"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.
The question is, where is the information that "Every one of them [President] has [published his birth certificate]. Along with their school records (all of which seem to be missing from the Obamassiah)"
'Want to show us some, or tell us where they were published?
So you're saying that the short form, which is an official document in Hawaii and was certified by the appropriate officials there, is a fraud and that the officials are liars? It contains all of the relevant information.
And if that's the case, what makes you think that the long form is better?
I'm saying more information is better, and most people probably have what I have, which includes all the long form info. So, to many people the short form doesn't look right. It doesn't to me, because it looks like a lot is missing. That's because of what I'm used to, not because it's a fraud. Nevertheless I didn't have serious doubt about the short one.
Well, then, you have no reason for Obama to supply the long one. I have the short one. Most of the one's I've seen, except for those people who have a copy made the week they were born, are short ones. I have one from the week I was born, and it's a short form.
In any case, there was no reason for Obama to supply either one except to shut up the birthers, who aren't going to vote for him anyway, under any conditions. The Supreme Court hasn't even granted cert on the cases that were brought, because the certification by Hawaii is enough to satisfy any legal requirement.
Releasing it sounds like a bad precedent to me. But Trump was distracting attention, so I understand why he released it.
I think "Natural born Citizen" pretty much covers that. Although, come to think of it, that could exclude anyone who was from their mother's womb untimely ripped, a la Caesarian section.
And why is Trump getting so much press anyway? He's nothing but a professional loudmouthed asshole anyway.
Gunner Asch on Thu, 28 Apr 2011 03:48:14 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
Nope. But a manual machine may have variations on "miss strikes". One of the classics is when what is to be a capital letter is typed and the shift key is not held down properly. You wind up with the bottom of one case and the top of the other both striking the page. (This assumes a manual machine, not an electric one.)
Of course kids these days don't know from typewriters, having faked all their notes on computers. B-)
Gunner Asch on Sat, 30 Apr 2011 19:37:43 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
And a lot of "natural born Citizens" had no birth certificates, as they were born at home. Some of them may even still be alive, for all I know. I wonder how many hippie kids had no birth certificate issued, as Mom & Dad were hippies and didn't want anything to do with "The Man"?
Gunner Asch on Sat, 30 Apr 2011 17:02:56 -0700 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:
It is scary some times. I remember pulling out a printout from a program I had written, about nuclear weapon effects. The fact that it was about Nuclear Weapons _and_ printed on green bar, seemed to some of the folks in my dorm to mean it was some kind of "Official" document. I was kind of flabbergasted at their ... naivety.
Which doesn't say *anything* about needing to produce a birth certificate.
Apparently, that person was you, because I'm clearly better informed on the subject than you are. Now produce a cite for your claim that a candidate needs to produce his birth certificate, or STFU.
Show me where the Constitution says a candidate for President needs to produce his birth certificate. That's what you claimed, after all. Let's see the proof.
Yes, we know that. But *you* said that the *birth certificate* is a requirement -- and it's not.
I'm perfectly familiar with it. You appear to be completely ignorant of the entire document, though, since you seem to think that it somewhere requires that candidates produce a birth certificate to prove their citizenship.
News flash: it doesn't.
Can you possibly be that stupid? He was born in Hawaii. Hawaii is a U.S. state, and was at the time of his birth. That makes him a natural-born citizen.
I'm obviously more knowledgeable about the Constitution than you are. At least, *I* know that it doesn't contain any requirement for birth certificates.
LMAO! **YOU** need to go back and read it, *and* the Constitution, over and over and over, until you realize that there's no requirement for a birth certificate.
Ummm.... that would be you, Gummer. *You* claimed that producing a birth certificate is a requirement. But it's not. And when challenged to produce a cite for that [false] claim, you resort to insults and abuse.
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?
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.