Re: BTW, Johne...

On Sun, 17 Apr 2011, Karl Swenson wrote:
> **and before I get accused of being a birther, I am not, I am 100% 
> convinced that Obama was born when and where he said he was.  But I am 
> appalled at the notion that an actually constitutional requirement is 
> being treated dismissively when Obama can end it with a simple phone 
> call.

FWIW, one of the people who "unfriended" Johne seemed to be upset that the 
issues around John McCain's birth were being ignored too.  Apparently, 
according to this person, McCain was not born on a military base but, 
rather, was born in an off-base hospital, and therefore McCain was *not* 
born on U.S. soil and was *not* eligible for the presidency either.

***Yes, but as I recall it was heavily vetted and determined not to be an
issue.  The Obama thing really has not had the same level scrutiny to my
knowledge.

> The truth is that the ownership of birtherism is Obama and the 
> democrats, which makes the birthers dupes.

FWIW, I'm sympathetic to this.  I might even agree. 

***I heard on the radio that the Clinton campaign actually spawned it.

 But at the same time, 
even if Obama has not shown everyone the original form that they're all 
clamouring for, I *have* to say that the computerized duplicate form (or 
whatever you'd call it) is good enough for just about anything in your 
country, right?  I mean, it would be good enough if he were using it to 
get a passport or a driver's license, etc., etc., so for everyone to 
suddenly say it's not good enough for *this* is just weird.

**Well, the fact6 is that the requirement has never really passed any kind
of legal challenge so there is no precendent.

**I do also know, however, that there are a lot of loopholes in getting the
COLB from Hawaii, and it has been demonstrated how easily one could be
issued falsely.  There is a grain of an issue there.


-- 
dadl-ot mailing list
http://mail.thehood.us/mailman/listinfo/dadl-ot_thehood.us
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.music.dadl.ot