Comments on: The Birth Certificate Drama

By: Flagstaff

Flagstaff — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 21:35:42 +0000

By: mdc

mdc — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 17:22:25 +0000

except when asked for the one on file in HI he hires lawyers instead of doing the easy and less costly thing and turn it over.

Me thinks most people would just hand it over and laugh, not hire lawyers to fight it.

By: Achance

Achance — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 15:35:58 +0000

since he did go on that Grand Tour last summer. Unless he was “special,” they make you produce a true, State certified copy of your birth certificate to get a Passport.

You can use any old copy, even fraudulent ones, for most things, e.g., I-9s, but I had to write the State of Georgia to get the certified copy for my Passport application.

By: Neil Stevens

Neil Stevens — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 15:29:39 +0000

The point you’re missing is that the truther nuts don’t want to believe it. Anything you show them won’t be enough, because some shady conspiracy will be behind it.

By: Moe Lane

Moe Lane — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 15:02:04 +0000

Is there some other valid way to remove a President? - Because the only one that I can think of would be via the 25th Amendment, which is pretty much a disaster waiting to happen.

By: leftylurker

leftylurker — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 14:53:05 +0000

through the impeachment process.

By: mdc

mdc — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 14:08:00 +0000

He could have made this all go away by turning over a simple document that all of us have to provide throughout our lives. Instead of doing that he and the DNC hired lawyers to fight it.
This makes the whole thing take on a life of its own and the subject will never go away.
Now if I was a betting man and because of how BO has responded to this I would have to bet that there is something on the document he doesn’t want people to see.
Now what that something is, is anyones guess.

By: merkurfan

merkurfan — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 13:14:18 +0000

It is up to the court to decide if it was meant to be before birth, or if time after birth is counted.

My guess, and if I was sitting on the bench, it would be BEFORE birth. Does not matter if it’s the president elect, or joe dirt.

By: John Steele

John Steele — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 13:12:25 +0000

… you should consult the later statute

By: John Steele

John Steele — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 13:10:48 +0000

… did consult the later statute

By: John Steele

John Steele — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 13:09:27 +0000

… try consulting the more recent versions

It hasn’t always been thus.

By: John Steele

John Steele — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 13:06:47 +0000

… finds an acorn now and then.

By: Neil Stevens

Neil Stevens — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 07:47:16 +0000

That’s what the comments section is here fore, and I’m sure Erick agrees.

Passion is A-OK, as long as you’re staying civil, and you are.

By: JSobieski

JSobieski — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 06:49:12 +0000

Admit it!

By: JLenardDetroit

JLenardDetroit — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 05:53:20 +0000

Remember the old Democrat plea…. doesn’t matter the merit, “it is the seriousness of the charge” thereby warranting Congressional investigation (or, by extension in this case, by the SCOTUS). Yep, a stretch… but good excuse to throw back out a dumb Democrat line… lol You know, just another “double standards” reminder! If they could go at a Republican on any of this… they would!

By: GuyInSD

GuyInSD — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 05:46:42 +0000

was a full copy with a state seal embossed on it. My only exposure to a COLB is for those not born in hospitals (as with home deliveries) who need the birth documented.

As for use of “vault copy,” this is the term used in several of the lawsuits to distinguish between a confirmation of birth and a formal copy of the hospital-created version.

This should be a non-issue and only one person can make it such. That he doesn’t is what continues to fuel the issue.

By: MikeWas

MikeWas — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 05:45:10 +0000

Born to a US citizen who resided in the United States for at least 15 years and resided in the United States for 5 years after age 14.

But that five years doesn’t have to be BEFORE he was born. You’re reading things into the law that aren’t there.

By: JLenardDetroit

JLenardDetroit — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 05:38:22 +0000

I first read it and thought that it was meant as “children” to mean any number (1 to however many you can pop out). Can read it as “children” and “citizens” as identifications of 2 seperate “groups.” That allows for any one single individual child amongst/within the “children” group as a whole born of a single US citizen as one of the overall “citizens” as a category/group.

I’m tired… did I say that in any sort of way that made sense to you?!?!

By: MikeWas

MikeWas — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 05:32:10 +0000

His mother was an American citizen, physically present in the U.S. for ten years, including five years after the age of 14. Because Barack Obama was born in 1961, this makes him a U.S. citizen from birth.

http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html

(Anyone who thinks that’s not a “natural born citizen,” I suggest you have a pretty tough burden to prove.)

By: Menlo

Menlo — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 05:29:49 +0000

Does anyone honestly think this will get a cert grant? At a time when they don’t take enough cases to justify their existence?

I don’t know what the comment about Thomas means. I thought cert votes were handled by the clerks (with the exception of Stevens and Alito) without disclosure.

I suspect they get all sorts of nutty cases. They don’t take them anymore though. I wouldn’t be surprised to see this case granted cert by a pre-Reagan era court,