federal judge set's trial date for obamas eligibility

[heliochrome85]

I thought Hypocracy was the new Calvin Klein fragrance????? Maybe i was wrong...

[dusred]

I'm with Greg on this one.

He could just show them what they want and tell them to STFU but he seems to want to make a big deal out of it. Personally, I think he's a citizen, but the more he ignores the "Birthers" the more trouble he's causing for himself and the more suspicion he is putting on those of us who do believe he's legit.



Sorry to say but that birth certificate for some reason doesn't look real to me. . . I'm not sure why . . . . . Thinking about it further in reviewing both my parents birth certificates they are both hand written and interestingly enough my dad was also born in 1961. I know they had printers back then but something about this "exact copy" "scanned birth certificate" doesn't look real.

It would, however, be interesting to find someone else born the same year and review their birth certificate and see if it is printed or hand written.

The Snopes article includes terms like "self proclaimed experts" without giving any specific examples and the entire thing reeks of bias and therefore is very unconvincing.

Notice where the case is. Orange County, CA, an ultraconservative right wing area noted for electing "over the top" people.

You have a very good point. Judges should be judges right?. . . unbiased ect. But in our society today it seems the judges have taken sides. If you went to a Liberal judge he obviously would dismiss the case, so the only way to even have the case looked at would be to go to a conservative judge.

[AZhitman]

That was how the klan was put out of business.Telcoman

[smockers83]

I hate to say it, but that birth certificate is invalid.

Read the bottom, look at the top.

Also, that copy is not a complete copy of a birth certificate. It only serves as a copy as well.

My birth certificate was written out, I was born in 1986.

[srellim234]

Were you born in Hawaii? What the hell difference does it make whether yours is typed or written in crayon if it's not from that era in Hawaii?

I'll go with politifact on this one. They've done a lot more digging and looking than any of us and they say it matches everything from that period in Hawaii. Along with the announcements in the newspapers.

[szh]

And, like I said earlier in this thread, where Prez Obama was born or whether his birth certificate is perfectly accurate or not, is simply not relevant really. Obama's mother was a US citizen and that makes him one too, and thus eligible for the office of POTUS.

So, while I still do not like him and his cronies that he now has in office, we all need to move on to real issues with his administration and policies.

Z

[dusred]

Lets find someone in Hawaii who was born around that time and have them show us their birth certificate.

Weather it makes any difference or not it would be nice to know if he's really pulling bulls*** over our eyes.

[heliochrome85]

i still dont understand the issue here. The burden of proof is on those who are making the allegations. It just seems like the issue is that people are looking for reasons to remove him from power. It isnt for some major or serious concerns for the health of our country, but for some other deep seeded reason. Did anyone ask the legitimacy of Bush or Clinton?

[dusred]

The burden of proof is on those who are making the allegations.

You ever dealt with the IRS?

Obama is a public servant and therefore more is going to be expected of him. He could just produce the damn thing and get on with life but he seems to want to make a big deal out of it. Weird.

[srellim234]

Lets find someone in Hawaii who was born around that time and have them show us their birth certificate.

Weather it makes any difference or not it would be nice to know if he's really pulling bulls*** over our eyes.

You should at least read the links before you make statements like that. The Politifact article clearly states that they've seen it and it matches others from Hawaii. That's why it's important to look at more than just sympathetic websites. You might find that your own side is pulling the wool over YOUR eyes.

"When the birth certificate arrived from the Obama campaign it confirmed his name as the other documents already showed it. Still, we took an extra step: We e-mailed it to the Hawaii Department of Health, which maintains such records, to ask if it was real.

"It's a valid Hawaii state birth certificate," spokesman Janice Okubo told us....

...When the official documents were questioned, we went looking for more answers. We circled back to the Department of Health, had a newsroom colleague bring in her own Hawaii birth certificate to see if it looks the same (it's identical)."

[pallnet]

The constitution and the bill of rights is the glue that has held our country together for so long. Now days they are looked at as just pces of paper because too many people have gotten away with more now then they would have long ago in our country's youth.

If he's guilty of falsifying legal documents by supplying a fake Hawaii birth certificate or if it shows that his applications for schooling were filled out as if he were a citizen of another country then he should pay the price just like anyone else would for doing such things.

I honestly think that even if they can prove he's not able to hold the seat of the presidency, he will be allowed to keep the seat. It would cause a war in the USA but WTF do they care, we are expendible, right?

America was built on the backs of the workers and fighters, it will collapse otherwise. They are about to findout how true this is with all of the bailing out and trashing of capitalism.

pallnet

[dusred]

You should at least read the links before you make statements like that.

Are you trying to say I didn't? As I already pointed out that Snopes article is full of bias. For being an unbiased source the PolitFact article goes further than just pointing out the fact that they saw it but they go further and say that it's just all the internet's fault that's it's even an issue dismissing the fact that there are people with genuine concerns. The fact that they sympathize with "the other side" to me shows bias. Again, if they were unbiased they would simply state that they saw it and believed it was real and that's that.

Quote » The Politifact article clearly states that they've seen it and it matches others from Hawaii. That's why it's important to look at more than just sympathetic websites.[/quote]Quite honestly I've never been on any of the sites owned by the "birthers" and not until just now reviewing this thread have I even taken a second look at it. The only articles I've read are the 2 you posted and in both of them I find bias.

Notice how they didn't post any of the other Hawaii birth certificates up on their site? Interesting hu? You want me to just take their word for it? That would be letting them pull wool over my eyes wouldn't it?

Now again, srellim235, I seriously don't think it's an issue as far as his presidency is concerned - if he wasn't born in the US fine, his mom was, so I don't care but one thing we won't stand for is the President falsifying legal documents and flat out lying to us about such a serious issue. If he was "totally transparent" like he promised in his campaign he would put his damn birth certificate in a museum in Texas for the whole world to see but for some reason he won't and that's what concerns me.

[C-Kwik]

So, an attorney has no right to file a case in a US court? Really?

Let me get this straight: The party that DEFENDS the right to bring frivolous lawsuits, is now calling for sanctions against someone for bringing a "frivolous" lawsuit?

In the particular case where she was fined, it wasn't for the lawsuit itself. Aparently, the judge dismissed the case and she continued to press the court with motions:

Land, appointed in 2001 by President George W. Bush, had already dismissed the lawsuit, but Taitz continued filing motions. He said he fined her $20,000 "as a deterrent to prevent future misconduct and to protect the integrity of the court."

"The absolute absence of any legitimate legal argument, combined with the political diatribe in her motions, demonstrates that Ms. Taitz's purpose is to advance a political agenda and not to pursue a legitimate legal cause of action," Land wrote.

He added that while Taitz's speech is protected by the U.S. Constitution, "the federal courts are reserved for hearing genuine legal disputes, not as a platform for political rhetoric and insults."

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33...itics/

Ultimately, the problem with this attorney as I stated before is she keeps crying wolf. I can't imagine very many courts in the nation having much patience with her.

Obama is a public servant and therefore more is going to be expected of him. He could just produce the damn thing and get on with life but he seems to want to make a big deal out of it. Weird.

Expectations should be limited to his performance in office and his personal integrity as it relates to the office. He should not be held to any higher standards than that which is stated in the Constitution with regards to qualifications. And as for producing the document, understand that there are basic legal procedures to be followed:

http://deathby1000papercuts.bl....html

[heliochrome85]

why try C-Kwik? There are many people out there, some of which post on this forum, who if they went back in time and watched, like a fly on the wall, President Obama being born and registered as a US Citizen, they wouldn't believe it. Isnt that the basis behind the birther movement? That they think the paper trail that has been proven valid every time examined, is not legit?

Go ahead, call him a foreigner. If you de-legitimize the guy, its only a matter of time til they apply the term Jigaboo to him. Its not like its thats never been done before.

[srellim234]

But apparently you don't find bias when you suggest to someone looking for info that the ONLY site he check is FoxNews (as you did in that other thread)????

You can find bias in absolutely anything if you don't approach it with an open mind to start with.

[heliochrome85]

did you expect anything else? He spends most of his time here playing 2nd fiddle to audi and Greg when they "debate" Obama. If i spent all my time reading how right I was, id think i was brilliant too.

[dusred]

But apparently you don't find bias when you suggest to someone looking for info that the ONLY site he check is FoxNews (as you did in that other thread)????

Dude, seriously, I was joshin' the new guy that's why I put a at the end. Of course Fox News isn't the source of all my info. Fox news is never totally unbiased and I think would be safe to say that no major news organizations are totally without bias. Oh, and the sites hosted by the "birthers"? LOL! I can't imagine there being anything but bias in them cause they have an agenda.

My point was that there isn't an unbiased source that has reviewed the birth certificate.

Quote »You can find bias in absolutely anything if you don't approach it with an open mind to start with.[/quote] No argument from me there. Here is an example of how an unbiased article about Obamas birth certificate would look:

. . . we here at nicoclub.com have just received the original copy of Obama's birth certificate and have carefully checked it and found it to be authentic.

You get the idea right? Notice how there is no "crackhead conspiracy theorists suggest. . . " in the article?

did you expect anything else? He spends most of his time here playing 2nd fiddle to audi and Greg when they "debate" Obama. If i spent all my time reading how right I was, id think i was brilliant too.

At least I don't call other members "morons" for holding a different political view. My mommy and daddy and Greg taught me better. . Other than that is that all you have to contribute to the thread? I totally enjoy having discussions with Srellium234 because he seems to be quite intelligent and knowledgeable. . . unfortunately I can't say the same about myself or some other members of the board.

[C-Kwik]

why try C-Kwik?

As much as it seems to be a waste of time, it serves me several purposes:

1. I just enjoy a good debate.

2. It helps me to expand my own knowledge as it provides me with reason/motivation to seek out knowledge.

3. If I believe someone else's statement is wrong, then I will point it out the best I can. Even if a person doesn't end up in agreement, it does plant a seed. Perhaps later experiences and observations will have them reflect on the points made and reconsider. This of course does work both ways.

4. Frankly, this is where I'm getting most of my political information lately. Or at least initially. My classes are starting to get pretty heavy and requiring much more time from me.

If i spent all my time reading how right I was, id think i was brilliant too.

Effing hilarious man!

[smockers83]

I never said it wasn't complete, I was just stating that an actual birth certificate typically has a lot more info. A copy of a document like a birth certificate doesn't need to include all info from the original document, just pertinent information. The document says it is certified and serves as a copy to the original document. This does not mean it was directly transcribed from the original document.

However, what I was also trying to point out that it is invalid because the bottom says it is void if any alterations are made. There's an alteration made on that version of the certificate, so we cannot take that copy as legit, for our argument's sake.

That was just more a make-fun jab.

[srellim234]

I totally enjoy having discussions with Srellium234 because he seems to be quite intelligent and knowledgeable. . .

Thank you for the compliment. I really enjoy this, too, because you guys make me look into things a lot deeper than I would have without your interaction. As such, this forum has become a valuable part of my daily routine.

As I've gravitated to more centrist positions, I depend a lot more on information from both sides. When I was a conservative Republican, I tended to rely more on the right for news. Plus, the further right OR left you go, the more biased news sites and organizations either right or left spend a lot more time telling you their take on the news instead of just presenting it.

[heliochrome85]

bring facts to the table, and you get treated like an adult. Bring conjecture and conspiracy theories, and my patience quickly degrades. Just ask DiamondJ30. The OP chose to connect two unrelated issues and claim that the Obama white house was controlling the messages being presented on TV. He then went on to cry about freedom of speech and such. Point is, his theory/post was based on a memo found that referenced the inspiratory nature of Obama's presidency, and nothing more. This wasnt an issue of for/against a certain position. It was an issue of truth vs. pure heresay.

Howie gets the same treatment in almost every thread.

and if someone doesnt know which thread is being referenced...zer...shing

Id be happy to debate the opinions of those who disagree with me. I refuse to engage in pure heresay though. Loose lips sink ships.

[dusred]

You say

conspiracy theories.

and I say

valid arguments

Difference of opinion? I think so. Just so you know, Helio, I don't hate you or anything but I do differ in opinion. Maybe someday when I'm 21 we can go . Just saying.

[heliochrome85]

ha, id meet you half way for a coke since i dont drink. could also be why im usually so angry. meh, we're all gonna die anyway.

[heliochrome85]

on a side note, since im an expat currently, i look for things that remind me of home.

this is one of themhttp://www.peopleofwalmart.com/

amuse yourselves.

[AZhitman]

"The absolute absence of any legitimate legal argument..."

Here's the part I take issue with. Predetermination of a conclusion before exploration of the facts is a slippery slope.

"Absolute absence"? Hmmmm....

If that's the case, why don't they just instruct the Clerk Of Court to refuse her motions?

[AZhitman]

Isnt that the basis behind the birther movement? That they think the paper trail that has been proven valid every time examined, is not legit?

Whoa, dude... I don't think there's any birthers here. We're just asking for some transparency. As I said before, I could give a damn if he's half Scottish and half Guatemalan - and I think the birthers are whackos. But we entertained the Lefty whackos when they demanded recounts in Florida...

Go ahead, call him a foreigner. If you de-legitimize the guy, its only a matter of time til they apply the term Jigaboo to him. Its not like its thats never been done before.

Damn, Abooboo... That's rough.

I don't need his citizenship to de-legitimize him, nor his race.

But his Blackness is no shield against scrutiny either.

[szh]

ha, id meet you half way for a coke since i dont drink.

Nor me ... except for the rare glass of red wine recommended by my heart specialist.

meh, we're all gonna die anyway.

True.

Indeed, there is a 100% correlation between breathing air and dying ... someday ... just takes longer for some.

I know! I know!! Maybe the Dems should ban breathing as part of the Health Care Plan!

Z

[telcoman]

...... But we entertained the Lefty whackos when they demanded recounts in Florida...

Excuse me!

Had the recount of the entire state of Florida occurred Bush never would have been elected president and the mess this country was in by the time he left office never would have happened.

Two wars, thousands of dead and wounded American soldiers, a huge runup in debt, economic collaspse, unwise and unneeded tax cuts for the richest Americans, a collapse of our economy and healthcare system and ......on and on.......

And so Greg what about the unhinged wacko righties bringing guns to tea parties with Nazi signs and attacking our president.

He was elected by a majority in this country.

Look at the makeup of the huge crowds President Obama attracts when he speaks.

A crowd made up of white, black, asian, latino, christian. muslim, jewish, etc.

Compare that with the crowd makeup at the tea parties.

All you see is a bunch of angry whites who did not vote for Obama.

Look at the old news footage of marches in the south for the right of blacks to vote.

Who do you see?

The same bunch of angry white racists that are still around today attending tea parties.

Telcoman

[dusred]

And so Greg what about the unhinged wacko righties bringing guns to tea parties with Nazi signs and attacking our president.

We have the right to bear arms. Damn, were they actually shooting at the president or were they just throwing rocks at him?

Quote »He was elected by a majority in this country.[/quote]So was Bush.

Quote »The same bunch of angry white racists that are still around today attending tea parties.[/quote]Are you black? I'm going to have to assume you are. Shut the Fack up and stop your b****ing. There were white, black, purple and green people in the tea party protests. Unless you have a legit reason to call us tea partiers' racists you better keep it to yourself. Oh, and protesting against a man, who happens to be black, and happens to be our president, is not racist. Spray paint him white and I would still protest against him.

[C-Kwik]

Here's the part I take issue with. Predetermination of a conclusion before exploration of the facts is a slippery slope.

"Absolute absence"? Hmmmm....

If that's the case, why don't they just instruct the Clerk Of Court to refuse her motions?

Context is key. This was after the case was originally dismissed. My guess would be that the judge got fed up with the continued filing of motions that were determined to be illegitimate. Hard to say without actually being there or perhaps being able to go over the transcripts. But its not likely to do with hearing the actual evidence of whether or not the birth certificate is real. Read that second link I posted. It goes over it in pretty good detail. In short though, there are many legal rules that qualify if a person can sue for something. One thing you see a lot in the insurance industry is people trying to sue an insurance company for an accident. Its a common mistake as laypersons don't always understand that they need to sue the person that was involved in the accident. The insurance company shows up, explains who they are, and the judge summararily dismisses the case as there is no case against the insurance company. Imagine what the judge would do if the plaintiff continued to press the issue filing motion after motion. This is the type of thing that I gather is occuring here...

As for the clerk refusing motions, I don't think they can do that. The merits of a motion have to be heard to judge its validity. Squelching it at the clerk would go against the very thing you appear to be speaking against when you are referring to "absolute absence."