Predicto's chronolgy of the Obama Birth Certificate controversy.

[Larry]

Actually, I keep reflecting on an article I read, back when this "controversy" was building steam. Basically, he was speculating on possible reasons why people would invest this much energy into trying to reveal a piece of paper.

In short, he assumed that the people pushing this crusade actually had a rational plan, and tried to figure out what it was. (I'll leave it up to speculation as to whether this person's assumption was a valid one.)

This then led him to the assertion that the only possible reason for demanding Paper X over Paper Y was because there is something which is on Paper X (but not on Paper Y) which the person wants. (And wants desperately.)

In short, he asked "What's on this piece of paper that y'all want so bad?"

He then observed that there are several pieces of information which are typically on forms of that type which are no longer shown on modern, state-issued documents.

The only two things he could see, that looked like somebody might really want, though, were:

Many birth certificates have blanks for the parent's religion. It's possible that this entire circus is being put on, so that people can shout "Look! His Father was Muslim!"

The other possibility the author proposed was that many birth certificates have a blank for the parent's marital status. The article claimed that there is, supposedly, a question about Obama's parent's marital status, because his Father, later, apparently married someone else, without first getting a divorce.

In short, this article at least speculated that the entire demand for Obama's birth certificate is an intentionally manufactured "controversy", manufactured by people who've already (illegally) managed to see the document, who want it revealed so they can play political "Gotcha!"

[CrabR]

Dear god they just don't frickin' quit.

Here's a scavenger hunt for you all. Go now get what you think is your "birth certificate" and see if it meets the requirements for what you are calling for Obama to produce; i.e. doctor's signatures etc.

Now, if none of you can produce something that meets those standards then you aren't real citizens and I demand that you all leave this country and go back to whatever hole the in wall you crawled out from.

---------- Post added February-6th-2011 at 08:04 AM ----------

It doesn't, Obama could have been born on the moon as long as his mother was a citizen.

I lost mine in the 70's got a another one in 81, It is the size of a credit card. It was from NC

this is beyond stupid

[Boss_Hogg]

This is absurd.

Here the ****ing certificate:

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

[Bliz]

IMo whats going to happen this next go around is that a State will REQUIRE ORIGINAL documentation to be offered as proof for meeting qualifications to run for those office(s) in which have clear prerequisites and to be placed on a States ballot. The presidency is one of those and so anyone who wishes to run will be required to offer an "ORIGINAL birth certificate" and not what a State offers as one ex-post facto. There is pending legislation in multiples States that will make this mandatory. An "original" means the one issued at time of birth. The dam will break on way or another.

I believe this would be unconstitutional or ineffective for at least two reasons. First its a violation of full faith and credit. Arizona can't tell hawaii how to issue birth certificates. If hawaii says this is valid, arizona has to accept it, just like they have to accept marriages performed in other states, even if they did not have all the elements required by arizona (if arizona required marriage counseling first, or had a higher age of consent, for example)

Second, this sounds like an impermissible attempt to re-define who is eligible to run. The constitution sets the limits and a state cannot decide how those requirements are interpreted, any more than they could say you have to be over 60 to appear on our state ballot. Even if they could do that, they couldn't stop people from writing in a candidate's name, and if the write-in candidate won, they would have to award the electoral votes to that candidate

[Zguy28]

This is the original Mike Evans interview. This interview sounds pretty genuine. It sounds to me that his back track was more damage control than truth.

So this Evans guy is a liar then. Either in his first claim or the second. Either way he's an official liar.

---------- Post added February-6th-2011 at 03:24 PM ----------

I believe this would be unconstitutional or ineffective for at least two reasons. First its a violation of full faith and credit. Arizona can't tell hawaii how to issue birth certificates. If hawaii says this is valid, arizona has to accept it, just like they have to accept marriages performed in other states, even if they did not have all the elements required by arizona (if arizona required marriage counseling first, or had a higher age of consent, for example)

Second, this sounds like an impermissible attempt to re-define who is eligible to run. The constitution sets the limits and a state cannot decide how those requirements are interpreted, any more than they could say you have to be over 60 to appear on our state ballot. Even if they could do that, they couldn't stop people from writing in a candidate's name, and if the write-in candidate won, they would have to award the electoral votes to that candidate

I believe states like Maryland require even a write-in to be registered in order for votes to count.

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=cache:wGgQpoVUqycJ:www.elections.state.md.us/candidacy/documents/Writein_packet.pdf+maryland+write-in+candidates&hl=en&gl=us&pid=bl&srcid=ADGEESj0P8OEzrnlpoBZ-8qvCXTmoc3m3xgozL6zSrIUX6tKMBwONhe_n0wH98PF9MPrz0vFAMfPe__OLiSMHmNEZsk5GNwARkaMIyNOhhKZXPbBSZh9FMtielexFinYVyONO8qF3Usq&sig=AHIEtbTXKKXFT--FT4f-ac3NGiy2TIkFWg

[aREDSKIN]

I believe this would be unconstitutional or ineffective for at least two reasons. First its a violation of full faith and credit. Arizona can't tell hawaii how to issue birth certificates. If hawaii says this is valid, arizona has to accept it, just like they have to accept marriages performed in other states, even if they did not have all the elements required by arizona (if arizona required marriage counseling first, or had a higher age of consent, for example)

Second, this sounds like an impermissible attempt to re-define who is eligible to run. The constitution sets the limits and a state cannot decide how those requirements are interpreted, any more than they could say you have to be over 60 to appear on our state ballot. Even if they could do that, they couldn't stop people from writing in a candidate's name, and if the write-in candidate won, they would have to award the electoral votes to that candidate

This is what's percolating. We'll have to wait and see if it's effective.

"The Arizona bill also requires attachments, "which shall be sworn to under penalty of perjury," including "an original long form birth certificate that includes the date and place of birth, the names of the hospital and the attending physician and signatures of the witnesses in attendance."

http://www.thecypresstimes.com/article/News/National_News/GAMECHANGER_ARIZONA_TO_PASS_2012_ELIGIBILITY_LAW/39399

[Burgold]

This is what's percolating. We'll have to wait and see if it's effective.

"The Arizona bill also requires attachments, "which shall be sworn to under penalty of perjury," including "an original long form birth certificate that includes the date and place of birth, the names of the hospital and the attending physician and signatures of the witnesses in attendance."

http://www.thecypresstimes.com/article/News/National_News/GAMECHANGER_ARIZONA_TO_PASS_2012_ELIGIBILITY_LAW/39399

It's crazy how much craziness has come out of Arizona in the last few years. It really is a pretty radical state.

[Koolblue13]

This is so stupid.

"I wasn't going to vote for him anyway, but he's a Muslim"

"no he isn't"

"well, he's black"

"I don't care"

"but he's a socialist"

"you don't even know what that means"

"he doesn't have a birth certificate, he isn't an American, one of us"

"facepalm"

I don't care for him and really didn't want him elected, but I've had that conversation so many times, I just put my head down when "dumb" rears it's ugly head.

[Jumbo]

.....I just put my head down when "dumb" rears it's ugly head.

So you're saying that you basically have to feel your way through the tailgate with your hands while watching your feet, or are using some sort of Dare-Devil (Marvel) sonar to navigate.

[Madison Redskin]

It's crazy how much craziness has come out of Arizona in the last few years. It really is a pretty radical state.

And it's one that is led by a total idiot. What is up with Republicans and their recent love affair with vacuous, moronic women (e.g., Palin, Bachmann, and Brewer)?

xUPKKbmWMZ8

d1xV7nTSqww

[Koolblue13]

So you're saying that you basically have to feel your way through the tailgate with your hands while watching your feet, or are using some sort of Dare-Devil (Marvel) sonar to navigate.

I keep on my feet in the Tailgate. Now, the Stadium is a different story.

[Bliz]

This is what's percolating. We'll have to wait and see if it's effective.

"The Arizona bill also requires attachments, "which shall be sworn to under penalty of perjury," including "an original long form birth certificate that includes the date and place of birth, the names of the hospital and the attending physician and signatures of the witnesses in attendance."

http://www.thecypresstimes.com/article/News/National_News/GAMECHANGER_ARIZONA_TO_PASS_2012_ELIGIBILITY_LAW/39399

I don't doubt that they're trying to do it. What I'm saying is, it is highly suspect and questionable whether such a thing could be enforced. I don't think they care. I think they WANT the Feds to challenge it as an unconstitutional usurpation so they can point their finger and scream "why are they fighting this so hard?!? What is he hiding???"

[Burgold]

I don't doubt that they're trying to do it. What I'm saying is, it is highly suspect and questionable whether such a thing could be enforced. I don't think they care. I think they WANT the Feds to challenge it as an unconstitutional usurpation so they can point their finger and scream "why are they fighting this so hard?!? What is he hiding???"

or in other words, waste tons of taxpayer money on useless trials and investigations in order to score a few political points.

[AsburySkinsFan]

So this Evans guy is a liar then. Either in his first claim or the second. Either way he's an official liar.

Quoted for truth. But, people will still persist that his initial comments were the truthful ones and the second were coerced.

---------- Post added February-6th-2011 at 04:52 PM ----------

or in other words, waste tons of taxpayer money on useless trials and investigations in order to score a few political points.

Don't ever tell me that you don't understand politics.

[Bang]

For me, Frank Zappa is one of those artists in which I recognize the genius behind the music, but a lot of it really gets on my nerves after a few minutes.

Oh, and raisinets are overrated.

~Bang

[AsburySkinsFan]

Have you ever tried "All Flavor" potato chips Bang?

Fantastic! But, I've never found them south of the Canadian border.

[Mad Mike]

For me, Frank Zappa is one of those artists in which I recognize the genius behind the music, but a lot of it really gets on my nerves after a few minutes.

Oh, and raisinets are overrated.

~Bang

Great googlymoogly, Zappa is good for at least a song or two before an overload. But I agree about raisenets.

[aREDSKIN]

I don't doubt that they're trying to do it. What I'm saying is, it is highly suspect and questionable whether such a thing could be enforced. I don't think they care. I think they WANT the Feds to challenge it as an unconstitutional usurpation so they can point their finger and scream "why are they fighting this so hard?!? What is he hiding???"

Well there are a total of ten states attempting to go this route of some degree or another.

According to officials with the National Conference of State Legislatures, 10 states already have some sort of eligibility-proof requirement plan.

There is Arizona`s HB2544, Connecticut`s SB391, Georgia`s HB37, Indiana`s SB114, Maine`s LD34, Missouri`s HB283, Montana`s HB205, Nebraska`s LB654, Oklahoma`s SB91, SB384 and SB540, and Texas; HB295 and HB529.

Led by Texas with 34, the states control 107 Electoral College votes.

The NCLS said New Hampshire last year adopted HB1245, but it requires only a statement under penalty of perjury that a candidate meets the qualification requirements of the U.S. Constitution, which is something similar to what the political parties already state regarding their candidates.

Other plans were considered last year in Texas, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Missouri, Minnesota, Maine and Arizona, and Arizona`s probably got the closest to law, falling a "pocket veto" short in the state Senate, despite widespread support.

http://thesop.org/story/20110128/10-states-ban-together-to-develop-eligibilityproof-demands.html

[Box76]

or in other words, waste tons of taxpayer money on useless trials and investigations in order to score a few political points.

Who started this whole 'conspiracy'? Democrats, specifically Hillary Clinton's staff. Who refuses to provide the solution, a single piece of paper, to avoid ueseless trials?

Why would a President of all people play childish games with a large segment of the American public? Thats not a leader by definition which is par for his course.

I would like to know what any of his supporters really know about him? What made you think he was presidental material beside his teleprompted speeches and skin color? I can't find any past accomplishments or Senate records to back up anything he stands for. He is a complete unkown and as your and my President I would like to know more about the man who makes decisions that affect my life now and in the future.

1. Dunham-Obama marriage license. Not released.

2. Dunham-Soetoro marriage license. Not released.

3. Barry Soetoro aka Barack Obama adoption records. Not released.

4. Obama’s aka Soetoro’s Besuki School application obtained.

5. Obama’s aka Soetoro’s Punahou School records. Not released.

6. Selective Service Registration – a proven forgery released and a criminal act.

7. Obama’s Occidental College records. Not released.

9. Obama’s passport from Indonesia, he had to have one to attend school in Indonesia. Not released.

10. Obama’s U.S. Passport, if one exists. Not released.

11. Obama entered Pakistan on what countries passport. Not released.

12. Obama’s Columbia University records, a foreign exchange student? Not released.

13. Obama’s Columbia University thesis. Not released.

14. Not one name of any student who knows Obama attendant Columbia released or known.

15. Obama’s Harvard Law School records, a foreign exchange student? Not released.

16. Obama’s Harvard Law Review articles, none released.

17. Obama’s Baptism certificate, if one exists? None released.

18. Obama’s Illinois State Senate records. Not released.

19. Obama’s Illinois State Senate schedule. Not released (alleged to have been lost).

20. Obama’s Law practices client list and billing records. Not released.

21. Obama’s University of Chicago scholarly articles, none released or exist?

22. The reason Obama lost his license to practice law in Illinois.

[greenspandan]

hahaha i love when people out themselves as morons by believing this claptrap. it's the easiest possible way to nullify any future opinions of that person.

[Burgold]

Who started this whole 'conspiracy'? .

Who cares who started it? A question was raised and it was answered. The form used by Hawaii was released. No offense, but anyone who continues on this subject has an agenda or is a nut.

[AsburySkinsFan]

Well there are a total of ten states attempting to go this route of some degree or another.

Here's the kicker, in order for them to do this it will have to be done at the Federal level, meaning that there will have to be a Federal standard for all birth certificates, what's more is that the impact of this won't be felt until 35 years following the passage of the legislation as anyone currently living will have to be grandfathered in, unless they are going to go through every state's birth records and re-issue Federal standard certificates to the nearly 300 million natural born citizens living right now.

So....who thinks that's gonna happen?

Yeah...me neither.

---------- Post added February-6th-2011 at 05:35 PM ----------

Why would a President of all people play childish games with a large segment of the American public? Thats not a leader by definition which is par for his course.

Why? Because YOU don't have the RIGHT to demand him to give up his RIGHTS. Dang what is so hard about that!

I don't believe you're an American citizen, I demand to see your birth certificate right now or I'm calling Immigration on you! Now, turn over your legally protected documents because some nutjob with an axe to grind says so.

You guys are just outraged that the Kenyan Muslim sleeper cell who is the President of the United States knows US law better than you do.

Frick this is dumb.

[Larry]

hahaha i love when people out themselves as morons by believing this claptrap. it's the easiest possible way to nullify any future opinions of that person.

Frankly, I think we should have a "birther" avatar.

[AsburySkinsFan]

This......

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

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

Ends any and all debate about Barack Hussien Obama's natural born citizenship.....end of story.

Unless you're going to try and say that his mother was not a citizen.

This crap needs to end, seriously how can anyone respect democratic voting by the people when people don't even understand the laws of the nation?

[Larry]

This......

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

Ends any and all debate about Barack Hussien Obama's natural born citizenship.....end of story.

Actually, I think Predicto will tell you that it doesn't. Because there has never been a ruling about exactly what the words "natural born citizen" means. (For example, the way it was explained to me in High School was "he has to be born in the US".) (Although that would have disqualified McCain.)

I've expressed the opinion that if they ever are forced to rule on it (and they'll have to be forced to rule on it, because they'd rather avoid the whole thing), there ruling will most likely be along the lines of "'natural born citizen' means 'any person who was a citizen at the time of his birth, based on the laws in effect at the time of his birth'." And he's agreed that yeah, that's probably what they would rule. But they haven't.