The boobie prize

[BNaylor]

Then why doesn't Obama just produce and show his original 1961 Birth Certificate and/or release his hospital birth records to settle this issue once and for all. Unless he has something to hide? It just doesn't make sense and all he is doing is festering and prolonging the conspiracy theories about him.

[ericn1300]

Originally Posted by BNaylor

Then why doesn't Obama just produce and show his original 1961 Birth Certificate and/or release his hospital birth records to settle this issue once and for all. Unless he has something to hide? It just doesn't make sense and all he is doing is festering and prolonging the conspiracy theories about him.

He has produced his birth cerificate and you can see an examination of it here: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...n_the_usa.html

I doubt he has a copy of his hospital birth records, I don't know anyone who does have those, and any way wouldn't those records be his mothers records?

[BNaylor]

Originally Posted by ericn1300

He has produced his birth cerificate and you can see an examination of it here: http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...n_the_usa.html

Therein lies one of the problems raised and why this matter is still propagating. That is the short form COLB reprinted in 2007 referenced and not the vault file copy of his real 1961 birth certificate, the long form which State of Hawaii officials admit to having but have not released any further data like which hospital he was born at, etc. The lawsuits claim that he was born in Kenya and his mother Stanley Ann Dunham simply registered his birth in Hawaii since Hawaii statutes allowed that at the time. However, you cannot even get Hawaii Homelands status with the short form per Hawaii statute. You must produce the long form.

Also, factcheck.org is supposed to be a non-partisan organization but it is run by the Annenberg Foundation. Obama was part of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge so factcheck.org is not necessarily a disinterested party in the outcome. He was a chairman of that organization. Therefore any reference to factcheck.org when asking about Obama would be like asking the fox to guard the hen house.

Originally Posted by ericn1300

I doubt he has a copy of his hospital birth records, I don't know anyone who does have those, and any way wouldn't those records be his mothers records?

The hospitals in Hawaii whichever it is since no one knows for sure would have those records but they are now protected by the HIPAA Act. There are discrepancies as to which hospital he was birthed at. Queens Medical Center or Kapiolani Medical Center? Or Mombassa Coast Hospital, Kenya? However, Obama has refused to answer which hospital he was really born at when he was asked by the mainstream media.

[03cavPA]

It has also been said that he has his original birth certificate in his Chicago office.

So, what's the big deal to whip that bad boy out for the Supremes and then tell everyone to STFU? How hard can it be if he goes to court with his attorneys and the official document and simply proves who he is and where he came into this world?

What's missing here? It can't be that difficult, can it? He's got enough of Clinton's old crew in his administration, maybe he's now trying to come up with a page out of the Clinton playbook for what the definition of "birth" actually is.

Of course, we'll have to mull over the definition of "is" first.

[KustmAce]

He could produce the original birth certificate, all the paperwork, interview the doctor and nurses who delivered him, security tapes from the hospital, and anything else, and all the butthurt republicans would still cry false.

[BNaylor]

Originally Posted by 03cavPA

What's missing here? It can't be that difficult, can it? He's got enough of Clinton's old crew in his administration, maybe he's now trying to come up with a page out of the Clinton playbook for what the definition of "birth" actually is.

Very simple. Fess up.

Speaking of acting too fast on his cabinet and other staff picks the Democrats in Georgia and nationwide are still trying to figure out what the hell went wrong with the Senate runoff between Chambliss (R) and Martin (D). It might have been wiser to wait until after December 2. Chambliss won approximately 60% to 40% of the vote so the Demos do not have a super majority to stop a filibuster or the 60 votes normally needed to bring a bill to the Senate floor. There are indications that many Democrats in Georgia did not like Obama's picks and saw his change theme as misleading so they crossed party lines. Regardless, still nice to have a system of checks and balances. My hats off to the voters in Georgia.

Originally Posted by KustmAce

He could produce the original birth certificate, all the paperwork, interview the doctor and nurses who delivered him, security tapes from the hospital, and anything else, and all the butthurt republicans would still cry false.

Ah........a vast right wing conspiracy.

The lawsuits currently at SCOTUS were not brought by Republicans and they won't touch this issue with a 10 foot pole. One of the lawsuits was filed by a Democrat and Hillary Clinton supporter.

The other one wanted McCain disqualified from running too since he was born in Panama in the Canal Zone.

[ericn1300]

Originally Posted by BNaylor

The lawsuits claim that he was born in Kenya and his mother Stanley Ann Dunham simply registered his birth in Hawaii since Hawaii statutes allowed that at the time. However, you cannot even get Hawaii Homelands status with the short form per Hawaii statute. You must produce the long form.

Those law suits about his place of birth are over. The case in front of The Supreme court is about the term “natural born” in the constitution

Originally Posted by AOL.com

The argument brought by Leo Donofrio goes like this:
"Don't be distracted by the birth certificate and Indonesia issues. They are irrelevant to Senator Obama's ineligibility to be President. Since Barack Obama's father was a Citizen of Kenya and therefore subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of Senator Obama's birth, then Senator Obama was a British Citizen 'at birth', just like the Framers of the Constitution, and therefore, even if he were to produce an original birth certificate proving he were born on US soil, he still wouldn't be eligible to be President.
The Framers of the Constitution, at the time of their birth, were also British Citizens and that's why the Framers declared that, while they were Citizens of the United States, they themselves were not "natural born Citizens".

Got it? The argument is that even if he was born in the U.S., his daddy was an immigrant, so he can't be president. Donofrio in fact "concedes Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii."

Also, the Supreme Court isn't hearing the case, they are deciding whether to hear the case.

[BNaylor]

Originally Posted by ericn1300

Those law suits about his place of birth are over. The case in front of The Supreme court is about the term “natural born” in the constitution

Nope. The Berg suit which is still alive maintains that argument in addition to the "natural born" issue. And the Keyes lawsuit in California just got started and may work its way to the U.S. Supreme Court. This is Berg's web site below. Take it for what it is worth.

Click here

All that is being decided is whether the Petition for Writ of Certiorari will be granted to fully hear the case. It is not on the merits. Solely, the "lack of standing" issue.

Interesting to finally see the mainstream TV media (NBC) Pete Williams talk about the cases. Of course, only after the election.

[03cavPA]

Originally Posted by BNaylor

There are indications that many Democrats in Georgia did not like Obama's picks and saw his change theme as misleading so they crossed party lines.

I'm on the fence on that one. While he picked a lot of insiders, leading many to believe his platform of "change" was just so much BS, I'm also not sure we have the luxury of breaking in a bunch of newbies when there are so many pressing issues to address.

We'll just have to let his team do their thing and hope they get some things right. Otherwise, if we're still here in 4 years, we can toss them out.

[BNaylor]

Originally Posted by 03cavPA

I'm on the fence on that one. While he picked a lot of insiders, leading many to believe his platform of "change" was just so much BS, I'm also not sure we have the luxury of breaking in a bunch of newbies when there are so many pressing issues to address.

Then he picks Robert Gates, a conservative, to continue as Secretary of Defense and Retired Army General Shinseki to take over the Department of Veteran Affairs.

Gates will probably be used as a scapegoat and although I respect General Shinseki to a point and being a West Point graduate he was not exactly 100% correct on how the War in Iraq should have been conducted. He wanted several hundred thousand troops deployed similar to Gulf War I during the initial invasion and thereafter leading to a much higher U.S. higher body count. IMO it would have not stopped any Insurgency and our time over there. Obsolete old school Vietnam War and Cold War style military tactics using overwhelming force. And obviously that type of warfare failed as evidenced by the Vietnam War. Clueless.

Obama still will not give any credit to General David Petraeus and the success of the troop surge and stabilization in Iraq using far less troops. All he did was bad mouth him in front of the troops when he visited Anbar Province, Iraq back in July and was more interested in playing basketball and doing photo ops. Again, clueless.

Source: Washington Post

President-elect Barack introduced retired Army Gen. Eric K. Shinseki as his nominee to head the Department of Veterans Affairs, bringing to his Cabinet a career military officer best known for running afoul of the Bush administration by questioning the Pentagon's Iraq war strategy.

Shinseki was Army chief of staff when, during the run-up to the Iraq war, he publicly disputed the Bush administration's determination to invade with a relatively small force. To maintain the postwar peace in Iraq, Shinseki told the Senate Armed Services Committee in February 2003, "something on the order of several hundred thousand soldiers" could be necessary. Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld reacted by telling reporters that the estimate "will prove to be high," and Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul D. Wolfowitz called it "way off the mark."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?hpid=topnews