White House Says "Birthers" Aren't Rational

Quote from trefoil:

We are here talking about a requirement that is in the Constitution, for the only Federal office that all 50 states get to vote on.
Whether a party qualifies to be on the ballot is a state matter. Whether a candidate is qualified to run for President is based on the requirements stated in the Constitution, because we are here talking about the only Federal office that is voted on by more than one state, and the only one for which the requirements are specifically and clearly stated in the Constitution.
Therefore, the question before us here, whether Obama is over 35, and a natural born citizen of the US, is a question for Federal, not state, law. The question of whether the Democratic Party can appear on a ballot is a question for state law only.
States are sovereign only on questions that pertain to their level. The Federal gov't can't tell a state gov't to put the Democratic Party, or any other party, on the ballot. It can tell a state that it has to send its electors to the Electoral College for a particular candidate if that candidate meets the Constitutional requirements and has qualified under that state's laws as that state's candidate for the Presidency.
There is no Constitutional mandate for how that candidate is chosen. By custom, the candidate is chosen by statewide popular vote. Some states, like Maine, divide it up by Congressional district. From the Constitution's POV, all this is fine, because it does not state how the state's candidate is chosen. It does very particularly state which citizens are eligible to be President, however, and it also states that each state must recognize all the other states' certifications on a person's citizenship status.
Since Obama is over 35 and no one is disputing that, the only thing left is his citizenship status. That status has been certified by Hawaii. End of story.
More...

Before the 2012 elections at least 5 states will have laws making it necessary for each presidential candidate to present proper documentation verifying constitutional eligibility to the Secretary of the respected State before they will be allowed on the state's ballot.
 
"Former Hawaii elections clerk Tim Adams has signed an affidavit swearing he was told by his supervisors in Hawaii that no long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate existed for Barack Obama Jr. in Hawaii and that neither Queens Medical Center nor Kapi'olani Medical Center in Honolulu had any record of Obama having been born in their medical facilities."

Read more: Hawaii official now swears: No Obama birth certificate http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=254401#ixzz1C14aHkW2
 
Quote from pspr:

Not so fast. The document distributed by Obama is NOT a birth certificate. It is a computer generated certification of live birth and has been issued to both U.S. citizens and NON-citizens in Hawaii. Hawaii won't even recognize this form as proof of citizenship.

What needs to be produced is a copy of the long form hospital birth certificate signed by the attending physician.

See for yourself.

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=100451
More...

1. It was produced by Hawaii, not Obama, so your first statement is a flat-out lie.
2. As it was produced by Hawaii, obviously they recognize it, so your 2nd statement is a further lie.
3. Hawaii has stated repeatedly it no longer produces the long form, so your third statement is another flat-out lie, one that keeps getting repeated over and over, of course.
Repetition means nothing. You can state it a thousand times, and it would remain a lie.

There isn't one shred of actual truth in anything you said, which is par for the course.
 
Quote from Wallet:

Before the 2012 elections at least 5 states will have laws making it necessary for each presidential candidate to present proper documentation verifying constitutional eligibility to the Secretary of the respected State before they will be allowed on the state's ballot.
More...

Which documentation has already been produced. Also, the states must recognize each other's certifications. If Hawaii says, as it has, that he was born there, that's it. They can take it to court, if they want to waste their taxpayer's money, and see the case thrown out as all the others have, of course.
 
Quote from trefoil:

Which documentation has already been produced. Also, the states must recognize each other's certifications. If Hawaii says, as it has, that he was born there, that's it. They can take it to court, if they want to waste their taxpayer's money, and see the case thrown out as all the others have, of course.
More...
Sure, go to court....Just like Rahm...another fraud the courts have stopped.
 
I think these fools would have to prove that Obama's mother was not a U.S. citizen. The place of his birth seems immaterial. For example, wasn't McCain born in Panama.
 
Quote from trefoil:

Which documentation has already been produced. Also, the states must recognize each other's certifications. If Hawaii says, as it has, that he was born there, that's it. They can take it to court, if they want to waste their taxpayer's money, and see the case thrown out as all the others have, of course.
More...

What documentation has already been produced? The 2012 Election has not taken place, and the candidates are not known at this time. However the 2012 election will stand on it's own, all candidates for all respected parties will have to produce the proper documentation for constitutional eligibility, namely a long form birth certificate.

If President Obama seeks reelection, He will have to produce his at that time. But I know it won't be a problem as there's many people in Hawaii that swear it exists. So it's really no big deal.
 
Quote from trefoil:

1. It was produced by Hawaii, not Obama, so your first statement is a flat-out lie.
2. As it was produced by Hawaii, obviously they recognize it, so your 2nd statement is a further lie.
3. Hawaii has stated repeatedly it no longer produces the long form, so your third statement is another flat-out lie, one that keeps getting repeated over and over, of course.
Repetition means nothing. You can state it a thousand times, and it would remain a lie.

There isn't one shred of actual truth in anything you said, which is par for the course.
More...

The only liar I see here is you and your fascist attitude about something you know little. You can't deal with the truth.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top