I maintain that Michael Savage, Rick Roberts, and Chris Baker no longer have more than a handfull of functioning brain cells between them.

I maintain that these three are aholes and do nothing but lie, spew lies. The hate from Savage is amazing, it has no limits. 

WOR in NY, why is this A hole allowed to have a forum to spew lies and hate? Why?

Stoned ! They must be stoned !

If you're implying that they're marijuana smokers I take great offense at that notion.  However, if you're using the biblical meaning of the word then I wholeheartedly agree!

WOR in NY, why is this A hole allowed to have a forum to spew lies and hate? Why?

The first two John Gamblings and Jean Shepperd must be spinning in their graves because of what Michael Weiner is doing to their once-great radio stration....

But maybe the Hawaiian Health Department and WorldNetDaily are in on the big liberal conspiracy...

Someone help me out here.  Isn't there some sort of body that actually asks for this sort of thing when someone runs for President?  Is it even possible for someone to run a major campaign, get elected and then years later admit they were too young or born in France or something?  I would think there would be some sort of verification process somewhere along the line, considering you're not dealing with that many people running for office.

OK, Savage. You vote for McCain then. Vote for someone who wasn't born in the United States - different from Barack Obama, who was born in Hawaii.

But of course, you'll never accept that - 'cause you're a member of the Ku Klux Klan, and you don't want Obama in the White House 'cause you're a white supremacist, who will do ANYTHING to keep people of color away from power. And guess what, Hitler-Savage? Your time is up.

You vote for McCain then. Vote for someone who wasn't born in the United States

McCain is actually Panamanian , correct?

Exactly. So Savage can take his "Obama is anti-American" BS and stick it where the sun don't shine, if he's going to vote for The Manchurian-Panamanian Candidate.

Now it's time for CPA to come here and tell us he understood what savage really meant and that savage is a really smart guy.

He's already formed a new political party. He's given up on McCain's chances

He's already formed a new political party. He's given up on McCain's chances

I've heard his party's slogan - "Be a Smarty - Join the Nazi Party".

Even if he didn't post his birth certificate, it really doesn't matter where he was born:

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html

http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_citi.html

That is the thing that these loonies keep forgetting, is that no matter where Obama was born, he was born to an American citizen. You don't have to be born of terra firma American soil to be an American, and to run for President. You have to be a natural born citizen, meaning, Obama, born to a mother from Kansas, qualifies, as does McCain.

To Loonz and Magnolialover, excellent research, except for one small detail. You have posted a link to the law as it stands today. Because of that glaring deficiency, I can reasonably deduce that neither one of you are lawyers. When dealing with Barack Obama's citizenship, one must refer to laws as they were written at the time of his birth in 1961. Mr. Berg has done so in his case that is before the federal court. He IS, unlike you, a lawyer, and he is very thorough. 

The law, in 1961, spoke of "pass-through" citizenship. If Barack Obama was, in fact, born in Kenya then it makes a HUGE amount of difference in the question of his status as "natural born". In 1961, in order for Barack Obama to be a "natural born" citizen if (as Mr. Berg claims) he was born on foreign soil to one parent who was NOT a US citizen (his father) and one that WAS a US citizen (Stanley), the following condition must have been met:

That the citizen parent had lived in the United States for 10 years (which Stanley had), 5 of which must have occured AFTER the age of 14. This is where Stanley did NOT meet the criteria to "pass citizenship" to her child IF the child was born on foreign soil. Stanley was only 18 years old when she gave birth to Barack Obama (some speculate that she was only 17, another embarrassing reason to NOT produce a birth certificate, but I digress) and therefore could NOT legally pass citizenship to him in Kenya.

Therefore, if Mr. Berg's allegations are proven correct, it in fact DOES make a difference where he was born. If Barack Obama was born in Kenya, by law as it stood in 1961, he is NOT a "natural born" American.

What Mr. Berg is demanding to see is the ACTUAL birth document prepared by the hospital that he was born in. This "vault" document would have the doctor's name and signature, type of birth (cessarian, breach, etc.) the child's footprints, so on and so forth. The document provided by Barack Obama is a "certificate of live birth", a government document. It provides no PROOF that he was born on US soil.

Since there is reason to believe that Barack Obama was born in Kenya, Mr. Berg is demanding to see this document to "clear the air", so to speak.

Barack Obama's own family members have stated that he was born in 2 different hospitals in Hawaii (grandmother says this one, half-sister says that one), NEITHER OF WHICH HAVE ANY RECORD OF HIS MOTHER BEING ADMITTED AT THE TIME OF HIS BIRTH. This is the basis for Mr. Berg's case.

Use some logic, here. If the case had NO legal basis whatsoever (as you claim), it would have been tossed by now. Phillip Berg is no crack-pot. He KNOWS the law. The question, NOW, is why has Barack Obama chosen to try and dismiss this case instead of the simple solution----just produce the document.

The Hawaiian state certificate of live birth is the standard form issued by the state verifying the information they have on record.  The source of that information is the original birth certificate.  The COLB would not be issued without having the birth certificate on file.  The COLB has been the official document of record for all circumstances requiring one.  The state of Hawaii does not issue one without verified records on file.  It is every bit as valid as the original document would be.  The one issued to Obama on display on the internet has an official certificate number, is certified by the state registrar and is stamped with the embossed official seal of the State of Hawaii.  How do you propose that information became part of the official state record many years ago when no one would have any idea that Obama was going to become President of the US?  Even to the point of getting a announcement printed in the local paper a week later?

Obama and the DNC are seeking to have the case dismissed because there are several charges made in it apart from the birth certificate nonsense.  Producing the original document wouldn't satisfy the suit.  Therefore, if a case can be made that Berg had no legal standing to bring suit, this frivolous lawsuit can be pushed aside more easily, saving everyone a waste of time.

It is true that generally a person must satisfy statutory requirements at the time of birth to be considered a natural-born citizen.  Historical versions of statutes are very difficult to track down online without considerable expense, so I haven't looked up whether you (and/or Berg) are correct about the requirements in place as of the date of Obama's birth.

The big problem, though, is that Berg's complaint is so insanely constructed that the production of any one document is not going to rebut all averments.  Despite your opinion of the man, he appears to me to be tilting at windmills, to put it politely.  He did the same when he spent almost a year seeking recusal of justices in Bush v. Gore and later seeking to invalidate the decision.  Then there's the 9/11 truth movement, but it's probably a bad idea to go into that too deeply on this thread.

It's as though the guy has never engaged in litigation before - he's crying foul that Obama wants to stay discovery while a motion to dismiss is pending, but since the motion to dismiss has colorable support, Berg can't explain why the judge shouldn't stay discovery - discovery is time-consuming, and if the case is ripe for dismissal on the pleadings, attorneys should not be spending hours upon hours to deal with documents for a case that will not go forward.

I think Berg's case is going to be dismissed for lack of standing, but federal courts move very deliberately (read: slowly) so we won't see it too quickly.  If he were not an attorney, that might not create a big problem for him, but since he is, he is eligible for Rule 11 sanctions.

Spot-on, Solon.  Excellent summary, and I totally agree about the resolution to this issue...just produce the document.  Bring the darn thing to the debate tonight and hold it up for everyone to see on national television. 

Oh balls.  You raise phony issues and expect Obama to provide "proof."  Well he already has.  Enough already.

"How could he not be Muslim if he has a Muslim name? How could he not be Muslim if his father and grandfather were Muslims? How is that possible, when he has no known birth certificate?"

Funny, he understands that Islam is a religion, but somehow a name is supposed to dictate it.  It's not a nationality.  My parents were Mormon, and I'm certainly not.  They could have named me "Brigham" and I still wouldn't be Mormon.  He isn't a strictly stupid person, but he does seem to be rather insane.

Bill Ayers is holding Barack Obama's original birth certificate in his safe (bomb-proof)... And, speaking of Bill Ayers, were you aware that the second letter in Obama's last name is the first letter in Bill Ayer's first name...and that the second letter of Barack's first name is the first letter in Ayer's last name? I say it's just too coincidental... ;>)

This is why these jackasses are so afraid of the re-emergence of the Fairness Doctrine. They know that if the stations that air their filth were required to also air programs representing the opposite view, their lies would be debunked within hours. Bill www.truthtopowermedia.com

the more desperate they become, the more " mistakes " they will engineer ! I am just imagining what would happen to all these people if sen Obama gets in and they, who finance these moronic people, find out they got nothing for their expenditures.

it seems to me, anyone can go to the hall of records in honolulu and pick one up.

This is clearly slander and is not protected by the 1st amendment.  Obama really should consider civil prosecution.  Not to do so not only encourages Savage, but it makes Obama appear weak and fearful of bullies.  

To avoid prosecution Savage could be given the alternative to give a public apology and to pledge to never again make public statements about Obama's citizenship or religion.

The idea of legal action for slander, defamation, or something like this is an ABSOLUTE MUST.  I don't know why some of the progressives have not gone this route. 

These crazies have to be held accountable for what they say.

It would sure be great if the documents were submitted to the courts to put this argument to rest. That way there would be no doubts as to whether or not the certificate is legitimate, or factcheck's bias. It would also discredit Berg, and obamacrimes.com. Until then, it will not be "truly" verified to many (makes sense though).

Also, pretty sure I saw video footage of Obama campaigning with Odinga (see link- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6eVVVKFHu0 ). Video was actually just prior to Odinga's announcement, but what 's the difference? 

The MSM sweeps everyting under the rug, and it is starting to smell fishy to a lot of people.

i'll be the first to agree that these radio host are on the crazy side but really the extreme right and the extreme left act the same. And for the retard that says mccain is a panamaian or what ever, at this time in history he was born on a Military base which is United States Soil to two american citizens. thus by law at this time makes him a United states citizen. My point to all of you is why won't obama just give the judge his records, that would get rid of any question about where he was born.

I love how Rick Roberts "contrast and compares" Obama to Hitler, but doesn't offer one example of why he came to that conclusion.  What makes Obama and Hitler so similar, Rick?  Please tell everyone so we can determine if you suffer from a lack of education or medication.

Then why hasn't the judge issued an Order to Dismiss? I doubt it is because he has better lawsuits to focus on.

The stupidity of the Conservative Talk Radio audience cannot be overstated.  Rush Limbaugh likes to demonstrate it every day.  One of his favorite tricks is to play an audio clip, then lie to his sycophants about what they just heard. Today, he played a clip of Tom Brokaw saying that the current economic crisis could cause us to take a second look at our priorities, and our attitudes toward how we use credit.  He went on to say that we may ask ourselves how big a house we really need, what kind of car, etc.

Rush then went on one of his tirades, claiming that Brokaw was advocating Marxism, that the government would tell us what kind of car to drive and how big a house we could buy.  It was obvious to any objective listener that Brokaw was simply advocating the common sense preached by most financial advisors.

I have yet to hear one of his drooling listeners call in and point out one of these lies.  Either they're too brainwashed to notice, or the screeners don't let them through.  Maybe both.

Come on now. The only people they let through that disagree with Rush, are the comical looney folks that make Rush sound like he has a lot of common sense. An actual intelligent caller who could tear apart Rush's tirades would never be allowed in, and even if they were, they would never make it through the yelling and turning off of their phone so that they wouldn't ever be heard. This is how these guys play the game. It's fine, as long as you know that's what they're doing. Of course, there are a lot of syncophants who listen to Rush, et all, that just believe everything that tumbles from their lying lips, truth be damned. And hence, why they have dubbed themselves, proudly I might add, dittoheads. Talk about lemmings...

Does anyone know exactly how the screeners keep out the disagreeing callers?  Those who might actually say the truth or talk sense?  How do they identify only the supportive callers?

Of course they do. Do you ever listen to the show? I've been listening to Rush and his ilk for years. All we hear is complimentary callers, or callers who disagree who are so stupid, they're easy to talk down to in an "argument". 

The question was, HOW do they identify only positive callers?  HOW do they screen the one who calls and politely says he wants to say wonderful things to Savage, Rush, whoever, but who really wants to lay some facts and truth on them?  Not everyone who calls to disagree tells them they are calling to disagree.  Once in a while a sensible person gets through, but it is rare.  They obviously have a way of screening out the sensible, intelligent caller, and I am asking how they do that.

Why can't the office in Hawaii find a real birth certificate?

You know where there's a really swell item you should read, Zamfir? Right at the top of this page, before the comments.

Yeah but there is already evidence that the birth certificate on the website might have been tampered with.  And FactCheck.org is operated by the Annenberg project which Obama sat on the board of.  Any visit to FactCheck.org shows the obvious liberal bias of that site. 

Well hell, why don't you just mosey on over to redstate then? They've got a hummjob of a discussion going on right now about how Obama's real birth certificate from Kenya is in the hands of the Clinton camp! It's just days away from being revealed to the world that he was really born there! What a perfect setup for Hillary to have one last go for it in 2004. You'll fit right in with that discussion.

In fact, just because it's possible that records may not be available for reasons unknown - oh, say a hurricane wipes out the records building, or a flash flood, or a tornado for instance - we should go through every single american's birth certificate record and have the FBI analyze it to the nth degree. If there's even the slightest hint of rightwing concern about the validity of said certificate we can purge them from the voter rolls, move them to a detention center in Oklahoma, and eventually extradite them to some foreign country they most likely never saw even though they were born here. That would sure make you happy, wouldn't it?

Hey, ignoramus.

Obama was born to a white woman from Kansas who happens to be a US citizen. He could have been born in Timbuktu, and he'd still be able to run for President. Get it? He's a citizen. A natural born citizen. Constitution says so...

I suggest you listen to this much more highly qualified practitioner of the law (who has also been a prominent member of the Democrat party) about Constitutional law, and how it relates to obama's citizenship.  It fully describes the current lawsuit against obama (that media refuses to report on), and all the possible outcomes of the lawsuit.  Whichever way the case goes, very interesting stuff:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gA6_k3NtXZs

Oooohh! Same question for you from earlier. Like I said before, please, please please answer yes!

Posted by snoopy in reply to theplanner2477

Ah, so some moron who claims he's a die hard democrat is your source? Does that mean if I can produce a moron who claims he's a die hard republican with a lawsuit against mccain you will automatically claim it's a factual issue worth discussing? Hmmm?

I hope you answer yes...

Posted Tuesday October 14, 2008 9:48:38 PM EDT / Flag this comment

Your inability to research this man before making a stupid comment like that is embarassing, and your ignorance about the case is monumental.  You say, "so some moron who claims he's a die hard democrat is your source?"

Here are some facts about this "moron" who "claims" he is a Democrat, Philip J. Berg: Berg is a former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania; former candidate for Governor and U.S. Senate in Democratic Primaries; former Chair of the Democratic Party in Montgomery County; former member of Democratic State Committee; an attorney with offices in Montgomery County, PA and an active practice in Philadelphia, PA.  He is licensed to practice before the US Supreme Court.  From what I have read, he is a big Hillary Clinton supporter.

Get your facts straight before making yourself look stupid.  And if you don't want to watch the video I posted, refer to solon's post above, he did a spot-on job with summing things up.

So you can't answer the question, eh? Who cares what party he's from? He has less credibility than Liebermann who at one time was a VP candidate for the democratic party. Throw your credentials around in a site that cares, like red state.

And for once in your life try to come here with facts that matter. You just look real stupid posting irrelevant garbage.

I remember not too long ago Obama was engaged in a battle with someone named Hillary Clinton for the party nomination.  At the time, many people of your ilk were elated about this, since McCain was all by himself and that supposedly gave him an advantage, since the Democrats would have wounds to heal from all the infighting.

But today, the actions of a big Hillary Clinton supporter which go against Obama have great merit because he's a Democrat.  I guess all those alliances just don't mean anything anymore.

Funny how things change, isn't it?

LOL

Berg is an Hillary supporter who can't get over the fact that she lost. He's about as creditable as a PUMA member. The lawsuit is simply a pathetic ploy by a unhappy Hillary supporter. Berg's no Democratic anything.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Philip J. Berg, Esquire
555 Andorra Glen Court, Suite 12 Lafayette Hill, PA 19444-2531
Cell (610) 662-3005 (610) 825-3134
(800) 993-PHIL [7445]
Fax (610) 834-7659
philjberg@gmail.com

A Plea to Democratic SuperDelegates and Delegates to Nominate
the Candidate who can Win in November 2008 - Hillary Clinton

http://philipjberg.blogspot.com/2008/06/for-immediate-release-philip-j.html

Wingnuts Away, my boys, Wingnuts Aweigh.
Farewell to honest truth,
We lie at break of day-ay-ay-ay.
Through our last smear cam-paign, stink-in of crap,
Until we smear once more.
Here's wishing you a re-pub-lic-an score!

http://www.yestodemocracy.com/yes_to_democracy_no_to_pu/2008/08/wingnuts-away-.html

It is a shame that an allegedly reputable organization like Media Matters is so obviously in the tank for Obama.  This article suggests that "the claim that Sen. Barack Obama has not produced a valid U.S. birth certificate" has been discredited.  FYI, posting an alleged copy of a birth certificate on Obama's website is not the same thing as providing an actual certified copy of one to the court.  Obama could stop all of this rumor and conjecture merely by springing for the $10 to purchase a certified copy, and submitting it to the court.  Instead, he spends thousands of dollars trying to quash the lawsuit.  John McCain has voluntarily provided all evidence of his citizenship; why won't Obama?  What is he hiding.  Shame on you Media Matters for sloppy and biased reporting. 

Exactly!!  That's what I want to know.  And the attorney Philip J. Berg that is suing Obama to show an actual birth certificate is getting the runaround.  Go ahead, Google "Philip J. Berg".  The guy seems legit.

Go ahead, Google "Philip J. Berg".  The guy seems legit.

Phil's first attempt to remove Obama and nominate Hillary was a online petition, which received a total of 209 signatures. The lawsuit is simply his second attempt, which will also fail. http://www.petitiononline.com/Nov2008/petition.html

http://www.petitiononline.com/mod_perl/signed.cgi?Nov2008&201

Berg is an unhappy Hillary supporter.

Oh god, two peas in a pod. You have proof Obama didn't spring that $10? Again? How many times must he buy another "copy" before you will believe it?

Either you are a little slow, or purposefully missing the point.  All Obama has "consented" to do so far is to place an alleged copy of his birth certificate on his website.  He refuses to spring for the $10 to submit a certified copy of it to the court.  This question is for any Obama supporter:  CAN YOU THINK OF ONE GOOD REASON WHY OBAMA WOULD NOT MERELY SUBMIT A CERTIFIED COPY OF HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE TO THE COURT?  I'll be waiting.

The slow one here is you. His mom is a US citizen. Regardless of where he was born you have no argument, he's automatically a US citizen. Read the damn constitution!

AGAIN, YOU CAN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION, CAN YOU.  Thank you for proving my point that there is no plausible reason why Obama refuses to submit a certified copy of his birth certificate to the court.  He is definitely hiding something.

No, you are an idiot. You can't provide a single piece of proof that Obama's certificate is a forgery. You forget, DA, you have to live by the same rules you demand. You must show us proof that comes from a non rightwing funded site that provides reason to question his legally certified certificate that he provided to factcheck.org. In the meantime, here's the part of the constitution that clearly shows why you are just providing nothing more than distraction to the subject. Now you are screwed, because not only do you have to provide a non-biased source that meets both your and my criteria for non-bias, you have to take an extra step and debunk the 14th amendment. Have fun doing something beyond saying "you can't answer the question" that you think demands something above and beyond logical...

Natural-born citizen

Who is a natural-born citizen? Who, in other words, is a citizen at birth, such that that person can be a President someday?

The 14th Amendment defines citizenship this way: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." But even this does not get specific enough. As usual, the Constitution provides the framework for the law, but it is the law that fills in the gaps.

Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"

• Anyone born inside the United States
• Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
• Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
• Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
• Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
• Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
• Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
• A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.

Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born, and is eligible to run for President or Vice President. These provisions allow the children of military families to be considered natural-born, for example.

Separate sections handle territories that the United States has acquired over time, such as Puerto Rico (8 USC 1402), Alaska (8 USC 1404), Hawaii (8 USC 1405), the U.S. Virgin Islands (8 USC 1406), and Guam (8 USC 1407). Each of these sections confer citizenship on persons living in these territories as of a certain date, and usually confer natural-born status on persons born in those territories after that date. For example, for Puerto Rico, all persons born in Puerto Rico between April 11, 1899, and January 12, 1941, are automatically conferred citizenship as of the date the law was signed by the President (June 27, 1952). Additionally, all persons born in Puerto Rico on or after January 13, 1941, are natural-born citizens of the United States. Note that because of when the law was passed, for some, the natural-born status was retroactive.

The law contains one other section of historical note, concerning the Panama Canal Zone and the nation of Panama. In 8 USC 1403, the law states that anyone born in the Canal Zone or in Panama itself, on or after February 26, 1904, to a mother and/or father who is a United States citizen, was "declared" to be a United States citizen. Note that the terms "natural-born" or "citizen at birth" are missing from this section.

In 2008, when Arizona Senator John McCain ran for president on the Republican ticket, some theorized that because McCain was born in the Canal Zone, he was not actually qualified to be president. However, it should be noted that section 1403 was written to apply to a small group of people to whom section 1401 did not apply. McCain is a natural-born citizen under 8 USC 1401(c): "a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person."

U.S. Nationals

A "national" is a person who is considered under the legal protection of a country, while not necessarily a citizen. National status is generally conferred on persons who lived in places acquired by the U.S. before the date of acquisition. A person can be a national-at-birth under a similar set of rules for a natural-born citizen. U.S. nationals must go through the same processes as an immigrant to become a full citizen. U.S. nationals who become citizens are not considered natural-born.

Becoming a citizen

A non-citizen may apply to become a citizen of the United States. At no time will such a person ever be considered natural-born (unless the U.S. Code is changed in some way). The process to become a citizen involves several steps, including applying to become and becoming a permanent resident (previously known as a resident alien), applying to become and becoming naturalized, and finally taking the Oath of Allegiance to the United States. Children of naturalized U.S. citizens generally become citizens automatically, though they will also not be considered natural-born. There is a time constraint before a permanent resident can apply for naturalization, generally either 3 or 5 years. The other requirements are that there be a minimum length of time in a specific state or district, successful completion of a citizenship exam, ability to read, write, and speak English, and good moral character.

AGAIN, YOU CAN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION, CAN YOU.  YOU ARE EMBARRASSING YOURSELF. 

ONE MORE TIME, can you put forth one plausible reason why Obama refuses to submit a certified copy of his birth certificate to the court?  And, please, no BS this time; just answer the question, or please just shut up and let intelligent individuals carry on this discussion.  Thank you for your cooperation.

I guess you can't read. Please ask mommy to read my response for you. You are embarrassing yourself by refusing to acknowledge that I supplied an answer. Stop spewing BS and let the intelligent individuals carry on this discussion. Thank you for your cooperation.

The reason they do not jump everytime the wingnuts, like you, make a demand is that they will have to spend all their time catering to your pathetic requests which are designed to derail their focus.  ie: because they're not stupid, stupid.  They know how your game is played.

AGAIN, YOU CAN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION, CAN YOU.  YOU ARE EMBARRASSING YOURSELF. 

ONE MORE TIME, can you put forth one plausible reason why Obama refuses to submit a certified copy of his birth certificate to the court?  And, please, no BS this time; just answer the question, or please just shut up and let intelligent individuals carry on this discussion.  Thank you for your cooperation.

CAN YOU THINK OF ONE GOOD REASON WHY OBAMA WOULD NOT MERELY SUBMIT A CERTIFIED COPY OF HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE TO THE COURT? ThePlanner, which court is asking for this proof? U.S. Supreme? Superior Court? Every local municipal court in the country? Does it even tingle either of the little synapses in your brain that Obama has been working for the U.S. Gov't for years, and nobody except am radio screechmonkeys and right wing rags are demanding he "show his papers"? You wingnuts are priceless.

Now, now, I know in Wingnutistan that facts have this nasty tendency to have a liberal bias. But anybody with an EEG that doesn't register as a flat line knows, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that Obama has proven he was born in Hawaii. I think these nut jobs are trying out some of Rove's greatest hits in repeatedly advancing these cockamamie theories in the hopes the public will believe them. But after Gore and Kerry, the Democratic party finally got wise and won't stand for such tripe. Why don't both you dolts borrow a dollar from your mom's purse and buy a clue!!!

We'll see. :)  Three weeks is a long time until election day.

Yes it is...

Can you say LANDSLIDE!!!!

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHERE HE WAS BORN. HE WAS BORN TO HIS MOTHER WHO IS AN AMERICAN CITIZEN. CASE OVER. CASE CLOSED.

You guys should really read up on this constitution thing.

C'mon, Mags. These morons don't believe in the constitution. That's why they had a serious discussion about running Ahhnold Schwarzenneger for president. It's win at all costs for them.

CAN YOU THINK OF ONE GOOD REASON WHY OBAMA WOULD REFUSE TO SUBMIT A CERTIFIED COPY OF HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE TO THE COURT? 

Can you think of one good reason why you dummies keep bringing up an issue that the constitution clearly covers regardless of your assinine efforts at distraction?

SEE, YOU CAN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION, BECAUSE THERE IS NO GOOD REASON WHY HE WOULDN'T PUT THIS ISSUE BEHIND HIM BY SUBMITTING HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE.  Thank you for proving my point.

I answered the question. You just refuse to accept the answer. Thanks for proving you are nothing more than a partisan idiot who can't provide a single piece of proof that there's an issue with Barack's certified birth certificate that he provided to factcheck.org.

AGAIN, YOU CAN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION, CAN YOU.  YOU ARE EMBARRASSING YOURSELF. 

ONE MORE TIME, can you put forth one plausible reason why Obama refuses to submit a certified copy of his birth certificate to the court?  And, please, no BS this time; just answer the question, or please just shut up and let intelligent individuals carry on this discussion.  Thank you for your cooperation.

again, you don't like my answer. If you don't like it and are unwilling to acccept my response then please just shut up and let intelligent individuals carry on this discussion. Thank you for your cooperation.

One good reason:

Because he is not going to play the wingnut game designed to disrupt his focus.

Ok, I'm going to type this real slow so you mental midgets can keep up - it's irrelevant if he was born in Hawaii (which he was) as he is an American citizen.    Unless you and any of your wing nut friends can prove differently, then STFU!!!!!

To paraphrase Savage, not all conversatives are morons, but all morons are Republicans.

But, you asked a question, so here's an answer - Obama is not going to give an ounce of credibility to this asinine question because the official govt agencies have already verifiied the authenticity.  It's like a state patrol officer asking for the results of your driving test after you hand him your license.  It's obvious as the age spots on McCain's skin that Obama is on the up and up.

Go peddle your craziness else where...

OBAMA FIGHTS LAWSUIT ALLEGING HE IS NOT AN AMERICAN CITIZEN!  HE WILL NOT COOPERATE WITH THE COURT IN PROVING HIS ELIGIBILITY TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

Every voter in this country should view this video. The question is very simple; if Obama is eligible to run for President of this country, all he has to do is spring for the $10 or so to obtain a certified copy of his birth certificate, and submit it to the court. If he did, and he is a natural born citizen (assuming he did not lose his citizenship in Indonesia), then the issue would be laid to rest. This would be better for Obama, and better for the nation. Instead, however, he spends thousands of dollars to have the lawsuit dismissed, so that the American people cannot find out whether he is, indeed, eligible to run for President. CAN ANY OBAMA SUPPORTER GIVE ONE GOOD REASON WHY OBAMA WILL NOT SUBMIT A CERTIFIED COPY OF HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE TO THE COURT? I didn't think so.

http://www.americanpatrol.com/MISCNEWS/2006-UP/ELECTIONS/2008/OBAMA/OctSurpriseVideo081012.html?v=gA6_k3NtXZs

Ah, so some moron who claims he's a die hard democrat is your source? Does that mean if I can produce a moron who claims he's a die hard republican with a lawsuit against mccain you will automatically claim it's a factual issue worth discussing? Hmmm?

I hope you answer yes...

Hey, I've got an idea. Since you want to engage in BS journalism, here's another "fact" courtesy of Red State. I'm quite sure it's a site of conservative "information" vetted by you. Enjoy your next talking point courtesy of snoopy!

Nearing The Bottom Of The Barrel: Red State Floats Enquirer "Obama Molestation" Story

By Logan Murphy Tuesday Oct 14, 2008 4:45pm

From Red State: (yes, it goes there)

After that coup, the left, which patently refused to mention the Edwards scandal decided that anything the Enquirer wrote about Sarah Palin had to be the gospel truth. They could talk about her alleged affair. They could speculate that her baby was not really her baby. They could go after her kids. After all, the National Enquirer covered it.

The National Enquirer now suggests Barack Obama had an underage, gay affair with a pedophile. Yup. That Frank Marshall Davis guy Barry says was his good friend? Turns out he was a perv of the first order and liked young boys.

This post is not intended to spread that rumor...

Remember John Edwards? Who broke the Edwards story? The National Enquirer of course.

I read about this earlier.  What in God's outhouse is an "underage gay affair with a pedophile"?  That's molestation, that's sexual abuse.  The phrasing makes it sound like there would be something consentual going on there.

How wildly partisan and utterly shameless does someone have to be to not only try to make hay out of a rumor about something of this nature, but to do it in such a way that makes it sound like the child was willing?  The linguistic contortions must be outmatched only by those of the moral self-justifications.  If it gets any lower than that, I can't imagine how.

 The question is very simple; if Obama is eligible to run for President of this country, all he has to do is spring for the $10 or so to obtain a certified copy of his birth certificate, and submit it to the court.

First of all, that's not a question.

Second, if he is eligible, why would he spend 10 bucks to become eligible? Doesn't seem like the sort of fiscal sense you'd want in a president.

Seriously, even posting anonymously, you're making a fool of yourself.

MUST... <dzzt!> CALL... <dzzt! wink! wink!> RUSH... <dzzt! spark! wink!>...

AGAIN, YOU CAN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION, CAN YOU.  YOU ARE EMBARRASSING YOURSELF. 

ONE MORE TIME, can you put forth one plausible reason why Obama refuses to submit a certified copy of his birth certificate to the court?  And, please, no BS this time; just answer the question, or please just shut up and let intelligent individuals carry on this discussion.  Thank you for your cooperation.

As the info above states, he did post a certified copy, you don't want to recognize it as legit because you don't like factcheck.org. Get over it, he's never gonna spend another $10 to personally give you a certified copy.

Because, for one thing, birth certificates can be used for things we like to call identification theft, which is why mine is locked in my safety deposit box in my bank. Second of all, as others have pointed out to you, and as other websites have proven beyond the shadow of a doubt, Obama is an American citizen. The mere fact that you can't wrap your ignorant mind around the fact that Obama's mother is an American citizen, and NO MATTER WHERE he might have been born (even though it was in the US State of Hawaii) he'd still be eligible to run for President, because he was born an American citizen. He would be born in Iceland, it wouldn't matter. He'd still be a natural born citizen as defined by the Constitution. The fact that he doesn't want to produce his birth certificate for some wingnut demanding to see it in court means, well, nothing... Why? Because it's a waste of everybody's time, because again, Obama's mother is an AMERICAN CITIZEN. Get it? I'm sure that you don't. The Constitution says that Obama can run for President. The Constitution says that McCain can run for President (remember, he was not born on US soil at ALL). 

Stop acting like an ignorant oaf, because you can't read the laws, or read the Constitution. Obama doesn't need to produce his birth certificate, even though, he already has. Posted it on his website for ALL to see. Let factcheck.org review it, so that they could tear down these stupid rumors, and that's not good enough for you? I'm sure you'll say something about Obama being on the Annenberg board or something like that, but guess what? Annenberg was a die hard REPUBLICAN. And Factcheck.org is not the same as the board that Obama served on, which was about educational reform.

You guys should really come at the man with something more than a birth certificate thing. Again, read the Constitution. It might surprise you at what is actually in there.

WRONG, OBAMA BREATH.  Privacy should not be an excuse because Obama has already posted an "alleged" copy his website.  SO, AGAIN, WHY IS OBAMA REFUSING TO SUBMIT A CERTIFIED COPY OF HIS BIRTH CERTICATE TO THE COURT?  TRY AGAIN, OBAMA CULTISTS.

Do you know why he fights this stupid lawsuit? Because, it's stupid and without merit at all. The judge hearing it, should throw it out immediately.

Do you really think a Constitutional scholar is going to run for President if he is hiding that he's not eligible? I'm sure you guys are working up impeachment papers already, and will be hard at work trying to take down Obama from day 1, just like Clinton. 

IF IT HAS NO MERIT, HE CAN STOP IT IN ITS TRACKS BY MERELY SUBMITTING A CERTIFIED COPY OF HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE TO THE COURT.  WHY DOES HE REFUSE TO DO SO?  GIVE ME ONE GOOD REASON, IF YOU CAN.

You know, if you keep repeating the same things over and over again, it doesn't make them any more true than before.

Why does he refuse to? I answered your silly little question before, but I'll do so again. Because the lawsuit is without merit, and he doesn't have time to play paddy cake with some whack job who thinks he has the answers to the "Obama question". He is sort of busy right now, you know, running for the Presidency. He also doesn't need to make public private records, because it is not required by law that he do so. Obama is an American citizen qualified to run for President as put forth in the Constitution of the United States of America.

 HE WILL NOT COOPERATE WITH THE COURT IN PROVING HIS ELIGIBILITY TO BE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES:

WHICH court requested Obama prove his citizenship??????????????

It's quite obvious what's going on here. Troglodytes like WeeklyPlanner are setting up their Post-Defeat Paradigm. They see Grampy's campaign circling the drain, so they are building their case that Obama's presidency will be somehow "illegitimate". They did it to Clinton because he won with less than 50% of the popular vote. It gives them something to kvetch about for the next four years.... and ensures a lucrative career for professional liars like Weenie Savage and Pigboy Limbaugh.

Judging by the lack of intelligent response on this thread, I conclude that NONE of you have done any credible research. I refer the following to my post from October 15, 2008 2:40:19 AM EDT ON THIS VERY THREAD!

Snoopy, wzwriter, Irony101, brabantio, matrixbio2014, Col. Harland Sanders, Steve Wyp.

And now the questions to be answered: WHY AVOID PRODUCING A ROCK-SOLID, CASE-CLOSED DOCUMENT (THE "VAULT" BIRTH CERTIFICATE FROM THE HOSPITAL)? WHY THE MOTION TO DISMISS? WHY THE REFUSAL TO COOPERATE? WHAT IS HE NOT TELLING US?

I just answered above, but I'll repeat it for you.

Obama and the DNC are seeking to have the case dismissed because there are several charges made in it apart from the birth certificate nonsense.  Producing the original document wouldn't satisfy the suit.  Therefore, if a case can be made that Berg had no legal standing to bring suit, this frivolous lawsuit can be pushed aside more easily, saving everyone a waste of time.

I like how the failure of anyone to respond at 3:30 in the flippin' morning is some indication that liberals have been stymied by solon's brilliant argumentation.  That is some funny stuff right there.

I've misplaced my MMFA poster duty roster.  Who was responsible for 3:30 AM responses this morning?

THE OTHER DOCUMENTS WHICH ARE REQUESTED ARE ALSO OF NO CONSEQUENCE TO OBAMA, UNLESS HE IS LYING ABOUT HIS CITIZENSHIP. 

AGAIN, YOU CAN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION, CAN YOU.  YOU ARE EMBARRASSING YOURSELF. 

ONE MORE TIME, can you put forth one plausible reason why Obama refuses to submit a certified copy of his birth certificate to the court?  And, please, no BS this time; just answer the question, or please just shut up and let intelligent individuals carry on this discussion.  Thank you for your cooperation.

It's not simply a case of documents provided and I didn't say it was.  Please learn to read more carefully and you might not allow yourself to be fooled by that kind of nonsense peddler.

Berg's frivolous lawsuit also makes charges that Obama lost his citizenship during his time in Indonesia and that he has dual or conflicting national loyalties with regard to Kenya and Indonesia.  There are some other issues also raised.  If his campaign starts addressing some elements of the suit he would be expected to address all of that nonsense.  If there is a legitimate case to be made that Berg lacks standing to bring the suit, it provides a convenient way to brush aside a silly nuisance.  Obama and the DNC would be foolish not to use that tool.

Obama has made available the official document routinely provided by the state of Hawaii.  This document provides an official certificate number, is certified by the registrar of the state and bears the embossed seal of the state of Hawaii.  This documentation is accepted in all states as proper legal documentation of birth.  It is based on the documentation the state received 47 years ago from which information was entered into the official record.

All of the official documentation supports the fact that Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961.  Berg is coming in and basically saying "I believe that the official documentation is wrong.  You have to prove me wrong."  The legal system doesn't work that way.  Berg is making the affirmative charges, it is his responsibility to support his case.

Finally, there's a key just above your shift key called a Capslock key.  Press it when you find yourself typing in all caps and you won't look like such a fool.

STILL, YOU REFUSE TO ANSWER THE QUESTION.  WHAT DOES OBAMA HAVE TO LOSE IF HE SUBMITS A COPY OF HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE?  KEEP TRYING, OBAMA CULTISTS.  I'LL BE WAITING FOR A PLAUSIBLE REASON.

The capslock thing really does knock about ten points of the apparent intelligence of any poster.  Learning to use it might allow us to take you more seriously.  Then again, the vapid nature of your posts will pretty much nullify that.

He's provided the documentation that is acceptable to all agencies of the US government and all of the states of the union.  If he starts picking and choosing which nonsense from Berg's frivolous suit he responds to, he'll open himself up to addressing all of it.  He has nothing to gain, because the nutjobs who are buying into this BS aren't going to vote for him in any case.

As I understand it the Court has not asked Obama to sumit a certified copy of his birth certificate to it. 

Have you provided a certified copy of YOUR birth certificate to the Court?  If not, why your refusal?

If I were running for any office, and this issue came up, I would have absolutely no problem submitting a certified copy of my birth certificate to the court, or even the press.  Why not?  After all, I have nothing to hide. Obviously, Obama does.

If you were running for president and you responded to every loony tunes who made a ridiculous request, that wouldn't leave you much time for campaigning.

But I guess that would be your call.

Why give any form of credibility to a guy who in the past has filed a RICO case against the US government accusing it of complicity in the 9/11 attack?

Berg is a nutbag, a well educated nutbag, but still not worth time and attention.

So, how did you namejack the real solon's name? And why do you refuse to acknowledge that the 14th amendment supercedes that drivel you wrote?

I didn't namejack anything. And unless you're a black and white beagle with a little yellow bird for a friend, I wouldn't start spouting anything about namejacking.

As to your left-field reference to the 14th amendment my answer is: What does the 14th amendment have to do with an assertion that Barack Obama actually born in Kenya to a non-citizen father and a mother who was ineligible to legally pass citizenship to her child born abroad? NOTHING!!

That's not what "namejack" means.  It means someone else here had the name before you, therefore you shouldn't have access to it.

I have to wonder.... given the irrational hysteria being fomented on the Right about Obama, what will they do if Obama wins?  I've heard them calling in to local Talk Radio, and they are threatening to fire all their workers and head to the woods with guns and beef jerky.

After President Numbnuts won in 2004, I was severely disappointed, and couldn't believe the stupidity of my fellow Americans, and I kvetched as much as anybody.  I was, however, able to function and go on with my life.  Will the Evangelical Troglodytes be able to function, considering that the Republican Liars have convinced them that Obama is a Marxist Muslim Extremist Terrorist who will raise their taxes, confiscate their guns and eat their children?

Assuming an Obama win, I can't wait to hear PigBoy Limbaugh's show the day after the election.

Simple, he has already proven that he was born in Hawaii. Therefore, he doesn't need to waste his valuable time on some right wing paper chase. Until you conservative denialists can prove otherwise, Obama owes you nothing further.

What occurs to me about all this is that the President is still a Republican at the moment.  He probably wants McCain to win.  Couldn't he, as the most powerful man in the free world, make a couple of phone calls and find out if the certificate of live birth is in fact not genuine?

HE COULD HAVE ONE OF HIS ARMY OF EMPLOYEES MAIL A CERTIFIED COPY OF HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE TO THE COURT IN AN HOUR.  THE "HE DOESN'T HAVE TIME" ARGUMENT IS BOGUS. 

AGAIN, YOU CAN'T ANSWER THE QUESTION, CAN YOU.  YOU ARE EMBARRASSING YOURSELF. 

ONE MORE TIME, can you put forth one plausible reason why Obama refuses to submit a certified copy of his birth certificate to the court?  And, please, no BS this time; just answer the question, or please just shut up and let intelligent individuals carry on this discussion.  Thank you for your cooperation.

Nuts, you has got them.

Because he knows it won't be enough.  To these people there will never be enough proof.  It's like dealing with a child stuck in the "But why?" stage.  No matter what one says there will always be another question and the only way to escape the endless and pointless discussion is to avoid it entirely.

OBVIOUSLY, NO ONE CAN GIVE A PLAUSIBLE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION, YET.  MCCAIN HAS PROVIDED A CERTIFIED COPY OF HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE WHEN IT BECAME AN ISSUE.  WHY IS OBAMA REFUSING TO DO SO?  TRY AGAIN, OBAMA CULTISTS.