# Birther laughed out of court by judge in lawsuit



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

:lol:

Have you heard? I bet not...

Anyways... for those of you pundits following legal rulings and/or politics..

the latest news is that the crazy birther lady's lawsuit against Obama was laughed out of court.

http://static.mgnetwork.com/rbl/pdf/rho ... donald.pdf



> U.S. District Judge Clay Land has denied a temporary restraining order for Army Captain Connie Rhodes. In his order published today, Judge Land wrote " After conducting a hearing on Plaintiff's motion, the Court finds that Plaintiff's claims *are frivolous*. Accordingly, her application for a temporary restraining order is denied, and her Complaint is dismissed in its entirety. *Furthermore, Plaintiff's counsel is hereby notified that the filing of any future actions in this Court, which are similarly frivolous, shall subject counsel to sanctions.*"





> *Plaintiff's complaint is not plausible on its face*. To the extent that it alleges any "facts," the Complaint does not connect those facts to any actual violation of Plaintiff's individual constitutional rights.
> 
> *Unlike in Alice in Wonderland, simply saying something is so does not make it so*.


:rollin:

That's a good literary reference, there, Judge. Those might be some wise words for some folks here to consider about themselves...  In fact I'm sensing this might be good signature material...



> *Orly Taitz gets laughed out of court*
> 
> Orly Taitz, the de facto leader of the Birthers -- the people who believe President Obama doesn't meet the Constitution's eligibility requirements for his job -- is nothing if not persistent. So she'll probably be back in court soon enough. But the fairly epic smackdown she received at the hands of a federal judge Wednesday is bound to be discouraging.
> 
> ...


(Paraphrased, this means that she will not let reason stand in her way.)

:withstupid:

OUCH! talk about a verbal SMACK down! You don't often see harsher language than this spelled out so boldly and explicitly in a court decision!

That should all but end any serious discussion over any legalities surrounding the birther movement.... well... that is... for those of us who understand the legal implications of the precedent of this lawsuit...

Of course I eagerly sit on the edge of my seat awaiting the peanut gallery assessment ...


----------



## Bobm (Aug 26, 2003)

> That should all but end any serious discussion over any legalities surrounding the birther movement.... well... that is... for those of us who understand the legal implications of the precedent of this lawsuit...


SO says the the greatest legal mind, in his mind :lol:


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

With the amount of baseless, clueless and senseless drivel that permeates this politics forum.... having the ability to read, comprehend, and then apply ramifications of legal rulings isn't at the top of many folk's strengths here...

Often times watching those abilities (or lack thereof) is more entertaining than Thursday night primetime comedy.

But your attempt at ridiculing me, when the story speaks for itsself is cute.

Nice try.

Let's focus on the merits of the thread... ok Mr. moderator?

Thanks.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

It's a shame screwballs like her have to go to court because the democrat party didn't do it's job. The actions of this lady doesn't make all people who want Obama to prove his citizenship likewise inept. She simply didn't have a good case. For you to think this has bearing upon Obama's innocents is poor logic at best. Maybe Obama hires idiots to file lawsuits to set precedent. 

There are screw balls on both sides. She and you have a lot in common Ryan. Her credability in court is much like your credability about Palin. She will find that when you screw up credability in one area real real bad it's hard to gain credability of any kind again.


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

The courts are the courts, with many decisions being overturned by the next level. The problem with the "birthers" case is many, as it has never really been dealt with before, so there really is no precident. Since BO never did produce the proper documentation required, all accusations are considered conjecture in court because there is no proof, and I mean real proof not the un-official/official stuff missing the proper seals, etc, that he meets the requirements.

Once in, pretty hard to reverse course.

I don't know if he is foreign or not, but I do know secrets all eventually come out and the democrat party will be done forever if it would ever turn out to be true.

All in all, it really doesn't matter, the Dem's are going down in flames with this health care debacle, and will be ousted big time in the midterms, leaving Obama a 3 yr lame duck, not even being able to get his own parties nomination in 2012.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman said:


> It's a shame screwballs like her have to go to court because the democrat party didn't do it's job. The actions of this lady doesn't make all people who want Obama to prove his citizenship likewise inept. She simply didn't have a good case. For you to think this has bearing upon Obama's innocents is poor logic at best. Maybe Obama hires idiots to file lawsuits to set precedent.
> 
> There are screw balls on both sides. She and you have a lot in common Ryan. Her credability in court is much like your credability about Palin. She will find that when you screw up credability in one area real real bad it's hard to gain credability of any kind again.


:lol:

The fact that you think I lost any credibility about Palin is cute too... everyone except a few select pockets of the country know that Palin is a loon of the highest degree.... and certain aspects of her still remain .. "vague" we'll say...

I think I'll sleep comfortably well at night safe in the knowledge that I have no worries about my perceptions, inferences and knowledge of Sarah Palin. She will go down in history as one of the great punch lines of all time.

The jury is still out on many of the Palin secrets.  I think the American people might still be in for a few surprises, years from now when the REAL truth emerges from her half truths including her (il)legal dealings, Bristol's children, and other assorted skeletons come out. Me thinks she quit office because of reasons surrounding the above, rather than her stated ones... but we'll maybe never know anytime soon... unless she is foolish enough to run for higher office.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

southdakbearfan said:


> The courts are the courts, with many decisions being overturned by the next level. The problem with the "birthers" case is many, as it has never really been dealt with before, so there really is no precident. Since BO never did produce the proper documentation required, all accusations are considered conjecture in court because there is no proof, and I mean real proof not the un-official/official stuff missing the proper seals, etc, that he meets the requirements.
> 
> Once in, pretty hard to reverse course.
> 
> ...


question SDBearfan...

which court made this decision?

What's the "next level"

And .... most importantly... what standard must be met to have standing at the "next level"

I await your answer with bated breath...

unless of course Bob with his superior legal knowledge knows off the top of his head?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Lets see now they call those who question Obama's birth place Birthers, I wonder what we should call those who are a little off their rocker about Palin. I remember you eating your words (choking on them would be more like it) when you had to admit you jumped the gun saying the child with problems was really Bristols. Then you gave lots of credit to your gay friend blogger who really blew it. I'll have to think about a descriptive name that depicts my first signature line. I always think of you when I read it.  
I'll give you one thing Ryan what you lack in logic you make up for by being a persistent little fellow. :thumb:
When all else fails you sucker for Palin or FOX like a kid for candy.


----------



## southdakbearfan (Oct 11, 2004)

R y a n said:


> southdakbearfan said:
> 
> 
> > The courts are the courts, with many decisions being overturned by the next level. The problem with the "birthers" case is many, as it has never really been dealt with before, so there really is no precident. Since BO never did produce the proper documentation required, all accusations are considered conjecture in court because there is no proof, and I mean real proof not the un-official/official stuff missing the proper seals, etc, that he meets the requirements.
> ...


The eleventh circuit court of appeals is the next level, and if you would actually read and comprehend, it is pretty clear that I think this isn't going anywhere. That was why the statement "Once in, hard to reverse course". The time to question the proper documentation came and went. There wasn't enough power behind it to get the proper people and research behind it, if there is anything actually to it.

Like I said, I have no idea if he is or isn't constitutionally allowed to be president. I do know, no proper data with the proper seals as is supposed to be required, to the public.

Keep on drinking the cool-aid by the gallon man. This idiot we have for a president and his lackeys are BANKRUPTING this country.


----------



## jacobsol80 (Aug 12, 2008)

It will be interesting to see what happens with the lawsuit in California. It is scheduled for trial in Jan 2010. Obama's lawyers --- well I guess they are paid for by us taxpayers -- have sought dismissal of the suit, but the judge has yet to rule. My question is, what will Obama do if the judge requires he produce the original document? Does it really exist or just like Alice does wishing make it reality?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

The worshipers want this to go away, so they will demonize, make fun of, discredit, and do what ever it takes to take the pressure off Obama. That has always been a liberal game strategy.

It's kind of like the environmental debate. Back in the mid 1960's science was seriously looking at environmental degradation. Then the darn hippies picked up on it and started demonstrations. Stable sane people looked at that and soon labeled anyone with environmental concerned wild eyed hippies. Al Gore has done the same disservice to science that is seriously looking at global warming.

jacobsol80 you will notice that Ryan follows that game plan often. That's what he did with Palin and it's his strategy to protect Obama from having to meet the requirements of the constitution. He knows it's a legitimate question, but he puts it in rank with Jim Jones, etc in the hopes we shy from taking it serious. If Ryan had been in the Jim Jones camp many more people would have survived because Ryan would have drank far more than his share of the Kool-Aid. 

Please understand I am not picking on Ryan, this is the game plan and often used tactic of many from the left political spectrum. Most like to see a socialist stirring the Kool-Aid.


----------



## pintailtim (Apr 6, 2007)

R y a n said:


> Plainsman said:
> 
> 
> > It's a shame screwballs like her have to go to court because the democrat party didn't do it's job. The actions of this lady doesn't make all people who want Obama to prove his citizenship likewise inept. She simply didn't have a good case. For you to think this has bearing upon Obama's innocents is poor logic at best. Maybe Obama hires idiots to file lawsuits to set precedent.
> ...


Have you heard the real reason Palin quit?

Nope it isn't the dawning realization of what a hellish 24/7 job having a downs baby and a grueling political agenda is...

Nope it isn't having to deal with her out of control dirtball relatives...

Nope it isn't having to deal with the hypocrisy and embarrassment of a family values platform candidate with an 18 year old single parent daughter with an infant ( or 2 ) ...

andddd

Nope it isn't her finally honestly assessing that her provincial political experience in a rural state with a healthy petroleum endowment in no way qualifies her to address the vast clusterf____ that is the lower 48.

Nope it isn't any of that.

Do you honestly believe that only a few weeks ago Palin was hard charging take no prisoners poster child for the Old guard Conservative Grand Ol' Perverts base.. and now within the span of of a month she suddenly calls an emergency hastily arranged press conference to announce her sudden departure from the Governorship? On the afternoon before a huge holiday weekend in order to dampen down the media frenzy? Really? NONE of her staff knew of this in advance. NOTHING of this was hinted at to her Senator a day before the announcement.

Why the rush to announce?

And NONE of you raise any eyebrows? Nothing?

Anyone dare risk their credibility saying this is all about nothing? Anyone? Buehler?

C'mon I know you are willing to stick your neck out! Tell us all that all of this adds up to nothing! I know you can! Jump on that radical Conservative bandwagon! Hello?

*cricket* *cricket*

Right. You dare make a challenge that someone "who hates Palin enough" will step up the the liberal alter...

I'll throw it back at you. Do you have any guts to say this is nothing?

Ohh before I forget...

*cough* Federal

*cough* Indictment

*cough* Pending

But feel free to let Fox News alert you to the breaking news when it happens in a few days

Have a nice weekend. I know I will.

I can barely contain my glee at the pending news coming...

STILL WAITING


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

southdakbearfan said:


> R y a n said:
> 
> 
> > southdakbearfan said:
> ...


This is cute...

I'll ask it again... (you aren't catching on)

Is it possible for a case that got laughed (thrown) out of court....... to have an appeal? Did the case go forward? Yes or no? Was there any finding to "reverse" as you've now said


> That was why the statement "Once in, hard to reverse course".


Let me ask the question a different way to lead a horse to water...

What precise set of findings would the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals have to use in order to EVEN TAKE the case... or rather.. under what ERROR of law would this lawyer have to claim, in order to justify having any STANDING before an appeals court? Does this case even have STANDING as NO CASE EVEN WENT FORWARD.

Let me interpret again for you... There is no way it can be appealed. There is nothing to appeal. There is no case. The case was thrown out due to not even being worth wasting the court's time.

This has nothing do to with any prior precedent.... nothing to do with not having the proper evidence to bring... nothing to do with any .... lack of proper credentials... it is pure folly. And a Court judged with applying the letter of the law to the case has said that and MUCH more...

:eyeroll:

I won't even touch the rest of the comments. They are classic to the judge's logic in my original post. Alice in Wonderland anyone?


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

It's really cute to see the moderators participating in taking this thread off course. I thought moderators were supposed to facilitate the discussion about a particular thread, and keep it on track?

that's what I thought.

I must be mistaken.


----------



## Longshot (Feb 9, 2004)

> But feel free to let Fox News alert you to the breaking news when it happens in a few days


Ryan, this is what you said a couple months ago and still you claim it will happen in a few days. What seems to be the hold up? I'm asking since it seems you have some kind of inside knowledge. It will be interesting to see. Will this actually hold water unlike most of your claims about Palin or is this going to be another "who's baby is it" or another Arctic Cat jacket bs complaint?

As to the courts case, I do believe is was poorly thought out. I do not think this will go away. I can't for the life of me understand why someone would hide something when it would clear their name.

As for moderator status, you are about the most insulting one of all. Those who proclaim their superior intellect are usually those most lacking.


----------



## Gooseguy10 (Oct 10, 2006)

Plainsman said:


> The worshipers want this to go away, so they will demonize, make fun of, discredit, and do what ever it takes to take the pressure off Obama. That has always been a liberal game strategy.
> 
> It's kind of like the environmental debate. Back in the mid 1960's science was seriously looking at environmental degradation. Then the darn hippies picked up on it and started demonstrations. Stable sane people looked at that and soon labeled anyone with environmental concerned wild eyed hippies. Al Gore has done the same disservice to science that is seriously looking at global warming.


Your thoughts on this matter totally sum up my belief about the conservative extremists on this board. In my opinion, your first paragraph sums up to a T the game plan of some on this board, only on the different spectrum.

As I have said over and over, the tactics of the extreme on here lead to a VAST, VAST gap in credibility of the conserative movement.....but so many on here don't understand that.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

R y a n said:


> It's really cute to see the moderators participating in taking this thread off course. I thought moderators were supposed to facilitate the discussion about a particular thread, and keep it on track?
> 
> that's what I thought.
> 
> I must be mistaken.


OK, point taken. However, my point is simply this: This woman does not represent serious average joe American that still questions Obamas birth place serious. We need not all be nut jobs to take that question serious, and want proof. I think your point was to make all who question look as if they are nut jobs. Therefore my thoughts were to take apart your thought process. To do that I needed to provide other examples of your failed logic. Follow me now?

Edit: Longshot, Ryans account of Palin being federally indited was proven false long long ago. I think pintailtim simply posted one of Ryans old posts to remind Ryan that since he has failed many times in his attacks that he should perhaps reconsider his thoughts about birthers.


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman said:


> R y a n said:
> 
> 
> > It's really cute to see the moderators participating in taking this thread off course. I thought moderators were supposed to facilitate the discussion about a particular thread, and keep it on track?
> ...


point taken also Plainsman.

Thank you.

In response,... I'll add that the point I was trying to make was that this case was a prime opportunity to get an objective look (by a judge) at whether any part of the entire birther argument had merit.... not someone here.. not someone from this forum... but someone who is a licensed judge, and presumably intimately knowledgeable about the law.

I don't need to "make anyone look like a nutjob"... many do a fine job of that by themselves without any assistance or prodding by me. Your attempts at "taking down my thought process" do not normally have much actual substance, and all too often instead resort to subtle put downs.

Like I said before... Palin quit. The timing and logic behind that decision are fishy. We know what she said... but then again we know how competent she isn't. And yes... for all of you who keep sidetracking the thread... I still believe all the facts on the controversies around her haven't been settled. We can re-hash my earlier Palin statements in a few years when her name surfaces again in a relevent thread.

But I stand by my original words. You may not agree, but that is your right. My differing opinion on many things doesn't hurt my credibility.

Ohh and Longshot.. try posting some in depth political thoughts. All you ever seem to do is post a reply to take a shot at me. It's easy to take shots at someone when they are the one making statements, and answering questions about their politics. You have done nothing of the kind. Until such time as you start playing in the sandbox with the rest of us and contributing on a regular basis, you'll continue to be marginalized. Don't expect any substantive responses from me, until such time.

-Ryan


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Ryan,

I have not read the entire article.....

But what was the lady doing...sueing or trying to get obama to produce documents?

Because those can be two different events or rulings. Just because her case does not have merit others could. Look at the OJ murder trial. One way did not work....the other did.

But with that said I totally believe Obama is legit on his citezenship. Yes there are question marks. But if it ever came back that a person won the presidental election and did not have the criteria needed to fulfill the job then we have even more issues than we do now.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

Obama not proving his birth place is perplexing. On one hand I wonder if he wants confusion while the democrats pass outrageous bills in the congress. On the other hand would he really spend a million dollars to provide this type of cover? On the other hand someone may give him two million and he only spends one million. It simply leaves a lot of questions all unanswered. The pity is it would be so simple to put to rest. So simple that I wonder why Obama doesn't do it.

Ryan, if you were running for governor of Washington and it was required you prove your residency for one year or ten years, or whatever. Would you provide the proof or would you run anyway and spend a million dollars hiding that proof. It just doesn't make sense.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

Gooseguy10 said:


> As I have said over and over, the tactics of the extreme on here lead to a VAST, VAST gap in credibility of the *liberal* movement.....but so many on here don't understand that.


There, fixed it for you. :wink: 8)

huntin1


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> "Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they are ignorant, but that they know so much that isn't so." - Ronald Reagan


That explains Palin. It explains them knowing Obama is a citizen. It explains them telling us we must embrace the gay community and conservatism is dead. It explains those who think we were in Iraq for oil. It explains those who think Bush had the world trade center bombed. It explains about 90% of the liberal ideas, and I am not trying to be nasty, I am serious.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

Chuck Smith said:


> Ryan,
> 
> I have not read the entire article.....
> 
> ...


From what I gathered when I read it, she was suing to keep from being deployed to Iraq, using the arguement that since Obama has not produced proper documentation that he is a citizen, he has not proven that he is eligible to serve as President, her orders are unconstitutional.

That is the gist of her lawsuit in a nutshell.

I do not know if he is a citizen or not, I'd like to think that he is and is not scamming America. But, the question has been brought, and it can easily be answered by him. The fact that he is spending money to keep those documents from us raises red flags. At least with me, and it should with everyone.

huntin1


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

Plainsman said:


> Obama not proving his birth place is perplexing. On one hand I wonder if he wants confusion while the democrats pass outrageous bills in the congress. On the other hand would he really spend a million dollars to provide this type of cover? On the other hand someone may give him two million and he only spends one million. It simply leaves a lot of questions all unanswered. The pity is it would be so simple to put to rest. So simple that I wonder why Obama doesn't do it.
> 
> Ryan, if you were running for governor of Washington and it was required you prove your residency for one year or ten years, or whatever. Would you provide the proof or would you run anyway and spend a million dollars hiding that proof. It just doesn't make sense.


In reply... I'd offer that the way this entire story is being construed is thru the eyes of the Conservative slant. I'm not trying to be snarky at all by saying that. I'm just saying that many in Democratic circles, believe the matter has long ago been put to rest.

Even the angle that "Obama is spending a million dollars to hide" is a slant.

For argument's sake... let's say the real answer lies somewhere in the middle..

Let's say that bits and pieces of the truth are interwoven with certain facts that Obama has come to realize would open a whole can of worms if he were to divert valuable time and energy towards satisfying a hypothetical grand jury investigation.

What if he was born in Hawaii, but for whatever reason, the records got screwed up? What if he is indeed completely certain in his own mind that he grew up American(and if he was indeed born in Hawaii legally), but that record keeping methods that were completely out of his control, were not the best? What if someone was simply negligent in their job on that day and the form wasn't correctly filled out? Do you not believe that the rabid right wouldn't froth at the mouth to find a conspiracy within those documents?

In circles outside of this one on this board... this is a completely non issue. Period. Only a few folks keep re-hashing this increasingly tired argument. If Obama hadn't won the Democratic ticket, Hillary would have.... The last election wasn't about Obama, as much as it was against Bush. The McCain/Palin ticket made it all that much easier, but it represented a fundamental shift in politics in this country. That subsequent anger by the ultra conservative R minority is now using this Obama "birth certificate mess" as a unifying, justification for civil unrest at all costs.

To me it is the tip of the iceberg over the entirety of the shambles that the Republican party is in. They have no leadership. They have no message. They have no plan. All they have is sowing seeds of discontent and anarchy. Certain elements within the party are quietly promoting all of the events of recent past. Consider everything that has happened in the past 4 months... is that the party you are proud to represent?

Really?


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> is that the party you are proud to represent?


I don't like any of them, but the republicans currently have a lot more credability than the democrats. Do you have any idea of the beating your boys are going to take in 2010. Ryan you must be hiding under a rock if you don't see what is going on. No transparency, no good plan for the economy, socialist programs at every turn, czars that are not constitutional, and the list goes on and on. 
A leader will rise from the ranks of the republican party, but if the democrats continue the road they are on we could pick anyone and win. Look at the corrupt ACORN scandal and you thought we were just right wing nut jobs when we brought that up last fall. 
Get those rose colored glasses off Ryan and look at the real world. It's falling apart around us. Just in the last couple of days he let down American allies in Europe. NATO means little, the United Nations is trying to dictate, and the radical Muslims could not be much happier. Heck Osama wants everyone to read Jimmy Carters book. 
We question Obama's citizenship for a number of reasons not the least of which is he is methodically destroying America. When he said "we are about to fundamentally change America" he meant it. Do you for a nanosecond think things are better?


----------



## Chuck Smith (Feb 22, 2005)

Ryan I agree totally that he might not be confident in the paperwork if he is really spending that amount of $$.



> To me it is the tip of the iceberg over the entirety of the shambles that the Republican party is in. They have no leadership. They have no message. They have no plan. All they have is sowing seeds of discontent and anarchy. Certain elements within the party are quietly promoting all of the events of recent past. Consider everything that has happened in the past 4 months... is that the party you are proud to represent?
> 
> Really?


With this comment I think more people are turning towards the republican party because of some of the stuff the Dems are doing. I also think more are turning towards the Rep party because they thought obama was going to fix everything ASAP......which he is trying too but people are impatient.

Myself.....I am leaning more to the right side than I have ever before. because of the crappy legislation that has been approved and what they are also trying to pass. I mean all the stimulus stuff was BS. It stalled and artificially inflated markets which would correct themselves if the goverment would have just kept out of it. Now they just delayed the worse from happening. Just look at the mess in CA with its debt.....goverment and citizens of that state both are in debt to their eyeballs. But some of the stimulus stuff is just delaying more people and giving false hope.

Cash for clunkers....great idea...but think of it like this.....the people who owned these clunkers were in them because they could not afford anything else....but now they gave them $4500 for a car that was worth $1500...they could not resist and over spend their means and get a new vehicle and loan!!! So now instead of it being housing it will be cars....

Then the $8000 first time home buyers....great in theory...but many first time home buyers are fresh out of college and now spending on home, student loans, cash for clunkers, etc....and are not finding the good paying jobs because of a poor job market and living pay check to pay check.

And then the HC bill.....well if you have read any of my posts people would know how I feel about the public option.

Sorry I will get off my soap box and did not mean to hi jack a thread.....


----------



## hunter9494 (Jan 21, 2007)

R y a n said:


> It's really cute to see the moderators participating in taking this thread off course. I thought moderators were supposed to facilitate the discussion about a particular thread, and keep it on track?
> 
> that's what I thought.
> 
> I must be mistaken.


talk about the kettle calling the pot black! :rollin:


----------



## R y a n (Apr 4, 2005)

hunter9494 said:


> R y a n said:
> 
> 
> > It's really cute to see the moderators participating in taking this thread off course. I thought moderators were supposed to facilitate the discussion about a particular thread, and keep it on track?
> ...


This thread was actually going well without your participation H94

Nice to see you contributing your best effort

edit: and note that I don't hi jack threads, unlike countless others here...yourself being at the top of that list.

.


----------



## Plainsman (Jul 30, 2003)

> Sorry I will get off my soap box and did not mean to hi jack a thread.....


Some complain about hi jacked threads. I do not. I say don't worry about it let it flow like a conversation. Sometimes one subject leads to another, and sometimes there is only so much you can say about one simple thing. Those that complain are not moderating this form.
If the subject is fresh by all means continue to keep on subject. This one I think has run it's course and if it evolves into something else great. If it doesn't I think it will die shortly.


----------



## jacobsol80 (Aug 12, 2008)

Hmmm. It seems my point re: the California case hasn't been addressed by Ryan. What will the anointed one do if he is compelled to produce the original birth certificate? Heck, you can't even play Little League baseball without your ORIGINAL birth certificate, yet you can be elected president?
Apparently this country has gone to hell in a handbasket while I was momentarily distracted.


----------



## Dak (Feb 28, 2005)

Ryan,

Thanks for the original post. The citizen issue is inane at this point.


----------



## huntin1 (Nov 14, 2003)

The only thing that is inane is the O's refusal to address it, and in fact spending money to keep us all from seeing the documents that would prove it once and for all.

It is not inane to question the background of the President, in fact it is our duty as American citizens to do just that. It is also his duty as a servant of the American people to produce the information that is asked for.

The fact that he refuses to do so is decidely inane.

huntin1


----------



## rberglof (May 17, 2007)

First person to file lawsuit about Obama birth not a conservative. It's interesting that people think that only Republicans care about his birthplace and why he will not reveal documents that he claims in a book he wrote that he has.

Philip J. Berg, Esquire states "There has been a lot of attention regarding the birth certificate issues addressed in the media lately. Unfortunately, there are many discrepancies in the reporting of the facts surrounding the questions into Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack H. Obama's birth and citizenship status."

The media, in addressing the citizenship issues regarding Barry Soetoro a/k/a Barack H. Obama; my background; and intentions have mis-stated the following facts:

1.

People say I am a disgruntled Republican - WRONG:
1.

I am a lifelong Democrat;
2.

Served as a Democratic Committeeman for 31 years [I am 65 years "young"];
3.

Former Chair of the Democratic Party in Montgomery County, PA;
4.

Former Member of Pennsylvania Democratic State Committee for eight [8] years; and
5.

Former Candidate in Pennsylvania Democratic Statewide Primaries for Governor and United States Senator; 
It is correct that questions have been asked regarding our now President Obama's birth place and the fact the issues of Obama's citizenship is all over the internet, however, the rest of the assertions are inaccurate. The only document purporting to be Mr. Obama's birth certificate was actually a Hawaiian Certification of Live Birth [COLB], an image of which was placed on Obama's campaign website in June of 2008. It is important to note, Hawaii also issues Certification of Live Births to children born abroad upon the registration by a family member of the birth. A Hawaiian Certification of Live Birth is issued to children who are United States "natural born" citizens as well as "naturalized" citizens, who did not qualify for "natural born" status. Take for instance, Maya Soetoro, Mr. Obama's half-sister who was born in Jakarta, Indonesia in 1970, she too has a Certification of Live Birth, however, she is not a United States "natural born" citizen.


----------

