Obama Takes Oath Again
Obama decided to take the oath of office again:
“We decided that because it was so much fun …,” Obama joked to reporters who followed press secretary Robert Gibbs into the room. No TV camera crews or news photographers were allowed in. A few of Obama’s closest aides were there, along with a White House photographer.
Roberts put on his black robe.
“Are you ready to take the oath?” he said.
“Yes, I am,” Obama said. “And we’re going to do it very slowly.”
Roberts then led Obama through the oath without any missteps.
The president said he did not have his Bible with him, but that the oath was binding anyway.
I never would have thought it necessary myself, but after reading this article this morning citing experts who were concerned (because the exact wording of the oath appears in the Constitution), I think this was a prudent move.
Maybe this explains The One’s sour look when Joe Biden joked about it:
I guess Roberts didn’t want the case in his court.
Kevin Murphy (0b2493) — 1/21/2009 @ 7:47 pmHere we go 2000 again!
Supreme Court deciding who our next President is!!!!!!!!!
Obama über alles!!!!! (48dd5e) — 1/21/2009 @ 7:54 pmThis links to a photo of the second Presidential Oath.
DRJ (345e40) — 1/21/2009 @ 7:59 pmDoes this count as his second term under the 22nd Amendment?
JayC (24a512) — 1/21/2009 @ 7:59 pmIn a worst case, it’s harmless. In a best case, it clears up a serious controversy. So there’s no downside and a lot of upside.
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:03 pmI think it is redundant. I don’t see the need for that. He was already President as from 12pm on the 20th of Jan. Oath or no oath. He shouldn’t have bothered.
Emperor7 (0c8c2c) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:05 pmFriends, there is another possibility. Barack Obama has been replaced by his evil twin.
Eric Blair (3e2520) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:07 pmNot to be psycho crazy here, but if Obama takes technicalities this seriously, why didn’t he just release his original birth certificate or whatever the hell it was they wanted?
I mean, both this and that case seem kinda silly to worry about, so why did they only solve one of them? My guess is because the birth certificate / citizenship issue makes the right look bad, but who knows…
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:11 pmWhat an insecure twit. I wonder whether he’s getting Mayor Daley to pinch him to make sure he’s not dreaming. Oh man, Putin and Hu must be laughing their asses off at us.
nk (bbe952) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:11 pmAnd, yeah, it was Roberts’s flub. It doesn’t matter that Juggy “stepped on his lines”. Roberts had an oath to recite for the president-to-be to repeat and he did not do it right.
nk (bbe952) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:14 pmBarack Obama has been replaced by his evil twin.
I thought Barack was the evil twin.
JayC (24a512) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:22 pmWingnuts still got birth certificate to hang on to.
imdw (a81897) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:39 pmNo camera, sucks.
His followers missed out on that sensuous, sexy second line.
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:39 pmThe President is required to take the oath. No oath, no President. The Constitution says in Article II, Section 1:
“Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.”
And if he doesn’t swear exactly that, he’s not the President. Of course, that also means that anything he did yesterday was strictly on an amateur basis.
Official Internet Data Office (c048e2) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:40 pmHow long before the mere sight of Biden walking down the hall makes the President want to puke up his morning oatmeal? I give it about a week.
MTF (a04f28) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:40 pmAt least evil has a plan, stupid just kinda wanders around knocking things over then crying about how unfair the world is.
Soronel Haetir (cabedb) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:40 pmYeah, imdw. It’s not like he had to hire a bunch of attorneys to keep the b.c. story under control. You woulda slaughtered Bush for that. Truth.
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:41 pmimdw, sadly, you’re right.
Those who are paranoid certainly do have the citizenship issue to cling onto. It’s expensive to our judiciary and it’s annoying to me, but we all know that at least thousands of people are not satisfied that the constitutional requirements were given due deference (because they were settled by a lack of standing and a vague promise from vague Hawaiian officials in a sloppy way).
Sadly, it’s already clear that this can’t even be mentioned without the entire right wing being tarnished as lunatic. We all know that the democrats would have checked into this ages ago, and there’s no there, there (and hell, if Obama really is no citizen, then thank God Mccain wasn’t elected because he’d have to be extremely incompetent not to have dealt with this). It’s just interesting that Obama treated this issue so much differently than the extremely similar oath issue, is it not?
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/21/2009 @ 8:54 pmYes, it is interesting. And his grandmama said she was at the hospital in Kenya when he was born. The locals acknowledge its location as the place. But we must not refer to it. For some reason. Taboo
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/21/2009 @ 9:03 pmI dunno. I like the theory, in Sharia law, that if the condemned is not executed on the first try he goes free. If the President(snicker)Elect does not get the oath right the first time, he’s not President and no repeats can cure it.
Welcome, Mr. President(snicker)Elect.
nk (bbe952) — 1/21/2009 @ 9:09 pmAs far as everybody else is concerned, the BC issue has been resolved. Only the 20 percenters are still concerned about the birth certificate, and they would not have been satisfied if Obama had produced a video of John Kennedy delivering the Obama in front of the Liberty Bell.
Ed from PA (5550d5) — 1/21/2009 @ 9:10 pmHe seems a little – how should I say it –
insecure?
Amphipolis (e6b868) — 1/21/2009 @ 9:16 pm“they would not have been satisfied if Obama had produced a video ”
I’m going to call bullshit on this one. I think the people making the challenge would be happy just to see this argued on the merits, instead of being dismissed as though the requirement in the constitution wasn’t important. And given that the document (I forget and don’t care what it’s called) that was posted on the internet was apparently available to those born overseas, and no one had to testify in court that it meant Obama was a citizen is a fair thing to point out.
It’s not really all that relevant that only a small number of people give a crap about this, given the media climate we live in today. And my point was that Obama is being stupid and inefficient and inconsistent. I made it pretty dang clear I wasn’t discussing the merits of the challenge (it’s not really the topic in this thread anyway). I just think Obama’s extreme care here is inconsistent with his ignoring an issue that is at least as relevant (given that some relatives actually claimed Obama was born elsewhere, and some documents apparently listed Obama as a non US citizen, and more were upset about this issue than the oath issue).
So why do you think Obama treated this oath issue differently than the citizenship issue? Maybe he’s just trying to prolong his inauguration for good press, or make Roberts look bad, or he lost his birth certificate but is legit, or his certificate says something inconvenient but not legally relevant…
Do I need anyone’s permission to ask about it?
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/21/2009 @ 9:27 pmActually, it is relevent.
Have you heard the expression ‘percention is reality’. Sad, but true, my friend. Also, the Supreme Court was presented this issue on multiple occassions and they did not find it relevent. Are you claiming to be more knowledgeable than them?
Ed from PA (5550d5) — 1/21/2009 @ 9:29 pmThis can’t even be mentioned without the entire right wing being tarnished as lunatic.
By whom? The smears are supplied by Democrats, and the media. They want this matter to disappear.
The birth certificate issue hasn’t been resolved; it’s just assumed to have been resolved. But the real issue is that The Supreme Court of the United States has never ruled on the exact meaning of the phrase “natural born citizen,” as it appears in the Constitution as one of the qualifications for the office of President.
The Court, by the way, isn’t presented issues that may or may not interest them. They receive petitions to hear cases, and sometimes they consent.
Keep in mind that if the Supreme Court does rule on this and finds Obama ineligible, they can do so at any time after he assumes the office. Of course, that means any law signed by Obama, or any executive order, is void, since he was never the President in the first place under this scenario.
Official Internet Data Office (c048e2) — 1/21/2009 @ 9:45 pmPerception, not percention. Oops. 🙂
Ed from PA (5550d5) — 1/21/2009 @ 9:47 pmComment by Ed from PA — 1/21/2009 @ 9:29 pm
I would claim that SCOTUS wouldn’t touch this issue no matter how compelling the proof. They would do what they should have with Bush v Gore and left it for Congress to decide.
Soronel Haetir (cabedb) — 1/21/2009 @ 9:50 pmComment by Official Internet Data Office — 1/21/2009 @ 9:45 pm
If they thought that his being ruled ineligible was a real possibility, do you really think the court would not have consented to hear the case? Answer that question in light of all the necessary laws that we have in place to ensure we have a commander in chief at all times, including Obama’s assuming the office before he was sworn in (law says he takes over as soon as Bush’s term expires which was approximately 5 minutes before Obama was sworn in).
Ed from PA (5550d5) — 1/21/2009 @ 9:50 pmObama had a real sour look on his face in his document signing event with Feinstein too. Feinstein was hovering behind him. After he signed the thing with his left hand, Feinstein remarked, “I used to be left handed too, until I broke my hand.” Obama just brushed her off and looked the other way. Recall the recent spat between the two on the Panetta appointment. I think all these guys really get under Obama’s skin.
Wesson (3ab0b8) — 1/21/2009 @ 10:31 pmOIDO and Joco, good posts.
And the doc is the Certificate of Live Birth. But if the in-crowd says I shouldn’t worry about this… believe me… this character has many, many things which happen to smell funky.
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/21/2009 @ 10:52 pmI think Obama was really worried that America would learn something about him and kick his sorry butt out of the White House if there was a loop hole that allowed it. He realizes that he will be immune from impeachment for a few years so he is latching the back door and the trap doors.
j curtis (6241e0) — 1/21/2009 @ 10:52 pmEd, yeah, I do think I am more knowledgeable than some of the court’s members… have you read Ginsburg or Kennedy’s stuff? At least they are better than O’Connor was.
You don’t understand that I’m asking about Obama’s behavior here… it’s inconsistent and I think that either tells us he’s erratic or something odd was going on with the citizenship issue (likely something other than Obama’s actual eligibility, though).
So of course it doesn’t matter that a smallish number of people care about his citizenship. I realize, as a practical matter, it means everything.
“But the real issue is that The Supreme Court of the United States has never ruled on the exact meaning of the phrase “natural born citizen,”
This is so much more interesting to me than the rest of the case. And I am quite certain that the Court, which after all, isn’t really interpreting the law unless forced to, would read it in such a way as to avoid a disaster. Since Marbury, the Court has been playing politics and destroying the concept of a nation ruled by a constitution that is amended instead of reinterpreted.
I think that Obama is a Natural Born Citizen even if he was born on the moon, since his mama was American (I don’t give a damn that some law back then had some rule for single mothers of a certain age).
J Curtis, at this point, only John Conyers and Nancy Pelosi could remove Obama from office. I think Obama has pretty good job security.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/21/2009 @ 11:09 pmAnd he got a new birth certificate to boot!
Joe (17aeff) — 1/21/2009 @ 11:14 pmWhat if Civil Rights had been approached this way? At one time it was.
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/21/2009 @ 11:20 pmVN, your point is certainly strong and valid, but…
I’m saying that I am discussing a specific and narrow thing: Obama’s strange pattern. And for that specific topic, it’s not relevant what the price of tea in China is. Or how many people contend Obama is a citizen. Or even whether Obama is a Natural Born Citizen. all that matters is that Obama acted like he was above issues like this, and frankly I think he was being obnoxious about it… now, he’s dotting his ‘i’s thirty times each.
I don’t mean to diminish the issue of whether Obama is a citizen… it’s a shame the issue wasn’t handled more presidentially.
oh, and I’d suggest that Civil Rights is currently entirely a creature of populism.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/21/2009 @ 11:28 pmI agree with you. And I think we’re going to see much more of the same until… well, until we don’t. He’s proven his lack of character, he’s shown us when he wants to act presidential. Basically, when it suits his needs. Everything else is ‘above his pay grade.’
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/21/2009 @ 11:58 pmWhat’s the matter with John Roberts? All those hours he supposedly practiced? And he’s supposed to be smart and all?
tamizdat (e8f5ce) — 1/22/2009 @ 12:00 am^ As someone posted here, Obama could have saved the oath by properly reciting the words. It would’ve shown him to be independent and intelligent. Well read and prepared. If he got derailed at his own ceremony, how jumpy will he be around Chavez or Ahma-Iran? Think about it.
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/22/2009 @ 12:14 amtamizdat,
I am pretty sure that Obama started screwing up the oath before Roberts moves a single word to a grammatically more logical location (a sign that he understood the oath rather than memorizing it). While Roberts did make the error that made Obama sputter, it is amazing to me that Obama supporters are SOOOOO defensive about Obama that they have to build this into Roberts being stupid.
Time actually called Roberts the first Bush mistake that Obama had to fix. Anyone thinking Obama’s gaffe says anything about Obama is a child… and same goes for those thinking this says something about Roberts.
Obama fans: stop being so defensive!
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/22/2009 @ 1:16 amObama’s sour look when gaffe-o-matic made his “joke” is due to realizing that his number two waited exactly 24 hours before letting fly with a partisan-asshole staement.
Icy Texan (b7d162) — 1/22/2009 @ 1:58 amAs far as everybody else is concerned, the BC issue has been resolved.
Because actual argument is below you, I guesss….
Look, law at the time was that you had to be a citizen for X years before your kids were citizens, original BC hasn’t been produced and it would be *really easy* to bring out a certified copy of the original BC. If we’re going to ignore the law at the time for something else, cool, whatever.
However…the “fix” is so very, very easy– it’s done for a bloody passport….
That means that *something* is being hidden.
Cue up the morons who think that calling names is a decent argument…meh, like I’m not use to THAT after being a class assistant for 15 year olds.
Foxfier (db0f51) — 1/22/2009 @ 3:20 amThe Birth Certificate issue is a non-issue in my opinion.
– His mother was a US citizen from birth to death.
– The SC has denied the request from one person already – they are supposed to be the legal last word for the US
– Having had two children born overseas to a non-US citizen mother and US citizen Dad I can attest to the other than normal paperwork involved. In fact my first child was born 5 months after we married. The consulate called me in because they had to ask the question as to whether the child was mine. I expected it and to the consular’s (?) relief I didn’t get indignant. The birth certificate as it was may not even have a raised seal.
Since Obama’s mother was the US citizen there shouldn’t be any real question about his status. I would imagine she didn’t do all the requisite paperwork or something similar.
But if this becomes the truther issue for the far right it will be too bad because focus on policies and their impact will be ignored.
Just Let.it.go
voiceofreason2 (590c85) — 1/22/2009 @ 4:40 amTake the test.
FIRST QUESTION: Who IS the actual and lawful 44th President of the USA?
ANSWER: Joe Biden
Biden was initially the Acting President for at least 5 minutes under either the Constitution’s Article 2 or the Constitution’s 20th Amendment, from 12:00 Noon 1/20/09, having already taken his Oath of Office and before Obama completed his ‘oath’ at approximately 12:05 PM, 1/20/09. Under the 20th Amendment if the President-elect shall have failed to qualify, or alternatively under Article 2 if the President is unable to discharge the powers and duties, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term, being 12:00 Noon 1/20/09, which ability and/or qualification includes that he take the Article 2 oath “before he enter on the execution of his office,” then either the Presidency shall devolve on the Vice President under Article 2 or the Vice President shall act as President under the 20th Amendment. (The importance of the oath in ‘commencing’ an ‘Obama Presidency’ — rather than merely the 1/20/09 Noon time — is confirmed by the re-take of the ‘oath’ by Obama at the White House on 1/21/09 after the first ‘oath’ was NOT administered by Justice Roberts NOR recited by Obama in the words as required under Article 2.)
This is significant because at such time that the Supreme Court finally rules on the merits on Obama’s disqualification as not being an Article 2 “natural born citizen” (clearly he is NOT), Biden’s automatic status (without needing to take a separate Presidential Oath) of being President would be predicated upon four different bases: First, having been Vice President under Article 2; second, having been Vice President-elect under the 20th Amendment; third, having been actual President in the hiatus before Obama took the ‘oath(s)’; and fourth, retroactively deemed President during the full period of the Obama usurpation so that the acts of the Federal Government under the usurpation can be deemed authorized and/or ratified by Biden’s legitimacy.
SECOND QUESTION: Who will be the 45th President?
ANSWER: Hillary Clinton
One must assume that Bill and Hillary Clinton have been aware of all of the above. Biden’s wife recently “let the cat out of the bag” on the Oprah Show that both Biden and Hillary had considered alternatively Veep or Secretary of State, in either case, setting up Hillary to be President on a vote of the Democratic Congress if need be.
THIRD QUESTION: Is Obama an unwitting victim of this troika or a knowing participant?
ANSWER: Yet undetermined.
Ted (429bc3) — 1/22/2009 @ 4:59 am“So why do you think Obama treated this oath issue differently than the citizenship issue?”
Is there any proof he took the Oath? What, just a picture of it on the Internet?
imdw (e36369) — 1/22/2009 @ 5:14 amWell, if President Obama decided to retake the oath, just to be sure, does that mean that every piece of paper he signed between the botched oath and the accurate one is invalid?
For example, he signed the official nominations to the cabinet on the 20th; how could any confirmations be acceptable if the President never signed them?
The inquisitive Dana (3e4784) — 1/22/2009 @ 5:15 amimdw, vor2,
You guys don’t seem to get the point. And it’s clear you don’t want to. You know you’re being obtuse, so why are you even talking about this issue? You act like this is the equivalent to Trig trutherism or 9/11 conspiracy.
It really is interesting to discuss whether Obama is a N.B. Citizen if he wasn’t born here (I think he is). It’s interesting to discuss how he’s letting this thing go unanswered (since no one has testified under oath… it’s really not settled even if the legal authority decided not to hear the case).
Why in the hell would this analysis of how Obama is erratic and the press and even many conservatives shun reasonable discussion detract from the topics you want to talk about? That just doesn’t make any sense to me. Did 9/11 hysteria detract from complaints about GITMO?
VOR2, you are trying to keep the right from devolving into paranoid derangement. But maybe it’s not really warranted right now, when the discussion clearly shows a diversity of views and a lot of polite discussion.
the only issue the discussion is detracting from is whether Obama is properly sworn in. WHOOPIDEEDOOOOOOOO
I think it’s the xenophobic nature of these questions that really worried you, and I understand that. but is that really a problem in this thread? Is there really anything loathsome about this thread?
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/22/2009 @ 6:35 amthose aren’t rhetorical questions… I am interested in knowing just what is wrong with asking longshot speculative questions in a detached manner.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/22/2009 @ 6:38 amBecause they are a bunch of 911 Twoofer loons who do not have the right to command him to jump through hoops.
Also, the constitution doesn’t mention birth certificates.
Also, the document he did produce is an official document of the government of Hawaii that has the full legal weight of any document (long form or otherwise) sitting in its vaults:
See also: No rational person doubts he was born in the USA.
Seriously, you people make the crowd at rense.com look sane.
Geek, Esq. (e5efc3) — 1/22/2009 @ 6:42 amGeek, esq, would it kill you to read the whole thread before calling me one of ‘you people’ [who are insane]?
You’re arguing with nobody. I don’t care about any of the issues you’re bringing up. It’s stupid to point out that the Constitution doesn’t mention birth certificates, when it also doesn’t specifically mention 99.999999% of what’s in my Chemerisnky hornbook.
Your claim that no rational person would disagree with the Chicago factcheck.org almost-Obama-campaign site is silly.
And as far as I know, the cert. of live birth, which would be a legal document as soon as it was sworn to, is redacted and hasn’t been submitted as evidence (where someone swears it’s true and faithful and answers the question).
But I don’t really care… I’m more interested in the manner Obama handled the situation, and the way unproven questions about Obama are treated. I guess I could say 100000 times that I don’t think it matters where Obama was born, and someone will insist I’m one of ‘those people’ who are as unreasonable as the 9/11 truthers. That’s disgusting and completely cheapens how awful 9/11 conspiracy mongering is.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/22/2009 @ 7:16 amWhile this thread may be discussing it rationally it is not the case on other sites or places. the 9-11 truthers didn’t start with one single point of origin. But it went unchecked and became a force of its own and arguably hurt the Democrats in the 02 and 04 elections when by historical standards they should have gained and not lost seats in the house and senate. My point is that there are better things to keep an eye on and to discourage things like this simply as distractions.
voiceofreason2 (10af7e) — 1/22/2009 @ 7:27 amOath of office: explicitly required by the Constitution.
Long-form birth certificate: demanded by crazy people.
If you need me to explain why Obama respects the Constitution but doesn’t respect World Nuts Daily . . .
Geek, Esq. (e5efc3) — 1/22/2009 @ 7:27 amPlease. This should be entertaining …
JD (397a27) — 1/22/2009 @ 7:34 amI think the Constitution of the United States takes precedence over Hawaii statute §338-13(b). Hawaii used to allow children born outside of the US to obtain birth certificates there.
Official Internet Data Office (c048e2) — 1/22/2009 @ 7:50 amGeek, you’re the one hurling insults, not me. Call me crazy all day… it really doesn’t bother me. I’m not one of those ‘OMG THE INTERNETZ ARE SERIOUZ BIZNASS’ types. I realize some people will be harsh towards any criticism of Obama.
Frankly, my mind is full of easier targets for your anger! I think Bill Ayers is the most likely author of one of Obama’s memoirs. I think Obama really hates Jews, since he attended that church for 2 decades. I think he abused his children in taking them to the same place. I think his wife is a petty parasite who exchanged her husband’s loyalty for a cushy job that didn’t exist before she had it, and didn’t exist when she quit. I think Rezko bribed Obama, and Obama tried to bribe Blagojevich. I think Obama sincerely doesn’t like the USA, snorted cocaine, and is dumber than Bush (and couldn’t succeed academically at Columbia because they wouldn’t inflate his grades Harvard style).
To me, it’s so stupid to care about Obama’s citizenship as a practical matter. The issue is obviously exhausted legally, and as a character issue, it’s inconsequential compared to palling around with terrorists.
So trust me, even if you agreed that the citizenship bullshit is worth a mere hearing, you would find me a nut regardless. Hell, I wouldn’t even personally be offended by a foreign born person being the president if elected. I definitely mind Obama for other reasons.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/22/2009 @ 7:58 amFrom the dim recesses of my liberal education, I remember the story of the first king of some European country who placed the crown on his own head during his coronation instead of having a bishop do it as was the previous custom, thus declaring his independence from the church. I’m sorry that Obama did not have the imagination to simply walk up to the podium, pull out his pocket copy of the Constitution*, and simply read out the oath.
*I have mine, sent to me by CJ Warren Burger, during the Bicentennial Celebration of the ratification of the Constitution.
nk (bf9c84) — 1/22/2009 @ 7:58 amnk, that’s cool.
I actually have a CATO institute copy given to me by F James Sensenbrenner, which I guess just isn’t nearly as cool.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:02 amDamn, I forgot myself for a minute, there.
Make that *I’m sorry that Rahm Emanuel, Obama’s leash-handler, did not have the imagination to simply have Obama walk up to the podium, pull out his pocket copy of the Constitution, and simply read out the oath.*
nk (bf9c84) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:02 amThe birth certificate states that he was born in Honolulu. And the Constitution requires that he be a natural born citizen–it says nothing about long-form, short-form, etc etc.
Toodles.
Geek, Esq. (e5efc3) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:06 amComment by nk — 1/22/2009 @ 7:58 am
That was Napoleon, crowning himself Emperor!
AD (5bbccc) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:06 am1+
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:07 amI think it was a good idea to retake the oath as it appears more of a legal issue. What I wonder is, what would they do if the President elect were mute?
On Biden, I think President Obama was very dissatisfied with the joke which was in poor taste.
Hal (55f147) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:08 amComment by Geek, Esq. — 1/22/2009 @ 8:06 am
Please cite the clause in the Constitution that, with specificity, secures a right to an abortion.
AD (5bbccc) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:09 amDid Joe Biden become the 44th President and Obama the 45th President? Are all the appointments and exec orders made during the interim void or voidable due to this oversight/gaffe? Was the Obama team ready from Day ONE?
eaglewingz08 (c46606) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:13 am[tongue in cheek]
Steverino (69d941) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:17 amNo, Biden didn’t take the oath of office of the President, either, so he couldn’t have become President. Nancy Pelosi was the 44th President!
Ready from Day Two! (Close enough for government work.)
Official Internet Data Office (c048e2) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:18 amThe birth certificate states that he was born in Honolulu. Comment by Geek, Esq
It’s comments like that that make me think you’re just trolling to get people to correct you (for example, about the name of the document, or the fact that the cert of live birth offered was available to those born outside the USA. you know that it takes a lot of effort to rummage (for the billionth time) through explaining why you’re wrong on the facts, and you mainly just want to repeatedly see that done. You know that these aren’t important issues to argue about when compared with Obama’s simple lack of character.
I guess that’s how you play ball when you have to defend Barack Obama. What you call the long form… we’d have the right to know about that if it were Bush’s. We’d have the right to Bush’s medical records, we’d have the right to know what’s on his DD 214, we’d have a right to know all about his campaign’s funding.
But with Obama, we don’t have any right to force that poor man to ‘jump through hoops’. Even though our judiciary had to spend a fortune. Bush hiding this stuff would be seen as proof he was hiding something. But Obama isn’t Bush, now is he?
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:19 amReally? Where, exactly, has it been produced so that you can make such a declarative statement?
JD (397a27) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:19 amThe Certificate of Live Birth that has been shown by the Obama campaign does indeed state that the location of his birth was Honolulu.
I don’t see the point of continuing to beat this irrelevant horse.
SPQR (72771e) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:26 am“If a birth certificate did not exist, it would be necessary to invent one.”
Official Internet Data Office (c048e2) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:29 am–Voltaire
SPQR – Had Geek stated that, I would be inclined to agree. I do not think that even that has been produced for inspection, but that someone stated that is what it said. If I mis-state, please correct me.
JD (397a27) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:35 amJD, the certificate of live birth has been published by the campaign on the internet.
SPQR (72771e) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:55 amJD, you’re right.
What SPQR is saying is logically identical to saying ‘Obama claims to be a natural born citizen’. Well of course he claims to be eligible!
But as I said, it’s not a practical problem so much as a great look at Obama’s bewildering pattern.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/22/2009 @ 8:57 amJoco, that is false. What I said was that Obama has produced a copy of a document that by itself would be sufficient evidence of his claim of natural birth as a US citizen.
The conspiracy theorists have produced no evidence at all.
SPQR (72771e) — 1/22/2009 @ 9:09 amMy bad, SPQR. Did they ever even bother to produce the COLB in Court? I have stated my position on this previously, insofar as I think it is ridiculous that they refuse to simply produce the information necessary to put all of this to rest. I believe he is a natural born citizen, but the idea that he is above proving so because he is Teh One is laughable. I understand that there may be something embarassing on the original, hence their reluctance to produce same.
All in all, it is a rabbit hole not worth running down, but notable in how it illuminates Baracky’s most transparent administation in the history of the galaxy.
JD (397a27) — 1/22/2009 @ 9:25 amSPQR, seriously, that’s lame.
Do you claim that Obama’s Grandmother did not claim Obama was born in Kenya? And that several documents claimed that Obama was not a US citizen? Sure, that silliness isn’t even close to dispositive, but it’s some evidence, and enough evidence to warrant simply looking into it. Obviously, that’s all the evidence that the ‘conspiracy theorists’ could possibly have access to. It’s not like anyone has had a chance to see much of anything.
I really don’t get people like you. Obama’s campaign put out a document that hasn’t been verified and isn’t available for anyone to examine. It’s redacted, and as we all know, was totally available to people born overseas. It is the same as merely asserting what you are claiming it proves.
Jesus Christ. And as I’ve said a million times, I don’t care and it doesn’t matter. Red herring on your part.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/22/2009 @ 9:30 amJoco, at #39: I’m an Obama supporter; I think both of them got it wrong. I will admit to making “the Chief Justice doesn’t know the Constitution” jokes, not because I think the Chief Justice is stupid (he isn’t), but because the whole thing was funny: the Chief Justice doesn’t remember the Constitution and the President can’t repeat words he is told to repeat. 🙂
aphrael (9e8ccd) — 1/22/2009 @ 9:31 amJoco, you keep bringing this point up, but there is a flaw in your reasoning. The document when given to people born overseas showed the location of birth as overseas. Obama’s certificate showed Honolulu, Hawaii, as his place of birth.
Now, unless you want to assert that the state of Hawaii routinely put the wrong place of birth on these documents, this point of yours is meaningless.
Steverino (69d941) — 1/22/2009 @ 9:41 amaphrael, it is pretty damn funny. Roberts obviously choked at the nervous occasion, but same could be said for Obama.
Althouse had a funny discussion about this having a lot to do with Roberts’s former role as a Managing Editor.
SPQR, I really am tired of this issue, and I’ve certainly made my point that Obama isn’t handling this issue well. If you want to admit your error, that would be good, but if you want to persist, note that I’m merely asking questions. You’re making assertions that need to be proven. And some of them are indeed pretty unlikely (such as zero evidence from the whackos). If you don’t have anything to add except to repeat that you have been convinced by the one piece of evidence that Obama presented, then I don’t think there’s anything more to say except that I’m right… Obama isn’t transparent or presidential, and he’s terribly inconsistent for some unknown political reason, when this oath silliness is taken into account.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/22/2009 @ 9:41 amSteverino, firstly, what Certification of Live Birth? Do you know the certification number? Is there even the mere attempt to provide a verifiable document? Who has testified that it’s a fair representation? A website asserted it’s accurate… which is no different than simply saying Obama is eligible. I don’t find birth location relevant, my comments on Natural Born Citizenship applying to Obama regardless should show that to you… I just find the idea that this is proof to be absurd.
The point you’re getting at is that Hawaii said that this is Obama’s certification… they didn’t, though. They said that a certification exists and refused to say if it’s the one with the locale listed.
Ok? The state certified a document no one has seen, and can be issued to a person born overseas. We have seen a document that the state hasn’t certified. It’s easy to conflate the two, I guess, which is basically what is going on here.
Once again, I note that this is a red herring and utterly irrelevant. I don’t care about Obama’s eligibility. I care about his strange pattern, intransparency, obnoxiousness in releasing this to KOS, etc. It’s just unprofessional behavior, and I suspect there’s a reason for the change to putting dumb conspiracy theories to rest with the oath fix.
See? I’m claiming that both theories are not worth looking into. I am not claiming that Obama is ineligible. I am, for some dumb reason, correcting a bunch of stupid errors people are making in saying that the eligibility question is closed (or that zero evidence was presented, as if the oddball way Obama released this to KOS wasn’t suspicious in and of itself).
So what conclusion of mine are you disagreeing with?
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/22/2009 @ 9:56 amI don’t know Conservative Conspiratists, I hear Obama didn’t swear on a bible the second time around. Are you gonna let that slide?
Palin/Joe The Plumber 2012 😉
Oiram (983921) — 1/22/2009 @ 11:24 amactually, I don’t believe there’s any actual requirement a text of ANY kind be used. Heck, if I got elected, I’m pretty sure I could put my hand on a stack of porn mags for the swearing in…
Scott Jacobs (a1c284) — 1/22/2009 @ 11:28 am#81 Absolutely Scott. Porno mags works for me.
How would everyone feel if a president were to actually swear on our constitution for a change?
Oiram (983921) — 1/22/2009 @ 11:34 amIf you don’t find birth location relevant, I think there’s no point in arguing with you any further. Because if Obama was born in Honolulu, as the state of Hawaii has certified, then he is a natural born citizen of the US. If you think that’s irrelevant, I am not sure what else to say.
As far as the document goes, I looked at the scanned image, and have concluded based on my own knowledge that it’s an image of a genuine document.
None of that has anything to do with my point: that you keep saying Hawaii issued certificates to people born overseas. But you don’t make any statement about whether Hawaii falsified the place of birth on those certificates. If Hawaii didn’t falsify Obama’s place of birth, and has certified that the place of birth is Honolulu, then it’s clear that Obama is a natural born citizen.
Clearly, SOMEone has seen it, because it was scanned. Care to admit you’re wrong on this count?
You haven’t proven that such a document issued to someone born overseas would list a Hawaii birthplace. If Hawaii would deliberately falsify birthplace data on those documents, then you’d have a point. But you haven’t offered any evidence to suggest that the birthplace on those documents is anything other than where the people were actually born.
Which document would that be? Because the state did in fact certify the document I’m talking about.
Steverino (69d941) — 1/22/2009 @ 11:38 amJoco writes: “It’s redacted, and as we all know, was totally available to people born overseas. It is the same as merely asserting what you are claiming it proves.”
Why is it that you continue to make misrepresentations? The substantive part is not redacted. While the cert may have been statutorily available to those born elsewhere, the one that’s been published specifically cites his birth place. And the document has evidentiary value under Hawaiian law. So it is not the same as my merely asserting its contents.
You claim a red herring but your own statements are intentional misrepresentations of the facts.
SPQR (72771e) — 1/22/2009 @ 11:40 amHiring a team of lawyers for a simple doc does not equate with any type of transparency. Obama has a solid track record of selective omission.
I think Joco’s point of inconsistency rings true. The stumbles @ oath didn’t bother anyone. His need for a re-do is very interesting and also very inconsistent.
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/22/2009 @ 11:40 am“Hiring a team of lawyers for a simple doc does not equate with any type of transparency.”
I’ve heard references to this sort of thing. But no satisfactory flushing out of the claim. Can you tell me more about the ‘team of lawyers’ for a ‘simple doc’? As far as i know the obama team never litigated anything.
imdw (c5488f) — 1/22/2009 @ 4:18 pmThe redo of the oath is very interesting and was probably a strategic blunder by Obama. The only responses I have seen to his failure to produce a simple document (certified vault copy of birth certificate) have been: “wingnut”, “far right”, “truther”, “irrelevant”, etc. None of these responses are substantive. Nor have I seen a substantive rebuttal (as opposed to more ad hominems) to the numerous points raised by Polarik calling into question the authenticity of the computer generated certification of birth produced. Among facts favoring, but by no means demonstrating, Obama’s status as natural born citizen are the birth announcements in Hawaiian newspapers several days after his birth (without indication, however, of place of birth). On balance, given Obama’s failure to produce a simple document, expenditure of considerable sums to dismiss court challenges based on standing, and detailed analysis tending to show the certification produced is not authentic, my operating assumption is that Obama does not qualify as a natural born citizen.
I would welcome any substantive information tending to show the contrary.
Full disclosure: I voted for Obama and am quite satisified with his performance to date (such as it is) as President.
ggonzalez (233e4e) — 1/22/2009 @ 4:28 pmWhat’s the question? His original cert. with seal was requested. Instead he had his attorneys call.
I have to show credentials when checking out a libraray book. For the President, call me anal. It just doesn’t change my basic need to see the original. With seal. Sorry.
OTOH, I do plan to focus on his policies — and I won’t be intimidated by politically correct folks who attempt the racist ploy.
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/22/2009 @ 4:32 pm“. It just doesn’t change my basic need to see the original.”
You mean a picture of the original, right? You don’t mean you want the only orignal copy in front of you, do you?
I’ve said it before and i’ll say it again. I’m only going to be satisfied when hawaii officials certify that they have a birth certificate, and then issue a certified document to show this, and then and then he places an image of it on his website.
imdw (173fdc) — 1/22/2009 @ 4:54 pmMine has a foil seal. I don’t drag it out too often. Obama, I highly doubt, was born in HI. But I’m sure the papers for overseas births were adjusted, even processed, with mistakes. There’s something on there that’s worth an attorney’s time. At least Obama thinks so.
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/22/2009 @ 5:21 pmThe reporter making a whole article of this and remarking about the major networks not being invited in is a bit much; isn’t this just the sort of nit picking that fuels discord and contributes to missing the bigger picture.
Would the other syoty have been, ‘Obama leaves history to chance; ignores written Constitution!’ ??
C’mon everybody…we better get real, and yes, pay attention to everything, but be concerned about what matters.
Earthwatcher (d7dc84) — 1/22/2009 @ 7:54 pmWhile the cert[ification of live birth] may have been statutorily available to those born elsewhere, the one that’s been published specifically cites his birth place.
And that proves nothing. If the Certification can use Hawaii as a birthplace even if the child was born elsewhere, then it’s just as easy to specify Honolulu as the city of birth, too, even if the child was born elsewhere–or anywhere.
Official Internet Data Office (a33193) — 1/22/2009 @ 7:58 pm“If the Certification can use Hawaii as a birthplace even if the child was born elsewhere”
Says who it can? You think hawaii policy is to certify as true false information?
imdw (ea37e6) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:12 amOh for Christ’s sake. Enough with the birth certificate trutherism already. Let. It. Go.
Pablo (99243e) — 1/23/2009 @ 6:09 amThat’s quite right, imdw.
Do you see what you’re doing here, people? You’re giving imdw a chance to be right!! Stop it!
Pablo (99243e) — 1/23/2009 @ 6:12 amOIDC, your comment is why I’m getting so annoyed with the Birthers. You pile speculation upon unfounded speculation and act like the result is a factual conclusion.
SPQR (26be8b) — 1/23/2009 @ 6:50 am“If the Certification can use Hawaii as a birthplace even if the child was born elsewhere. . “
Not today, but Hawaii did that during the 1960s.
“You pile speculation upon unfounded speculation”
That’s because we don’t have subpoena power.
Official Internet Data Office (a33193) — 1/23/2009 @ 8:50 amGood point.
I respect the opinions of those here opposing the challenge. I read their posts and generally agree. Can’t understand why attorneys were dispatched to handle the matter. It’s not the same as just ignoring it, which Obama could have done. Instead… attorneys. Doesn’t matter if they had to litigate or not. I don’t see it as giving weight to imdw — but it’s TRUE there are many policy issues and character flaws that should fully consume our blogging efforts.
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/23/2009 @ 9:02 amIf the moon was made of green cheese, then we’d have to pick astronauts for the Apollo program who were not lactose intolerant too. I blame NASA.
SPQR (72771e) — 1/23/2009 @ 9:05 amWhose attorneys? And what did they do?
Pablo (99243e) — 1/23/2009 @ 9:08 am^ But we wouldn’t hire attorneys to hide whether the moon was green (or not! ) .
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/23/2009 @ 9:10 amOnly Obama could answer why it was necessary to fortify his wall of defense. Running interference?
Taking a story which had some valid doubt around it… I still respect your posts. So I’m not a troofer. Just acknowledging that as we move on to the major problems of an Obama presidency, of which there are already many — it leaves this unanswered matter. Unanswered for some, that is.
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/23/2009 @ 9:21 amHow was that done? By whom? I’m not looking for the what, I’m looking for the what.
I respect you too, VN. Just not this argument.
Pablo (99243e) — 1/23/2009 @ 9:30 amIf the moon was made of green cheese, we could prove that by posting a green computer-generated image of the moon on the internet, and get a member of the Wisconsin State Dairy Council to certify that it’s green cheese.
But certainly not American cheese.
Official Internet Data Office (a33193) — 1/23/2009 @ 9:44 amComment by Oiram — 1/22/2009 @ 11:34 am
How would everyone feel if a president were to actually swear on our constitution for a change?
— Which part would he be swearing
Icy Texan (b7d162) — 1/23/2009 @ 10:08 amaton . . . the 2nd Amendment? or the 1st?imdw:
Says no one in his right mind. For once, even the OIDOtard itself didn’t actually come out and say that; all it did say being that if that ridiculous premise were true, then its equally ridiculous conclusion would be, too. Which is every bit as true as SPQR’s bit about green cheese and lactose intolerant astronauts.
Vermont Neighbor:
There never was any valid doubt. As with Creationists, 9/11 truthers, etc., the mere existence of doubt is not evidence of its validity. I have yet to see any credible evidence that the short-form birth certificate in question was forged, nor has anyone offered a credible motive for such forgery. Unless you have evidence that Ann Dunham wasn’t really his mother, or that she wasn’t a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth, then it doesn’t matter where he was born; he’s a
Xrlq (62cad4) — 1/23/2009 @ 11:30 am“national and citizen at birth” either way.
His hiring of attorneys to handle the matter meant more than what the matter may (not) have been.
Look (…to quote a favorite Obamaism). We have John McCain now defending Obama’s recent decisions and his Chicago ‘legacy.’ We don’t really need to jump into the fray either way. Judge the policies and the admin. – and discuss ideas in a reasonable manner.
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/23/2009 @ 11:50 amThe BHO grandma from Kenya says she was there and remembers him being born at that hospital. People in town regularly cite the bldg. as where Obama was born. That could be tossed back & forth as “valid doubt.” JMO and FWIW.
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/23/2009 @ 11:58 amFWIW is nothing. As noted, even if BHO was born in Kenya, he still would be a natural born citizen because of his mother. So with all due respect, whatever doubts you may continue to harbor about Obama’s constitutional qualifications to the Presidency are emphatically not valid.
Xrlq (62cad4) — 1/23/2009 @ 12:04 pmYou keep bringing this up as if it means something. Obama hired lawyers to respond to a lawsuit, that’s all it means.
Suppose someone sued you demanding you produce your bank account numbers, signature cards, and social security number? What would you do? Would you give him that information, just to make the suit go away? Or would you hire a lawyer to respond to the suit because this is a nuisance suit?
Now, you’ll probably say that every American citizen has a right to see Obama’s birth certificate. Based on what? What we need to know is what has already been shown: that Obama is above the age of 35 and born in Honolulu, HI.
Steverino (69d941) — 1/23/2009 @ 12:07 pmWell, no discussion of this topic (which always generates the longest and most entertaining threads) is complete without a belligerent post from that lawyer Xrlq, who I believe is one of the 95% of lawyers who make the other 5% look bad.
Sadly, he apparently can’t sit down at the computer without using the epithet “tard.” Based on his rants, he also appears to be uninformed, and he is unworthy of being taken seriously until he learns not to call the other commenters bad names.
Of course, when he stops doing that, he’s still not to be taken seriously.
Official Internet Data Office (a33193) — 1/23/2009 @ 12:41 pmOIDC, so just why do you keep repeating talking points that have no basis in fact at all? That’s what makes me curious?
For all conspiracy theorists, what puzzles me is exactly what sort of need does trafficking in these myths fulfill?
SPQR (72771e) — 1/23/2009 @ 12:54 pmSPQR, it’s been explained to you exactly what the point is, and it’s not, for everyone anyway, a serious attempt to remove Obama from office.
If you refuse to even read the thread, then please don’t demand I explain it to you. Obama is erratic and inconsistent, and the lack of inconsistency is interesting in and of itself. It probably means there’s something being hidden, though it’s probably not that Obama isn’t eligible to serve.
It’s not a complicated point.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/23/2009 @ 1:22 pmSteverino, the President is the American public’s property, and we have a right to know who is coke dealer is, and who he’s sleeping with, and if he has lung cancer, and if he’s smoking.
You don’t get that. Why? Any secret Obama has is leverage that can be used against him. Obama must have no personal secrets at all. It’s not a partisan concern.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/23/2009 @ 1:24 pmJoco, I’ve read not merely this thread, but all of the previous threads on this topic on this and many other blogs.
I’m familiar with the actual issues and the arguments and have seen them universally debunked.
Claiming I’m refusing to read the thread only shows that you are unfamiliar with the repetitive discussions that have occurred here.
SPQR (72771e) — 1/23/2009 @ 1:25 pmThis entire line of inquiry was created by the lack of transparency from Obama throughout his campaign. If Obama were a Republican, the media would be hounding him with phrases like “unanswered questions still linger,” and “his entire administration is under a cloud” and so on.
I’ve read about scenarios, none of them definitively proved, that Obama was born in Kenya, or Indonesia, or Canada, or the United States. But instead of complaining about “talking points that have no basis in fact,” or “myths,” I think you can agree, at least, that the Supreme Court of the United States has never ruled on the precise definition of natural born citizen.
Official Internet Data Office (a33193) — 1/23/2009 @ 1:28 pmAs a reminder
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23415028/
Note that in the article the “liberal blogosphere” was credited with fueling a similar question about McCain’s citizenship. It had no more merit than the questions about Obama.
It also pointed out
voiceofreason2 (10af7e) — 1/23/2009 @ 1:44 pm“Sen. McCain’s supporters draw some comfort from a law passed in 1790 by the first Congress. It provided that the children of US citizens born outside the US “shall be considered as natural born citizens.” The law is no longer in effect, but it provides some guidance on what the founders had in mind at the time of the Constitution.”
Joco, advancing frivolous arguments is not a “serious” attempt to unseat anybody. Your friend the ‘tard won’t answer these questions, so perhaps you will: do you have evidence that Ann Dunham…
1. Was not really Barack Obama’s mother?
2. Was not really a U.S. citizen at the time of his birth?
3. Actually gave birth to her before 12/24/1951 (bear in mind that she was born in 1942 – yuck)?
Unless you can credibly answer at least one of the above questions in the affirmative, the whole “Obama isn’t a natural born citizen” argument would be complete and total bunk – even if the claim that he was born in Kenya had any merit, which it doesn’t.
Xrlq (62cad4) — 1/23/2009 @ 2:09 pmIf Obama was born in Kenya, and his mother was a US citizen, that makes him a citizen under a current US statute–but a natural born citizen? Maybe.
However, I still don’t know whether the statute applying to Obama’s mom (and, yes, I do concede he had one) which requires at least one parent to have had two years living in the US after the age of 14 to confer citizenship on offspring born outside the US, was applicable in 1961 (the alleged year of Obama’s birth) or whether it required five years after the age of 14 then (which she wouldn’t have had at age 18), or if the current law applies retroactively anyway.
As I understand it, Hawaii issued something called a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth prior to 1972, and even children born elsewhere could get one. This is the theoretical loophole which Obama has so far failed to close. Over the years, either a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth or a Certificate of Live Birth were issued for Hawaiians, and can be published today as a computer-generated Certification of Live Birth.
Official Internet Data Office (a33193) — 1/23/2009 @ 2:29 pmSo you have nothing substantive, OIDO.
SPQR (72771e) — 1/23/2009 @ 2:36 pmOIDO: Many states issue birth certificates to individuals not born in that state. None, Hawaii included, has a policy of issuing birth certificates that falsely claim the person was born there when he wasn’t. Even if Hawaii had had this supposed policy up until 1972, as you claim, that screwy policy would not account for the COLB we’ve all seen on the Internet, which was generated much more recently than that.
8 U.S.C. § 1401 draws no distinction between one born on U.S. soil and one born to a U.S. national who has lived two years in the US after the age of 14. Both are defined as “nationals and citizens at birth.” Either both fit the definition of “natural born citizen” or neither does. And the current version of Subsection (g) applies, by its terms, to all persons born on or after 12/24/1952, “to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date,” which should take care of any concerns about retroactivity.
Xrlq (62cad4) — 1/23/2009 @ 2:52 pm…SNORE…
AD (fbe62c) — 1/23/2009 @ 3:04 pmYes, they generate an image using data previously input into their records. That’s how they get a Certification of Live Birth on your very own computer screen. They draw you a picture.
Official Internet Data Office (a33193) — 1/23/2009 @ 3:17 pmSo you think it’s forged, then. Show us the evidence of a forgery. While you’re at it, kindly explain why you would not be making the exact same allegations if they had scanned the original birth certificate instead. Those can be forged too, after all.
Xrlq (62cad4) — 1/23/2009 @ 3:19 pmXrlq,
His mother didn’t meet the 5-year residency requirement in the States at 19.
Gotta dash which everyone will appreciate… not trying to do more than debate, but I haven’t seen everything debunked as maybe SPQR has.
Steverino, I just don’t see the matter in the way you wrote; I’m not running for President for one. No nuisance lawsuit was presented to Obama, not in the manner of a birth cert. anyway. If matters were settled and debunked, well that’s great.
McCain was never a question b/c of his father’s Naval service and JM’s Panama birth.
TGIF wishes to all. . . eat, drink and be merry, willya? : D
Vermont Neighbor (ab0837) — 1/23/2009 @ 3:23 pmNo, not at all. We have no evidence that Hawaii scanned the original birth certificate, or if one still exists, or if it ever existed, of if they had a Certificate of Hawaiian birth instead. What you see online is a picture. It’s apparently generated for Hawaiians who request one, just as paper Certifications were (and may still be) prepared by authorities of my own birth state even many years later.
But there is no forgery. That’s like saying PDFs of documents are forgeries, which they’re not. Hawaii just uses an image template that contains data, and it’s their preferred format, but as the saying goes, garbage in garbage out. Once again, the theoretical loophole is the previous issuance of the Certificates of Hawaiian Birth. Hawaiian authorities are using the data they have, and are not forging anything, I’m sure. As I understand it, Obama’s half-sister Maya was born in Indonesia, but has a Hawaiian birth certificate.
Official Internet Data Office (a33193) — 1/23/2009 @ 3:41 pmOIDO, but you don’t know that Maya’s birth certificate says she was born anywhere but Indonesia. So why are you pretending that there is meaning in that?
SPQR (72771e) — 1/23/2009 @ 3:55 pmYeah, Obama is not an American. New information from a reliable source shows that Obama is really a Ghanaian refugee to America. Right now the Ghanaian govt have a placed a bounty on his head. I think he is wanted for stealing pencils.
Emperor7 (0c8c2c) — 1/23/2009 @ 3:56 pmVM, if you’d read the law in question, which I linked to, you would know that there is no 5-year residency requirement for BHO’s mother to have met. All 8 U.S.C. § 1401(g) requires is that she lived at least 2 years in the US following her 14th birthday, a requirement she easily met.
Xrlq (62cad4) — 1/23/2009 @ 4:16 pmSo, if you were running for President and someone sued asking you reveal your bank account numbers and access codes, then you’d reveal them? Or would you hire lawyers to fend off the nuisance?
Yes, Philip Berg’s suit was a nuisance suit. Every court he was in denied that he had standing. Berg probably could have sued the Hawaii Department of Health, but he sued Obama to get notariety.
So, is it okay for a Presidential candidate to hire lawyers to respond to nuisance suits?
Steverino (69d941) — 1/23/2009 @ 4:18 pmComment by Vermont Neighbor — 1/23/2009 @ 3:23 pm
Emperor7 (0c8c2c) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:08 pmNah…you are not gonna just take off like that? Take your stand, VN. You have a legitimate case. Obama is a fake. He stole pencils from his original country, Ghana. VN. You must fight this imposter. VN? VN? VEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEENNNN!………………….crickets…
Interesting what the right has been reduced to here — a bunch of jabbering baboons endlessly debating already settled issues. Meanwhile, the left is governing.
AD (04db65) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:16 pmAD? Is “governing” the word you really want to use?
But yes, your point is well taken.
Eric Blair (e92b94) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:18 pmPoint of personal privilege….
#132 is by someone flying under a false flag, who has appropriated my handle.
The original AD (previously known as Another Drew) (fbe62c) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:22 pmNow that is frustrating. Isn’t that a blog-offense?
Eric Blair (e92b94) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:26 pmRacists!
The fake JD (0c8c2c) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:27 pmAt least the name-hijacker isn’t writing in all caps.
Eric Blair (e92b94) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:28 pmIt must be one of our previously banned trolls having a little fun….boy, am I laughing!
The original AD (previously known as Another Drew) (fbe62c) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:30 pmI see he’s posted as “The Fake JK” too.
Opps…fake JD.
The original AD (previously known as Another Drew) (fbe62c) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:30 pmNow this is getting out of hand. So many trolls in one thread. I can’t stand these trolls. Make them stop, please!
The fake Eric Blair (0c8c2c) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:31 pmWhy do these trolls keep carrying about and arguing over previously debunked claims. It’s been debunked over and over again on this thread. WTF am I talking about?
The fake SPQR (0c8c2c) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:37 pmWhoever it is must be having fun. Sort of. Kind of.
Eric Blair (e92b94) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:37 pmWho is this? Well it’s not funny! Obama has just lost my vote. He is fake. He is from Ghana. He steals pencils! Who steals pencil? Tell me.
The fake Emperor7 (0c8c2c) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:46 pmI got it! It’s Glenn Greenwald, and his Magic Socks!
Eric Blair (e92b94) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:51 pm“Hawaii just uses an image template that contains data”
So the data that hawaii has says obama was born there. Fantastic.
“As noted, even if BHO was born in Kenya, he still would be a natural born citizen because of his mother.”
This is an interesting point. Lots of folks talk about statutes and requirements defining citizenships. Would an originalist reading of the ‘natural born citizen’ requirement allow a statute passed 100 or however many years later to change what defines a ‘natural born citizen’?
imdw (a81897) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:53 pmWhat did I miss? Must have slept it through. Eric? Is that you? These trolls have declared a siege on us! It’s a troll war. They are taking over this blog. I even hear there is also a “fake Patterico”.
The fake AD (0c8c2c) — 1/23/2009 @ 5:57 pmGo right ahead and post that way. I don’t think that our host will find you quite as funny as you think you are.
It has been termed a “ban-able offense” on this blog before.
Eric Blair (e92b94) — 1/23/2009 @ 6:03 pmSince it has most likely already been banned, why would it care?
The original AD (previously known as Another Drew) (fbe62c) — 1/23/2009 @ 6:11 pmAn example of why gun-control laws to keep guns out of the hands of criminals don’t work…
If they cared about laws in the first place, they wouldn’t be criminals.
This, I suspect, is either Levi or tnj.
Actually, AD, I think it is a regular poster here. Consider it for a moment, and see if you think the way I am thinking. The point is that Patterico will know soon enough.
Eric Blair (e92b94) — 1/23/2009 @ 6:15 pmI sent him an email just after posting my POPP.
The original AD (previously known as Another Drew) (fbe62c) — 1/23/2009 @ 6:17 pmThe fake AD is apparently confused about more than his or her identity. Stevenson was famously photographed with a hole in his shoe. The podium pounder was Khrushchev, who was indeed a Communist.
Tim McGarry (9fe080) — 1/23/2009 @ 6:32 pmSomething cogent and coherent.
The Fake OIDO (62cad4) — 1/23/2009 @ 6:33 pmlovey is the one going around calling herself “The fake ______” (with the exception of #152, who is Xrlq, as you can tell from clicking the link). I think she is satirizing the posters here, and that doesn’t seem bannable. She might consider that she’s made her point and it’s getting annoying.
She is not the one who used the handle “AD.” That IP address is the same as a “Rielle” from a few days ago, but it may not be a static IP address. Also, the use of “AD” could be a coincidence, as it’s not a particularly unique handle. I’ll keep an eye on that one.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 1/23/2009 @ 7:12 pmSPQR, I really can’t stand people who must argue against strawmans. I’m not claiming that Obama isn’t a citizen, I’m claiming he’s being inconsistent when settling one bizarre eligibility requirement but being obnoxious about another.
You noted you had not read this thread when you said that you knew everything there is to know about the citizenship case, and have seen all claims debunked. That’s not what this thread is about, and has nothing to do with what I’m talking about.
Oh well.
There is evidence, despite your claims contrary, that Obama wasn’t born here. Such as the grandmother’s claims, documentation asserting Obama isn’t a citizen (school stuff, mostly), and of course, the fact that the only evidence offerd to show Obama’s citizenship is weird, and no one official will claim it’s valid, and it’s redacted. It could be the real document Hawaii issued, but it probably isn’t, since it came out at Daily KOS, and that birth time silliness (you know exactly what I’m talking about, since you already know everything). Obviously it would have been much easier to provide an unredacted document, or a Hawaii official to testify that Obama was born in Hawaii, or the original birth certificate. Why would Barack Obama, a politician, not put this to rest as well as he possibly could before the election?
It’s obvious, both from that last question and from the fact that Obama hates to leave even tiny random issues unfixed (as shown many times, but most recently in taking the oath twice), that something is amiss. That’s my entire conclusion. Something odd is on Obama’s original birth certificate. I would bet money that it’s something stupid and beside the point you keep arguing, that Obama is eligible.
Steverino, you can’t conflate personal secrets with bank account numbers. And it’s not a nuisance lawsuit just because a litigant was denied standing.
Suppose, just for a second, that one of Obama’s friends photoshopped this certification. And Obama had been given a certification that didn’t say Honolulu on it. And Hawaii noted it had given a certification, but refused to take credit for the fake. It’s possible, though I find it implausible, that this happened. Bigger and dumber scandals and stunts have occurred.
Or suppose that Obama was born in Honolulu, but Obama’s name, birth time, and other details, were actually different on his real birth certificate from the photoshopped certification on Daily KOS. And his staff claimed that the fake was proof because they made a mistake. It’s possible, and I find it not too implausible, that this happened, but Obama didn’t want to deal with the flack this would raise, so he said nothing, knowing he would ultimately win any lawsuit.
I’m not saying this happened. It would be stupid to make a claim like that. Just as stupid as it is to claim we shouldn’t know everything there is to know about Barack Obama (and no, I’m not talking about his bank account number, but we probably should know his social security number and the contents of his credit report, and I actually think it wouldn’t be a big deal if we knew his bank account number).
I’m the one taking the moderate ‘I really don’t know’ position. You two are taking the extreme position and making huge assumptions (such as the Daily KOS document is actual, or there’s no chance some underling would enter false data into a computer for Obama).
All I’m saying, again, and finally, is that Obama is being inconsistent, and it raises my suspicion that his refusal, as politician, to put at least a few voter’s minds at ease is indeed odd.
Joco (4cdfb7) — 1/23/2009 @ 7:29 pmI even hear there is also a “fake Patterico”.
I never heard of a fake Patterico?
But there is pseudo LGF better known as LGF2
ML (14488c) — 1/23/2009 @ 7:33 pmPatterico: I suspected it was love2008. It didn’t seem overly malicious, but I thought he/she (I honestly don’t know) had had some rough interactions today, and was blowing off some steam.
The trouble with parody is the boundaries and the perceptions of parodizer and parodizee. The ironic part is that many parody-meisters (I don’t mean love2008) tell their victims to “toughen up,” but are actually quite sensitive to criticism themselves.
Love2008 has never been nasty to me, though there are many areas where we disagree.
So hopefully the humor is over.
As for our earlier trollfest, perhaps your own and carlitos’ advice sunk in. Which is good, because I have seen people “blackballed” from jobs over their actions outside the workplace. It isn’t right, but it does happen.
Eric Blair (e92b94) — 1/23/2009 @ 7:43 pmI do not like this issue one little bit, for so many reasons.
JD (5ffaf3) — 1/23/2009 @ 7:44 pmLooking at Patterico’s post, he seems confident that love2008 is a “she.” Apologies all around.
Off topic….
Incidentally, the carlitos business reminds me of a problem I had when I taught in Southern California. I had a student who was really good, but had annoyed another professor (the student had complained about a personal friend of the professor). The student was unaware of that irritation. The other professor acted as if she liked the student fine. So the student asked that other professor for a letter of recommendation.
Long story short, the professor would write quite negative letters of recommendation. So the student couldn’t get hired. I kept trying to hint to the student not to use the other professor as a reference, but I had to keep what I knew confidential. I pleaded with the other professor to be honest with the student, to use another recommender, but the professor was adamant that she was “…just stating her opinion.”
Finally, the student tried not using the other professor, and got several job offers.
Now I tell that story to students: be very, very careful about irritating people who you might ask for letters of recommendation later.
I would add, being vulgar on the internet to that list.
Eric Blair (e92b94) — 1/23/2009 @ 7:50 pmOh, and lovie, if you are going to try parody, you ought to at least try to be funny.
JD (5ffaf3) — 1/23/2009 @ 7:54 pmRemind me to never ask timmah, David Petranos Esp, MKDP, Ed from PA, TMJ, or Mario for a letter of recommdendation.
JD (5ffaf3) — 1/23/2009 @ 8:01 pmRacist!
Eric Blair (e92b94) — 1/23/2009 @ 8:08 pmAaaaarrgh! They got me! Okay okay. Who said it wasn’t funny? Heh? I nearly broke my ribs laughing. It was fun. While it lasted. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, PATTERICO. THANKS FOR RUINING IT!
The fake AD (1b037c) — 1/24/2009 @ 4:44 amJD, why are you so jealous? You know you were laughing your head off. Yes? 🙂
Last comment did not appear. Please comment #162 is from Emperor7. Forgot to change back to my screen name before posting. Apologies.
Emperor7 (1b037c) — 1/24/2009 @ 4:53 amletter of recommdendation.
Comment by JD — 1/23/2009 @ 8:01 pm
Emperor7 (1b037c) — 1/24/2009 @ 5:02 amWhat? RECOMMDENDATION? Now that’s funny. ROTFLMHO! 😀