Is Obama A Natural Born Citizen?

Oh Oh, Ok you're not sure?

Lemme help ya out lil guy.

Why that would be.... YOU! (epic LOLz)

And yes, for those keeping track, that was just one page ago........

 

This is so fraught with errors.

Biden didn't get it wrong. He was asked to respond specifically to the role of the VP in the legislature, vis-a-vis Cheney's views on the same, and following on the heels of Palin's extraordinary misread of the VP's role in the Senate, as provided for in the Constitution.

Palin didn't say at the debate her earlier stupid statement "I don't know what a VP does." At the debate, she specifically got it wrong in saying it was her job to help ensure the President's policies are carried out with a willing Senate. Biden replied with a correct response, referring to Article I, which has been explicitly referred to countless times, now, by myself, George, Logic and others. It is incorrect to say Article II deals with the Vice President - it is about the President.

And so on. But it doesn't matter, obviously. When we've got members who simply refuse to read a one-sentence section of the Constitution, nothing will change the skewed view, it seems to me.

 

No Obamas lack of a response is what leads me to believe what i believe. He can easily settle this, yet he doesn't. Why not?

I have read that and when i told you that, you acted as if there was more. I have seen the fax of the ruling, and the different fax numbers, which without a doubt prove another party was involved.

I have read enough to suggest something isnt right with this case.

Below is the dismissal.

[JURIST] Judge R. Barclay Surrick of the US District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania [official website] on Friday dismissed [case materials] a lawsuit challenging the citizenship status and eligibility of Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) to become US president. The lawsuit [complaint, PDF], filed by Pennsylvania attorney Philip Berg, had alleged that Obama did not meet the constitutional requirement [LII backgrounder] of being a "natural born" US citizen, arguing that Obama had lost his citizenship as a child when his mother married an Indonesian man, and had failed to reclaim it upon becoming an adult. Berg also alleged that there was insufficient evidence that Obama had been born in the US, and challenged the veracity of his Hawaiian birth certificate [certificate image]. Surrick dismissed the case, finding that Berg lacked standing to bring the suit because he did not face direct harm even if the allegations were true. Berg has said that he plans to appeal [press release] the suit's dismissal.

The judge didnt even give him the benefit of considering the evidence. He dismissed it because he was in no direct harm. Thats CRAP!

 

He can settle this by doing what exactly?

 

Producing the actual document.

Someone really should merge these two threads, its pointless to keep repeating myself in different threads.

 

George, these are the quotes that started my involvement in this part of the discussion.

The statements in bold red are where i started to chime in on this particular topic. It appears to be you that is not keeping up so well.

As you can see at no point did I question the VP's senate responsibility. I merely questioned Bidens understanding, honestly i wasnt sure. So i looked, and found evidence that maybe he had failed to understand the role of the VP.

Guys im all about learning here, i dont claim to know it all, i simply learn as i go. I do see Biden had it pretty right, but... His duties are not necessarily limited to the constitution. He can be appointed duties as i have posted.

That is my only point on this part of the discussion.

agreed

And your point? Im not defending Palin had it right.

You know whats strange, you claim my post below was so fraught with errors, yet you didnt touch one of them.

To my understanding we were talking about VP duties, I dont know who limited the discussion to the senate, but it certainly wasnt me. The president can assign duties to the VP, just as i have posted below.

And again I never limited my conversation to the Senate

 

Damn, Simply - HOW MANY TIMES HAVE I SAID THIS?

How many times have I told you it doesn't matter - that is what a ruling on a Motion to Dismiss does - presumes the allegations true, and rules on the basis of jurisdiction and standing? If indeed you've read the Memorandum and Order (I have my doubts - sorry), you must understand that this is how a ruling like this works. One more time...

I can't help you to read and understand it, Simply - but all you seek really is here. Unless you'd seek to overthrow the legal system, in which case, I can't help you.

 

Easy North, i don't want you to fall out of your wheel chair.

Due to my lack of law knowledge, let me ask you a couple questions. I would appreciate an answer, as i continue to answer yours.


1. Will Berg have a different judge appointed to the appeal?
2. Does that judge have the authority to overrule the previous ruling?

Please answer honestly

 

<<Sigh>>.

Higher standard than what? Being right? (Error 1)

She explicitly stated she did know the role of the VP, and stated it was given to her by constitutional provenance (She was wrong). (Error 2).

Yes there are. To provide a tie-breaking vote in the Senate (Article I), and to take over in the event of the President's death or inability to perform his or her duty as President (Amendment 20). (Error 3).

Simply, please stop. Seriously.

 

Done http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

Now, before you come back and say something stupid and I waste another post answering something obvious let me ask you.

If the scans of the document aren't proof.

If the photos taken by a factcheck.org reporter that went to Obama's headquarters doesn't prove it. (that's the part where they "produce the actual document" try to keep up)

If multiple officials from the state of Hawaii dept of Health verifying it is authentic and that they have a record of his birth isn't proof.


Then what is? Because it sounds to me like YOU DON'T WANT to believe it. Not someone who is rationally looking at the facts before them.

 

So are you saying he got the articles correct when referencing them?

Wasn't it in fact article II not I? Im afraid that make him wrong North.

Id love to hear you say your wrong here, I believe it would be a first.

granted

You must have missed this part, i guess once you read something once it doesnt count anymore.

 

First off, as to your wheelchair comment, mind your ignorant mouth. I have severely impaired use of my legs, now, due to a spinal injury, so no, it's not appreciated or appropriate.

You answer nothing, actually. Unless you understand sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting "nananananananan" to be an answer. And your closing, "please answer honestly" is ridiculous, since this is how I operate. You've been handed everything under the sun to address your concerns, you refuse to read them, and then you proceed with the rest.

Anywayyyyyyyyyy,

Of course, if it reaches a higher jurisdiction, another judge will hear it. From here, it will go to a Court of Appeals, and from there, to the Supreme Court. But based on what I've read, I don't believe it will progress, for the many reasons I've repeatedly stated. It will die, particularly because the District judge was careful to reason using Supreme Court case law. This clown's best hope was to stay the election itself, which failed.

 

Logic, George - anyone else want to repeat this again? Please?

Article I, Section 3, U.S. Constitution

Then you don't read as well anywhere else, either.

Uh-huh. I'm sorry, I'm having a bit of difficulty understanding how:

and

Go in the same logical universe.

Nevermind, Simply. It's exhausting, to be honest, to try to help you when you refuse to exert yourself in anyway. All the best.

 

So you can call me stupid, which you basically have, and its not true. I may miss a few things here or there, but stupid is not the appropriate word. Careless, maybe.

but i cant comment on your handicap, which is true?

Do you see the irony there?

I asked if it was possible. Your now saying it is. Yet you have constantly grilled me about how it is hopeless!

It is actually your opinion, which you have a right to, but dont attack me because mine is different. Remember, you just said its possible.

 

I have no idea what you're talking about. No one does, to be honest, from the PM's I've received, but that's to be expected, to be honest.

Simply, you do understand that anyone can sue anyone, for any reason, right? But that this doesn't mean the suit will come to anything? I have repeatedly said, this will simply die. That's what happens to cases that have no merit - they languish in the appellate chain. Nothing comes of them.

<<Sigh>>. Nevermind. I've tried. Knock yourself out. I'm out.

 

Lets try this again

http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html

Were talking about executive powers not legislative

Its Artivle II that refers to executive powers.

 

Tootaloo.....

 

Researching delayed registrations of birth, I found that in Utah a foreign born child can be issued a birth cerificate.

http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r436/r436-006.htm

The mission statement of the Federal Election Commission doesn't mention verifying citizenship.

 

A final time.

That's true. Article I defines the role of the VP in the legislature, which was the question.

You cut the rest of Biden's comment, which isn't surprising, since you're trying a failed tack. He actually said:

True again. The Vice President is the Executive Branch. Cheney should know that. You should know that. You do know that, correct, that the Vice President is a member of the Executive Branch?

As with the other ridiculous thread, Simply, while it's been a blast, I'm exhausted. I've tried to help you understand something, and I've failed. All the best.

 

Unless you have proof that Obama did that I don't see the relevance other than you trying to throw more spaghetti at the wall?

It's a tired tactic. Just keep on throwing stuff at the wall and pretend that it's just more evidence piling against him. It's not evidence it's just more unfounded accusations and innuendos. Fact is I could go and make that same claim about Palin right now and all you'd have to disprove it is her birth certificate and her state verifying that it is valid. Just like Obama.

I can't make it any more clear than this. His state certified that is birth certificate is genuine.

I'm not going to continue to point out the obvious. This is the Republican dream right now and is fast becoming your last hope to cling to.

You are correct. I shall research this.