.”

Another state? “There must be an affidavit, because that is how they handle things in another state.”

Logic.

I don't think that word means what NC thinks it means.

How do you know he never verified it? Do you have proof? Did you talk to him?

It has been documented that Hawaii printed out their COLB at Obamas request. IF you want to allege that he forged or altered it before submitting it to Factcheck you have to PROVE IT.

To be taken seriously, you can't just throw accusations around. You have a brand new accusation every time someone trashes your last one because you have NO PROOF.

If you believe Miller didn't verify something before posting it, you are accusing him of fraud. When someone makes an accusation, they must have some for of evidence to back it up – some form of PROOF.

How can anyone believe it is accurate? Because we have no evidence otherwise. Until to can conjure up some PROOF, we will continue to believe it. We believe it because the overwhelming preponderance of PROOF supports it.

gee why would the DoH break the law… you're just “asking questions” we get it.

You're an ignorant fool. Did I say “PROOF” enough for you to get the picture?

Oh, I see. Now you want our president and the DoH to answer for every THEORY that you can come up with. BWAHAHAHAHA!!! What next, you going to dream something as want them to prove your dream wrong? WOW, you are some sort of BSer!!! LOL

They don’t teach logical thinking at Smith, do they?

Let me make it simple for you.
I am not using report of Obama’s foreign birth as a proof. It is rather an indication that he has not been transparent about it in the past. That is why we have so many conflicting reports.

It raises enough suspicion not to take his word for granted. That is why the verification of COLB document is important.

II am not talking about taking a word from Dr. Fukino as a proof of anything.

NC says: Obama's foreign birth WAS REGISTERED based on an AFFIDAVIT FROM A RELATIVE. The registration IS AUTOMATICALLY REPORTED to the the newspapers.”

NC then says: “It is not a claim. It is a theory . . .”

In the English language, “was registered based on an affidavit from a relative” is a declaration of a fact, and a very specific one at that.

The translation of NC's statements: “I make stuff up, and then when I can't provide factual support, I recast my statements as theories.”

Orly is narcissistic and believes she is the most important person on this planet. How DARE they not call her back or take her phone calls. Certainly, what she's doing is more important than what they are doing.

You are just in the very first steps of “Dancing with the Birftards.”

Just wait until NC takes you through the “natural born citizen” waltz, the “de Vattel” polka, and the “John Jay's letter to George Washington” foxtrot. And after you do this for several days, you will find the NC has taken you full circle back to the “birf sertificat” boxstep.

That's right. He publically made the statement that he was from Krypton and sent by his father Jor-el. I'm surprise the birthtards have never jumped on that statement.

Do you have any links to the story about COLB being issued to Obama on June 6, 2007. I have not seen one.

Joe Miller never said that “factcheck.org” team verified the information shown on COLB by asking the confirmation from DoH.

The validity of COLB will be proven (or not) after DoH follows the law and issues a document that is in public domain.
You rely on DoH to continue ignoring the state law.

You should start with reading the UIPA law in Hawaii. Then follow it up with statute 338-18 (13 d)
http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_…

The factcheck.org has been proven wrong in the past. Their claim that Obama's Kenyan citizenship expired in 1982 was not correct.

SO, NBC, is it your contention that the officials at the DOH ignored hundreds of calls, e-mails and letters from you birther about the document posted on-line?

If the document posted on-line does not match the DOH records EXACTLY, that would be ample proof that Obama posted an altered or forged document, would it not?

If so, then why has the REPUBLICAN governor and the REPUBLICAN Attorney General of Hawaii ignored this?

Are they corrupt like the Judges in Texas, Georgia and California?

or are you just bat shit crazy?

Chucky's latest response to the Florida court regarding sanctions. And now, he's letting it all out about his and Orly's 'passionate' love affair.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/22664105/Rivernider-2…

I thought John Jay sent an e-mail to GW, but Vattel spammed them both so Sam Adams called them all poopie faces.

from the files of “birther Confidential. . . “

Now that I've read the affidavit by Charles Lincoln to the Florida court regarding sanctions, I may post an encouraging message to Orly. Something to the effect that I'm behind her 150% and sign it Neil Anhump.

More accurate statement is:
There COULD be an affidavit because that is how they handle things in another state.

This is such a trivial situation. A state manual explaining the meaning of the status field on Hawaii COLB documents is all that is needed to understand whether my theory is correct or not.

I am not relying on anything but a public document. It is an honest way of going about COLB verification.

You have complained about fake BC's floating on the internet. Now, when a simple and legitimate verification could be done – you are attacking it as well. In the past you were quick to cite the particular court case to support your arguments. No citations of any kind regarding the COLB verification issue?

It is obvious that you are not intersted in finding the truth about Obama's COLB because you are afraid of the possibility that he was not born in Hawaii.

NC is so funny, isn’t she? You point out the correction, and the argument shifts to “the mistake in the Honolulu paper in 2006 is all Obama’s fault because he hasn’t been transparent.” But Obama hasn’t tried to hide where he was born — in Honolulu, he posted his Certificate of Live Birth on his campaign page, and he made it available to responsible journalists for inspection.

The only thing more transparent is the birfers’ anger that a black man was elected President.

A classic example of “I read it on WND or Orly said it, so it is true”

Nice!

I particularly like Para. 5 of Chucky's affidavit, wherein he states that he has drafted 95-98% of Orly's pleadings in all of her cases.

Orly, of course, accused Judge Carter of having his new law clerk do all of his work for him.

Projection?

Irony?

Birfer food fight!

I do not want to engage in explanations of any politician's motivation.

Any citizen has standing to obtain public documents from Hawaii DoH.

There are three possibilities about validity of COLB document:
a) The COLB document is valid and indicates Hawaii birth
b) The COLB document is valid and indicates that not enough data was supplied to support the Hawaiian birth
c) The COLB document is fake.

Option (c) could be discarded if DoH issues index data related to number 10641. If they come back and say that it belongs to Obama – option (c) is eliminated.

To eliminate option (b) we need the state manual describing the “Filed by Registrar” field. It could disprove my theory of birth registration via affidavit.

You should never expect NC to offer anything besides unsubstantiated rumors, unreliable hearsay, and heaping helpings of Swiss philosophy.

After all, since NC has absolutely no proof that Hawaii forged or lied about anything, he has to keep asking questions to try to hide the fact that he as absolutely no proof to support anything he claims; he thinks he can fool someone by doing this, but that kind of trickery

Just wait and see…the only thing NC and the other birfers have to offer are stupid questions and illogical conspiracy theories ripped straight from the message boards at WND. No facts, no logic, no law, just bullshit.

You are using an isolated sentence to reach your conclusion. It was used as a possible explanation of brith annoouncements in the newspaper.

You have ignored numerous other posts where I asked for verification of 'Filed by Registrar” field based on the description in the state manual.

The state manual is public document. The DoH should publish it on the web – than they do not need to answer any questions about it – people can read for themselves. Numerous other hawaii state laws and documents have been posted on government web sites.

I don't think any of us are interested in 'finding the truth' because we know the truth. Like Judge Carter, we trust the records kept by the States and believe, as Judge Carter, that the record keepers are honest.

Direct quote from my response to you (few hours ago):
—————————————————————————
“Obama's foreign birth was registered based on an affidavit from a relative. The registration is automatically reported to the newspapers.

This theory can be easily verified. We need a state manual from Hawaii explaining the status field on his COLB: “Filed by Registrar”.
It could indicate that initial registration did not have enough required evidence and it was not “Accepted by State Registrar…”
—————————————————————————–

Did you notice the third sentence?

O.K., now I've read the whole thing. To quote Jim: BWAHAHAHA!!!!!

The Lucas Smith affidavit was true — Orly and Chucky had a torrid affair, and the Lucas Smith affidavit was how Orly's husband found out.

To summarize Orly's current situation:

(1) The U.S. Marshalls will be collecting $20,000 in sanctions, plus interest, from Orly.

(2) Orly's controlling husband is pissed about her affair.

(3) The guy who wrote nearly all of Orly's pleadings no longer works for her.

(4) Orly faces possible sanctions in the Florida case, if not a malpractice action as well.

(5) Orly faces multiple disciplinary complaints at the California State Bar.

(6) Orly's protest of Bill O'Reilly was an utter failure.

(7) Orly filed a dreadful Motion for Reconsideration with Judge Carter, which will also be denied and could lead to further sanctions.

So Birfers — behold your conquering hero.

Is that from “Birther Confidential” or “Keeping up with the Birfdashians”?

Holy crap

NC = nail

LMAO!

The Charles Lincoln affidavit makes great reading, doesn't it? Can you imagine what life is like inside the Taitz household right now? Her controlling husband finds out she has been having an affair with Chucky, through an affidavit filed by a birfer in one of Orly's cases, and spread across the internets . . . it is no wonder Orly seems to be everywhere in the country except her hometown.

If I recall correctly, the affidavit procedure the birftards are referring to comes from Nevada. Apparently, the Nevada statute got horribly drunk, married a complete stranger on the Vegas strip, boarded the wrong flight, and woke up in Honolulu.

The DoH has submitted a document into the public domain from their records.

That you chose to ignore it's validity is YOUR problem. You have CHOSEN not to trust it based on NO evidence.

YOUR problem is not a constitutional crisis for the rest of us.

I could tell you to go to Fightthesmears but you won't trust them. I do because I have not seen any evidence to the contrary.

How is the DoH ignoring the law? Oh, because the of the index data. So… have you tried to get the index data yourself? Cause if you haven't then you don't have any proof they are breaking the law.

In November of 2008 the DoH Health director issues voucher in response to 'ridiculous' barrage State Health Department employees continue to be barraged by requests from people demanding to see Barack Obama's birth certificate, including some who have called the department's registrar of vital statistics at home – in the middle of the night.

At this point, if you continue to ignore the evidence against you and the absence of ANY evidence FOR you, you are ignorant.

no shitte, right? This index data – “filed by registrar” crap is so scraping the bottom of the barrel nonsense.

Why are you asking for verification here? Why don't you go to the State of Hawaii and ask for verification? You inspire joy joy feelings in every post you make.

NC,
A few questions…
Do have any proof at all that the COLB is fake? Granted, your talk of “index data” and “filed by resgistrar” is not PROOF. It is conjecture based on your biased interpretation of bureaucratic language.

In the absence of proof, why do you not trust that the COLB is not valid? A simple answer will do.

Why did you not question the citizenship of John McCain? or Joe Biden for that matter. Biden is a heartbeat away, where are your questions about his COLB?

Where is the proof you have about the citizenship of George Bush, Bill Clinton, GHWB Sr. and Ronald Reagan? Do you have or can you provide links to proof of citizenship that is in keeping with the standard you are currently holding Obama to?

Easy questions.

Oh, but you have barely scratched the surface of the birftard banquet! Soon, very soon, NC's birftard biorhythms will take him/her back to the “constitutional law” phase of the cycle of dementia, in which NC tells you that it doesn't matter where Barack Obama was born, because the fact that his father was Kenyan means Obama is not a “natural born citizen” and therefore ineligible to serve as President. You will be given NC's special insights into Swiss philosophers, a letter John Jay wrote to George Washington, Congressional enactments from 1790 and 1795, and other perhaps other delights. And all of this will demonstrate, conclusively, that NC knows more than Judge Land, more than Judge Carter, more than the Indiana Court of Appeals, and more than the U.S. Supreme Court.

Have fun on the journey, if you choose to take it. Laugh. A lot.

But understand that no argument you make, no proof you present, will prevent NC from starting the cycle all over again, with the same arguments, as if the two of you had never exchanged a word.

No kidding! NC = No Clue.

NC wanted to know how Judge Land handles evidence in his chambers. I provide NC with the phone number of Judge Land's courtroom clerk.

NC alleged that President Obama has committed Social Security fraud. I provided NC with a link to the Office of Inspector General for the Social Security Administration, to make a such a complaint against the President.

NC alleged that President Obama got his position at the University of Chicago through “affirmative action” and was less qualified than other lecturers. I provided NC with a link to the emails of all current Lecturers in Law, to check on their qualifications.

NC alleged that a “Comment” written by Obama for the Harvard Law Review was “hidden” (apparently because there is copyright protection). I provided NC with the volume and page, information on the location of the Alameda County Law Library, and I even confirmed through the online catalog that the volume in question was available on microfiche.

NC keeps asking us for information, rather than going to the source. Yet NC doesn't believe anything we say.

Pathological. But also quite entertaining. Kind of like Monty Python's “Upperclass Twit of the Year Contest.”

Read my previous post. There is no possibility to prove that the COLB is fake or valid because DoH is hiding the public data.

The reason why I do not trust the COLB is simple:
1) Obama's birth has been reported in three different countries. To avoid confusion and noise generated on both sides of the issue, a simple verification can be done that does not require good will on Obama's part.

Since he will not authorize the release of the long form birth certificate, there are legal ways to conclude whether the COLB document is valid or not.

2) An image of a document (a *.jpg) file) posted on the web is very easy to modify. No government agency will accept an image posted on a web as a proof of qualification when somebody applies for a job.

The factcheck.org has published incorrect information about the expiration of Obama's Kenyan citizenship. It is obvious that they did not put much effort to verify the COLB document.

3) Even if the COLB is valid – we still do not know the meaning of the “Filed by Registrar” phrase. Once we learn its meaning, we will be know whether the COLB is based on the original birth certificate that confirms Hawaiian birth.

To learn how this phrase is used in Hawaii COLB documents, we need to look into the state manual that describes it. According to Hawaii laws, this manual is in public domain and should be made available upon request. A more practical solution is to put it on a government web site, as is the case with numerous other Hawaii government documents.

McCain's citizenship is not in question. His “natural born status” (NBC) is. I do not believe he is eligible because he was born outside the USA. NBC = born in the USA of citizen parents.

I am not aware that there were any reports of foreign births for either Joe Biden or above mentioned former presidents.

In Obama's case, we have THREE countries and two different Hawaii hospitals reported as his place of birth.
In addition candidates from minor parties asked for verification of his eligibility to be placed on the ballot – only to be ignored by secretaries of state.

A simple COLB verification can give us the answer whether Obama was born in Hawaii.

I think you owe nails an apology.

Are you a resident of Hawaii?

1.) Three different countries, eh? Pray tell, what are these nations and where are the official birth certificates, not already proven to be frauds, from official record keepers from the provinces in which he is reported to have been born? Why do you not hold these allegations to the same standard of bureaucratic language to which you hold the State of Hawaii?

According to the State of Hawaii, no demand has been made to keep his records sealed beyond their independent laws, so your point is moot.

2.) Factcheck.org will sure be pleased to get your endorsement as the ONLY website where official documents are challenged or verified.

You are correct, no agency will accept a photo on a website. But no one is asking them to. Obama put it up there to show it to the public, a public who has no right to it according to Hawaiian law. He has the copy printed out and submitted to him upon request in June of 2007. Hawaii has stated repeatedly that this is their official version. Your assertion that no agency would accept a copy, while accurate, is ridiculous, since that photo is not the only copy.

3.) So the only reason you can't accept the document is the filed by registrar crap? Why don't you trust Obama or the Hawaiian officials when they say it is? Did you investigate Bush or Clinton or Bush Sr.s or Reagan's place of birth? An don't give us that BS about reported places of birth… No official from any foreign land has claimed Obama was born in such a place. Claims of foreign birth have been made by AMERICANS, not foreigners and they have not been proven in over two years. By your standards of proof any of these previous presidents could have been nor outside the US – why? Because I now make the claim. Here it is: I claim george W. Bush was actually born in Canada.

there you go, I said it. Our last president was not an NBC and everything he did is now null and void.

You are getting your information is poor places and then you demand a high level of proof from others. You are inconsistent and ignorant.

See, I think he knows that his last desperate argument, his last desperate hope is in the B.S. about bureaucratic language.

Ewwwwwwwwwwwwww.

And suborning witnesses to commit perjury.

You're a fucking loser.

NC is a sophist and an idiot.

You are arguing with a bowl of instant grits. There's not much there.

Did you notice you need help?

You claimed repeatedly that an affidavit was sworn evidence and valid.

Snopes was bad. Snopes was good. Snopes is bad.

Can you keep up with your lies?

I don't think you can.

This maniac wants samples of placenta.

No, I live in California.

Does the following statement looks like an endorsement?
———————————————————————–
The factcheck.org has published incorrect information about the expiration of Obama's Kenyan citizenship. It is obvious that they did not put much effort to verify the COLB document.
———————————————————————–

2) For every statement from Dr. Fukino, I will quote you three statements by Colin Powell, George Tennet or other high ranking government officials about WMDs in Iraq.

If there is a simple way to verify claims by government officials on important issues, I prefer to see the evidence rather than blindly follow.

3) I read articles and watched videos about presidents you mentioned. I am not aware of any claims that they were born abroad.

4) How do you know where I get the information from? Is your claim based on the speculation written by “bearclaw”?

What is the supporting evidence for Obama's Hawaiian birth: An image posted on the web and words from one low ranking government official in Hawaii.

The DoH did NOT submit all requested public documents.
If you want to read about it, here is the link to Leo Donofrio's blog:
http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/10…

Right. I forgot about that. Given that the Lucas Smith affidavit looks more credible now (because Charles Lincoln has confirmed the allegations about adultery), Orly could actually face prosecution.

You are just jealous that a non-lawyer could spot holes in your logic to defend Obama's eligibility.

If my memory is correct, you claimed that courts do not issue advisory opinion (during the debate about whether judge Carter should allow the discovery process to go forward).

When the Appellate Court in Indiana dismissed the case on the standing issue and then proceeded to issue an “advisory opinion” about NBC definition, not a word from “bearclaw” about this tactic to defend Obama.

Was that an encouragement you learned from your father?

That half-sister Maya is being hidden for a reason. She probably knows something since she herself obtained a Hawaiian BC.

Yeah well he was a Kenyan-Brit at birth and got adopted as an Indonesian and attended college as a Kenyan, Brit or more than likely as an Indonesian. He is an illegitimate president.

A shining example of honest record keepers from New Jersey – this is a link to a story about corrupt official selling birth certificates:

http://www.justice.gov/usao/nj/press/files/ande…

It still comes down to the same stuff we wanted to see a year ago: The original Birth Certificate and the college records. The man is an imposter.

Did you know that you can easily review NC's past comments? Click on the “face” icon to the left of NC's name, then click on “View More Comments.” You can go back and review lots of past comments from NC. I guarantee you, every discussion you are having with NC has been done before, many times. You may feel that you have NC cornered, and that s/he must soon surrender. That would be incorrect. NC's opinions are, ultimately, based on NC's opinions. You can't change them, and NC has no interest in answering the questions s/he asks.

But if you want to take NC seriously, and try to engage in dialogue, go ahead. I think you will find, however, that you are simply meeting the emotional needs of a lonely person who would rather be attacked than ignored. So he will never agree with you, because the attacks would end, and s/he would be left alone in the dark.

Your guess is wrong again.

“bearclaw” reads blogs that reported this information.

I noticed that Obama needs help to keep his spine straight:
http://www.newsmax.com/insidecover/obama_empero…

Your are a complete idiot.

(1) Quote the portion of the Indiana Court of Appeals decision holding that the plaintiffs did not have standing. Here is the case:

http://www.in.gov/judiciary/opinions/pdf/111209…

(2) The Court of Appeals did not dismiss on the basis of standing. In fact, the word “standing” does not appear anywhere in the opinion, you complete moron. Try searching the opinion.

(3) The Court of Appeals did dismiss on the basis of “failure to state a claim on which relief may be granted.” Translation: even if Plaintiffs are right on the facts, they lose on the law because a person born in the United States is a natural born citizen within the meaning of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4. That isn't an advisory opinion — it was directly presented by the plaintiffs' claims.

(4) Some state courts may be able to give advisory opinions, but under Article III, the federal courts can only address real “cases and controversies.” Do you, moron, think federal courts can give advisory opinions? You think you know more than I do about the law? Then please cite the law or case stating that federal courts are free to give advisory opinions. O.K., idiot? Let's see you support your view.

Here is my proof, moron:

http://www.answers.com/topic/advisory-opinion

Isn't ironic? The principle that the federal courts do not issue advisory opinions dates back to a letter from Chief Justice John Jay to President George Washington, refusing to answer a question Washington presented to the court.

So where is your proof that I am wrong and that the federal courts can issue advisory opinions?

(5) Look at footnote 15 of the Indiana Court of Appeals decision. The court specifically states that it will not give an opinion on whether persons born outside the U.S. to parents who are citizens are “natural born citizens” because the plaintiffs did not properly present the issue to the court. In other words, the court won't give an advisory opinion — an opinion that is not necessary to resolving the case.

You are so right.

Nails, I apologize. Can you ever forgive me?

NC's latest:

“When the Appellate Court in Indiana dismissed the case on the standing issue and then proceeded to issue an “advisory opinion” about NBC definition, not a word from “bearclaw” about this tactic to defend Obama.”

In fact, the Indiana Court of Appeals did not dismiss on the basis of standing. In fact, the word “standing” does not even appear anywhere in the Court's opinion. And the Court didn't issue an advisory opinion. It stated that the plaintiffs failed to state a claim on which relief could be granted because a person born in the United States (Obama) is a “natural born citizen” within the meaning of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4.

NC is far dumber than a bag of nails.

Again, my apologies to nails.

I agree. Until we see your original birth certificate and your college records, we have no choice but to conclude that you are not the real RedGraham.

NC is developing a pattern of invoking my name as support for his propositions. Do not ever believe NC. I have never seen any blog supporting the notion that Hawaii has such an affidavit process. I recall seeing something about such a process in Nevada, cited by a birftard, and of course utterly irrelevant to Hawaii procedures.

What is the difference between the “motion to dismiss” and standing?

Was there any debate in court?

Why are you asking ME? You know everything about the law, right? And you will never admit that your were wrong. YOU said the court dismissed on the basis that plaintiffs lacked standing. To what part of the opinion were you referring? Where did the court even refer to standing? (Clue: It didn't). How is the court's decision an “advisory opinion”? I've already explained why I think it is not an advisory opinion.

If you really want me to answer your questions about court cases, my standard rate is $315/hour.

1. Language used by court may be different but the essence is the same – plaintiffs had no chance to argue their case in court.

Why did courts use this tactic – to prevent the discovery phase. They want to rule on the issue without having a debate.

2. The three stooges from the Indiana court (or the law clerk who wrote the document) do not know how to count. This speaks volumes about the “quality” of their ruling. Quote from the footnote 14:

“…For all but forty-four people in our nation?s history (the forty-four Presidents), the dichotomy between who is a natural born citizen and who is a naturalized citizen under the Fourteenth Amendment is irrelevant….”

Have they heard that the eligibility requirement for vice-president is the same?

Have they heard about the fact that several of the early presidents were not natural born citizens, but citizens at the time when the Constitution was adopted?

3. In the same footnote they quote WKA:
“We note the fact that the Court in Wong Kim Ark did not actually pronounce the plaintiff a “natural born Citizen” using the Constitution?s Article II language is immaterial.”

SCOTUS did not officially pronounce the WKA an NBC, but the three stooges from Indiana can do it in Obama's case!?

To a non-lawyer the essence is the same – no debate in court. I may not used the precise language that a lawyer would use but my thoughts on the case are as follows:

The Appellate court was supposed to decide whether the motion to dismiss was properly granted by the lower court.

I thought that the meaning of that was simple: did plaintiffs have the legal basis for suing the Governor. I thought that the lower court decision was about the procedure – not the merits of the claim. After all, this was the basis for dismissal of eligibility lawsuits in the past.

When the Appellate court proceeded to define the NBC – it clearly went beyond the discussion about the procedure. To me this looks like an advisory opinion disguised as a ruling.

The birth certificate was posted over a year ago. Cut it out.

To this non-lawyer the meaning is crystal clear. It is a legal ruling, not an advisory opinion, and as such has the force of law.

Give it up, Orly or whoever you are this week. You're wrong. Now go do something useful, like roll bandages for the Red Cross, and stop wasting your time on things you clearly don't understand.

Sorry, but your grammar is still unacceptable. Have you started English classes yet? Also, what about Pepperdine or another law school? You really should ask a legal scholar before spouting off again when you're so clearly wrong.

Laguna Niguel, I'll bet….

JEALOUS????

BWAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!

More than likely, RedGraham isn't even from this country. He is an imposter that lives in Switzerland and is acting as if he is posting from within the U.S.

Well, then, you're within swimming distance of Hawaii. Just watch out for Great Whites on your way there.

More stupid birfer bullshit.

*yawn*

What is the significance of Laguna Niguel?

Actually, he's in Israel. That's who Orly visited when she was there. Mr Lincoln wasn't satisfying her animal urges enough so she had to go look up boy-toy #2. Or, didn't you already know that? I think it was NOT_AXJ that traced his IP back to there.

Why did judge Carter (or any other judge in eligibility cases) avoid ruling on definition of an NBC? According to the logic employed by the Indiana court, he could have done it.

I thought that plaintiffs must jump over the first hurdle (standing issue) before the merits of the case are discussed.

Did you experience similar parental encouragement?

1.) so.. factcheck is the only website out there that checks facts?

2.) So… you can give me a detailed description of the bureaucratic infighting that happened in Hawaii between 1961 and 2007 that had one faction creating it's own intelligence service to cherry-pick intelligence in support of a false-belief? See what I did there? I offered you proof that allows me to accuse Powell, Cheney and the rest with a clear sense of logical integrity. That proof can be easily obtained simply by watching FRONTLINE.

3.) You are not aware of an CREDIBLE claims that any those President's were born abroad. Guess what, you may be aware of claims that Obama was born abroad, but they aren't credible. Why are you willing to lend credence to those claims, when you fail to place those very same claims under the harsh microscope under which you place the State of Hawaii? The MOST credible claim being made by ANY official from any state province or nation is being made by Hawaii, yet you use the other claims, wholly without merit and not made by officials as somesort of basis to question the most credible – again all of this WITHOUT A SHRED OF PROOF.

4.) I am guessing where you get your info because it the same info I see spread by racist opportunists who will cling to any last desperate shred of their theory in the effort to not have to confront the ugly truth.

It's immature of you ignore the truth, that's what do. You keep talking about “easily verifiable” but that is a bullshit argument. In this country, in our courts there is a bar you must clear. As soon as you claim the suspicions that the COLB form Hawaii is potentially suspect, you must have proof to go on. You have none. The courts are an extension of a rule we extend to our entire society. Someone at work may think you a thief (probably not) and a moron (most definitely). They may say you stole something. They can say it to your face all the want, just like you can scream INDEX DATA! FILED BY REGISTRAR! all you want. But when you co-worker takes that accusation to your superior, things change. Now that co-worker needs proof. She is leveling an accusation and through that action attempting to have to painted as thief, removed from your position and even arrested. Our standard in this nation is that you are innocent until proven guilty. You are degrading that standard in an ugly and disgusting way.

Tell me…
Do you support the Kyoto Treaty?
What about War Crimes Tribunals? Should American officials be allowed to be extradited to The Hague?

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
News Release
LINDA LINGLE
GOVERNOR
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CHIYOME LEINAALA FUKINO M.D.
DIRECTOR

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
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 Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii 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.”
###

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/faq/

Oily should have checked the fluids in her Lincoln before driving it so hard.

Leo? That's laughably suspect information.

I want to say this to you very clearly. The image on the web is a COPY of the actual document. The DoH submitted all documents requested by Obama to Obama. If Leo didn't get what eh wanted, it's because he has no standing under Hawaiian Law.

“What is the supporting evidence for Obama's Hawaiian birth: An image posted on the web and words from one low ranking government official in Hawaii.”

This statement by you is factually inaccurate and says fathoms about the lack of depth of your intellect. The fact that you cannot grasp the fact that the image on the web is a COPY of an actual document is mind-boggling in the extreme.

Oh yeah, cut out the bullshit about “low ranking” you have no credible claim to being an expert in Hawaii bureaucratic hierarchy and as far as you or anyone else knows this is the proper official to perform a task as mundane as fulfilling COLB requests. See… a COLB request is actually a fairly mundane and everyday task. The fact that it is the President's COLB, a President you hate, make's it important in your mind. But if the President is supposed to be a citisen whole has risen by the votes and confidence of his peers to higher office, than his COLB is no more important and should be treated with no more or less attention than the rest of us – you included.

Yeah, I can only keep it up for a little while longer. It’s amusing in the extreme. It reminds me to make sure I don’t cling to closely to things in my own life. Helps me to reexamine my priorities.

Even the village idiot serves a purpose.

NC wrote: “There is an article published in 2004. Google it and you will find an interview with Obama’s sister.”

I take this as admission that you have no such thing. I am not your fetching dog. You produce it.

Hint: I have already seen the finish line; I am way ahead of you. What you are saying is not true.

NC wrote: “Again, this is not a proof of his birthplace – it just illustrates that he has been less that truthful about it in the past.”

It does no such thing, of course, not in dispute. It shows in fact that you are less than truthful.

Orly's donation usage: Verified by Lucas Smith.

Designer suit from Saks – $4000.00
Jimmy Chu pumps – $600.00
Gold/diamond jewelry – $10,000.00
leather attache case – $1,500.00
Teeth veneers – $5000.00
Peroxide- $10.00
Tammy Faye Racoon Eye makeup – $50.00
Lunches – $300.00/ea

Being outed as a fraud by your own volunteer staff – PRICELESS!”

The best thing about that story is that people have proof. Where is yours?

I do not need to speculate about Obama's birthplace. I want to see PUBLIC documents available to ANY CITIZEN.
Are you afraid that Obama was not born in the USA?

I used the WMDs example as an illustration that government officials can be wrong even when they give a convincing performance in public. That is why I prefer to verify Dr. Fukino's words.

Your other questions are irrelevant for this thread (and we are running out of column space).

Put them in a separate post on top of the page and I will comment on them.

It has to be the original paper copy, right? with the typewriter impressions and the ink signatures, right?

Get a life.

No proof, only suspicion.

Great White Sharks?

Or Great White Whales (Rush, Sean, Glenn and Lou)?

Can I post an image of my diploma on the web and ask government officials to use it as the only proof of eligibility for a government job?

The index data for registration number 10641 is in PUBLIC domain. There is no standing issue.
The same is true about state manual describing the process for handling birth certificates. Yet, the DoH is violating Hawaii laws and not disclosing the information. They are trying to hide the truth about Obama’s birth certificate.

The “low ranking government official” phrase was used because of the comparison I made with other, higher ranked, government officials (Powell, Tennet,…).

Index data for registration number 10641 and state manual describing the “Filed by Registrar” phrase shown in Obama's COLB will be good enough as a substitute for a paper copy.

First there was a suspicion that something was not right. Then they had an investigation to prove it.

Do you understand that documents issued to those people were 100% genuine. The government workers who issued it did not know that database records were falsified.

That is why I want to see PUBLIC data related to the COLB issued to Obama. It will help us in determining whether his COLB is genuine.

You are arguing for dismissing the investigation.

my favorite line:

“Plaintiffs pledge that they will never mention Dr. Orly Taitz in this litigation again if the Courts will allow them to proceed.”

If only it were that easy. . .

(BTW, whi is the e-mail from Orly to CEL printed out from Yahoo Germany? )

NC wrote: “Yet “snopes.com” reported thwo birth hospitals.”

So what? This has nothing to do with Obama, but with sloppy reporting. Mistakes by others is not Obama’s problem.

NC wrote: “I am just asking, which one is it?”

Kapiolani.

NC wrote: “Let the DoH confirm the COLB posted on the “factcheck.org”.

It did.

NC wrote: “Why are you people worried about the request? It will just confirm Obama’s claim, will it not?”

The claim has been fully confirmed as unquestionable fact. Case is closed.

for you, but the submitted document is good enough for the rest of us, the State Department and all courts of the land.

Evasion noted. You’re losing it, and you’re going down fast.

oh.. so you can determine what's relevant and I can't?

See.. there are no public documents available to any citizen. The State of Hawaii has guidelines as to whom they release information too. You are bound by these laws.

Your illustration fails because they are not equivalent circumstances.

My other questions are completely relevant. If you believe claims from Kenyans that he was born in Kenya over Hwaiian officials than I need to understand where you stand on other issues where the precedent of American law and standards are beholden to foreign standands instead. For example, if you believe allowing American officials to be extradited to The Hague violates our legal standards then why do rumors from foreign countries suddenly trump the legal vital records guidelines of the State of Hawaii. I am just looking to plumb the depths of you intellect for any nuggets of sense.

NC wrote: “Can I post an image of my diploma on the web and ask government officials to use it as the only proof of eligibility for a government job?”

There is no requirement anywhere for Obama to post anything at all. Regardless, he did and in fact he made history by being the ONLY president in US history to prove he is a natural born citizen by releasing his birth certificate. You took every other president’s word for it alone; for this black man, you reject the proven fact. Why is that?

The web dissemination of his COLB is simply a courtesy to the public; it is not the document itself. There is no practical way to hand-delivery one piece of paper to 300 million Americans. Should we put his BC on tour like King Tut’s memorabilia?

This horse you’e beating is not only dead, it has fully decomposed and its bones picked clean and scattered.

No you probably can’t. But you are again missing the point. He didn’t post it on the web for the government – he did it to fight the idiotic racism of you and your kind. I’ve made this point numerous times, that you fail to see the point makes you ignorant.

How are they violating the law? Have you tried to get this public domain info and been blocked – you personally?

Your characterization was meant to somehow prejudice the statements of Fukino in your favor and I have already explain how it is transparent and immature attempt on your part.

You are a sad little person holding on to desperate falsity and I urge you to pursue more constructive endeavors.

It is really hard to continue this merry-go-round nonsense without calling you out for what you are an embittered ignorant fool. Asking the same questions, getting the same answers but then asking them again hoping to get a different response is the definition of insanity.

NC wrote: “I am not using report of Obama’s foreign birth as a proof. It is rather an indication that he has not been transparent about it in the past. That is why we have so many conflicting reports.”

That is a lie. Obama has been completely transparent. Mistakes by others are not Obama’s problem. A high school student writing in his school paper plagiarizing Wiki does not mean Obama is not transparent.

Go to a real school, Orly, and get an education.

The pathology I find particularly fascinating is that NC, more than most other birfers, asks questions that seem genuine, but NC never believes our answers. NC always believes s/he knows more than we do, more than appellate judges, more than legal scholars. So why does NC ask us questions?

I have to conclude that NC's greatest fear is the fear of being ignored. NC will ask any question, make any crazy statement, just to elicit a response. Any response is better than the lonely dark corner where NC spends his/her time.

He gave you five points and you only addressed the first one by saying that what they wrote isn’t reall what they meant? Is that your argument?
You’re a fucking moron.

Who is this “we” you refer to? It certainly doesn't seem to be the average American, who cares a lot more about not having health insurance or a job or ending a useless and unjustified war than about badgering the President for something he's already released.

Dos this mean that she will have to draft her own motins now or is Jonathan Levy going to do that fer her?

Will she sleep with Jonathan as well?

I do not care about any rumors about birth certificate from another country.
Got it!?

Hawaii laws allow access to public information about DoH index data, state manuals, etc.

I am NOT talking about the original birth certificate or paper copy of COLB.

The column is very narrow, if you want to debate any other issue post it on the top.

Back to the latest CEL motion in the Rivernider case. Did anyone else notice the irony of her accusing CEL of having psychological problems?

and what's with the German Yahoo account? Is Charles E Lincoln any relation to George Lincoln Rockwell?

Why can’t you post at the top NC? Nothing preventing it…except you.

SOP…Standard Orly Procedure. It's what has happened in all her filings when she's been shot down.

I am only asking for access to public data under the Hawaii laws: UIPA and 338-18 (d).

The DoH is violating Hawaii laws by not releasing documents in public domain.

Do you accept selective application of laws?

After Judge Carter denies her motion for reconsideration, what then? Kreep's already filed his appeal. Will she file one as well? Will the courts force both appeals into the same case? Will Gary punch Orly in the nose? The world wants’ to know.

What, that she accuses someone else of having psychological problems?

I am answering questions from several Obama supporters at the same time.

What role will jonathan Levy have in her quest from no on? Will she be blaming the Vatican for hiding Obama's birth certificate now?

Yep, or being a traitor. Whatever's handy at the moment. With no proof, of course.

Will there be any way to find out when the US Attorney seizes her money?

NC says:
“I do not care about any rumors about birth certificate from another country.
Got it!?”

NC says earlier:
“The reason why I do not trust the COLB is simple:
1) Obama's birth has been reported in three different countries. “

So which is it? You care about the COLB because of reports of foreign birth or rumors of foreign birth don't matter to you?

I am still waiting for answers on
1.) Why you never checked into the birth records of other presidents
2.) Where you stand on foreign laws trumping American laws
3.) Confirmation that you understand that the internet COLB is a copy of a real document and that the posting of that copy was a gesture by Obama and in no way constitutes any sort of official notification you can protest.
4.) Proof of wrongdoing in Hawaii
5.) Whether or not factcheck.org is the ONLY factchecking site on the web
6.) Whether or not you have personally sought from Hawaii the public “index data” and this potentially mythic manual that will double for a dictionary in defining for the word “filed” and who a “registrar” is.

But why is Charles Lincoln using a German Yahoo account?

Funny, you only seem to be answering in this thread. Guess if you need to pump yourself up…have at it.

Why are you asking us? Ask them yourself. Go ahead and do it. Wait.. I thought it was 10641?

Oh wait. You haven’t actually done it have you? Someone posted on a blag that they tried and were rebuffed right? Well, to believe that they actually requested and and were rejected I am going to need to see the original submitted request forms and the letters they received rejecting them. I will not accpt copies posted to WND or AXJ – those could be forged.

I hope so. Most of the info I get for that case I get from here:

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/news/breaking_news/

If not her payment, maybe her arrest?

I think when Yosef finds $20,000 missing from the checking account, Orly's going to have some 'splaining to do.

If what Charles Lincoln says about his temper is true, there could be a domestic disturbance call to the police in the picture. .

I'm not familiar with Jonathan Levy. What's the scoop?

You are late to the party to understand the complete context of the conversation based only on few previous posts.

I had debates with “bearclaw” about judge Carter and the discovery process in that case.

Bearclaw argued that Carter does not have standing to remove the sitting president.

My argument was that this would not be have been necessary. The discovery process could have answered the question whether the rights of minor party candidates were violated. If that were the case, a monetary damage could have been awarded to Keyes and Co and the political questions could have been left for Congress to deal with.

Bearclaw said that Court did not work that way, Carter could not skip the standing and issue advisory oppinion. He had to dismiss the case on standing without going into the merits of the case.

Now we have a situation where Appelate court in Indiana rules on the procedure by affirming the motion for dismiss from lower court and then proceeds on arguing the merits of the case, even though the merits were not debated in the lower court.

Yes a suspicion based on a credible inconsistency.

You have no credible inconsistency. You just have your need to keep grasping at straws.

And soon NC will tell you that the birf sertifikat doesn't really matter at all because Obama's daddy was Kenyan and de Vattel, John Jay, 1790 statute, yadda yadda yadda.

NC does not provide answers. Don't expect them. Part of the Zen of dealing with NC is detachment from NC's responses (difficult, I admit, and I often fail in this department). NC is in this for attention. NC's emotional needs are fed when people respond to NC, either by answering NC's questions (which will be followed by more questions) or by insulting NC. NC does not get any emotional bang from answering questions. If you don't respond to several of NC's posts, NC begins to whine that s/he is being ignored.

My assumption is that NC is either unemployed or underemployed, is ashamed of his/her lack of status, blames “affirmative action” for his/her lack of success (NC went on a rant about Obama and affirmative action last week), particularly hates blacks, and finds that blogging here gives him/her a feeling of importance and interaction that NC does not get in what otherwise is probably a very lonely and unsatisfying existence.

Another reason Orly can be found just about anywhere in the country except her own home.

So what if they did? Their including their opinion in their dismissal is not an Advisory Opinion. You have an incorrect definition of an Advisory Opinion. An AO is a SEPERATE issuance from a lower court in answer to a request for legal advice from government or agency officials, not a ruling on an actual case.

Secondly, the Indiana court addresses the merits of case to express their frustration that plantiffs ignored American case law while arguing in an American court. You may not like that there was not any debate, but clearly plantiffs were not prepared for debate.

He’s a fellow graduate of Orly’s alma mater, Taft university. He’s also an anti catholic rabble rouser.
http://www.vaticanbankclaims.com/belgrade.htm

He also believes in the existence of the illuminati and has been on Alex Jones' show a couple of times. That should tell you all you need to know.

Newspaper reports of Obama's foreign birth are only important to indicate that there was a confusion about his birthplace.

I do not care about foreign documents. Obama's birthplace can be verified using PUBLIC data (according to Hawaii laws).

1) There were no reports of foreign birth for any recent presidents.
Even if there were, I was not eligible to vote in US presidential elections until 2004 – therefore it was not an issue that intereseted me at the time.

2) No foreign laws should trump US laws.

3) COLB could be a copy of a real and valid document. That is what I am trying to verify. That is the reason for asking for the lawful release of index data for record number 10641, state manuals, etc..

COLB could be valid and still not confirm the Hawaiian birth (that is why we need to examine the meaning of “Filed By Registrar” phrase) .

4) There is no proof – unitl the lawful process of obtaining public document is executed, there is no way to prove that DoH is doing something wrong.

the DoH is violating Hawaii laws in not releasing the public data, which creates a perception of obstructionist behavior. I am entitled to have my opinion on why they behave in such manner.

5) Factcheck.org is the only place that claimed to have seen the physical COLB document provided to them by the Obama campaign.

6) I have not presonally asked the DoH for index data for a simple reason: After reading about emails between Donofrio and group of other people asking for such data, I did not want to ask the same question and “crowd the lines”, thus making it more difficult for them to deal with the DoH. I limited my role to spreading the information about it on the web.

There is no dictionary in the world that will tell you the difference between phrases “Filed by Registrar” and “Accepted by State Registrar” as used by the DoH on COLB documents. The manual describing their meaning is in public domain and it should be posted on a government web site for everyone to see as is the case with numerous other government documents.
That would reduce the number of calls to DoH.

—
3) COLB could be a copy of a real and valid document. That is what I am trying to verify.

What's the point of a state issuing certified documents if you have to verify it? If it is a certified copy, then it is a true copy. What part of that don't you understand?

2) No foreign laws should trump US laws.

——————————-

So then a British law in effect at the time of obama's birth does not trump U.S. laws, is that what you are saying?

You trust an image posted on the web – I do not.
You start from the premise that government officials always tell the truth – I do not.

In this case it should be trivial to verify the COLB. The fact that DoH has made it so complicated, indicates that they are hiding something.

He's her attorney on the appeal of her sanction in Georgia. Looks like a real nutcase. On his website, it appears that he does a lot regarding international law. I'm unsure how he could since he also is a Taft law student. He lives in South Carolina.

So, whenever you have to produce your gift certificate for proof, nobody should ever accept it from you? Or, should you require anybody to verify that it is true by seeing, in person, the official records? Man, you really want to bring this country to a standstill.

US Constitution requires that only natural born citizens are eligible. This is the law we follow. It is the US law that disqualifies Obama, not the British one.

The intention for using the NBC phrase in the eligibility requirement was to prevent a foreigner from becoming a commander of US military. Only a person with undivided loyalty at birth is eligible to run for POTUS.

Obama is not an NBC because of his dual citizenship at birth and possibly because of the foreign birth (yet to be determined).

The email message is from Orly to Charles and could be due to her having the language in her computer OS set to anther other than English. Also can happen when you're traveling and get a foreign IP. You're directed to the version of Yahoo or any other web based email for the language of your computer or the IP your computer is assigned when you're in a different country.

Great, now show me the US law that disqualifies Obama.

Under the U.S. Consitution, if he was born in this country, he is a natural born citizen.

End of the argument.

You lose.

BTW, how would he show his BC to 300,000,000 people, since that's what you're demanding.

Charming. Orly and Jonathan will make a nice couple.

How about we put all of the “Jews control the world” and “Catholics control the world” nuts in one room, and let them fight each other for control of the room?

Why does anyone even bother responding to NC. He or she should be called nutcase instead of naturalizedcitizen.

I do not know what the legal definition of an advisory opinion is. If you go up the thread you will notice that I put it in quotes. I did not know what would the most appropriate term for describe the court ruling.

I only know that two courts are using different rules when it comes to handling of eligibility cases.

It wouldn't matter what Orly's OS was set for, but Lincoln's The e-mails he put out about his interchance with the U.S. attorney who told him “nuts” are the same way. It's some wierd affectation of his or he is totally paranoid and running everything through a dozen proxies or some nonsense like that.

NC wrote: “I am only asking for access to public data under the Hawaii laws: UIPA and 338-18 (d).”

So you say, but that is not true. You have asked for a lot more, when in fact no more is needed. The dead horse is still dead. but knock yourself out; ask away. I don’t care. I’ll just continue to make fun of you and your entertaining delusions.

NC wrote: “The DoH is violating Hawaii laws by not releasing documents in public domain.”

That’s your story; pardon me if I don’t accept it. You have yet to establish that one item being sought even exists — a “letter” from the AG.

NC wrote: “Do you accept selective application of laws?”

Not at all. Why do you? Hawaii lawfully issued a COLB to Obama in June 2007 that proves he is a natural born citizen.

Good question. I asked this of NC about two weeks ago. NC's respone: the BC could be posted on the internet!

I kid you not! And when I pointed out that Obama had done precisely that, NC said, “No, it would have to be a government website.” But of course NC believes that the Hawaii Department of Health is corrupt, federal judges are corrupt or incompetent, the Indiana Court of Appeals is incompetent, and on and on.

Great, let's go:
1.) Are they actual credible newspaper reports in 1961 about his foreign birth? Not newspaper reports from Kenya in which relatives celebrate Barack's birth in Hawaii, mind you. Or are there instead modern newspaper stories reporting on the deranged factoids of people like Corsi and Donofrio?
Also, these so called reports create confusion. Was this confusion not cleared up by the COLB and the statements of Fukino or the absolute 100% complete and total lack of statements from Kenya or Indonesia? If so, why not? What motivation do you have faced first with confusion then faced with multiple pieces of data to dismiss that data? This is what I want to hear from you.

2.) If no foreign laws should trump US law, then why do reports, not even reports, RUMORS (unsubstantiated and debunked) of foreign birth trump the State of Hawaii?

3.) So you admit, the COLB is a real and valid document until you receive proof otherwise. Not the other way around, it is not a document waiting to be verified – remember innocent until proven guilty – it is a valid document subject to review with proof of forgery. You want verification, I know I know -but you're not entitled to it, nor are we entitled to serve your insane needs.

Also, do you even know this manual even exists? I mean, did Leo tell you about it? Because here in IL, there is no manual.

4.) Sure there is proof. There can be all sorts of proof besides making sure these numbers you have match up. You could talk to people who worked in the DoH and uncover a conspiracy to forge records. Or these people could tell you about database errors or lost records that were never revealed to be lost. There are numerous scenarios where the much ballyhooed index data would not be at all instrumental in covering errors or malfeasance. So… get to work!

5.) Sure, but I guess all the other sites missed the boat then, eh? They totally missed the years of news reports. They missed Lou Dobbs and O'Reilly giving the story prime time legs. I mean, surely someone else jumped on the story and uncovered the horrible truth none of us wants to admit, right? right? wrong. Where is the expose listing all the websites who begged and pleaded for the campaign to let them see it?

6.) So you haven't. Out of courtesy to the Hawaiians, the same Hawaiians that you slander with your nonsense? You just read some blogs posts and that was enough for you. What is it about Leo D that you believe in that can't extend the same understanding to Obama or Fukino or the good people of Hawaii who have worked so hard in the DoH for decades?

7.) Where is this manual you speak of. Have you asked Hawaii for it or have you read somewhere that there simply must be one to explain this complex and varied bureaucratic terms. And where did “accepted by State Registrar” come from? I see the filed thing on the COLB, but what about the other one? Is it from some magical blog you read? For the record, a basic understanding of English and a dictionary at hand can define “Filed by Registrar” as “placed among official records prescribed by law through the agency of an official record keeper.” I know I know, they could speak a totally different kind of English in Hawaii – what a load of bull crap. Tell em this, why on earth would a state government spend the time and money to keep documents on filed that were not verified by the proper channels? In what universe do people create reams of official documents for information (held for over 30 fucking years) that is pending?

“But all i want is verification and all this will go away, why are they hiding it?”

Why are you hiding from the police in your basement. Many people hear have said they believe you are mentally unstable and live in a basement. By your standards, that is enough for me to believe that you are clearly hiding from State Mental Health officials for fear of losing your recently naturalized status. Prove to me that you're not hiding from the police to stay in my beautiful country?

And, of course, when you pointed out that Hawaii can't release private data on a public site…well, then he wants the laws selectively applied. After, of course, complaining about the selective application of laws. It's so fun to watch him circle and circle and not get anywhere.

I have said it here many times – SCOTUS will have to issue a clear ruling on NBC definition.

He doesn't have dual citizenship at birth, because US law trumps British Law – as you just said.

No they don't. Millions of laws and statues are clarified everyday and hold precedent in all courts by lower federal courts.

Actually, you've made up your own version and will not accept SCOTUS. As you've proven time and time again.

no it doesn't. You have no proof of conspiracy and no proof they have deliberately made it difficult. They simply believe themselves and think you (oh wait, not really you just some bloggers) are an idiot.

So, if governent officials do not always tell the truth, what are you doing here. Shouldn't you be sitting on local council meetings making sure you local reps are staying honest. I'm sur there are local, city and state meetings you should be attending to keep everyone honest, right? What about Church or business officials? they've been known to lie too. You should really also be out there checking in on the environmental impact statements and financial records of local businesses, don't forget to stop by the church and double check everything they do as well.

Golly you must be so busy.

You are correct. I do not trust an Obama friendly unofficial web site for any proof of his eligibility.

If the DoH were corrupt to the point that they would put a fake document on the web – there would be no reasonable chance of fighting them at this time.

I belive that they would not put a fake document on an official web site and risk being prosecuted in the future.
Dr.Fukino's statements are carefully worded to imply the meaning that is not necessarily there – enough for a lawyer to have a wiggle room.
Put her under oath to testify that she saw the original birth certificate (indicating Obama's Hawaiian birth) and I will trust her words.

Since this is not going to happen, the only legal way to verify her words and COLB document is the release of DoH documents in PUBLIC domain.

They should release the documents in public domain. No need to release the private documents.

Read “fighthesmears.com”. They claimed that British law governed Obama's status at birth.

Point taken. You're right. On the receiving end, Lincoln's computer would have to be set to the language. I know when I use TOR to post, I forget to disable it and if I check my webmail, it'll go to which ever language for the IP I'm going through.

OK, so what should they release?

You're a nutcase.

NC says:”I do not know what the legal definition of an advisory opinion is. If you go up the thread you will notice that I put it in quotes. I did not know what would the most appropriate term for describe the court ruling.

I only know that two courts are using different rules when it comes to handling of eligibility cases.”

Are you motherfucking shitting me? Are you fucking serious? I would ask you to excuse my language, but frankly if I were talking to a live person, this would be the only way to express my disgust with your idiocy.

So you chastie me for “coming late” to an argument, the crux of which you HAD NO FUCKING IDEA ABOUT???

When Bearclaw (clearly the soul of patience) told you that federal courts do not issue Advisory Opinions, you challenged him and you had no clue? Right?

They aren't using two different sets of rules (for two different stages of appeal, mid you) they are using two avenues of argument.

Yes! Just as I predicted, NC's birftard biorhythms have shifted to the “Kenyan daddy” portion of the Cycle of Dementia. Hang on folks! de Vattel and John Jay's letter to George Washington can't be far behind!

The website doesn't constitute standing precedent.

Wait, so something from fightthesmears is accurate? You know they posted his COLB right? So that must be accurate.

The more I read of this dude, the more I inclined to agree with you.

In all the political arguments I have engaged in, nothing has baffled my intellect more than this nonsense.

From the comment from FactCheck.org:

Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

You need to read SCOTUS opinions in Perkins v Elg and Wong. Elg is more important than Wong because both of her parents were born in Sweden. Her parents came to the U.S. and she was born in New York City. She had dual citizenship at that point. Her parents moved her back to Sweden, and her father that became a naturalized citizen, renounced his U.S. Citizenship. However, she decided to return to the United States by her 21st birthday and never swore allegence to Sweden. SCOTUS found her to be a natural born citizen. That was in 1939. Since then, Congress has changed the law to where a person born in the U.S. and taken out of the country as a minor can return to the U.S. by the age of 25 and still be a natural born citizen.

We should have warned you that this isn't a political argument, it's entertainment watching true bigotry and stupidity at work. But, I have enjoyed watching you beat him down. BTW…GO ILLINI (basketball at least)

hilarious. We are becoming like a little group of kids who will group to high school and ask,
“whatever happened to that one kid who never bathed?”

It's just a round and round argument. Once you have beaten NC with all of his/her points, then it starts right back at the beginning and you have to go through all of the arguments again only to have it eventually all repeated. It's never ending…

If we all could exercise enough self-restraint, and refuse to respond directly to NC, I am all but certain NC would go away. But NC only needs one person willing to respond (by answering NC's questions or by insulting NC) to keep the game alive. In other words, I think we can discuss NC's positions, but when we hit “reply” to NC's posts, we are feeding his limitless emotional needs. NC would rather be abused in “replies” than ignored. This is what keeps him/her going in what otherwise must be a very lonely and sad existence.

The kid who never bathed?

Glenn has his own show on Fox now.

Wait, what? She actually spent five grand getting her teeth fixed? Isn’t she supposedly a dentist? Could she find no one to give her a professional courtesy rate?

./fist bump

My parents never called me a loser. Why would they?

He's like post-halloween office candy.

No worries gang, I've had fun.

Was referring to the sharks. NC shouldn’t be able to swim that far if he/she ‘s in California before NC is eaten alive.

I'd like to think that Orly will refuse to pay or provide the necessary information to where the US Attorney can seize the funds. If that's the case, I fully expect some video of some sorts of Orly being put into the back of a law enforcement car in cuffs.

No need to apologize for the language. NC has driven us all to the point of using profanity. Now, NC is more like a bothersome gnat that keeps flying up your nose.

I was born in a hospital in a state that has been part of the union for a long time. My replacement certificate for the birth certificate I misplaced, other than being from a different state, is very much like President Obama's COLB. I know my information was submitted by the hospital to the registrar, but mine also says filed, not accepted. I looked at the birth certificate I have for my older sister who was born at home on the ranch and delivered by my grandmother, and her certificate says filed, and yet her birth was registered by filling out the affidavit that was signed by my grandmother as the person who delivered her. I have two other siblings that were born at home and there certificates say filed. As do the certificates of the rest of us who were born in the hospital. Out of eight of us, whether born in a hospital or at home, we covered five different states. All of us have certificates that say the same thing- filed. So I can only conclude that filed is common among states, and it means they have the information needed to file the birth. Not part of the information, but all of it. There is no evidence to suggest the president was not born in a hospital but there is evidence via the story of another mom who was in the same hospital at the same time to have her babies, that he was born in the hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii as he, along with others, have said.

The only information that he was born somewhere other than Hawaii has come from people who do not want him in office and have tried to come up with ways to get him out. I have no doubt they have manufactured or have knowledge that it was manufactured, any supposed proof that the president was born anywhere else. Whether they don't want him office because he is a democrat or because he is black, they are manufacturing. If you look at what is there, even the 2 newspapers notice of birth, the fact that factcheck.org examined the actual piece of paper that has the embossed seal of Hawaii and the appropriate signature stamp and the security paper that it is printed on, there is much more evidence that he was born where and when stated. To try to claim otherwise, no matter the excuses you come up with, is grasping at straws to save a drowning cause. It won't work because you are wrong. I have so many more important things to do that I am not going to worry about your delusions and inability to accept those things you cannot change. I will keep looking for the Oily slapdowns that get posted here, but will not try to change your mind. You are blinded to the truth and won't believe the truth even when it jumps up and slaps you in the face.

Sounds good to me. I've already had to explain Evidence and Constitutional law to him, and he didn't even pay me tuition.

Shorter NC: “I have no idea what I'm talking about, but I'll be damned if shut the hell up anytime soon.”

Even Shorter NC: “Get the Black SOB out!”

Unfortunately, even after I posted what I did above, I responded to NC. I guess in some ways, don't feed the trolls should be the moto. However, this wouldn't be any fun at all if we were to just post here without a birthtard to insult. Lately, NC has been the most active. Then we have borderraving and RedDawn (RedGraham) – I think the two may be the same. Haven't seen ObamacornLies for awhile.

We all need to refer NC to our PayPal accounts. After appropriate payment has been made, then we'll respond.

LMAO!

My answer to your question about international vs. US laws was related to the issue of using the International War Crimes court and international laws for prosecuting administration officials. This was your original question before movig the debate to the top of the thread.

When it comes to the citizenship laws, for people with dual citizenship, appropriate laws of both countries should be followed.

According to US law in 1961, If Obama was born outside the US, his mother was too young to automatically confer her US citizenship to him. If he was born outside the USA Obama was British citizen at birth.

If he was born in the USA he was dual citizen at birth.

It is a widely known fact that his father was a foreigner. We do not need to consult the “fightthesmears.com” to determine whether Obama jr. was dual citizen at birth. We can read applicable US laws at that time.

“Fightthesmears.com” does not show the COLB registration number. At the bottom of the COLB document it says that any alteration invalidates the document.

Do you have the feeling you will be waiting a long, long time for NC to answer your question?

In Elg case, parents were naturalized USA citizens prior to her birth. She was born in the USA of citizen parents, therefore she was a natural born citizen. The fact that she was taken to Sweden as a child did not affect her status at birth.

This is quite different from Obama's case – his father was not a US citizen at the time of his birth.

Mocking what NC considers “logic” and “arguments” is almost cathartic. It's fun to watch someone who admittedly knows absolutely nothing about law and the Constitution try to argue the law and the Constitution.

Wonderful, free medical diagnosis from Dr. Bear.

Dr. Bear – what is the medical diagnosis for people who want to talk to Orly – so desperately that they believe in her using the “naturalizedcitizen” alias on this blog, LOL

so..
you say “visit A”,
I say “A doesn't matter”
you say “well then don't visit A, but i'm still right”

even though you're not.

bull shit dude, you just keep changing your tune to fit the story.

Any judge will tell you that US laws trumps all other laws.

um.. what law was this in 1961 that wasn't effected by Elg or Ark?

Just do us all a favor and shut your trap.

no, it's “quite different”

Obama was born in the USA of a citizen parent – thus NBC.

and you know, you're just in too deep to give up.

BTW, why haven't you surrendered yourself to the authorities yet? We all know you're a criminally insane fugitive.

The Appelate court affirmed the motion to dismiss and then proceeded to discuss the case on merits. This was exatly the opposite from bearclaw's claim about rules that judge Carter had to follow. Neither Carter nor any other eligibility case judge ruled on NBC definition.

I called the Appelate Court ruling “advisory opinion” because nobody asked them to rule on the merits of the case. Did anybody have a chance to argue the case in front of the Appelate Court?

Is the Indiana court unique when compared to other courts who dismissed the eligibility cases based on standing?

Tonight, I decided to send some words of 'support' to Orly to I commented on one of her posts.

You know you have the support of your people!

Jacque Strapp

Perhaps the Appelate court discussed the case on its merits whereas Orly's cases have never had merits?

I've had it. NC, I've got your IP and I have forwarded it to my superiors. I'll let the Secret Service take care of you.

Regardless, you mis-read. Only her father was a naturalized citizen AND he renounced his U. S. Citizenship. But it doesn't matter. The consensus from SCOTUS opinions show that anyone born on U.S. soil are NBC as long as the don't swear their allegence to another country.

You know what your original question was. I assumed that the shorter version was asked in the same context.

I am sure it would be easier for you to figure out the exact name of the US naturalization law in effect in 1961. (On top of my head I think it originated in 1948). I'll look it up later from home.

You assume that Obama was born in USA. If that is the case he was dual citizen at birth.

The same is true for Ark (citizen at birth). The Elg case is different because both parents were US citizens, therefore child was not only a citizen at birth but a natural born citizen.

BWAHAHAHAHA!!! Sorry, the wheel just keeps spinning.

NC: “Well, let me make up a law and believe me when I tell you, and even if not true I'll make something else up.”

Nothing wrong with that logic, is there.

What was the original intention for inclusion of the NBC phrase into Constitution?

Who is the source?

Answer to these two questions will tell you what the definition of an NBC is.

Ark was a natural born citizen. There are only two types of citizens. Natural born – born on U. S. soil and naturalized citizens – people that have immigrated to the U. S. and have become U. S. citizens. Are you just dense or are you dyslexic?

NC knows less than nothing about Constitutional law.

Secret Service!? I didn't know that you are so important, LOL

The only relevant status in Elg case is at birth. The fact that her father renounced the US citizenship after her birth does not affect her status in the eyes of the US law.

A dual citizen at birth owes allegiance to another country in addition to US. The same is true for US born children of residents and illegals.

The only subgroup of citizens that does not have dual loyalty at birth are those born in the USA of citizen parents.

Figthesmears is correct that Obama was dual citizen at birth.

It is not them who decided and determined it, but the US law. They just reported it. There is an easy way of verifying their claim.

The COLB is a different issue because the independent verification is impossible if the Hawaii DoH refuses to release the public data.
Only after the verification I'd be able to say whether the image posted on their site is consistent with the claim of Obama's Hawaiian birth.

Happy with the explanation?

Orly is not the only one who filed an eligibility lawsuit. There have been numerous other cases. No other court but the Indiana one ruled on the merit of the case.

What is so unique about this court to be able to issue such ruling?

Very Happy. You say: Only after the verification I'd be able to say whether the image posted on their site is consistent with the claim of Obama's Hawaiian birth. “

By what authority do you claim the exclusive right to verify government documents?

Very Happy. You say: Only after the verification I'd be able to say whether the image posted on their site is consistent with the claim of Obama's Hawaiian birth. “

By what authority do you claim the exclusive right to verify government documents?

you're missing the point, big surprise. BC said fed courts don't issue what is know by definiton as an AO, and you challenged him, but you were wrong.

Also, guess what, the court can write an opinion based on the merits if the want, when they are addressed the poor lawyering of the plantiff asking for am appeal.

Is Indiana unique, sure, but they can be if they want to. The are courts and they do have some freedom. If the plantiffs (or you) don't like it you can appeal again.

You are so ignorant.

you're missing the point, big surprise. BC said fed courts don't issue what is know by definiton as an AO, and you challenged him, but you were wrong.

Also, guess what, the court can write an opinion based on the merits if the want, when they are addressed the poor lawyering of the plantiff asking for am appeal.

Is Indiana unique, sure, but they can be if they want to. The are courts and they do have some freedom. If the plantiffs (or you) don't like it you can appeal again.

You are so ignorant.

As I slide down the bannister of my life, I will always remember you as a splinter in my ass…

There is only one type of citizenship. All citizens are equal in their rights and responsibilities.

We are talking about are different paths to obtaining a citizenship.
A person can be a citizen at birth or a naturalized citizen.

You have omitted foreign born children of US citizens in your list. They are citizens at birth. US born children are also citizens at birth.

The NBC definition is something we'll have to disagree on. I have provided my viewpoint and reasons to support it numerous times on this blog.

yeah, it was my attempt to get you to admit something that you might be consistent about, but you gain fail.

So, now I'm supposed to do the research to support your dumbass position?

I know Obama was born in the US and he is a NBC at birth. He was born of natural childbirth on US soil to an American mother – nothing changes that and the citizenship of his father does not matter. As much as you think it does – it simply doesn't and you're just plain wrong. Every time to you say it you are wrong.

Just because Elg had both parents, there is no prohibition on having only one parent. – that is why you are wrong.

are you really that motherfucking stupid?

Your reasons to support are INCORRECT.

Start doing your own research and quit relying on us to try to convince you because, I really don't care if you or any other birthtard is convinced. You are a minority and thus have to live with the majority's choice to elect Obama.

“This case could now be appealed to the Indiana Supreme Court, which will only review it if it wants to do so, and is not binding on other state or federal courts. But an “Order for Publication” is not for nothing and its influence will be felt as more Birther cases reach other courts, as every single Defense filing cites it in the future. Should the Indiana Supreme Court refuse to review, the only recourse is the US Supreme Court, which can also refuse to review, and probably will.”

no it won't you have it backwards. The framers didn't design a category and then make up words to define it, they used words they already had the meanings to and used them in combination to define what they wanted to say.

the easiest definition is non-naturalized citizen – a person born on US soil by citizens or immigrants participating in good faith commerce.

ignorant…

NO, it isn't the US law – you are repeatedly INCORRECT on this issue.

I don't fucking give a good god damn shit what you think about any of this anymore – you such a fucking idiot.

if we were in public I would not hesitate to call you this to your face and I would gladly accept the consequences.

There are two types of citizens. Those born on US soil and those that are naturalized by becoming citizens after immigration. My omittion of children born to two US citizens off US soil was omitted. Those children are considered to be natural born citizens.

Why don't you back your statement up with an explanation of what was wrong in my previous post.

Who suggested the use of phrase NBC?

What does the document say about the intention for using it?

Trying to multi-task. Children born on U.S. soil are natural born citizens regardless of their parents' citizenship. Look up the freak'n laws yourself. You know how to read and you can find them easily enough in various law websites as well as the congressional websites.

Verification can be done using documents available to anybody. No exclusive rights are needed (no standing issue) to ask for the release of DoH index data, state manuals,…

Do your own fucking research you idiot.

I have absolutely no more time to spend on your ridiculous nonsense. You are a fool to an extent that I cannot even fathom.

What's wrong with your post is that you're like a f'n parrot. You've been spouting the same crapolla for at least 5 or 6 weeks.

Now wait a minute…You said only YOU can verify it. I asked you who gave you that exclusive authority? Don’t change the subject when it suits you, answer the question.

I thought you were aware that I am here and paid by the DOJ to support Obama.

A minor can not owe allegiance because they're not educated enough to know what allegiance is. If they are born here, then it is common sense that their allegiance is first and foremost to the country where they were born. If they renounce their citizenship after they have become adults, then they are no longer U.S. citizens. However, at the time of their birth, they are considered natural born citizens. The only exception to this would be if the parents were citizens of another country and were ambassadors to this country. Then, US law states the allegiance of the child is to that of the country of their parents.

I have read about it and not everyone agrees with your view.

I tried to understand the original intent for the inclusion of NBC phrase into Constitution.

Once that was clear in my mind – it was easy to reach the conclusion on the meaning of NBC.

Now wait a minute…You said only YOU can verify it. I asked you who gave you that exclusive authority? Don't change the subject when it suits you, answer the question. Quit hiding.

I thought you might be French.

Or as the antibirthers would say “Hey the guys part-black so we can give him a pass on the citizen thing.”

No need to guess about COLB status field (Filed vs. Accepted) . We can read about it in the state manual (once Hawaii DoH releases it to the public).

The story about COLB is similar – it would be very easy to verify its authenticity if DoH released the data in public domain. I do not understand why is it a big deal to Obama supporters if people want to verify the COLB? If you are 100% sure that Obama is telling the truth – there is no need for you to argue with anyone asking for verification. You could even encourage it because it will only confirm what you already know, right?

1) The newspaper birth announcements cannot confirm whether Obama's birth was registered based on an affidavit from a relative.

The unwillingness to provide the long form birth cerificate and the behavior of Kapiolani hospital and DoH indicate that something is not quite right.

Instead of speculating, we can verify the COLB validity using the DoH data in public domain. (When DoH decides to stop violating the law and release such data).

2) Rumors are not relevant – there is a legal way to confirm the validity of COLB. That is all that matters. It will either confirm or deny Obama's story.

3) Manual does exist. Several years ago Hawaii DoH converted to use the electronic database. It is highly unlikely that DoH would undergo such task without providing written description of functional requirements to programmers.

No need to guess or speculate: the DoH will explain the definition of those terms used on COLB documents.

There are COLBs posted on the web that contain both phrases. It should not be a problem for DoH to publish the explanation on their web page. It will save them lot of time from answering phone calls and emails.

US citizens have the right to see the public data maintained by the DoH. Are you advocating a denial of those rights?

Allegiance to a country also comes through parents.

If that is not the case what would you say about foreign born children of US citizens – do they owe allegiance to the birth country, the USA or both?

I did my reasearch and this is the topic that bearclaw resents the most because he has no answer for it.

The source of NBC phrase is the letter from John Jay to George Washington.

The essence is simple: He asks for the strong check that a foreigner would not be eligible to become a commander of US military.

The phrase was included into Constitution without any debate.

The motivation is simple – national security.

Index data for record numbers 10641, 10637 and 10638.

State manual describing the status field in the COLB (Registered vs. Accepted).

Legal opinion from AG Bennett to Dr, Fukino, which she used as a basis for her July 2009 press-release proclaiming Obama a natural-born American citizen (with the explanation of her definition of this term).

A confirmation from DoH that they issued a COLB to Obama on June 6, 2007.

If Obama was born outside the USA, he was not a US citizen at birth.

Nationality Act of 1940, revised June 1952
http://www.aca.ch/op4b.htm

What is your definition of the phrase “natural childbirth”? Are you referring to a medical term or citizenship attribute?

My view on the NBC definition:
natural born citizen means that no man-made law is needed to determine the citizenship of such person at birth. By the law of nature such child belongs to only one country.
There is only one such definition: Born in the country of citizen parents.

Only in this case there is no doubt about citizenship or possible split loyalties at birth.

It also fits perfectly into the original motive for the inclusion of this phrase into the Constitution: national security measure to prevent foreigners from obtaining command of US military.

cheap ugg boots

discount ugg boots

ugg classic tall

buy ugg classic cardy boots

sale ugg boots

classic ugg tall boots

ugg classic short boots

classic ugg cardy boots

ugg bailey button

bailey ugg button boots

ugg mayfaire boots

ugg boots mayfaire

ugg argyle knit boots

ugg crochet boots

ugg baby bootie

ugg infant boots

ugg nightfall boots

classic ugg sundance boots

classic ugg nightfall boots

ugg rainier boots

ugg stripe cable nit boot

women's ugg boots

ugg women lo pro boots

ugg classic tall chestnut

ugg grey classic tall boots

ugg classic mini boots

ugg christmas special offer

ugg christmas promotion

purchase ugg boots

No one has said that except birthers who boast oh-so-loudly that they are not racists.

BTW, where's the picture of your adopted Korean daughter? And her Mexican boyfriend's green card? And your wife's tribal ID? Put up or shut up, old sport.

1. In short, you have nothing but rumors promulgated by birthers. Sorry, not valid.

2. It's been confirmed by the Hawaiian authorities.

3. Not relevant unless one is a birther who has trouble understanding English.

As for what I advocate, I strongly advocate birthers cutting out their nonsensical campaign and doing something useful, like planting trees to reforest areas that have been clear cut.

1. In short, you have nothing but rumors promulgated by birthers. Sorry, not valid.

2. It's been confirmed by the Hawaiian authorities.

3. Not relevant unless one is a birther who has trouble understanding English.

As for what I advocate, I strongly advocate birthers cutting out their nonsensical campaign and doing something useful, like planting trees to reforest areas that have been clear cut.

Your private definition does not trump established American law. FAIL.

GO ASK A LAW PROFESSOR TO EXPLAIN THIS TO YOU. Otherwise, stop babbling about things you clearly do not understand.

The motivation is actually that you and Orly and all your merry little friends don’t like black people very much. I can see no other reason for your obsession with something that is not an issue to any sane person in the world.

Do you have any Orggly Boots? Put them on and you immediately start trampling on the Constitution, demanding to see everyone’s birth certificate.

You are arguing for violating rights of citizens to access public data from the government.

When you talked to a law professor – did you ask about the source of the NBC phrase and motivation to include it into the Constitution?

You are hereby nominated for the 2009 “Best Response to Blog Spam” Award.

And don’t forget calling for sedition! There is no doubt Birthers are a bit “touched” but some are down right certifiable like this Rev. Manning. I wonder why we haven’t seen anyone in the media report on this incident.

http://crazyinternetpeople.blogspot.com/

Are you saying that US law does not recognize dual citizenship?

Are you saying that US law does not recognize dual citizenship?

Are you saying that US law does not recognize dual citizenship?

Here is the latest lie from NC, and all the funnier because I don't think NC realizes how easy it is to pull up my past comments.

NC's lies: “I did my reasearch and this is the topic that bearclaw resents the most because he has no answer for it.

The source of NBC phrase is the letter from John Jay to George Washington.

The essence is simple: He asks for the strong check that a foreigner would not be eligible to become a commander of US military.

The phrase was included into Constitution without any debate.”

My answer to NC, posted 5 days ago:

“1) John Jay was not a delegate to the Constitutional Convention.

(2) His letter to George Washington of July 25, 1787 is very short, proposes that the commander-in-chief of the army be a “natural born citizen” but nowhere defines what that phrase means.

(3) George Washington was not a member of the Committee of Eleven that drafted the “natural born citizen” requirement. There is no evidence he discussed John Jay's letter with the Committee of Eleven.

(4) John Jay never mentions the phrase “natural born citizen” in any of his other surviving correspondence, let alone in correspondence during the Constitutional Convention. Searchable database of letters:

http://www.familytales.org/results.php?tla=joj

(5) John Jay was a co-author of the Federalist Papers. The Federalist Papers do not ever discuss the “natural born citizen” requirement or its possible meaning. Searchable Federalist Papers:”
http://www.foundingfathers.info/federalistpapers/

The phrase “natural born citizen” was proposed by the Committee of Eleven, without explanation, and approved by the Constitutional Convention without debate. NC's notion that the phrase came from John Jay's letter is speculation that assumes several things NC cannot possibly prove. Moreover, John Jay's letter does not propose a definition of “natural born citizen”. That is the funniest part. It is NC's opinion that the “Founding Fathers” must have meant “natural born citizen” to mean “born in the U.S. to two citizen parents” but ultimately the sources of that conclusion are (a) NC's own opinion of what John Jay “must have meant” by the phrase, and (b) NC's assumption that the John Jay's letter was influential on the Committee of Eleven, even though NC has no evidence that any member of the Committee of Eleven ever saw the letter.

This is what I mean when I say that NC's argument goes around in circles. Right now he is in the “Kenyan daddy” phase of the Birftard Cycle of Dementia, and as usual NC is acting as if his arguments have never been shredded. They have. Multiple times. But NC will keep lying. It is what NC does.

I've already explained that in the United States, NC, we have the “Federal Government” and 50 “States.” I would have thought you learned about this in order to become a citizen, but maybe you are lying about becoming a citizen. You lie about everything else. The federal courts are governed by Article III of the Constitution, and the requirement of a real “case or controversy.” Article III does not apply to state courts. “Standing” rules for state courts are governed by — surprise — state law, including state constitutions. There are — surprise — 50 state constitutions. Guess what? They aren't all the same. It follows that rules of “standing” can differ among the 50 states.

Now, if the Indiana case ultimately goes to the U.S. Supreme Court, that Court is governed by Article III, and might find that the plaintiffs lacked Article III standing.

Good think I can pull this comment back up in few days when you conveniently “forget” that I have already explained this to you.

Conclusion: No conspiracy here. Just different rules, which is what happens when you have a U.S. Constitution and 50 different state constitutions.

Your view? Why the hell should we give one rats ass what your view is? Especially since your view is stupid?

Natural Law? NATURAL LAW?
teh very concept of nationality is construct of the human mind derived from the very same instinct to make laws to being with.

Contrary to your understanding and unique and idiotic definiton of the phrase NBC, it does not fir perfectly with you very flawed understanding of the framers intent (as outlined quite well and anotated by bearclaw above)

Natural Law? Oh God, please grant me the strength to avoid coming here and feeding into this BS.

Thank you for the clarification.

I have trouble understanding the following excerpt from the Indiana court ruling (page 5):

“..Initially, we note that the Plaintiffs do not cite to any authority recognizing that the Governor has a duty to determine the eligibility of a party?s nominee for the presidency. The Plaintiffs do not cite to authority, nor do they develop a cogent legal argument stating that a certificate of ascertainment has any relation to the eligibility of the candidates. However, we note that even if the Governor does have such a duty, for the reasons below we cannot say that President Barack Obama or Senator John McCain was not eligible to become President. We will handle each of Plaintiffs? arguments in turn…”

First they made the ruling that motion to dismiss from the lower court was properly granted. So far so good. The chances are that this decision is proper.

By going further and defining the NBC they are making a pre-emptive strike against eligibility lawsuits. The last two sentences are not necessary unless you want to engage in judicial activism.

If you appeal the Indiana court ruling to a higher court, what would be a basis for the appeal, motion to dismiss or NBC definition?

If the legal option is limited to motion to dismiss, the chances are that no other court will rule differently. In that case, the court has entered the NBC definition into the US case law for other judges to follow without any debate about it.

Is it possible to appeal the Indiana Court decision based on their definition of NBC? If it is possible than I don't mind them making such decision.

If it is not possible to challenge their NBC definition – that would be an example of what my initial claim of judicial activism is all about. They issued an opinion (not using the AO phrase here :-) that cannot be debated or appealed to a higher court.

John Jay and his letter is not a standing precedent. Bearclaw has posted above with in-depth explanation why you are incorrect.

John Jay and his letter is not a standing precedent. Bearclaw has posted above with in-depth explanation why you are incorrect.

John Jay and his letter is not a standing precedent. Bearclaw has posted above with in-depth explanation why you are incorrect.

I'll bet someone has some illustration software that can make a little diagram of NC arguments.

There is no other source for the inclusion of the NBC phrase into Constitution. I asked you about it and you could not provide it. There is none.

George Washington had “some” influence in political life at that time to discuss the issue with people who wrote the draft of the Constitution. You are completely dismissing this possibility but not providing an alternative source.

In the absence of any alternative proposal that includes the NBC phrase, John Jay's letter cannot be dismissed as you tried.

The letter does not explicitly say what the definition of an NBC is – however it provides a clear motivation on why the phrase is needed. You conveniently avoid to acknowledge this fact.

If you know the motivation for using this phrase, the definition is easy to understand.

1.) no no no. You don't get out of this one. point 1.) is about you having nay credible evidence that Obama or any other President was every born outside the US. Point .1) is not platform for you to circle back around for your “verification” sob story. If you hav no credible evidence of foreign birth, that leads us to .2)

2.) Again, not a platform for you to return to your verification nonsense. We all know you want verification.. I understand that 100% this is about your motivation for wanting it. Point 2.) is asking you why – if US law trumps foreign law – why things like rumor (which carry less wight that fact or law) trump the official proclamations of the State of Hawaii. This all goes back to needing proof to question the validity of the State of Hawaii.

“but I can't get proof as long as they hold the document hostage illegally!” I have addressed this and you have not responded. there are other ways for you to attain proof and until you try to obtain these alledgedly hiding documents for yourself, we cannot believe you becasue you assertions are based on allegations from blogs, which you yourself have said you cannot trust.

3.) You say “manual does exist” out of pure speculation.

Again, allow me to repeat myself ad nauseum. You have very right to think you need verification, but you have no right to demand it from us, from Hawaii or from anyone else. Your lack of faith in face of evidence is YOUR problem.

I have posted this explanation before but you did not see it:
We can use the process of elimination to come up with the definition of NBC. There are only three possibilities in the (citizen at birth category):

a) born a citizen (includes foreign born children of US citizens)
b) born in the US (includes children of illegal aliens)
c) born in US of citizen parents (most strict definition)

In 1790 US Congress passed a law (An Act to Establish An Uniform Rule of Naturalization) that extended the “natural born citizen” status to foreign born children of US citizens.
Five years later, the law was repealed and replaced with the one that declared foreign born children of US citizens to be citizens.

The early Congress made a clear distinction between the terms “Natural Born Citizen (NBC)” and “citizen at birth”.
This clearly indicates that option (a) is not the definition of an NBC.

The problem with definition (b) is simple: it qualifies children of illegal aliens to be eligible for POTUS.
In his letter to Washington, John Jay asked for a “strong check” that a foreigner could not become a commander of US military. He suggested the use of phrase “NBC”.

The idea that a child born in the USA of illegal immigrants would qualify to be a CiC, while foreign born children of US citizens (on a military deployment) would not qualify is clearly absurd and opposite to the original intention for eligibility requirement. It is a matter of national security that a CiC has only single loyalty at birth: to the USA.

By showing that options (a) and (b) are not correct, only option (c) remains.

This is also the only definition that is bulletproof in a sense that nobody has any doubts that such citizens are NBCs.

You are arguing for violating rights of citizens to access public data from the government.

No need to provide a reason for the request. End of story.
Hawaii DoH must follow the law.

Your concept of the actual application of reason when it comes to law and research is fundamentally flawed.

The absence of alternative does not give you reason to apply John Jay's letter without an actual direct connection that you can prove.

If there is no proof Washington did not meet or communicate with the Group of 11, you cannot plug him without direct proof.

In law the motivation for a phrase that holds standing in application does not entirely include motivation, as you suggest. Especially when the source you cite for motivation does not include an actual definition.

Also, your understanding of Washington's influence on the writing of the US Constitution is incorrect. Washington was even surprised to be elected President and reluctant to assume such high office. Many of the customs we still hold today r.e. Presidential behavior stem from his unease with political power.

Lastly, using the absence of evidence to plug in evidence with no direct correlation and them sell that package as the last word is not only intellectually flawed and lazy but it ignores all the case law since that time.

Are you willing to follow the same logic when it comes to the use of SCOTUS cases to justify Obama's eligibility?

There is no direct ruling on NBC phrase, therefore you cannot use any case to support your argument.

I am sure that you will argue for application of double standards.

the simple answer to you, that you will not accept because you can't and won't (for whatever reason who knows) is the Obama fulfills your option C.

“But his Dad and British Law!” US law trumps British law. His mothers status as an NBC combined with his birth in the US (as proved by the State of Hawaii held as fact by the courts regardless of your objections) fulfills all requirements.

The fact there there is no definiton that one or two parents does not prove your point. It only means there is no definiton

John Jay does not matter.

It is not accepted that Congress made a clear distinction between NBC and Citizen at Birth and, frankly, I would be interested in hearing an explanation about how those two phrases mean something different from each other. I would like to see something from an English language prof of Law scholar explaining how those two phrases are have a fundamental difference.

no I'm not. I'm arguing that the proof you want from Obama is not the same level of proof you are accepting from the blogosphere that Hawaii is violating anyone's rights.

Until you request the info and receive a letter from Hawaii, I don't belief Hawaii is violating anyone's rights.

Prove it to me the way you want Obama to prove to you.

Plaintiffs claim essentially presented the following two part argument: (1) the Governor of Indiana has a duty to make a determination regarding the eligibility of Presidential candidates, and (2) if the Governor had fulfilled that duty, he would have found Barack Obama and John McCain ineligible.

The Indiana Court of Appeals chose to resolve the case by saying: we don't need to decide whether the Governor has to determine eligibility, because the candidates were, in any event, eligible. Personally, if I were in the shoes of the Court of Appeals judges, I would have tried to resolve the matter on the first part of the argument, because most courts try to avoid deciding federal constitutional issues if there are “non-constitutional” grounds for deciding the matter. But there is nothing I am aware of that would absolutely prohibit the Indiana Court of Appeals from proceeding as it did.

I don't know what you mean about there being no “debate” in front of the Court of Appeals about the meaning of “natural born citizen.” It is clear the plaintiffs submitted written arguments, and they may have had oral argument. But please notice that they were “pro se”: no lawyers trying to present their own case, representing themselves. The Court notes the plaintiffs did a lousy job of arguing their case — making no cogent argument about John McCain's eligibility, for example.

I think you misunderstand the meaning of “Motion to Dismiss.” Defendants can move to dismiss on many grounds, for example: Court lacks jurisdiction over the subject matter; plaintiffs lack standing to present the claim. In this case, it appears that it was dismissed because, even if the facts alleged by the plaintiffs were true, they would necessarily lose the lawsuit on the merits because Obama — under the facts alleged — was eligible.

My definition of natural childbirth? are you serious?

Are tryto get to the point where you accuse me of saying that C-section children or babies conceived with invitro are not NBC? That’s the kind of logic you would use.

My definition of natural childbirth? are you serious?

Are tryto get to the point where you accuse me of saying that C-section children or babies conceived with invitro are not NBC? That’s the kind of logic you would use.

My definition of natural childbirth? are you serious?

Are tryto get to the point where you accuse me of saying that C-section children or babies conceived with invitro are not NBC? That’s the kind of logic you would use.

“No other source”: This argument is only going to be persuasive if you can put John Jay's letter into the hands of the Committee of Eleven. Show some historical evidence that they saw the letter. If you can't, your argument that the letter is a “source” is just speculation.

John Jay's letter states:

“Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.”

No definition of “natural born citizen.” Yes, John Jay expresses concern about protection of key government roles from “the admission of Foreigners.” But it is merely your opinion that they would have considered someone born in the United States, with a parent who was also a citizen (at birth), raised by that parent and by his materal grandparents (also citizens — at birth) to be such a threat to national security as not to be a “natural born citizen.” That is YOUR conclusion, based on what YOU think is necessary for national security. You are entitled to your opinion. Your opinion is not law until you can persuade a court to agree with you. Good luck with that.

No, I won't aruge for double standards. I will aruge for proper application and debate on the law. Something you have a serious problem with. I will also do you the courtesy of addressing your response IN FULL – a courtesy you rarely extend.

I will fully admit that there is no strict definition of NBC anywhere (not even in the recent Indiana ruling).

I can also argue strongly that both Ark and Elg apply to Obama. Especially Ark because Ark's Chinese parents were decided to have engaged in good faith commerce. As Obama's father was as a student this can be considered good faith commerce.

For you to use this argument to be valid, you must bring up SCOTUS cases where the protections extented by Ark and Elg do somehow NOT extend to the NBC status.

I understand why spam gets removed from this blog, but I count it a loss that those who read your post later will not have the delight of seeing the “ad” to which you were responding. Again, bravo!

He's also ignoring the fact that John Jay didn't seek to bar Royalists from serving as commander-in-chief. Without any actual written documentation from John Jay, how can we know what his true intention was? Was Jay secretly advocating a return to British rule if the Presdient (CiC), elected by the people, ran on a platform of annexation or commonwealth status with the British Crown.

I guess we will never know.

You don't really need software. Did you ever have a “Spirograph” as a kid?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirograph

Of course, what a Spirograph produces is far more enjoyable to look at.

I was thinking along similar lines, but one where you have the “yes” and “no” options and you follow arrows to the next box, except on this one, no matter which one you choose, eventually you end up right back where you started with the same tired old debunked arguments that hold no water.

what I would enjoy here by way of proof is a link to website where the COLB is stated to be a copy of the one given to Obama by Hawaii that clearly contains the phrase “accepted by State Registrar”

Still waiting for answers to 4, 5 and 6.

Oh yeah, and while you are trying to dig up some cases, perhaps you could also find away to show me this statement of yours interferes with you trying to justify how Ark and Elg protections are not extended to all forms of citizenship including NBC.

“There is only one type of citizenship. All citizens are equal in their rights and responsibilities.”

Wait… so birthers bitch that courts never rule on the merits but when courts do offer an opinion on the merits, they bitch too?

Strange group.

Oh yeah! They did the same with Judge Land's opinion…and Judge Carter's. Whenever they say something the blowers don't like, then ignore it…or call them a traitor or whatever word comes out of Orly's mouth that day.

The best one I remember was the claim in Georgia that the AG was in town for the first trial. NC tried to use that one after it had been thoroughly debunked…and got caught. Still he hung on until it was pointed out that the AG was giving a speech around the same time he was supposedly at that coffee shop in Georgia. After politely asking if the AG beamed to Georgia, he no longer uses it. All you're seeing is he will continually use arguments you can't directly rebuke, as the AG story, again and again and again. He's really practiced up at it and ready to ignore what he doesn't need for what he imagines. I'm still waiting for him to explain to me who gave him exclusive authority on deciding the legality of the BC and what authority gave him the right to ignore SCOTUS opinion over his own. In the meantime, I'm just sitting back enjoying your latest foray into the absurd.

I'd like to think that playing with him involves some emotions similar to the Ross Stage's of Death, I think I've reached anger (over why he is so stupid). I'm still going through parts of denial (how could someone be so stupid)
then there will be bargaining (that maybe I can get him to be not so stupid)
acceptance (that he is just stupid)
there's another on in there, but I forget it.

I'd like to think that playing with him involves some emotions similar to the Ross Stage's of Death, I think I've reached anger (over why he is so stupid). I'm still going through parts of denial (how could someone be so stupid)
then there will be bargaining (that maybe I can get him to be not so stupid)
acceptance (that he is just stupid)
there's another on in there, but I forget it.

Ruling is not a problem.

Ruling without a debate is.

Then it won't be a pretty diagram then…LOL!

but he was born in he US

I have no idea what are you talking about. Georgia case, AG story, cofee shop ???

You had that debate with someone else.

You might want to read this then….

http://www.scribd.com/doc/22475054/BERG-v-OBAMA…

The Appeals Court that smacked Berg's case into oblivion pretty much disgrees with every point you made…since they actually understand the Laws well count them correct and you a moron.

Orly thinks that Berg losing helps her is only coming from the idea that she needs to have her flying monkeys fill her paypal account before the US attorney comes knocking to collect her sanction funds…

That's assuming you were there and saw no debate take place in the original case. Or it assumes that you even have a grasp on what kind of debate happens in a court room.

I mean, you're entitled to your opinion but it doesn't mean squat in court.

Sorry, NC, it was you. Since the whole board knows who would be more likely to lie, I won't waste my time going back into my history and pulling it up directly. Like the rest of your BS.

Oh no, it can't be stupid. He researches too hard over at WND and Orly's sites. He's also on blower boards getting advice on his answers. My assumption would be he has a financial stake in keeping this alive…like runs a website or works for WND. Used to be we always had them here touting their websites as “proof”. Once we stopped clicking on them, they died off. So, I'd say this is just NC's way of trying to keep his $$$ alive…and he's losing.

The first draft of the Constitution did not include the NBC phrase. Yet shortly after John Jay's letter the phrase is in. Draw your own conclusions.

While asking for a direct link between the letter and the Committee of Eleven, you have no competing source to explain the inclusion of the NBC phrase into Constitution.

There was a proposal by Hamilton, but he wanted to use the phrase “born a citizen”. This is another indication that founding fathers did not consider the NBC to have the same meaning as “born a citizen” (BaC). If they did, the phrase BaC would have been used in the Constitution.

John Jay argues for a >>> strong <<< check that a foreigner will not be able to command the US military.

You have to have a simple rule not subject to interpretations (a natural rule). NBC is just that. Only a person with the exclusive loyalty to USA is eligible because such person will have easier time deciding about the use of military against a foreign country.

We have discussed this issue before. A hypothetical scenario from WW2. Let us assume that Harry Truman had a Japanese parent. Would he have made the same decision about using nuclear weapons to end the war, saving countless lives of US soldiers in the process?

There are other references to the definition of a “natural born citizen”, John Bingham (author of the Section 1 of the 14th Amendment) is very clear on this issue.

Eligibility requirement for POTUS is not a right. It is a national security measure. NBC is not the only restriction on who qualifies to run for POTUS (there is age and residency restriction as well).

Similarly, being a citizen does not give me the right to national security clearance. I would have to go through a screening process to obtain one.

All citizens have the same civil rights guaranteed by the Constitution. Ark case guarantees those rights to children born in the USA of premanent resident parents.

National security clearance is not a right.

No, but an election is. That's where we, the voters, get to weigh the person and decide whether or not we want them to lead our country. On that message, we are crystal clear. We, the voters, decided that Obama's father DID NOT disqualify him. The american people have spoken.

It is clear that early Congress made a clear distinction between phrases NBC and citizen (at birth)

In 1790 US Congress passed a law (An Act to Establish An Uniform Rule of Naturalization) that extended the “natural born citizen” status to foreign born children of US citizens.
Five years later, the law was repealed and replaced with the one that declared foreign born children of US citizens to be citizens.

We have the same law and two different phrases used. It is obvious that there would have been no need to change the law if the phrases had the same meaning.

Obama does not belong to option (c) because he had dual loyalty at birth.

John Bingham provides a clear definition on what an NBC is. The same guy who authored the Section 1 of 14th Amendment (most quoted US Amendment in court cases).

“Eligibility requirement for POTUS is not a right. It is a national security measure. “

So says YOU. Tell me are the age and residency requirements also national security measures?

What the hell does clearance have to do with NBC status? Madeline Albright got security clearance and she's isn't an NBC, what do you have to say about that?

We are not talking about National Security clearance. One does not need NBC status to obtain this clearance so you entire argument is moot.

And of course you did not in anyway answer my question. You stated “”There is only one type of citizenship. All citizens are equal in their rights and responsibilities.” Ark and Elg are standing case law that extends citizenship to Obama.

Show me, you sniveling coward, how NBC is NOT extended to Obama through our American legal system.

I want to see you defend this position. If you cannot, if you won't if you being me another stupid ass national security tangent then I call you nothing more that a low down dirty coward of a human.

Then, why have a Constitutional eligiblity requirement in the first place.

What other parts of Constitution should we overrule with a simple vote?

But we didn't. According to US law, Obama fulfills the requirements.

You disagree, sure, but the law is not on your side.

But, you, yourself say their is no direct definition of what NBC is. You chose your definition. Others chose theirs. Ultimately, the voter is the final authority on questions of the qualifications of the President. Unless otherwise stated. You say there is no direct definition, therefor it is left to the voter to decide. And, they have decided.

NO, it is not clear. Synonyms not being the same word does not constitute a binding legal framework.

The 1790 law and it's repealed version are not applicable because Obama was born in Hawaii according to State and Federal Law. Also, here from a link You yourself provided is information that debunks the assertion that the 1790 act repealed:
“1790 First Congress, Act of March 26th, 1790, 1 Stat. 103.

“And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States”.

1795 Act of January 29, 1795. Section 3, 1 Stat. 414, 415. (Same general provisions as above). “

He does not have dual loyalty at both because American law trumps British Law.

So what did John Bingham say? I assume you mean this: “[I] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…. . “
Obama does not fall under the auspices of this restriction.

“But his Dad!” American Law trumps British Law.

reply above, you coward

Age and residency mentioned in my previous posts are those specified in eligibility requirement for POTUS (35 years of age, 14 years residence in the USA.)

I mentioned security clearance as an example of measure that is not a right of a citizen, guaranteed by the Constitution.

A naturalized citizen gets all the rights as other citizens. The same is true for any citizen at birth including Obama (assuming he was born in the USA).

Constitution never says that NBC is a right. It cannot be – it is an attribute of citizenhip (path to a citizenship).

No SCOTUS case has specifically ruled on what the NBC phrase is. Therefore you cannot use any case to extend it to Obama.

The only definition where SCOTUS ruling is not even necessary is the one that says “born in the USA of citizen parents”. Only this definition requires no arguing whther such person is eligible. It ensures exclusive loyalty at birth. It confrms to the natural law as well.

No man-made laws are needed to determine the citizenship at birth for such person.

NC: “No SCOTUS case has specifically ruled on what the NBC phrase is. Therefore you cannot use any case to extend it to Obama.”

Therefor, it is up to the voter to decide if the candidate is qualified for NBC. You have your definition, you get 1 vote. Others have the correct definition, they get 1 vote each. The voter decides, then. Unless you can prove there IS a specific case that SCOTUS has ruled on.

Is there any dispute that child born in the USA of citizen parents is NBC?

There is a dispute about other definitions.

This was one of the reasons why I mentioned that SCOTUS ruling is needed to alleviate any doubts about the phrase.

Are you saying that Congress replaced one phrase with another that has the same meaning?

But wait a minute, if they had no definition, as you say, then why not assume because they wanted to leave it up to the voter to decide?

Does it mean that the case can be appealed to a higher court by disputing the definition of an NBC provided by the Appelate Court?

If that is the case – I have no problem with Indiana Court decision. The rulling on NBC definition belongs to the Supreme Court anyway.

It would be a very interesting case if we could get two best possible teams of lawyers arguing for both sides in a “judicial Super Bowl”. We do not want the “minor league mathches” to determine the Championship.

You're basing your entire understanding of the NBC concept on John Jay's letter. Any History Professor would laugh you right out of class. You're making unfounded assumptions and passing them off as facts.

And again, none of it matters because in the eyes of the Maerican Legal System, Barack Obama was born in Hawaii – end of story.

OOH I see, now it is only an example.

NO, I can use cases to extend to Obama. That's how the legal system works. You tale prior case law and argue that is applies a certain way.

Ark and Elg apply certain protections to citizens – those protections apply to Obama to protect his status as an NBC.

There is no natural law about nationality, nationality is human concept.

“No man-made laws are needed to determine the citizenship at birth for such person.”

Yes, you do need man-made laws – because concepts of citizenship and nationality only exist when the concept of a nation emerges – this concept requires a philosophy that does exist in the natural world.

*does NOT exist in the natural world.

“Is there any dispute that child born in the USA of citizen parents is NBC?”
NO, there isn't and Obama fulfills this requirement.

Amen. NC fundamentally does not trust the voters. NC views “NBC” as a national security concern: will we have a President with undivided allegiance. But what NC doesn't grasp, is that in every Presidential election, the voters have to decide that question anyway. My grandmother, for example, was convinced in 1960 that JFK (a natural born citizen even by NC's definition) was going to give control of the U.S. to the Pope. Numerous people claimed in 2008 that Barack Obama's allegiance was to the interest of blacks, not the U.S. as a whole. John Adams was accused of being a monarchist. In every election, the voters are faced with the decision of who will best serve the nation. The Supreme Court doesn't need to decide between our definition of NBC and NC's definition, because in a democracy, that difference is really a political question best addressed by each voter.

I'm saying that the existence of two phrases does not constitute a legal difference unless you can bring forth proof that those different phrases underwent debate as to their intent and meaning.

You cannot provide that proof that. I only ask you to bring the proof since you seem so attached to proof yourself.

You cannot provide any proof that a debate took place between Hamiltons suggestion and Jay suggestion. That Jay's language is in the document doesn't mean that Hamiltons concerns, or wording is invalid by comparison. Also, nothing in Jay's letter indicates that different phrases would transgress his concerns.

You are splitting verbal hairs and you have no prove, in the absence of proof – you use conjecture and pass it off as a fact that must be acknowledged – any professor would tell you your method is incorrect.

No it does not. But that does not prevent an appeal from citing the ruling and disputing it. Our legal system is very flexible.

Incidentally, the ruling doesn't actually define NBC, it outlines now current legal precedent was avoided by counsel and how that same precedent would be used against them.

I gotta tell ya, no lawyer in the country worth his or her salt would touch the birther case with a 10 pole.

Damn, that sounds just like trying to use “Help” in your computer. Anyone ever tried that? You follow these outrageously long (and stupid) algorithms that eventually take you right back to where you started and they are of no “Help” what so ever! Do you suppose that Bill Gates had something to do with the design of the Birther movement?

The diagram would be required to illustrate obsessive, compulsive, irrational paranoia and hatred, a complete lack of logic and reading skills and puerile sophism.

A Vent Diagram.

Check out the Secret Origins of Clippy:

http://technologizer.com/2009/01/02/microsoft-c…

Freaky stuff. It's funnier when you realize very well paid engineers took it VERY seriously.

: D

As you know by now, arguing the “Nut Case” is a no return trip to Monty Python's Argument Clinic.

Man:
Is this the right room for an argument?

Other Man: (John Cleese)
I've told you once.

Man:
No you haven't!

Other Man:
Yes I have.

Man:
When?
Other Man:
Just now.

Man:
No you didn't!
Other Man: Yes I did!

Man:
You didn't!
Other Man:
I did!

Man:
You didn't!
Other Man:
I'm telling you, I did!

Man:
You did not!
Other Man:
Oh I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?

http://www.jumpstation.ca/recroom/comedy/python…

I don’t know the rule for appeals to the Indiana Supreme Court (likely the next step). In most states, the State Supreme Court has discretion to refuse to review cases that it requested to review.

It is also possible that the Indiana Supreme Court, on review, could choose to affirm the Court of Appeals, but on different grounds (“right, but for the wrong reasons”). For example, the Indiana Supreme Court could hold that the Governor is not required to determine the eligibility of Presidential candidates. “Affirmed on other grounds.” End of story.

The U.S. Supreme Court reviews a very low percentage of the cases for which it receives a Petition for Writ of Certiorari. I doubt it would review this one. For one thing, from the Indiana Court of Appeals decision, I can’t tell who “Steve Ankeny” and “Bill Kruse” are. It is entirely possible that they would not meet the “injury in fact” standard for standing in federal court, and on that basis alone the U.S. Supreme Court would either deny the Petition for Writ of Certiorari, or if the Court grants the Petition, would subsequently dismiss it as improvidently granted.

It is also unlikely the U.S. Supreme Court would hear a case about the definition of “natural born citizen” that is targeted at a sitting President. Simply granting a Petition for Writ of Certiorari would create immense uncertainty regarding the ability of the President to act as the head of the Executive Branch and the Commander-in-Chief. The members of the Court are aware (and ever more aware since the uproar and criticism over Bush v. Gore) that they are appointed for life. They are not elected. Even raising the spectre that they would review the legitimacy of a sitting President (elected by the votes of over 69 million Americans) in a court proceeding (as opposed to in the impeachment process, which is politically accountable) would threaten the legitimacy of the Court itself.

One other point. These are serious issues. The Super Bowl is just a football game. Don’t confuse the two.

And there is a reason that your side of the argument is populated with pro se plaintiffs and third or fourth rate lawyers (Orly Taitz, Phil Berg and Leo Donofrio). Good luck finding a “major league” Supreme Court appellate lawyer willing to argue your side of the case. They will have to check their brains and integrity at the door.

A vote does not “overrule” anything. You admit the Supreme Court has never rules specifically on “natural born citizen” in the context of Presidential eligibility. I agree — it hasn't happened. Voters who voted for Obama weren't “overruling” anything — they just implicitly didn't agree with your definition.

There are aspects of the Constitution that are left to the political branches of our federal government to interpret and implement. The Constitution requires that every state guarantee to its citizens a “republican form of government.” The Supreme Court has held that the meaning of that phrase is for Congress and the President to interpret and implement. It is, in legal parlance, a “political question” the courts leave to the political branches of government.

Under my interpretation of “NBC” a person who was a citizen at the time of birth is eligible to be President. Under your definition, only a person born in the U.S. to two citizen parents is eligible to be President.

Why should the U.S. Supreme Court decide between those two definitions? If the concern is “national security,” then that is a realm where the Courts have relatively little to say compared with the electorate, which at every election weighs the qualifications of candidates to protect our national security. Some people thought John McCain would be great because he had military experience. Others thought he was a war monger (“bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran”). Some thought Obama was dangerously naive, others thought he was rational, calm and careful. We have to look at all of those qualities. The difference between your definition and ours can be left to the voters.

One other note: what do you do with “born in the U.S. of two citizen parents” the first time you have a candidate born of a mother who gave birth through in vitro fertilization from an anonymous sperm donor? Do we have to find out the citizenship of the sperm donor? I'd leave it to the voters. They don't always make the best decisions, but democracy is better than the alternatives.

They provided three specific eligibility requirements:
14 years residency
35 years of age
natural born citizen

I believe that NBC is as equally definitive as the other two.

To change any of these requirements you need to amend the Constitution. Simple vote is not enough. Vote in Congress is not enough.

But, I believe that being born in Hawaii defines it perfectly. Therefor, there is no legal definition for NBC and that is then left up to the voters to decide. You can't have it both ways. It is either legally defined or it isn't.

Someone made the great comment about NC, to the effect: “He wants the placenta!”

That got me thinking.

One thing courts don't like to do is to render opinions that will lead to even more difficult issues. In that light, I would like to contrast two possible definitions of “natural born citizen”:

Definition 1 (NC's definition): “born in the United States to two parents who are citizens.” This test is “sui generis”, i.e., it does not exist anywhere else in our law. As NC has noted repeatedly, we cannot use U.S. law on who is a “citizen” to make the determination.

Definition 2 (my definition): “a citizen of the United States at the time of birth.” Under my definition, a person can be a “natural born citizen” by virtue of being born in the United States, regardless of the citizenship of parent or parents (we won't get into the issue of children born to foreign diplomats, etc.) A person can also be a natural born citizen by virtue of being born outside the United States to a U.S. citizen (there are some limits) or to two U.S. citizens. Basically, you just apply U.S. citizenship law that was in effect when the child was born.

Now let's have some fun with these definitions.

Hypothetical #1: U.S. citizen single mother gives birth in U.S. to child after in vitro fertilization from an anonymous sperm donor. Under my definition, this is easy: NBC on two separate grounds (born in U.S.; a citizen parent). Under NC's definition, the court will have to decide whether a person with only one known parent meets the “two citizen parents” formulation that NC has given us. If two citizen parents really are required, is the child ineligible to become President because he or she cannot prove the citizenship of the sperm donor?

Hypothetical #2: Same as above, except the mother knows the identity of the sperm donor, who was a citizen of Australia, but under the law of the state where the child is born, the sperm donor has no parental rights. Under my definition, this is easy: NBC. Under NC's definition, we again face the question of whether the child is eligible because the only legal parent at birth is a U.S. citizen, ineligible because it has only one legal parent at birth (can't meet “two citizen parent” test) or is ineligible because, regardless of state law, the fact that the sperm donor is known to be an Australian citizen means the child can't be a natural born citizen for purposes of the U.S. Constitution.

Hypothetical #3: U.S. Citizen single mother gives birth in U.S. after having intercourse with identical twins. You guessed it: one twin was a citizen of U.S., other a citizen of Kenya. Under my definition, easy call: NBC. Under NC's definition, you have to figure out which identical twin was the father.

Hypothetical #4: U.S. citizen impregnated by her husband, a citizen of Russia. Her husband dies before child is born in U.S. Is child eligible? Under my definition, easy: yes. Under NC's definition, we are faced with several questions: must a person have two parents at birth to meet the “two citizen parent” test (child clearly only has one parent at birth). Is the child eligible because its only parent at birth was a U.S. citizen, or ineligible because child's known father was a foreign national (uh oh, “dual allegiance”)?

Hypothetical #5: U.S. citizen gives birth to child in U.S. Father is a citizen of Italy, but he is not present at the birth as is found dead of a heart attack shortly after child is born. Is child eligible? Under my definition, easy: yes. Under NC's definition, we might have to establish the father's precise time of death. If he died before child was born, is child eligible? Maybe, maybe not: child has only one parent at birth, but that parent was a citizen. If father died after child was born, then child is not eligible.

Hypothetical #6: U.S. citizen mother gives birth to child in her house in U.S. She is alone and there are no clocks in the room. Her husband, a citizen of Peru, is at the federal courthouse being sworn in as a U.S. citizen. Is the child eligible? Under my definition, easy: yes. Under NC's definition, you have to know the precise time of the child's birth and of the father becoming a citizen.

Hypothetical #7: U.S. citizen single mother gives birth to child in U.S. Because her parents hate her foreign (Austrian) boyfriend, another friend (a U.S. citizen) agrees to let her identify him as the father. Under the law of the state in which the child is born, this creates a legal presumption that he is the father. Child grows up knowing that Austrian citizen is his real biological father, but no paternity litigation ever occurs. Under my definition, child is clearly a natural born citizen. Under NC's definition, you have to determine whether the child is eligible because his birth certificate identifies a U.S. citizen as his legal father, or ineligible (despite state law) because child knows his real father was a foreigner (dual allegiance).

Hypothetical #8: U.S. citizen woman is fertile, but has a health condition that does not allow her to carry child to term. Her egg, fertilized with sperm of her U.S. citizen husband, is implanted in her sister, a citizen of South Africa, who acts as a surrogate. Child is born in U.S., and raised by the two U.S. citizen parents, who are legally considered parents by the law of the state in which the child is born and raised. The child knows his South African aunt gave birth to him. Is child eligible? Under my definition: yes, definitely. Under NC's definition, you have to ask what John Jay meant when NC says John Jay must have thought “two citizen parents.” Surrogacy was medically impossible in the 1700s. A South African citizen gave birth to the baby. In the 1700s, there was no doubt, was there, that the person who gave birth to you was your mother, a “parent”? Won't the child feel “dual allegiance” knowing that his South African aunt gave birth to him. Hmmm . . . a puzzler.

Have fun thinking up more!

awesomesauce

In all 8 of your hypotheticals the electorate will determine his NBC status at the ballot box.

The original Hawaiian BC could establish NBC if it exists. It could be the Kenyan BC Hawaii used though. Once that is released we can move on to the whole attending college as a Foreign Student thing.

You forgot to include examples of children of illegal aliens, children of terrorists who infiltrated the USA, foreign country agents who came to USA with the specific goal to groom a future president,…

When you talk about timing, there is no difference between your examples and the requirement that a person must be 35 years old and 14 years resident of USA. Wouldn't you have to check the exact time for a person whose 35th birthday is close to the cutoff time?

Other cases you mentioned: – mother and father listed on the birth certificate is what counts. The time of birth is also listed on the birth certificate. Even if it is an approximate time – the one recorded on the official document is what counts.

Nobody is giving DNA tests today to prove who the father of a child is, there would be no need to do it in the future. If both parents listed on the birth certificate were US citizens at the time when baby was born, the child is considered an NBC.

If your definition were correct, the eligibility requirement would have been the same as the one proposed by Hamilton: “Born A Citizen”. Yet this is not what was included into Constitution.
There would be no need for early Congress to change the phrase “natural born citizen” (1790 law) to citizen (1795 law).

The change of phrase indicates that Congress did not consider the two to be the same. Otherwise why change it? Everything else in that section of the law was the same.

2) How do you define the following phrase: “parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty”?

Does a British citizen father owe allegiance to UK or not?

I will listen to a history professor if (s)he can provide an alternative source or better example for inclusion of NBC phrase into Constitution.

“No man-made laws are needed to determine the citizenship at birth for such person.” is an awkward statement.

A better explanation: Only laws of a single country apply in determining the citizenship at birth. There is no allegiance to another country by either soil or blood.

NBC is a simple eligibility rule to qualify candidate to be on the presidential ballot.

Form that point onward – the voters are in control.

The NBC is an additional insurance that a candidate, who owes allegiance to another country (at birth), does not have a chance to become a CiC.

If you don't like the rule – there is a process to change the Constitution.

What would the birth certificate for in-vitro baby say about the father?

If nothing is listed – than not an NBC.

Why – motivation for NBC is national security. If information about father is not listed, no need to guess – not eligible.
Otherwise, this scenario could be exploited as a loophole to circumvent the NBC eligibility rule.

That is why we need a ruling by the Supreme Court. Either NBC has a specific meaning (not susceptible to the change of citizenship laws) or it does not.

NBC is a condition to be placed on the ballot. Voters do have the final word to chose among eligible candidates.

Under the Independence Constitution of Kenya, Obama became a Kenyan citizen on December 12, 1963. There is no record that he has ever renounced his Kenyan citizenship. On his senate web site, Obama tap dances around his own dual nationality when discussing his father. Obama obviously knows, because his father told him, that he also held/holds Kenyan nationality.
Once again, we find Barry O concealing fascinating information about his identity. There is nothing unusual about dual nationality. Indeed, ancient Roman Law doctrines of jus sanguini and jus soli come into play, because both Kenya and the U. S. recognize dual nationality. Once again, the issue is not “legality.” The issue is the cover-up; Obama’s concealment of his own identity. From us, and most of all from himself.
Obama was also registered in both of the Jakarta schools he attended as a citizen of Indonesia. Does he also enjoy Indonesian citizenship? Inquiring minds want to know. In August, 1985, Obama travels to Kenya for the first time. (Some reports have the year as 1986, and some as late as 1988)
Obama's 40-year-old cousin Said Hussein Obama commented, “My cousin found it difficult when he came here to learn of his six half-brothers and sisters were born to four different mothers.

I have been spending too much time on these responses already. It is impossible to respond to all questions in all posts in limited available time. I need to keep my job and spend time with my family as well.

I need to ask Jim if I could join the ranks of DOJ paid web squad for defending Obama. I could serve as a tester of their qualifications to join the ranks. (joke)

Back to SCOTUS cases. I look at NBC through a national security “prism”. There is no right to run for POTUS – therefore it cannot be protected. Similarly you are either 35 years old or you are not – if NBC was a right, the age requirement would be a discrimination against younger persons.

NBC is a restriction on who is eligible to run for POTUS. It is not in the same category as citizenship rights.
Citizenship rights, extended to those born in the USA regardless of their parent' status, are same for all citizens: freedom of speech, right to bear arms,…

It defies common sense that a law would be changed and the only phrase that changed is replaced with a phrase that has the same meaning!?

Why would they change the law if both versions are equivalent?

Buster Douglas was given no chance against Tyson.

I see that 'Graham the Red' took my advice, having been utterly discredited by his own remarks, and is now posing as 'Gunny Red'. Well done! We have been deceived.

Meantime time, a good joke at the expense of Gunny, Graham, Naturalized Citizen, Ernie, AJX Rocks in Head, RuPaulMD, Orly Herself, and all the other lunatics here. Referring to the issue of their diminished mental capacity, it has been observed,