Obama's Birth Certificate

almost ready

Inactive
Hawaii gives out those certs

to anyone whose 2 parents lived in Hawaii the year before they were born, wherever they were born, if it is requested. It doesn't in any way guarantee that the person so certified was born on the Islands. I've already posted the Hawaii code that pertains.

It doesn't matter. At least three people told me last weekend that Obama was foreign born, based on his refusal to respond. The damage has been done.

And they weren't Idahoans - they were in three different blue states. WA, CA and NY

I'm one of those fascinated by this process, rather like reading a mystery novel.
 

Laurane

Canadian Loonie
As I mentioned before....

my husband applied in Canada for US citizenship by derivation by virtue of both of his parents being US citizens.......he was not registered in Canada till age 6, so it was a bit of a problem to prove who he was and when and where he was born.

He had to have census records showing his parents as children on year 1900 US census, affadavits from his older sister and an aunt who were present at the birth, marriage records for his grandparents /parents in USA and biographies from others who would confirm this all happened.

Now if a regular person has to jump through all these hoops just to claim citizenship, why shouldn't a man who wants to be President have to pull out his original Vault certificate.

The Courthouse didn't burn down, or get bombed like in England, or flooded or tornadoed, so it must be there.......pull it out and put the rumors to rest.
 

cjpman

Member
my husband applied in Canada for US citizenship by derivation by virtue of both of his parents being US citizens.......he was not registered in Canada till age 6, so it was a bit of a problem to prove who he was and when and where he was born.

He had to have census records showing his parents as children on year 1900 US census, affadavits from his older sister and an aunt who were present at the birth, marriage records for his grandparents /parents in USA and biographies from others who would confirm this all happened.

Now if a regular person has to jump through all these hoops just to claim citizenship, why shouldn't a man who wants to be President have to pull out his original Vault certificate.

The Courthouse didn't burn down, or get bombed like in England, or flooded or tornadoed, so it must be there.......pull it out and put the rumors to rest.

Exactly:wvflg:
 

lectrickitty

Great Great Grandma!
my husband applied in Canada for US citizenship by derivation by virtue of both of his parents being US citizens.......he was not registered in Canada till age 6, so it was a bit of a problem to prove who he was and when and where he was born.

He had to have census records showing his parents as children on year 1900 US census, affadavits from his older sister and an aunt who were present at the birth, marriage records for his grandparents /parents in USA and biographies from others who would confirm this all happened.

Now if a regular person has to jump through all these hoops just to claim citizenship, why shouldn't a man who wants to be President have to pull out his original Vault certificate.

The Courthouse didn't burn down, or get bombed like in England, or flooded or tornadoed, so it must be there.......pull it out and put the rumors to rest.
In most, if not all, states... once a person has been adopted, the original birth certificate is sealed.

If Hawaii is one of the states that seals the originals of adoptive children, then the most BO would be able to do is provide a copy of his adoptive birth certificate along with a certified copy of his legal name change from when he dropped his adoptive name and took his birth name back.

Now it gets slippery. He was adopted in Indonesia, so his Hawaiian birth certificate might not have been sealed. Even with it not sealed, it was no longer his legal name. So now do we have a case of a man with a legal identity that isn't legal?

I guess there's always the possibility that he traveled the world as an Indonesian named Berry, and keeping the American birth certificate "on ice" he reserved the ability to return to America any time he wanted and use the American identity that was "waiting in the wings".

What about the legal papers when he dropped his adoptive name and took back his birth name? Did he do that in Indonesia too? Where are those papers? Was the name change done in a court of law or is there still a man named Berry Soetoro who is a legal resident of Indonesia (in case he decides to go back and pick up that identity again?)

Like everything in his life... Lots of questions, very few answers.
 

eXe

Techno Junkie
Just saw this..

Obama's birth certificate sealed by Hawaii governor

Story Link

HONOLULU, Hawaii – Although the legitimacy of Sen. Barack Obama's birth certificate has become a focus of intense speculation – and even several lawsuits – WND has learned that Hawaii's Gov. Linda Lingle has placed the candidate's birth certificate under seal, and instructed the state's Department of Health to make sure no one in the press obtains access to the original document under any circumstances.

The governor's office officially declined a request made in writing by WND in Hawaii to obtain a copy of the hospital-generated original birth certificate of Barack Obama.

"It does not appear that Dr. Corsi is within any of these categories of persons with a direct and tangible interest in the birth certificate he seeks," wrote Roz Makuala, manager of Constituent Services in the governor's office, in an e-mailed response to a WND request seeking the information.

Those listed as entitled to obtain a copy of an original birth certificate include the person born, or "registrant" according to the legal description from the governor's office, the spouse or parent of the registrant, a descendant of the registrant, a person having a common ancestor with the registrant, a legal guardian of the registrant, or a person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant.

WND was told the official reason for denial of access to Obama's birth certificate would be authority granted pursuant to Section 338-18 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes, a provision the anonymous source claimed was designed to prevent identity theft.

Still, the source told WND confidentially the motivation for withholding the original birth certificate was political, although the source refused to disclose whether there was any information on the original birth certificate that would prove politically embarrassing to Obama.

Get the book that started it all, Jerome Corsi's "The Obama Nation," autographed by the author, exclusively from WND's online store for the amazing low price of just $4.95.

The source also refused to answer WND's question whether the original document on file with the Department of Health was a hospital-generated birth certificate or a registration of birth that may have been filed subsequent to the birth.

The anonymous source made clear the Hawaii Department of Health would immediately release Obama's original birth certificate, provided Obama requested the document be released, but the Department of Heath has received no such request from the senator or from anyone acting officially on his behalf.

WND also found on microfilm in the Honolulu downtown public library a notice published under the "Births, Marriages, Deaths" section of the Honolulu Sunday Advertiser for August 13, 1961, on page B-6, noting: "Mr. and Mrs. Barack II Obama. 6085 Kalanianaole-Hwy, son, Aug. 4."

In searching through the birth notices of the Honolulu Advertiser for 1961, WND found many birth notices were published between one and two weeks after the date of birth listed.

The notice in the Honolulu Advertiser does not list the hospital where the Obama son was born or the doctor who delivered the baby.

In a startling development, Obama's Kenyan grandmother has reportedly alleged she witnessed Obama's birth at the Coast Provincial Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.

Friday, U.S. Federal judge Richard Barclay Surrick, a Clinton appointee, dismissed a lawsuit brought by Pennsylvania attorney Phillip J. Berg who alleged Obama was not a U.S. "natural born" citizen and therefore ineligible for the presidency under the specifications of the U.S. Constitution, under Article II, Section 1.

Berg told WND last week he does not have a copy of a Kenyan birth certificate for Obama that he alleges exists.

In Kenya, WND was told by government authorities that all documents concerning Obama were under seal until after the U.S. presidential election
on November 4.

The Obama campaign website entitled "Fight the Smears" posts a State of Hawaii "Certificate of Live Birth" which is obviously not the original birth certificate generate by the hospital where Obama was born.

"Fight the Smears" declares, "The truth is, Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen of the United States of America."

Although the Obama campaign could immediately put an end to all the challenges by simply producing the candidate's original birth certificate, it has not done so. And the "Fight the Smears" website offers no explanation as to why Obama has refused to request, and make public, an original hospital-generated birth certificate which the Hawaii Department of Health may possess.
 

Jarhead

Has No Life - Lives on TB
The Passport?

Something else that keeps gnawing at me is the passport.

Obama traveled to Indonesia. He was adopted there. Went to school there.

He then traveled from Indonesia to the U.S.

Under what countries passport did he travel under? (U.S or Indonesian)

And what about the visa's to leave and subsequently re-enter the U.S.?

So many questions, so few answers. :shr:

Jarhead
:usm:
 

thompson

Certa Bonum Certamen
Hawaii's Gov. Linda Lingle has placed the candidate's birth certificate under seal, and instructed the state's Department of Health to make sure no one in the press obtains access to the original document under any circumstances.

1Thessalonians 5:21 Prove all things; hold fast that which is good.
:22 Abstain from all appearance of evil.


"If you don't have something to hide, what's the big deal?!?"

Isn't that what we're often told? Yes, it is.

good for goose, good for gander
 

Fulltimer

Membership Revoked
Something else that keeps gnawing at me is the passport.

Obama traveled to Indonesia. He was adopted there. Went to school there.

He then traveled from Indonesia to the U.S.

Under what countries passport did he travel under? (U.S or Indonesian)

And what about the visa's to leave and subsequently re-enter the U.S.?

So many questions, so few answers. :shr:

Jarhead
:usm:
As a United States Senator he traveled all around the world on his United States passport.

Does the fact that neither the Republican National Party nor the John McCain campaign question Obama's citizenship sink in to you folks?

It is a Hillary supporter that has brought it up and is attempting to keep it in the news.



don;)
 

Laurane

Canadian Loonie
He traveled as Barry Soetoro on his Indonesian passport to Pakistan to stay with this old room-mates family there while in school. Americans were at that point not allowed to travel to Pakistan. He had both passports probably, but he wanted to go there, so he used the one passport which would allow him to.
 

Laurane

Canadian Loonie
Don

People who were not born in the USA can have American passports - e.g. my husband was born in Canada (his parents were born in USA). So Obama could qualify in some form for a US passport, though the stipulation about his mother having to live in USA for five years before his birth (in the 1961 timeframe rules is questionable too).

That doesn't prove he was born there, just that he got an abridged b/cert and a passport.

My DH keeps his US passport updated, but never uses it for travel - most people see Canadians as more lovable :p
 

Reborn

Seeking Aslan's Country
As a United States Senator he traveled all around the world on his United States passport.

Does the fact that neither the Republican National Party nor the John McCain campaign question Obama's citizenship sink in to you folks?

It is a Hillary supporter that has brought it up and is attempting to keep it in the news.

don;)

I don't care if it's Bugs Bunny bringing it up. The FACT that someone brought it up, and that it keep staying brought up by various other someones, and that OBAMA doesn't come out into the open with it (BC & other records) tells me (and other undecided's) a whole lot more than can possibly be imagined.

In the beginning I really didn't pay attention to this, but now I am. WHY? Because of the silence and actions of Obama, not because of the actions of a Hillary supporter.

Obama = Don't go by what he says, but by what he does.
 
Last edited:

Martin

Deceased
October 27, 2008

Sen. Obama, Stand and Deliver!

Frank Salvato


The recent ruling by the Hon. R. Barclay Surrick dismissing the lawsuit challenging Barack Obama’s citizenship, brought by former Deputy Attorney General for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and Democrat county chair Phillip Berg, presents the genesis of a Constitutional Crisis. While Barack Obama’s refusal to satisfy the citizens’ request to validate his citizenship illustrates his unbridled arrogance and that of his campaign and supporters, it also exposes the fact that politics, at the hands of political opportunists and ideologues, has usurped the legitimate execution of the supreme law of the land; the United States Constitution.

Make no mistake. I do not support Barack Obama in his quest for the presidency. I find his political ideology to embrace a one-world ideology borrowing heavily from the Marxist-Leninist dogma. But, if in fact he is a legal and naturally born citizen of the United States of America, if he thoroughly satisfies the requirements as set forth in Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, then I will defend his right to be placed on ballots across our nation. My concern is not partisan, it is constitutional.

Article II, Section 1 of the US Constitution reads:

"No Person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States."​

In what may come as a surprise to many, the Federal Election Commission does not have authority to verify whether or not a presidential candidate has satisfied the constitutional requirements set forth for candidacy.

The FEC’s mission statement reads:

“In 1975, Congress created the Federal Election Commission (FEC) to administer and enforce the Federal Election Campaign Act (FECA) - the statute that governs the financing of federal elections. The duties of the FEC, which is an independent regulatory agency, are to disclose campaign finance information, to enforce the provisions of the law such as the limits and prohibitions on contributions, and to oversee the public funding of Presidential elections.”​

So, a singular question becomes self-evident; what entity requires proof be filed of a candidate’s satisfaction of the constitutional requirements needed to become President of the United States?

In Marquis v. Reed, one of the eight lawsuits filed in an attempt to verify that Barack Obama is indeed eligible to hold the office of President of the United States, Steven Marquis takes a different tract than Berg. Marquis challenges the Washington State Secretary of State, Samuel Reed, to verify Obama’s eligibility.

In this lawsuit Marquis establishes:

“As we do not have a federal ballot per se, Washington State, through the office of the Washington State, Secretary of State creates its own ballot and supervises the same, electing electors to represent our choice for the Office of President...and presents a state question within this Court’s jurisdiction.”

Still, while establishing that the States, rather than the federal government, have jurisdiction over their individual election processes, it still doesn’t quest for the answer to the self-evident question of what entity requires proof be filed of a candidate’s satisfaction of the constitutional requirements needed to become President of the United States? Instead, it adds to the immediacy of the question and brings to the forefront a more refined question; is there an entity that verifies a candidate’s satisfaction of the requirements?

Examining the State of Illinois’ State Board of Elections Amended 2008 Candidate’s Guide, issued in May of 2008, it appears that the Illinois State Board of Elections doesn’t verify a candidate’s eligibility beyond requiring:

1) A Statement of Candidacy – This form (I use the FEC form as it encompasses everything in the Illinois form) requires each candidate to provide his name, address, party affiliation, office sought, the state and district of the contest, a designation of a principle campaign committee, the designation of other authorized committees and a declaration of intent to expend personal funds. Lastly, it requires a potential candidate to “attest” that he or she is “qualified for the office specified.” At no place in the official guide or paperwork is a birth certificate or other form of verification of natural born citizenship required.

2) A Loyalty Oath – Ironically, this is optional.

3) Receipt for filing a Statement of Economic Interests – This is not required for Federal Office or political party offices.

4) Completed Nominating Petitions – These petitions must be correctly filed out, notarized and contain a sufficient number of original signatures as set forth by the election commission.

Being familiar with the election process in Illinois, I then examined my country board of election’s requirements. Their requirements deferred to the requirements of the State of Illinois.

Again, the question remains, is there an entity – whether on a federal, state, county or municipal level – that verifies a candidate’s satisfaction of the requirements set forth by the US Constitution for holding the office of President of the United States?

In Judge Surrick’s ruling, he declared that Mr. Berg “lacked standing” to bring the lawsuit to the court. He stated that the harm cited by Berg was “too vague and its effects too attenuated to confer standing on any and all voters.” This ruling is a slap in the face to every citizen of the United States.

The U.S. Constitution begins with:

"We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.”

It does not begin with “We the Government...” or “We the Judiciary...” and for good reason. The United States government is empowered and created by We the People; the citizens. The U.S. Constitution belongs to the people not to the government. In fact, the Constitution was created to limit government’s ability to employ tyrannical governance. It is squarely within the citizen’s purview to protect and defend the US Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. This notion is called civic responsibility and it is our duty as citizens to pro-actively defend our Charters of Freedom. It is for this reason, among but a few more, that the Constitution is written in the First Person.

Barack Obama could defuse this situation by presenting his original vaulted birth certificate, thus satisfying his obligation to the American people to provide proof he meets the requirements for holding the office of President of the United States as set forth in Article II, Section 1. But I doubt he will. He has the luxury of having partisan judicial activists – tyrants – acting on his behalf, usurping the authority of the Constitution.

But the larger more serious Constitutional Crisis remains: it would appear we have no system in place for verifying a candidate’s eligibility for holding the office of President of the United States – or any other federal or state office for that matter. We have no system, but for relying on a partisan and politically hijacked Congress, for making sure that those running for elected office satisfy the requirements as set forth by those who loved our country enough to die for its creation.

This cannot stand.

Sen. Obama, stand and deliver! Answer the demand of the American people; those you say you so want to serve. Do the honorable thing and present your citizenship to the citizenry. Should you dare to be so arrogant as to dismiss the American people by usurping the Spirit of the U.S. Constitution, you will be solely responsible for the societal divide created by your inaction. You, Sen. Obama, will be solely responsible for bringing this Constitutional Crisis to bear.

We stand on the brink of a Second Great Civil War. Let’s see just how much Sen. Obama really loves our country.

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.1578/pub_detail.asp
 

almost ready

Inactive
The Indonesian citizenship is a real stickler

Something else that keeps gnawing at me is the passport.

Obama traveled to Indonesia. He was adopted there. Went to school there.

He then traveled from Indonesia to the U.S.

Under what countries passport did he travel under? (U.S or Indonesian)

And what about the visa's to leave and subsequently re-enter the U.S.?

So many questions, so few answers. :shr:

Jarhead
:usm:

No matter whether Hawaii issued him a birth cert. They'll do that if two one-year residents request certification of their child. It means nothing, and Hawaii code explicitly states that they will issue a cert if the child is born away from the state/territory. I've already posted the Hawaii code on this.

The Indonesian law states no dual citizenship. Obama lost his US citizenship if he ever had it, and held that passport until 1981, at least. THis presidential bid is a total scam/sham/whatever.

The problem here is so many American citizens have bought into the hate America club they really don't care. They're happy to see it being taken down. Ayers and company did their job well. We'll see how well on election day.

The Birth Cert is the big red herring that obama will display on Wednesday night to put Americans back to sleep. Look, see, I'm natural born. And the whole issue will be bypassed.
 

Fulltimer

Membership Revoked
No matter whether Hawaii issued him a birth cert. They'll do that if two one-year residents request certification of their child. It means nothing, and Hawaii code explicitly states that they will issue a cert if the child is born away from the state/territory. I've already posted the Hawaii code on this.

The Indonesian law states no dual citizenship. Obama lost his US citizenship if he ever had it, and held that passport until 1981, at least. THis presidential bid is a total scam/sham/whatever.

The problem here is so many American citizens have bought into the hate America club they really don't care. They're happy to see it being taken down. Ayers and company did their job well. We'll see how well on election day.

The Birth Cert is the big red herring that obama will display on Wednesday night to put Americans back to sleep. Look, see, I'm natural born. And the whole issue will be bypassed.

So who do you think should be in charge of issuing birth certificates?

Perhaps you subscribe to the notion that the Big Federal Government and their Department of Homeland Security should take that function away from the states as well.


don
 

Laurane

Canadian Loonie
Well Don......

it might be nice to have the same regulation for each State.....if Hawaii has an option that allows for fraud, surely it should be closed.

Hawaii code explicitly states that they will issue a cert if the child is born away from the state/territory.

So maybe regulations should be tightened up .......seems that Hawaii is breaking the registration laws by allowing babies born elsewhere to claim they were born in Hawaii??
 

almost ready

Inactive
Here's that Hawaii legal code reference again

It specifically allows for out of state/territory births to get certs. A Hawaii birth cert does not in any way mean he wasn't born in Kenya.

http://contrariancommentary.wordpre...ma’s-hawaii-years-the-truth-finally-revealed/

Just having the birth certificate might not be enough. All important is how and when it was issued and to whom. From what i’ve been reading even if it exists the supporting documents are all important, Hawaii State Law “[§338-17.8] Certificates for children born out of State. (a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.

It says legal parents and had declared Hawaii as their legal residence for 1 year prior to birth.

This is the opinion of a J.D. and Professor of Law, Andy Martin.
 

Fulltimer

Membership Revoked
Well Don......

it might be nice to have the same regulation for each State.....if Hawaii has an option that allows for fraud, surely it should be closed.

Hawaii code explicitly states that they will issue a cert if the child is born away from the state/territory.

So maybe regulations should be tightened up .......seems that Hawaii is breaking the registration laws by allowing babies born elsewhere to claim they were born in Hawaii??
Well you can vote for big Federal government control and I will vote for local control as the constitution intended.


don
 

mbo

Membership Revoked
Well you can vote for big Federal government control and I will vote for local control as the constitution intended.


don

Well, apparently you're schizophrenic, as Obama is the most anti-local-control politician since LBJ.


:screw:
 

Laurane

Canadian Loonie
Donny.....

just one more reason to see that VAULT certificate, and when it was dated then eh???

Rules out any kind of conspiracy between the employees of the Hawaiian Vital Stats offices and anybody who doesn't want the cert shown around.

Let local controls stand, but allow the original cert to be shown when it is being questioned.

Small gov. for me all the way - worked with our County gov. this summer on subdividing our land, and I would make even that smaller if I could :p

I really think you are hoping for too much from Obama - change doesn't really come from the top down - I just love the quote: "If the Democrats want to help the poor people, why are they still poor?"

Haven't the Dems been in charge of the House and/or Senate all through Bush's last term, or is it just they have been ineffective?
 

G-Man

Membership Revoked
Obama may be hiding that he was born illlegitimate I think his real father is not from Kenya at all, but the communist? and general all around freak Frank Marshall Davis.
 

Fulltimer

Membership Revoked
I thought this issue over last night while delivering the newspapers and here is what I came up with.

At issue here is does Hawaii have the right to issue birth certificates for babies born there and have them accepted as official documents in the other 49 states?

Berg contends that the Hawaiian "Record of Live Birth" should not be accepted as Obama's birth certificate and is trying to find a court that will order Obama off the ballot until he can prove the Hawaiian document is proof enough of his being born in the United States.

Of course, that could be a rather long drawn out procedure involving state's rights as well as procedural issues at the state level because it is not an action of Obama being questioned but the actions of the State of Hawaii.

So far, and rightly so, no court has been willing to accept that responsibility.

It is the responsibility of Congress to legislate the requirements of an acceptable record of birth for the states to adhere to if they wish to change the method from what we have used since the Republic was formed.

Naturally, whatever Congress passes as law would then have to be examined through lawsuits to determine the Constitutionality of the new law.

I would contend that whatever Congress changes the requirements to be would not affect the birth certificates already issued but would only apply to the future documents.

don
 

Laurane

Canadian Loonie
At issue here is does Hawaii have the right to issue birth certificates for babies born there and have them accepted as official documents in the other 49 states?

You do some good thinking delivering papers - That might be the correct issue, if this was not a problem:

provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.

It says legal parents and they had declared Hawaii as their legal residence for 1 year prior to birth.......it didn't say the child was actually born there, but they would give a cert anyway if the parents had lived there......does not make sense.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Now if Hawaii is going to give a cert to any child when its parents lived there a year.....it still doesn't prove where the child was born does it?
 

Laurane

Canadian Loonie
And yes......

it does seem that there is no OVERSIGHT committee/group to check the credentials of any candidate for POTUS. A very big failing.
 

Fulltimer

Membership Revoked
Let's look to the Constitution of the United States of America


Article IV
Sect. 1. Full faith and credit shall be given in each State to the public act, records, and judicial proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may, by general laws, prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

So, the provision is there that congress May prescribe the manner that those records can be proved but can they be made retroactive so as to apply to the State of Hawaii and where is the power given for the court to act in the issue when the Constitution gives that responsibility specifically to the Congress?

don;)
 

mbo

Membership Revoked
“I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution which granted a right to Congress of expending, on objects of benevolence, the money of their constituents.” — James Madison, 4 Annals of Congress 179, 1794

“[T]he government of the United States is a definite government, confined to specified objects. It is not like the state governments, whose powers are more general. Charity is no part of the legislative duty of the government.” — James Madison
 

Laurane

Canadian Loonie
Maybe Congressman Ron Paul....

should bring up the citizenship question of BO - he would be qualified to do so wouldn't he?
 

Fulltimer

Membership Revoked
should bring up the citizenship question of BO - he would be qualified to do so wouldn't he?
As a member of Congress he could introduce legislation.

Dr Ron Paul started me carrying my own pocket sized copy of the Constitution of the United States of America to refer to when ever in doubt over issues of the day.

I find that document a great source of information and a resolver of conflict.

Let us refer to it concerning this question shall we?
Article IV
Sect. 1. Full faith and credit shall be given in each State to the public act, records, and judicial proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may, by general laws, prescribe the manner in which such acts, records, and proceedings shall be proved, and the effect thereof.

At issue here is does Hawaii have the right to issue birth certificates for babies born there and have them accepted as official documents in the other 49 states?

Berg contends that the Hawaiian "Record of Live Birth" should not be accepted as Obama's birth certificate and is trying to find a court that will order Obama off the ballot until he can prove the Hawaiian document is proof enough of his being born in the United States.

Of course, that could be a rather long drawn out procedure involving state's rights as well as procedural issues at the state level because it is not an action of Obama being questioned but the actions of the State of Hawaii.

So far, and rightly so, no court has been willing to accept that responsibility.

It is the responsibility of Congress to legislate the requirements of an acceptable record of birth for the states to adhere to if they wish to change the method from what we have used since the Republic was formed.

Naturally, whatever Congress passes as law would then have to be examined through lawsuits to determine the Constitutionality of the new law.


don;)



:wvflg: Barack Hussein Obama- President that will return America to the principles of the Constitution of the United States of America.
God Bless America
:wvflg:
 

Kalliope

Inactive
I don't care if it's Bugs Bunny bringing it up. The FACT that someone brought it up, and that it keep staying brought up by various other someones, and that OBAMA doesn't come out into the open with it (BC & other records) tells me (and other undecided's) a whole lot more than can possibly be imagined.

In the beginning I really didn't pay attention to this, but now I am. WHY? Because of the silence and actions of Obama, not because of the actions of a Hillary supporter.

Obama = Don't go by what he says, but by what he does.

But the only someones who are bring it up is ya'll and the Freeper's. Doesn't that tell you something, that maybe you are all on the wrong track?
 

ainitfunny

Saved, to glorify God.
Why has nobody addressed the issue that HOW IS IT THAT ANYONE, ANY AUTHORITY ANYWHERE OUGHT HONOR AN OUTRIGHT LIE BECAUSE THAT LIE IS SWORN TO ON A FALSIFIED OFFICIAL DOCUMENT ie. "Official" Hawaiian Birth Certificates PERMITTING the false attestation and recording of a place of birth KNOWN to both the authorities issuing it and admitted by those applying for it that what it purports to "certifiy" is neither accurate nor the truth??

WHERE ARE "FALSIFICATION OF OFFICIAL RECORDS" CHARGES??? The Hawaiian "law" that "permits" this outrage is an ILLEGAL LAW.
 

Rasputin

Inactive
No state law would be allowed to trump the Constitutional requirement that he be a natural born citizen. The interpretation of that phrase is probably pretty well determined. Any state law that conflicts with this would be unconstitutional. The only problem is getting from A to B and coming up with a definitive ruling of whether he meets the constitutional requirement. I feel sure this issue will be litigated at some point. Obama signs a criminal law and someone gets arrested and tried. Someone will argue that he was prosecuted under an invalid law. It will be determined sooner or later.
 
Top