On Mon, 02 May 2011 00:33:08 GMT, (Doug
Miller) wrote:

In article , wrote:
On Sun, 01 May 2011 18:19:53 GMT, (Doug
Miller) wrote:

In article , Rich Grise
wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:

In article , Rich Grise
wrote:
Doug Miller wrote:
wrote:
[attribution dropped]
What other President has published his birth certificate? If the
answer is "none" then why should the present incumbent?

Every one of them has. Along with their school records (all of which
seem to be missing from the Obamassiah)

Proving the birth certificate to meet the qualifications is a
Requirement.

Requirement of what? Got a cite for that?

"No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United
States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be
eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible
to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five
Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

-- Constitution of the United States, Article II, section I, paragraph
5.

No, that doesn't help at all, because it doesn't say anything about birth
certificates.

I think "Natural born Citizen" pretty much covers that.

No, it doesn't. My father doesn't have one, AFAIK, and neither do/did any of
his brothers -- all born at home in rural Pennsylvania between 1913 and 1931.
Neither did his father, born at home in rural Pennsylvania in 1890. Are/were
they not natural born citizens?

Any of them try to become President? If not..the matter remains moot.

It doesn't matter whether they did or not: your insane fantasies
notwithstanding, the Constitution does not require a birth certificate or any
other form of proof.

Yes..it requires some form of proof.

Show me where it doesnt..how it couldnt?

You are aware..that even the Democratic Party of Hawaii in 2008, refused
to certify him for running for president, right?

http://www.evilconservativeonline.co...efused-to.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXFwqUi3zR0

2008: Hawaii Dems refused to certify Obama eligibility for the Pr...
The State Democratic Party of Hawaii would not certify in 2008 that
Obama was constitutionally and legally eligible for the Office of
President that he was running for which was the normal procedure by the
State Democratic Party of Hawaii in all the prior election cycles. See
the State Democratic Party of Hawaii certification of nomination
forms[embedded below] for the Presidential election years of 2008 for
Obama, 2004 for Kerry, and 2000 for Gore.

See this summarizing quote from the Butterdezillion blog post of 10 Sep
2010:

"It's been removed from the web, but shortly after CFP published their
original article about the Certificates of Nomination, somebody claiming
to represent the DNC stated on a discussion board that the DNC relies on
the state parties to verify Constitutional eligibility for candidates,
so the oath by Pelosi and Germond would just confirm that the state
democratic parties had confirmed the Constitutional eligibility of the
candidates.


But this is where the argument totally falls apart, because the Hawaii
Democratic Party actually ignored their protocols in 2008 in order to
specifically NOT certify Obama's eligibility as they had done for
candidates in the past. IOW, if Pelosi based her decision to certify on
whether the state party would confirm eligibility, then she had a duty
to NOT certify Obama's eligibility, because the democratic party of the
state supposedly holding Obama's birth certificate REFUSED TO CERTIFY
Obama's eligibility."
Source: http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2010/09

What did the State Democratic Party officials in Hawaii know about Obama
and his now hidden and sealed 1961 original typed long form birth
registration documents in Hawaii, and subsequent amendments to same,
which would cause them to change their normal certification of
nomination procedures for presidential candidates?

Is this possibly more evidence in Hawaii and elsewhere of possible
misprision of a felony?

So Doug...someone is going to give you $1 million dollars but only with
proof its actually you.

How are you going to do that? Or are you going to give up the $1
million dollars?

Inquiring minds really want to know.

Im also curious Doug..what leads you to state such a ridiculous a
statement?

Voted for him...didnt you...?

Gunner

--
"If I say two plus two is four and a Democrat says two plus two is eight,
it's not a partial victory for me when we agree that two plus two is
six. " Jonah Goldberg (modified)