HotStockMarket › Forums › Community › Politics › Obama's Birth Certificate Verified By State
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Obama's Birth Certificate Verified By State - Page 5

post #81 of 140

Yes, we're shouting "WHY NOT THE DONALD?"

post #82 of 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by 2SHEA View Post


 

 

Has a forensic documents examiner been hired to verify its authenticity? Inquiring people want to know!

 

Just because you're a Democrat (who admits that Obama is "bad") doesn't mean you have NO CHOICES...


More than 20% of Democrat voters have stated they aren't going to vote for Obama again under ANY circumstances!

If the DNC can't find a candidate to oppose ObaMao, that should set off a shitload of alarms and have Dem's shouting ..."WHY NOT"????


One GLARING error.

 

Do you see it?

 

 1-df112f5b89.jpg

 

 

 

Put in the Race of Father, ......African?

Africa is a continent not a race or a country.

 

In the days before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Blacks were classified as NEGRO in the United States.

I should know.

 

 

African-American is a PC classification made up by the Racist Democrat liberals.

After living in South Africa in 95-96, all the blacks I talked to find that moniker RIDICULOUS

given the fact the continent is populated by MANY races and not exclusively Black as

the liberals so erroniously believe and blindly promote as fact.

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

post #83 of 140
Thread Starter 

This is really a no-win situation for Obama.

 

No matter what he puts out, even if its a video of him emerging from the womb, holding a newpaper from the day, it will immediately be dismissed and fake and manipulated imagery.

 

 

post #84 of 140

Everything is a no-win situation for Obama.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by StockJock-e View Post

This is really a no-win situation for Obama.

 

No matter what he puts out, even if its a video of him emerging from the womb, holding a newpaper from the day, it will immediately be dismissed and fake and manipulated imagery.

 

 



 

post #85 of 140
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmm...Jaz View Post

Everything is a no-win situation for Obama.
 



 


Except the 2008 elections, and unless the GOP gets its house in order, the 2012 elections too.

 

 

 

post #86 of 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by StockJock-e View Post

This is really a no-win situation for Obama.

 

No matter what he puts out, even if its a video of him emerging from the womb, holding a newpaper from the day, it will immediately be dismissed and fake and manipulated imagery.

 

 



He won the first term with this nonsense and doesn't care if he wins this minor Birth Cert debacle.

It was promoted by the Democrats as a red herring for the expressed reason to draw fire away from

the school records.  It will continue.

 

 

 

 

post #87 of 140

So whats wrong now with the long birth certificate ?

 

 

post #88 of 140
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Z-OldEurope View Post

So whats wrong now with the long birth certificate ?

 

 


Nothing, but the birthers will say that:

 

a) Its a fake!

b) Look! it says something that is very unusual, therefor it is a fake!

c) A signature looks funny, its a fake!

d) some date is wrong, its a fake!

e) Meh... this was never the real issue anyway, but its still a fake!.

 

post #89 of 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Z-OldEurope View Post

So whats wrong now with the long birth certificate ?

 

 


No one knows what is wrong with the long birth certificate, no one has seen it.  The only thing that has been released is the "certificate of live birth", which is NOT a birth certificate.

 

post #90 of 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by StockJock-e View Post

This is really a no-win situation for Obama.

 

No matter what he puts out, even if its a video of him emerging from the womb, holding a newpaper from the day, it will immediately be dismissed and fake and manipulated imagery.

 

 



He could start with his actual birth certificate, instead of a certificate of live birth.  Maybe we could see what happens then, but till then it is his own fault that the issue is still alive.

post #91 of 140
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Z-OldEurope View Post

So whats wrong now with the long birth certificate ?

 

 


Nothing, but the birthers will say that:

 

a) Its a fake!

b) Look! it says something that is very unusual, therefor it is a fake!

c) A signature looks funny, its a fake!

d) some date is wrong, its a fake!

e) He is still communist Muslim!

 

Im sure The Daily Show is busy writing tonights episode this very moment laughing.gif

 

post #92 of 140
the only thing wrong with it is it taking this long to be offered up
post #93 of 140

Now that further and final proof has been provided, I wonder if any of the birther nutjobs will take even a moment to stop and consider the amount of time and energy they've wasted on a lie.  Will the massive wave of cognitive dissonance washing over the idiots of this nation today result in any meaningful self-examination, or will they simply move on to the next anti-Obama consipiracy theory they like?

post #94 of 140

Interesting......compare this to a copy of a regular persons real Hawaii Long form here from a birth the day after:

 

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=105347

 

Okaaaaay... Interesting how the latest Obama cert says the number is 10641 from the Aug 8th 1961 date....and the above linked cert has a date of Aug 11, but is 10637...which is not sequential and filled out on a different day from Obama's.  Shoddy record keeping? One would think they would be consecutive in numbers...  Maybe someone who cares more can side-by side compare...

 

 

Meh...whatever.....just stirring the pot... biggrin.gif

 

 

-w

 

post #95 of 140

Well now they are saying hes a dual citizen which doesn't allow him to be president. :) 

They want to see his school records. Which i dont think that's unreasonable, as you need certain criteria in your education.

 

Edit: i cant stand donalds hair. Is that a from back to front then to the side. A reverse comb part? laughing.gif

 


Edited by mjoke - 4/27/11 at 7:08pm
post #96 of 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by Techunter View Post




One GLARING error.

 

Do you see it?

 

 1-df112f5b89.jpg

 

 

 

Put in the Race of Father, ......African?

Africa is a continent not a race or a country.

 

In the days before the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Blacks were classified as NEGRO in the United States.

I should know.

 

 

African-American is a PC classification made up by the Racist Democrat liberals.

After living in South Africa in 95-96, all the blacks I talked to find that moniker RIDICULOUS

given the fact the continent is populated by MANY races and not exclusively Black as

the liberals so erroneously believe and blindly promote as fact.

 

 

 

 

 


 

 




Yeah, I saw that too...African...LOL...It was NOT the "correct terminology in use at the time"...

A proper BC would have said "NEGRO or NEGROID"...another thing that troubles me is:

Where is the outrage over the OBVIOUS...his father was very clearly indicated as KENYAN!

 

He could have been born in the Oval office and STILL would not be a "natural born citizen"...

The Constitution explicitly requires that BOTH parents be "citizens of the United States"...

According to the Constitution, the FATHER is the one who confers citizenship...NOT the Mother!!!

post #97 of 140
Thread Starter 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2SHEA View Post

He could have been born in the Oval office and STILL would not be a "natural born citizen"...

The Constitution explicitly requires that BOTH parents be "citizens of the United States"...

According to the Constitution, the FATHER is the one who confers citizenship...NOT the Mother!!!


Ive never heard of that before...which part of the constitution says that?

 

I was under the impression that the 14th amendment covers this:

 

"Section 1. 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."

 

So even if he was the son of two goat herders from Kazakhstan, he would still be a US citizen.

 

Please correct me if Im wrong.

 

post #98 of 140

I'll believe Barrack was born in Hawaii when I see a picture of his head crowning with Diamond Head, Waikiki beach and some outrigger canoes in the background. Yes I listened to Rush Limbo todaysmile.gif

moonrise-diamond-head.jpg

post #99 of 140


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by StockJock-e View Post


 


Ive never heard of that before...which part of the constitution says that?

 

I was under the impression that the 14th amendment covers this:

 

"Section 1. 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."

 

So even if he was the son of two goat herders from Kazakhstan, he would still be a US citizen.

 

Please correct me if Im wrong.

 



Obama was born in Hawaii to an American mother and a Kenyan father. His parents divorced and his mother married an Indonesian man.

We all KNOW that BHO was a student in Indonesia...In order to attend school there (at the time) the student HAD to be an Indonesian citizen!

Obama is either a citizen of his father's native Kenya or became a citizen of Indonesia after he moved there as a boy. Did Soetoro apply for US citizenship? If not, BHO is an Indonesian citizen!

 

Did Ann Dunham meet the statutory requirements to bestow citizenship on the child?

 

Quote:

The U.S. Law in effect during Mr. Obama’s birth stated if you are born abroad to one U.S. parent and a foreign national, the U.S. parent must have resided in the United States for ten (10) years, five (5) of which were after the age of Fourteen (14) in order to register the child’s birth abroad in the United States as a “natural born” U.S. citizen, under the Nationality Act of 1940, revised June 1952, United States of America v. Cervantes-Nava, 281 F.3d 501 (2002), Drozd v. I.N.S., 155 F.3d 81, 85-88 (2d Cir.1998), United States v. Gomez-Orozco, 188 F.3d 422, 426-27 (7th Cir. 1999), Scales v. Immigration and Naturalization Service 232 F.3d 1159 (9th Cir. 2000), Solis-Espinoza v. Gonzales 401 F.3d 1090 (9th Cir. 2005).

 

Under the Nationality Act of 1940, revised June 1952, is the law that applies to a birth abroad and is in effect at the time of birth, MarquezMarquez a/k/a Moreno v. Gonzales 455 F. 3d 548 (5th Cir. 2006), Runnett v. Shultz, 901 F.2d 782, 783 (9th Cir.1990) (holding that “the applicable law for transmitting citizenship to a child born abroad when one parent is a U.S. citizen is the statute that was in effect at the time of the child’s birth”).

 

Stanley Ann Dunham, Mr. Barry Soetoro’s mother, was only 18 when she gave birth to Barack Hussein Obama, Jr. She was not old enough to register Obama’s birth in Hawaii or anywhere else as a United States “natural born” citizen as she did not meet the residency requirements pursuant to our United States Laws; as such it does not matter that this is a minor technicality, the law is applied regardless — see United States of America v. Cervantes-Nava, 281 F.3d 501 (2002), Drozd v. I.N.S., 155 F.3d 81, 85-88 (2d Cir.1998).

 

 

 

Since we all agree that the 14th Amendment makes any person born in this country a citizen for all other purposes, it is absurd to think that the framers would not have wanted a person's lineage to be a consideration for who could be a President. Your logic flies in the face of the history of the era and it flies in the face of the Enlightenment Era thinking... when men like the American founders considered it paramount that a person be born of CITIZEN(S)...neither of whom would be owing allegiance to any other country.

 

This position is further supported by the fact that it was English common law for centuries before the United States came into existence, was the law in the colonies before the Declaration of Independence, and which common law formed the basis for American law which is what the framers would have understood the term to mean.

Quote:
The 14th Amendment recognizes this in defining that “[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.”

While it's true that if a person is born in the United States, they are a bona-fide citizen of the U.S., but they are not "natural born" unless BOTH parents are citizens of the U.S. Persons of dual citizenship are not considered natural born!

 

It's also worth reiteration -- there are only two types of citizens in this country:

1. Citizen at birth to parents who are BOTH citizens
(natural born)
2. Naturalized

There are no other legal classifications of citizens.

post #100 of 140

There is a new group of people touting themselves as the Afterbirthers...they are demanding to see Obama's placenta.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Politics
HotStockMarket › Forums › Community › Politics › Obama's Birth Certificate Verified By State