Obama Lawsuit

If it is true, the legal system has until the day the president elect is sworn in to sort it out. At this point many accusations are out there.

I believe both sides know the outcome now. I do not like the projected winner as his statements and voting record are at odds, not to mention he does not share my beliefs. I do not know whether he is American born or not. Since everything else about ones history is open to manipulation that would be to. A new birth certificate would be simple to generate and as president it could be forever blocked from the public.

Todays Zogby EC results are Obama 286, McCain 174 and the undecided states (now just 5) 79. The close states, including Ohio and Florida are leaning Obama.

I am now just watching the polls with (morbid) curiosity.

Slàinte,    

Patch    

Patch;

We don't have that problem up here. You do not have to be born in Canada to be Prime Minister. Our First P M. was a Scotsman John A. MacDonald. Loved to imbibe.

Camac

This requirement was written into our Constitution and would require an amendment to change it.

I think the founding fathers feared that a foreign born leader would lead us into entanglements with other countries that were not good for America.

Our native born leaders have done a fine job of that anyway.

Slàinte,   

 Patch    

Did you hear the one about Obama fathering two black children while in wedlock???

If you really want to know who Obama is go to http://obama.senate.gov/votes/
and look at his voting record. For the most part he has not voted. The times he has voted is pro federal government control and against families. He is the senator for Illinois and claims to care for his people but has almost consistantly voted against the people when he bothers to vote at all. He is asked questions and when he bothers to answer he gives only part answers. According to some responses I got directly from him on the born alive law and the marriage law stating that marriage is between a man and a woman only, he knows better what is good for the citizens. That's why when these laws came to a vote in Illinois 75-80% voted for the child born alive and voted that only marriage between a man and women be recognized. We are all dumb and don't know what is best for us? All faiths and beliefs I know including the ancient ones and even wiccans teach there is no life without man and woman together.
He has proven with his own words and actions to be pro abortion, anti family, pro gays, anti military, anti country, pro federal power, etc.
RebeccaAnn

As a true politician, he IS what the moment calls for to get elected. Then so is his opponent, just different issues for the most part.

Slàinte,    Patch    

What I stated was that a copy of a birth certificate is not proof of eligibility to work in the US. What you read was "he had to produce a birth certificate in order to get a job."

http://humanresources.about.com/od/policys...k/a/I9_form.htm
Scroll down to Section "C" item "3"
"Original or certified copy of a birth certificate issued by a state, county, municipal authority or outlying possession of the United States bearing an official seal."
An image posted on the Internet is not a "certified copy"
HOWEVER- a birth certificate is not the only proof accepted, any other item under Part C is also acceptable in its stead. Any item listed in Part A is also accepted.
An "official seal" is a raised seal, which is not visible on the image that was linked.

Federal CDL application requirements state that a birth certificate with a "raised seal" is required. Again, this raised seal is not visible.
Again, a copy of a birth certificate is not acceptable- however a birth certificate is not the only acceptable proof of identity.
Here's a link for PA, feel free to hunt up your own State's forms.
http://www.dmv.state.pa.us/pdotforms/fact_...ts/pub195us.pdf

For a passport, it says "Certified birth certificate issued by the city, county or state*"
At the asterisk we see:
"*A certified birth certificate has a registrar's raised, embossed, impressed or multicolored seal, registrar’s signature, and the date the certificate was filed with the registrar's office, which must be within 1 year of your birth. Please note, some short (abstract) versions of birth certificates may not be acceptable for passport purposes."

Once again, a raised, embossed, impressed or multicolor seal is required to be present. Such a thing is not present on the photo image.
from: http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/first...tml#DS11Instruc

No, but I *do* expect him to produce it for the authorities- in this case, the court.

The bottom line is that no raised, embossed, impressed or multicolor seal is visible on this document, thus it's not an official one. It is not acceptable proof of eligibility to work in the US- and that's exactly what we're debating here.

This is quite telling, as that certificate in the image is less than seven years old. The form revision date in the lower left hand corner is 11/01 so it was issued sometime after that. Seals do not fade away completely in a mere seven years.
OSHM 1.1 (Rev. 11/01) LASER

Have you looked at that posted image under magnification? Some interesting things, while not conclusive, they are suspicious:

Look at the area around his name, notably the "white space." Pay particular attention to the horizontal green bar that stops BEFORE it hits the "n" in "Hussein"
\

In other areas, such as around the top near the words "Hawaii" and "Honolulu" you don't see white space.


You'd expect some green to "pass through" the "o" in "Obama" like it did in the word "of" and in first "o" in "Honolulu." But it does not, despite the green bar being lined up correctly.
In addition, there is a horizontal green bar that does not show through the "U" in "Hussein."


Again, none of this is conclusive and can be the fault of the scanner used- however it is suspicious.

Looking at it again now, on my laptop, leads me to the conclusion that I need to replace the monitor for my desktop.

I can indeed see some pass-through in "o"s and the "u" on this monitor.

However- there still seems to be a lot more white space around the names of people (his name and parents' names) and the dates (birth and registration date) than there is around other lettering.

I can't prove the authenticity of the certificate, just as you can not disprove the authenticity. We each have our opinions and I doubt we're likely to change them. The fact remains that if there was any truth what so ever to these accusations, the McCain camp would be all over it. This man has offered his speculations and his theories, but he has offered no proof of what he says. Throw enough mud and hope some of it sticks seems to be the modis operandi of folks like this man. (in my opinion)

If the Obama camp responded to the lawsuit, they would be inundated with nuisance suits. By challenging the suit, they are forestalling being tied up in court with dozens of lawsuits.

I think one of the questions about his birth certificate was African, it was listed as a race. At that time they said race was listed as negro or colored, white or other. I know when my daughter was born in 1979 she was listed as other which up set me. The lady informed me that my little brown baby was not white or black but an other which were the only 3 choices we had. Now we all laugh about it. My other 3 are listed as white with their ethnic orgin.

I'll debunk this part: the non-official certificate posted earlier* was a reprint from sometime after 2001- I'll go so far as to say it's from 2007.
Based on the date on the form in the lower-left, that form came into use in 2001. Based on the bleed-through from printing on the backside, it looks to have actually been printed in 2007. I can't make out the day exactly, but the month appears to be June.

That having been said- it's very possible that under new "PC" standards it would have been printed with 'african' instead of 'negro.'
There are also numerous sites out there that show images of 1961 Hawaii birth certs that claim Obama's is fake because his is different. Same deal here- his was printed definitely after 2001, and most likely in 2007. Of course it won't look like one printed in 1961.

* I'm still maintaining that it's not an official certificate since it lacks an official seal. However the change in terminology and appearance can be easily explained.

I suppose since every conceivable criticism of Obama is taken as an attack by his campaign, and since looking at his associations and drawing a summation of his character based on those associations is ludicrous, then asking for proof of place of birth must be equally egregious. Sorry, Obama. i'm sure he'll still find someone to carry his cross up to the inauguration stage.


p.s. I wonder if the bank will loan me money using a photo of my house as collateral?

I believe the bank would have a year ago!

This has been a dirty election, as bad as I can remember.

Slàinte,    

Patch