Calling all Birthers

[Merlyn_LeRoy 72]

EagleDad, Obama published his birth certificate ages ago; he published what every other Hawaiian-born person gets. He had to go outside the normal channels to get his long form BC, just as any other Hawaiian who would try to get theirs.

[Eamonn 61]

I really haven't paid too much attention to the media coverage of "Birthers".

But I did find it a little strange that in order for HWMBO and the Fruit to get American Passports they had to send in copies of their birth certificates.

In the UK (At least when I was birthed) You got a certificate at birth.) Here in Pa you get a registration of birth and have to send away for a birth certificate.

President Obama, might have ran into the same fuss had he been birthed here in Pa?

Ea.

[Beavah 205]

Would we have had this discussion if Obama, or any other president, had simply published their birth certificated at the beginning, nope.

 

Yah... Except no other president had ever been harangued or questioned about it, eh? I can understand da president's sentiment. If I were standing in a line to buy something and they took everybody else's cash in front of me, but when they got to me they demanded that I prove my cash wasn't counterfeit by goin' back and getting a notarized statement from my bank stating that they verified my withdrawal and issued true federal reserve notes, I'd tell 'em to shove it in some anatomically inappropriate places.

 

Da real ethical question for me is what I would do if they did that to someone else while I was watching, eh? Would I do the right thing and stand up for da fellow? And I think as scouts, that's the proper ethical question for us.

 

BS-87, I completely understood your argument, eh? It wasn't a lack of comprehension on my part. It was incredulity. Da argument is foolish. Andrew Jackson's parents were virtually fresh off da boat from Ireland. None of da other presidents mentioned would be eligible either given your bizarre interpretation and today's laws. To say that da argument is "novel" is like sayin' Elvis is having your love child next week is novel. It might play well in those supermarket tabloids, but that's about it.

 

Da way we resolve minor constitutional issues is through the courts, and citizenship stuff has long since been resolved. The opposite of natural is naturalized, and da procedures for naturalization and when it is required are well defined. Now, we could of course amend da constitution as vol_scouter suggests. That's the sort of overly specific nonsense that doesn't belong in da constitution in my opinion, but yeh see tom fool folks in California do that kind of thing to their constitution all the time. Venezuelans too.

 

But let's be clear, eh? That would have excluded a number of past presidents. It would exclude many a child born to US servicemen and diplomats stationed overseas. It would exclude children of parents who happened to be on work abroad at the time of birth. We also don't have control of dual citizenship, eh? Other nations set their own rules for citizenship, and we don't have a say in that. I forget da details on Israel's right of return, but it seems like if you're Jewish and yeh went there on vacation you could have dual citizenship. . And all that leaves out da folks like Eamonn's son, many of whom have given their lives and their limbs fighting for us in Iraq and Afghanistan.

 

So it's really a question of standin' in line at a store, and your neighbor walks up to da counter but his cash is not good enough for 'em.

 

What do you do?

 

Beavah

[BS-87 30]

packsaddle -

 

You're right in that it's fallacious to assume that American parents will produce an American patriot. It's fallacious to assume that foreign parents will produce an un-American son.

 

Therefore, we must use inductive reasoning in this instance to assume that in more cases that the American parents will produce more American sons, and we must set a benchmark or law to establish that (as our Founding Fathers did by clarifying "natural born" in the Constitution)

[packsaddle 753]

Eamonn, it works the same in other states as well. No one in my family has any record in hand similar to the one just published by Obama. We all have documents similar to the certificate he released long ago. And we, like you, had to send away for those in order to get our passports. Merlyn is probably right, we'd have to make some special petition to get the 'long form'...I'm not sure it even exists for my children.

 

The Blancmange playfully suggested that I was somehow responsible for all this and I guess that means I'm thinking about running for President or something. But I think the furor over the veto of the Arizona 'Birther Bill' coupled with the astonishing polls showing a huge percentage of Republicans of the opinion Obama was not born in the US, along with the idiotic and sometimes incomprehensible statements by The Donald...all contributed to the sideshow and Obama just got tired of having that distraction around.

 

My advice to vol_scouter or BS-87 is to go for it! Put as much energy and time and resources as necessary to change the laws and to get things the way you want them to be.

And I will continue to support The Donald as the Republican nominee. "Help me, Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi. You're [our] only hope."

[acco40 95]

I've got two suggestions. Anyone who was born on American soil and have two or more generations of parents and grandparents who were all born on American soil should be disqualified from running for political office. The reason is that they take the "real" American ideals for granted.

 

If got a novel approach, why not allow the citizenry to elect whom they feel is the best choice for office regardless of race, age, sex, etc. Isn't that the American way?

 

This is such bull$hit. Terms like "un-American" and such have no real meaning. Is slavery the American way or un-American? Is wiping out indigenous people the American way or un-American way? Is sending troops to Afganistan to suppress muslim extremists the Soviet way? The American way? Un-American? Is opposing "Dubya" Bush policies un-American? Is opposing Obama's policies un-American?

 

If you are unsatisfied with our current sitting president, get involved in the political process and work for change. Resorting to calling him un-American or challenging his birth is beyond what any reasonable adult should do in my eyes.

[packsaddle 753]

Acco40, you must realize that these kinds of things are out there because they're easy. As opposed to the heavy lifting of constructing well-reasoned arguments. So try not to let this stuff get under your skin. The fringe is always going to be there. We have to live with it...maybe chuckle once in a while and shake our heads.

 

Edit: I keep forgetting to ask (sorry Vicki, this is just for the guys), how about those certificates of circumcision? Anyone ever get one of those?...The certificate - I mean.(This message has been edited by packsaddle)

[BadenP 93]

It amazes me how much these same birthers still want to argue this now settled argument with inane ideas about clarifying the Constitution and other such nonsense. You people need to give it up already as you continue to make yourselves look even more foolish and just plain ignorant about your understanding of what it truly means to be an American.

[vol_scouter 365]

Packsaddle,

 

Had you read the posts carefully, neither I nor BS-87 said that Eamon's son would not currently be eligible to be president. I made a very reasonable suggestion to clarify what the meaning of 'natural born citizen' should be. By the standards that you, acc40, and others espouse, then a child born on American soil of parents who are not citizens and was raised from 1 year through 25 in a communist system or extremist country such as North Korea or Iran would be eligible to be president when they were old enough. That is nonsense. Certainly, being born here of USA citizens does not assure that the child will be patriotic as in Bill Ayres and his wife. However, they are more likely to be loyal Americans than those who do not meet those requirements. Having requirements that must be met is very American. My suggestions are reasonable and logical. They would not affect the current office holder but codify what the requirements would be in the future.

[packsaddle 753]

BS-87 quote in his reply to Eamonn:

"Your son is 100% American. He's a native born citizen.

 

The only thing he won't be able to do as an American is hold the nation's two highest executive positions."

 

How else am I to interpret this?

[acco40 95]

Vol_scouter - humor me please. Who is better to determine what the best (however one defines "best") meat product is? Someone who has only tasted beef? Someone who has only tasted pork? Someone who has only tasted chicken (fowl is a meat in my book so don't bother going there)?

 

So I ask you, why are you so afraid of a political candidate who has experienced both democracy and communism? Almost every government in the world is some flavor of socialism. Do you think a Canadian, who has actually experienced socialized medicine, may be able to shed some light on the benefits and pratfalls of how it is done in Canada?

 

Right now, many Afghanis have had the "privilege" of experience communist rule under the Soviet Union, Sharia law under the Taliban, feudalism under Warlords and "democracy" under Karzai / US support. If one immigrated to the US and became a naturalized citizen many years later I think they would be more vastly qualified to determine the pros & cons of those governmental systems that you or I.

[vol_scouter 365]

acc40,

 

First, I agree with fowl being a meat. Second, I get so tired of the left accusing people who disagree with their ideas are 'afraid' of something. So why are you afraid of people who meet the standards that I outlined? Such an attitude is insulting and serves no useful purpose.

 

So to address your query, the USA is a representative democracy and the President, Vice President and Speaker of the House of Representatives need to understand our system and be dedicated to making it better. The immediate past Speaker of the House of Representatives demonstrated recently why such a belief is necessary when she questioned why we should have elections since they can undo legislation - clearly not a belief in democracy. She is an example of someone being a citizen but not supporting the Constitution that she has sworn to protect on many occasions. Our representative democracy is fragile since we are such an amalgam of people who are only bound by our ideals. Our leaders need to be able to clearly enunciate those ideals.

[packsaddle 753]

"So why are you afraid of people who meet the standards that I outlined?"

 

The best response I can give to this is that I have no fears under the standards as they exist now.

And because the standards as they exist now would include ALL of those eligible under your proposed standards, your question makes no sense.

I see no useful purpose for your further restrictions except to address YOUR fears with regard to people who meet current standards but not those which you propose.

 

So...how about that quote from BS-87? Did I interpret it incorrectly?

[acco40 95]

Okay, maybe "afraid" is a bad choice of words on my part. If you feel it is a bad choice, what was your purpose in using it? By the way, I'm a sinister person (i.e. left handed) but don't consider myself "the left" or "the right" - just correct.

 

Why does "the right" always talk down to the audience - yes, I know about our governmental processes. We have a judicial system that determines when laws are constitutional or not and yes, one year the law may be unconstitutional and another year constitutional (abortion). Why do so many have such a hard time grasping that there are shades of gray even in interpreting our constitution. If there wasn't, then I couldn't waste my time on the political issues section of this forum!

 

In the city of Detroit, things are a financial mess for various reasons. The citizens have elected a school board that can't live within it's means, produces poor quality education, has seas of red ink and problems are growing. It is faced with the possibility of a takeover. The previous "Canadian" democratic governor placed an appointed emergency financial manager who had broad powers to run the DPS. The current republican "tough nerd" governor is trying to go even further with a takeover of the DPS. Did they not know how our system of government works? Poppycock! They are taking extreme measures when extreme measures are needed. So, I turn a deaf ear when I hear the locals complain about government takeovers and such.

 

(This message has been edited by acco40)

[skeptic 997]

I am beginning to really understand Diogenes now. We certainly could benefit from a truly "honest man". Someone find me a lantern.