Birth Certificates and The Primaries
- Login to post comments
Thread rule: The intent of the thread is NOT to rehash the Obama Birth Certificate issue, but to discuss the challenges to Obama running in primaries where laws were changed to require a birth certificate to run.
This thread might end up locked, but what of all the laws passed by state legislatures requiring a birth certificate to be presented to run in the primary? Any snags for The Obama yet?
Ron Paul supporters have contested his primary run in NH...
November 18, 2011
Don't pencil in a victory for President Obama in New Hampshire's Democratic primary just yet. Today, the incumbent president must withstand a legal challenge that again questions his eligibility to seek the country's highest office.
"There's sufficient controversy that I want it investigated," Rappaport, a Ron Paul supporter, said yesterday. "Every time this is brought up . . . we get a lot of flak, but we've never gotten an answer."
http://www.concordmonitor.com/article/293101/birther-challenges-obama?SE...
There's many articles out there, but they are all in local and regional papers (I'm avoiding personal blog sites on this one) Not one national story about the challenges. If it was a Republican, it would headline everywhere, of course.........
The challenge by NH Lawmakers and another before a Judge in Georgia have been entombed in this ongoing thread.
wv_republican -
Which states have enacted new birth certificate laws? Why not provide readers either a summary of each new law or a link to them? I think that would be helpful.
Best,
skf
Finding credible information about it is very difficult on the internet. Except for local papers, news organizations studiously ignore the issue. The Congressional Research Service send in interoffice memo, never intended for public release, but was obtained by WND that documented that Obama was never vetted to run for president by his party, congress or any state in the union.
http://www.wnd.com/2010/11/225561/
This report led several states to introduce legislation to require candidates to submit a birth certificate to register for the primary, but democrats have fought the effort tooth and nail.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/22/arizona-house-oks-requiring-p...
http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2012/01/alabama_dem_lawyers_fight_atte.html
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/9701-democrats-to-state-secre...
My hope in this thread was for anyone who stumbled across a state battle over the issue this spring will post it here, because the press refuses to cover it.
"If it was a Republican, it would headline everywhere, of course........."
As I recall, there were challenges made by democrats to John McCain because of where he was born during the 2008 election. Did those get reported in the mainstream media? I think it would be even more interesting if they were, and this isn't.
Yes, they were reported, and those challenges were a direct response to the whole birther flap in the first place.
I can't believe we're actually revisiting this ridiculous story.
Barack Obama has outlined a defense strategy for a multitude of state-level challenges to his candidacy on the 2012 presidential ballot in a Georgia case that is scheduled to come before a judge later this month – simply explain that states have nothing to do with the eligibility of presidential candidates.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/obama-argues-against-appearing-at-eligibility...
That's a good article, wvr and I'd call it an absolute must read. I think the best part is that it helps to square the differences between so called "birthers" and others, like me, who believe there are legitimate issues which confront Barry's eligibility to serve.
On the other hand, I searched, rearranged the words, searched again and again and can't find so much as one recent story from the downstream media. It's so yesterday, right? Maybe we should be thinking about how tough it will be to beat Biden.
J Fred will live in infamy.
Inform yourself.
This Coming Sunday-- Set Your DVR for the Fox News channel at 9:00 PM eastern.
Maybe this is why the White House has been discounting FOX.
Sounds like this could be history in the making - someone may go down - either Obama or Fox News. It may be that Fox has been holding this information back due to the sensitivity of it and out of courtesy. But, Obama has taken on Fox and it appears they are ready to spill the ugly beans of truth about the background of this individual who has had an extremely radical past. This Sunday, Fox News is going to air a very important documentary about Barack Obama, Sunday night at 9P.M. Eastern.
The report will go back to Obama's earlier days, showing even then his close ties to radical Marxist professors, friends, spiritual advisers, etc. It will also reveal details about his ties to Rev. Wright for 20+ years, i.e., how he was participating with this man, and not for the reasons he stated. The report has uncovered more of Obama's radical past and we will see things that no one in the media is willing to put out there. It will be a segment to remember. Mark your calendar and pass this on to everyone you know:
Sunday night, 9 PM ET. Democrat or Republican, this report will open your eyes.
The best way to find these stories is to click on the News Search on Yahoo or Google (keeps the more wacky stuff at a minimum) and search for Obama Primary Court.
Here's the latest:
ATLANTA — A judge has ordered President Barack Obama to appear in court in Atlanta for a hearing on a complaint that says Obama isn’t a natural-born citizen and can’t be president....Deputy Chief Judge Michael Malihi on Friday denied a motion by the president’s lawyer to quash a subpoena that requires Obama to show up.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/georgia-judge-orders-obama-to-app...
Getting a little warm in Georgia....
a judge in Georgia has said the President must meet the constitutional demands of the office in order to appear on the ballot.
The ruling came from Deputy Chief Judge, Michael Malih,i in the Office of State Administrative Hearings....Michael Jablonski, Obama’s attorney argued that the law did not apply to candidates running in a presidential primary, but the judge rejected that line of reasoning.
http://www.greeleygazette.com/press/?p=12914
...and comming to a simmer.
This local paper lays out the judge's reasoning, well worth the read The hue and cry of racism that the liberal will shout will really be something if the judge rules against Obama's inclusion on the GA ballot and sets up a fast track appeals leading to a possible "constitutional crisis" that will make the 2000 USSC challenges pale in comparison.
Saints preserve us! The story has made it to the Drudge Report; top, right and above the fold. It's a CBS Atlanta link to a very shallow written article and a slightly more indepth video.
"I can't believe we're actually revisiting this ridiculous story." What is the ridiculous component of this story?
This is not the same story as the so called "birther" issue. This isn't a question of where Obama was born. It's a question on the definition of a "natural born citizen." From wv_republican's link:
"… U.S. Supreme Court decision from 1875, Minor v. Happersett… “At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”
Based on this standard Obama’s birth certificate proves he is not eligible…"
This argument accepts the birth certificate that Obama has put out there, and says that because his father wasn't a US Citizen, he isn't a "natural born" citizen and therefore is ineligible to be on the ballot. That's a whole different can of worms when considering the SCOTUS ruling referenced...I wonder of there are any others that contradict it?
"What is the ridiculous component of this story?"
1. If you do not want us to govern ourselves by adhering to the constitution.....then
2. What guidelines, guidance, rules do you suggest we use....to govern ourselves?
The constitution advises we not use mans natural instincts, ie might over right, to govern. That is unnatural eh?
Is the "birther" issue the ridiculous component?
Judging from the findings of the Congressional Research Service, ridiculous is the fact that there is no vetting process or authority. Shame on us.
Really ridiculous are those who make sport of the so called birthers and proclaim Obama's eligibility to have been thoroughly vetted. Shame on you.
Maybe we have a judge with too much time on his hands or maybe he's looking for his 15 minutes. Maybe he thinks the plaintiffs raise a good point and maybe he's right.
Okay WV, I read the article.
The Georgia judge certainly has a novel theory. Wonder what he'd have say about President Andrew Jackson, both of whose parents were Irish immigrants; James Buchanan, whose father was an Irish immigrant; Chester Arthur, whose father was Irish and moved here after a stint in Canada; Woodrow Wilson, whose mother was born in England, or Herbert Hoover, whose mother was Canadian.
Plus, there's all that "ex post facto" stuff, in case anyone forgot that. He'll be on the ballot.
"The Georgia judge certainly has a novel theory. Wonder what he'd have say about "my grandparents beat my parents, my parents beat me and therefor, I beat my . . " Novel theory.
Huh?
I was mocking the relevance of your post. As long as any of the parents you mention became citizens, the president child is a natural born citizen.
You're presuming that they did. From what I've been able to glean, most or all did not other than "automatic due to marriage."
By the way, read up on Chester Arthur. A similar game was played with him.
http://www.11alive.com/rss/article/223412/3/Ga-man-requests-Obama-attend...
The networks are starting to pick up the story. at the end of the video segment, the reporter states that Obama has been ordered to appear in Georgia at the hearing. If he doesn't show, will the judge give summary judgement against him?
A political action committee which believes Barack Obama is not legally qualified for U.S. president plans a live broadcast of tomorrow’s hotly anticipated court hearing in Atlanta regarding Obama’s eligibility.
The Article II Super PAC says it will provide uncensored, gavel-to-gavel video coverage of the event beginning at 9 a.m. Eastern at this online address.
http://www.wnd.com/2012/01/obama-eligibility-hearing-to-be-broadcast-live/
"If he doesn't show, will the judge give summary judgement against him?"
Different courts, different rules of/and procedures. If a bench warrant is an option, I hope he issues one. Who knows, though, Barry might show up . .
Not been able to log onto the Livestream site. It's either down or overloaded.
They offer two backup streams because they anticipated it.
Audio is annoying at all three on my computers, but there you have it.
Oh how soon we forget. If there was anything to this birth certificate thing, the Clintons would have found it.
I agree, Calvin. Where's that pic of the guy beating a dead horse?
charlie
I don't think that this is about where he was born. Nor is it about the last election. Though both are sure to be brought up.
This is about the definition of "natural born citizen," and it's for the upcoming election.
- Login to post comments

BIRMINGHAM, Alabama -- Lawyers for the Alabama Democratic Party chairman filed another legal argument over the weekend in their bid for a judge Monday to dismiss a suit seeking to keep President Barack Obama off the March 13 primary ballot
http://blog.al.com/spotnews/2012/01/al_dems_file_more_arguments_in.html