LadyJazzer wrote: If they "accept what the parents self-identify themselves to be", then you may be a long time in your quest... Good luck with that...
That still makes no sense. That means the parents could say they are Martians and the state would print that on a birth certificate? And again, show me ANYONE born in that era that has African as a race. I really do believe Obama was born here, I just can't get past the fact that his entire history is hidden from our view and he's spent quite a sum to keep it secret. As Chris 'tingle up my leg' Mathews said, just show the long form birth certificate and be done with it. I'm sure it will say he was born in the US but there must be something on it that he doesn't want to be seen.
And if there is.....why is that a problem for you? Obviously the birth certificate was good enough for whatever committee/government agency decides who is eligible to run for office. It's a done deal.....except for those who are using it for their own purposes to rile up the right wing fringe. Arizona is one of the states that has added a law requiring that any candidate for president must show them his/her birth certificate....and they admit that what is public now for Obama is enough to fulfil that requirement.
This whole birther movement would be amusing if it wasn't so ridiculous.
So if Bush's past was as hidden as Obama's, you have been fine with that?
It was always the women, and above all the young ones, who were the most bigoted adherents of the Party, the swallowers of slogans, the amateur spies and nosers−out of unorthodoxy
PrintSmith wrote: If the state of Hawaii did nothing more than accept what the parents supply for inclusion on their records, then how do we know that they didn't supply information that he was born in Hawaii when he wasn't? Wow, that opens up a whole new can of worms, doesn't it. Imagine if his mother had self identified herself as a Native American like Ward Churchill did. He could then be part Kickapoo!
Wow... That is truly a dumb statement... Since the kid was born in the hospital, and the hospital personnel are standing there asking the parents "What nationality should we put on the birth certificate for the parents?", you think having them state "He was born in _________" when they have the baby right there in-hand would be believed?
Every now and then you get so far off the reservation even *I* can't find you... :VeryScared:
Not necessarily on his birth certificate though CB. I would agree that there is something, somewhere in all of those records that Obama doesn't want seen, but I am not convinced it will be found in the Hawaii birth records. As Obama himself said:
The only people who don't want to disclose the truth are people with something to hide.
At this point, Obama can't release just one of the documents anymore than Nixon could release just one tape, and that's the problem he is facing now. He can't allow the release of the long form without then bowing to the pressure to release the rest of the documents that have been hidden as well. That's why I wrote that his birth certificate is only the starting point at this stage.
archer wrote: And if there is.....why is that a problem for you? Obviously the birth certificate was good enough for whatever committee/government agency decides who is eligible to run for office. It's a done deal.....except for those who are using it for their own purposes to rile up the right wing fringe. Arizona is one of the states that has added a law requiring that any candidate for president must show them his/her birth certificate....and they admit that what is public now for Obama is enough to fulfil that requirement.
Tell me archer, why would Article 3 of the 20th Amendment contain language prescribing the course of action to follow in the event a president was elected who failed to qualify for the office if it was a recognized fact that it wasn't possible for that to occur? The fact is that there is no safeguards assuring that a candidate is eligible to hold the office before the election is held outside of the ones put into place by the parties themselves. There is no government agency that decides who is eligible to run for the office and, according to the lawsuits thus far, no one with any standing to challenge the eligibility of someone even after they have been elected. The only vetting done appears to be at the party level, and we know that the parties don't do a good job of that as witnessed by the fact that the party, and other candidates, were unaware that one of the early frontrunners had a child whose mother wasn't the candidate's wife. If it only takes the acumen of The National Enquirer to find that out and all of them missed it, what then does it say about their abilities in the larger task of properly determining eligibility of the candidate?
PrintSmith wrote: If the state of Hawaii did nothing more than accept what the parents supply for inclusion on their records, then how do we know that they didn't supply information that he was born in Hawaii when he wasn't? Wow, that opens up a whole new can of worms, doesn't it. Imagine if his mother had self identified herself as a Native American like Ward Churchill did. He could then be part Kickapoo!
Wow... That is truly a dumb statement... Since the kid was born in the hospital, and the hospital personnel are standing there asking the parents "What nationality should we put on the birth certificate for the parents?", you think having them state "He was born in _________" when they have the baby right there in-hand would be believed?
Every now and then you get so far off the reservation even *I* can't find you... :VeryScared:
So tell me my friend, which hospital was Obama born at?
Gee, Snopes said it was Queens Medical Center, before they changed it Kapiolani. And didn't UPI run a story that said Obama described his birth as occurring at Queens as well? I know you don't spend much time at this, but it appears that Queens has been cited by numerous locations, including Obama's own Organizing for America website. Some of the references to Queens go back to 2006.
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=103306
I know, it's WND, but they have a lot of screen shots from the various web sites, and I knew you would ask me specifically about Obama's site listing it, according to the Hawaii governor, in the wrong place.
