Update on Obama Birth Certificate Lawsuits

[Zera]

Guys... This is just embarrassing.... Seriously.

 

[torchbearer]

Guys... This is just embarrassing.... Seriously.

Yeh I know, I had to show proof that I was legal to work for my employer before i got the job.. you'd think Obama would have to do the same for the most important job in the country.

 

[lynnf]

bad policy

Guys... This is just embarrassing.... Seriously.

nothing embarrassing about defending the Constitution.

the embarrassment is that the Secretaries of State of all the states let candidates sign a promise that they are eligible and they don't check credentials to ensure that they are.

lynn

 

[Pepsi]

Tennessee lawmakers lend names to Obama citizenship lawsuit

Several Tennessee lawmakers have signed onto a legal action intended to force President Barack Obama to turn over his birth certificate and other documents to prove his citizenship, an effort already rejected by the U.S. Supreme Court in another case.

Tennessee Reps. Eric Swafford, Stacey Campfield, Glen Casada and Frank Nicely have all agreed to be plaintiffs in future legal action from a Russian immigrant in California who has challenged whether Obama meets constitutional criteria to be president.

The lawsuit from the Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, which has not yet been filed, will be among several court challenges to Obama's citizenship.

One of the cases reached the U.S. Supreme Court late last year, and the court declined without comment to take it up, a move many interpreted as meaning the issue was dead. The campaign posted a copy of his certificate on a page intended to counter rumors about Obama.

Swafford’s letter states “I agree to be one of the plaintiff’s in a legal action filed by Dr. Orly Taitz, Esquire for a Writ of Mandamus to obtain birth certificate, immigration records, passports and other vital records for Barry Soetoro, aka Barack Hussein Obama.”

The letter from the Pikeville Republican is written on the official letterhead of the state House of Representatives.

Niceley, Campfield and Casada, who are also Republicans, confirmed that they too have agreed to be plaintiffs.

Casada said that he believes that Obama does have a U.S. birth certificate, and should just make it widely available.

“Let’s just put this to bed. Yes, people may say, you’re just chasing some conspiracy theory,” he said. “It’s a simple act on his part to just do, and we’re done – move on.”

Democratic lawmakers ridiculed the legal action on Thursday morning at a weekly press conference, with one lawmaker asking, “Who’s Eric Swafford?” and another answering, “He’s from Mars.”

The news of the lawsuit later provoked ribbing around the capitol, with one legislative staffer approaching a lawmaker and demanding to see his birth certificate.

http://www.tennessean.com/article/20090212/NEWS02/90212065

 

[lynnf]

What is he hiding?

typical scare tactics.....



http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=88746

'Sanctions' sought in eligibility case
President's attorneys file motion demanding birth, college records be withheld from public


A high-powered team of Los Angeles attorneys representing President Obama in his effort to keep his birth certificate, college records and passport documents concealed from the public has suggested there should be "monetary sanctions" against a lawyer whose clients have brought a complaint alleging Obama doesn't qualify for the Oval Office under the Constitution's demand for a "natural born" citizen in that post.

...



lynn

 

[libertarian4321]

Guys... This is just embarrassing.... Seriously.

Its embarrassing to the reasonable people on RPF- but to the nut jobs, this stuff is important, lol.

These folks are like the crazy uncle you hide in the basement...

 

[lynnf]

out of the basement now!

Its embarrassing to the reasonable people on RPF- but to the nut jobs, this stuff is important, lol.

These folks are like the crazy uncle you hide in the basement...

you know, you keep making ad-hominem attacks, but where's your proof that Obama is eligible? what? he won't help you by producing his Certificate of Birth? what? he won't release information about when he was in college? I wonder why?

you keep making these attacks but without anything to back it up. why is that?
why is it that I have to keep asking that?

lynn

 

[Pepsi]

Keyes: President 'has something to hide' about eligibility Says Dem 'asked to be chosen, therefore must answer'

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=89078

Another lawmaker Oklahoma state representative Dr. Mike Ritze as now join the Tennessee State Reps, and Stephen Pidgeon, attorney for Broe v. Reed has now Issue a National Grand Jury Declaration.

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=3739

Stephen Pidgeon, attorney for Broe v. Reed, has officially announced that he has issued a declaration for a national grand jury:

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=3758

 

[libertarian4321]

you know, you keep making ad-hominem attacks, but where's your proof that Obama is eligible? what? he won't help you by producing his Certificate of Birth? what? he won't release information about when he was in college? I wonder why?

you keep making these attacks but without anything to back it up. why is that?
why is it that I have to keep asking that?

lynn

I back it up with the Constitution. The time for questioning his eligibility has passed, as I have said on this forum many times before (and this, btw, is why Berg and the others are doomed to dismal failure).

I recommend you read a summary of why its too late for this from those radical "lefties" at the John Birch Society:

http://www.jbs.org/index.php/us-constitution-blog/4196

You claim support the Constitution, yet you only support it until you disagree with what it says.

So how are you any better than radical leftists or neocons?

 

[lynnf]

let's keep rolling on....

I back it up with the Constitution. The time for questioning his eligibility has passed, as I have said on this forum many times before (and this, btw, is why Berg and the others are doomed to dismal failure).

I recommend you read a summary of why its too late for this from those radical "lefties" at the John Birch Society:

http://www.jbs.org/index.php/us-constitution-blog/4196

You claim support the Constitution, yet you only support it until you disagree with what it says.

So how are you any better than radical leftists or neocons?

if you really believed in the Constitution, you would be with us and not with the Obama shills. the time hasn't passed, although some opportunities have, but not all of them.

you ask how am I better - I believe in God's truth and try to promote it. others are deluded as predicted by the Bible. that probably won't sit well with you, but I don't care.

again, thanks for the bump.

lynn

 

[AutoDas]

if you really believed in the Constitution, you would be with us and not with the Obama shills. the time hasn't passed, although some opportunities have, but not all of them.

you ask how am I better - I believe in God's truth and try to promote it. others are deluded as predicted by the Bible. that probably won't sit well with you, but I don't care.

again, thanks for the bump.

lynn

I'm just wondering why do you think the Constitution is beyond reproach? Would you have been against the movement to count all other people's votes as 3/5th?

 

[lynnf]

do your research

I'm just wondering why do you think the Constitution is beyond reproach? Would you have been against the movement to count all other people's votes as 3/5th?

I don't promote the Constitution as a perfect document but it is the best we have to work with.

if that is what you are meaning, you are only showing your ignorance. it wasn't the South's idea to count as 3/5, the South wanted to count as 5/5 = 1. I wish I could say nice try to play the race card, but it wasn't, it was just laughable. from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_compromise

(italics added)

"Delegates opposed to slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state. Delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, generally wanted to count slaves in their actual numbers. Since slaves could not vote, slaveholders would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College; taxation was only a secondary issue. The final compromise of counting "all other persons" as only three-fifths of their actual numbers reduced the power of the slave states relative to the original southern proposals, but is still generally credited with giving the pro-slavery forces disproportionate political power in the U.S. government from the establishment of the Constitution until the Civil War."

lynn

 

[AutoDas]

I don't promote the Constitution as a perfect document but it is the best we have to work with.

if that is what you are meaning, you are only showing your ignorance. it wasn't the South's idea to count as 3/5, the South wanted to count as 5/5 = 1. I wish I could say nice try to play the race card, but it wasn't, it was just laughable. from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_compromise

(italics added)

"Delegates opposed to slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state. Delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, generally wanted to count slaves in their actual numbers. Since slaves could not vote, slaveholders would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College; taxation was only a secondary issue. The final compromise of counting "all other persons" as only three-fifths of their actual numbers reduced the power of the slave states relative to the original southern proposals, but is still generally credited with giving the pro-slavery forces disproportionate political power in the U.S. government from the establishment of the Constitution until the Civil War."

lynn

I never brought up the Civil War or slavery. I wanted to know if you would defend the Constitution to count the other people as 3/5s? I know the South wanted to count the slaves as a full vote because it would mean they would have more representatives in the House.

 

[Zera]

I don't promote the Constitution as a perfect document but it is the best we have to work with.

if that is what you are meaning, you are only showing your ignorance. it wasn't the South's idea to count as 3/5, the South wanted to count as 5/5 = 1. I wish I could say nice try to play the race card, but it wasn't, it was just laughable. from Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three-fifths_compromise

(italics added)

"Delegates opposed to slavery generally wished to count only the free inhabitants of each state. Delegates supportive of slavery, on the other hand, generally wanted to count slaves in their actual numbers. Since slaves could not vote, slaveholders would thus have the benefit of increased representation in the House and the Electoral College; taxation was only a secondary issue. The final compromise of counting "all other persons" as only three-fifths of their actual numbers reduced the power of the slave states relative to the original southern proposals, but is still generally credited with giving the pro-slavery forces disproportionate political power in the U.S. government from the establishment of the Constitution until the Civil War."

lynn

If you realize the Constitution is not a perfect document, then you have to realize they never really specified what a natural born citizen is. Therefore, wouldn't being born in Hawaii be enough? Or have you guys already jumped off the "his father wasn't American, either" boat?

 

[lynnf]

Certificate of Live Birth vs Certification of Live Birth

If you realize the Constitution is not a perfect document, then you have to realize they never really specified what a natural born citizen is. Therefore, wouldn't being born in Hawaii be enough? Or have you guys already jumped off the "his father wasn't American, either" boat?

and what makes you think he was born in Hawaii? because someone posted a fake Certificate of Live Birth on a couple of websites, a document that has been examined by a forensic examiner who pronounced it a forgery? because Obama refuses to release certain college records that might reveal that he attended school on foreign aid? his behavior proves he's hiding something and the smart money is on the probability that the something being hidden is where he was born


lynn

 

[Bruno]

If Obama cannot prove he is a natural born citizen and does not get removed from the White House, then Putin could run in 2012 because of the precidence set.

 

[Zera]

and what makes you think he was born in Hawaii? because someone posted a fake Certificate of Live Birth on a couple of websites, a document that has been examined by a forensic examiner who pronounced it a forgery? because Obama refuses to release certain college records that might reveal that he attended school on foreign aid? his behavior proves he's hiding something and the smart money is on the probability that the something being hidden is where he was born


lynn

I wish I knew why you are so delusional to believe he wasn't born in Hawaii and why you refuse to believe that he was, though the whole 9/11 truth thing in your signature pretty much answers that.

You and your conspiracy theorist friends are the cancer to the movement.

 

[lynnf]

like outer space -- nothing there but vacuum

I wish I knew why you are so delusional to believe he wasn't born in Hawaii and why you refuse to believe that he was, though the whole 9/11 truth thing in your signature pretty much answers that.

You and your conspiracy theorist friends are the cancer to the movement.

gee, why am I not surprised? another ad-hominem attack -- because you have nothing else to respond with -- no substance!

lynn

 

[Zera]

gee, why am I not surprised? another ad-hominem attack -- because you have nothing else to respond with -- no substance!

lynn

Why should I explain why Obama won't release anything? Oh, that's right, because other than a few nuts like you, nobody gives a crap.

 

[lynnf]

more of the same

Why should I explain why Obama won't release anything? Oh, that's right, because other than a few nuts like you, nobody gives a crap.

and the ad-hominem attacks continue, and still no substance. this forum is for Ron Paul people, not Obama shills.

lynn