Obama In Violation of Current Immigration Law

Without evidence to the contrary, we must assume that Obama is in Violation of Current Immigration Law. This is not a matter of “innocent until proven guiltly”, but rather “ineligible until proven eligible”.

There has been a lot of attention on the fact that Arizona Governor Jan Brewer just signed the nation’s toughest immigration enforcement bill

I commend that new law, but how about enforcing a current Federal Immigration Law that has been on the books for over 23 years?  

All employees, citizens and noncitizens, hired after November 6, 1986 and working in the United States must complete a Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification.

Anyone who has started a new job in the last 23 years has been legally required, by the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, to fill out an I-9 form and supply the necessary hardcopy documentation.

I’ve done it, and chances are that you’ve done it, too. 

But has Obama done it? 

I see no evidence of him being in compliance with this legal requirement.

If you have evidence that Obama has submitted an I-9 form in compliance with the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, please provide that evidence.

This is not a “birther” issue, it is a law enforcement issue.

Everyone who has started a new job after November 6, 1986 has been legally required to present hardcopy documentation.

Obama started a new job on January 20, 2009. He, like every other employee in this country, was legally required to submit an I-9 form with substantiating hardcopy documentation. He has not done so, and he is in violation of current immigration law.

The I-9 does not accept newspaper birth announcements as documentation.

The I-9 does not accept URL links to a web page with .JPG images of a COLB as documentation.

Regardless of where you think Obama was born, why does anyone who respects the Rule of Law think that Obama should be allowed to present to his employers (We the People) a web URL instead of a hardcopy Birth Certificate?  No one who respects the rule of law should blindly accept what has been presented by Obama to date.

If a URL is not good enough to meet the legal requirements to work a minimum wage job, why does anyone accept it for the job of President and Commander in Chief?

To put this to rest, two things need to happen:

1) Obama needs to release an original, initial birth certificate, verifying his birth hospital, directly from the state of Hawaii to members of Congress. If Obama refuses to verify his “birth narrative” with official hardcopy documentation, he is not legally eligible to work, per CURRENT IMMIGRATION LAW.

2) If Obama does verify his “birth narrative” with official hardcopy documentation, there is still the legal question of whether or not someone born a British subject (which Obama’s campaign already acknowledged he was, because his father was a British subject, not a U.S. Citizen) can or cannot be considered a “natural born citizen” of the U.S.A. To put this to rest, the Courts must rule on this and clarify the legal definition of “natural born citizen”.

Those two things will put this to rest.

Nothing else will.

Now, I am well aware that Obama could complete an I-9 form with just a passport, or the combination of a driver’s license and Social Security Card.

But guess what? So could any naturalized citizen. So, while being a naturalized citizen is sufficient for an I-9 form and employment in the U.S.A., that is not sufficient for the job of President and Commander in Chief.

Once again, the argument is two-fold:

1) Obama is in violation of current federal immigration law because he has not submitted an I-9 form.

2) Obama, to be eligible to serve as President, must not only submit an I-9 form but also prove that he is a natural born citizen. Even a passport is insufficient for that purpose. He must present an original, initial birth certificate including birth hospital and delivering dotor’s signature, to prove native birth, and the Court must rule on the issue of whether someone born a subject of a foreign country (as Obama’s campaign admits he was) can be considered a “natural born citizen” of the United States.  If you have evidence that a court of law has ruled against Vattel’s definition of “natural born citizen” (even though it is clear that our Founders read and referrenced Vattel), then please provide that evidence.

UPDATE:  Don’t look now, Hawaii wants to change the law to stop people from asking questions about Obama’s records…

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Presidential Eligibility. Bookmark the permalink.

90 Responses to Obama In Violation of Current Immigration Law

  1. Mick says:

    How does he get security clearance?

  2. Ryan says:

    You are stating that Obama has not ever submitted an I-9 form (first you just said there’s no evidence that he’s submitted it, then you made the leap and claimed that he has not). What proof do you have of this violation? You also state that he is in possession of all the required documents to submit a valid I-9 form, so what reason would he have to not submit one, if asked?

    What will this blog be about after Obama’s term(s) end? You won’t have anything to talk about.

  3. skeeter says:

    The damage Obama has already inflicted on America will be felt and discussed for decades to come, and he isn’t finished yet.

  4. Ryan,

    What proof do you have of his compliance?

    You don’t have any, because it doesn’t exist.

    He is required by law to submit it, and he is in violation of the law by not having submitted it.

  5. Ryan says:

    I have no proof at all – I have not even looked for proof, because it’s a silly thing to look for, since it proves nothing (as you admit) and there’s no motivation for him not to submit such a form. Even if it were shown that there is no such form on file for Obama, it would be deemed to be a clerical error, not treason.

    Other things we don’t have proof for:

    – Obama is from Jupiter
    – Obama skinned and ate a Golden Retriever last night.
    – Obama shot JFK

    You are, once again misunderstanding the burden of proof responsibilities. You have made a claim, and therefore you must provide your source, or your evidence. You are doing the same thing the Glenn Beck does every weekday evening. By the way did you know that Glenn Beck will not provide evidence that he did not kill a young girl back in 1990? It’s shocking that he will not answer these allegations.

  6. kj says:

    The I-9 seems like the perfect document to file a FOIA request on. I believe that documentation presented is noted on the form.

  7. Even if it were shown that there is no such form on file for Obama, it would be deemed to be a clerical error…

    Like Tim Geithner’s tax evasion was a “Turbo Tax” error.

    Riiiiight…

    And as to your other garbage, they say:

    We’re not accusing Glenn Beck of raping and murdering a young girl in 1990 – in fact, we think he didn’t! But we can’t help but wonder, since he has failed to deny these horrible allegations. Why won’t he deny that he raped and killed a young girl in 1990?

    And when did you stop beating your wife?

    Beck is under no legal obligation to respond to that garbage.

    But Obama is under legal obligation to submit an I-9 form and substantiating documents. He cannot legally serve as President without that.

  8. Ryan says:

    I don;t think you fully understand the point of the website. It’s pointing out that a person can tarnish the image of a public figure simply by “asking questions”. Glenn Beck does this to avoid legal problems, since he never actually accuses somebody of something. You are doing the same thing.

    But Obama is under legal obligation to submit an I-9 form and substantiating documents. He cannot legally serve as President without that.

    Why do you think he has not submitted such a form? Give me one good reason to doubt that he has, and show me evidence that one other president has submitted one.

  9. The law was passed in 1986, so only Presidents elected in 1988 onward are subject to it. George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama were all legally required to submit an I-9.

  10. Ryan says:

    OK, so show me:

    A) Any reason at all that you think Obama has not submitted his form

    and

    B) Any evidence that the other three presidents have submitted their forms.

    I quickly searched for these things and found nothing at all. I actually didn’t even find a single person other than you asking for these forms. Searching for I-9 form and Obama brings up only some news stories about the Obama administration’s immigration policy, this site, and Michelle Malkin’s blog, where there are numerous comments by you claiming that Obama has not submitted the form. I challenge that you have no evidence to make that claim, and you are grasping at straws to make any claim to discredit him, since the “birther” movement is just about out of steam.

  11. BirtherLover says:

    Yes, please. I’d like to see the I-9 forms of George Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush as well! Where are they, since they apparently submitted them so eagerly!

  12. All employees, citizens and noncitizens, hired after November 6, 1986 and working in the United States must complete a Form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification.

    Obama and Biden are the employees. “We the People” are the employers. It is the employee’s legal responsibility to complete the form and provide the documentation.

    If you are ever brought to trial for breaking a law, you cannot use as a defense, “Well, other people broke the law, too, so I shouldn’t have to obey it.”

    Yes, I’d like to see the I-9 forms and supporting documentation for George Bush, Dan Quayle, Bill Clinton, Al Gore, George W. Bush, and Dick Cheney as well. The Rule of Law required them to complete it, too. While it was apparently never doubted that they were born on U.S. soil to two U.S. citizen parents, that does not exempt them from the requirements of the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 and Article II Section 1 of the United States Constitution.

  13. the “birther” movement is just about out of steam.

    You wish. With Illegal Immigration and Immigration Law getting a lot of attention, this is picking up steam. The law is the law, and the President is not above the law.

  14. Math says:

    You wish. With Illegal Immigration and Immigration Law getting a lot of attention, this is picking up steam. The law is the law, and the President is not above the law.

    Wanna bet Obama can get reelected without even being on the Arizona ballot? That would be a nice FU to the birthers and give you something to whine about for until 2016.

  15. Ryan says:

    So it’s true that you have absolutely no evidence that Obama has violated the law and not submitted an I-9 form, despite your rantings to that effect.

    No evidence, and not even any reason to believe he is in violation. Don’t try to pretend that you want to see previous presidents’ forms, this is not about them. It’s about Obama, not previous presidents, not the constitution, not the law, and certainly not about patriotism.

  16. If Obama is not allowed to continue acting like he’s above the law, and is challenged on his ineligibility, he may not even be acting as President when the 2012 primaries roll around. But if he is still acting as President then, he may not even beat his Democratic primary challenger.

  17. So it’s true that you have absolutely no evidence that Obama has violated the law and not submitted an I-9 form, despite your rantings to that effect.

    “We the people” are the employer. Obama is the employee. It is the employee’s legal responsibility to provide the I-9 form and the supporting documentation to the employer. You’re damn right that Obama has provided absolutely no evidence of the I-9 form and supporting documentation to his employer, “We the people”. That is exactly why he is in violation of the law.

    No evidence, and not even any reason to believe he is in violation.

    No evidence is why he’s in violation of the law.

    Don’t try to pretend that you want to see previous presidents’ forms, this is not about them. It’s about Obama, not previous presidents, not the constitution, not the law, and certainly not about patriotism.

    I absolutely do care about the Rule of Law and the Supreme Law of the Land, our Constitution. Don’t try to speak for me. I consider your comment slanderous, and if you slander me again, I’ll ban you.

  18. Gov. Bill Richardson at the Democratic National Convention in Denver Colorado on Sept. 1st 2008 (in Spanish):

    “Barack Obama is an immigrant…he is one of us…“

  19. Obama’s biological and adoptive fathers were both foreigners.

    Obama’s earliest memories are of growing up in a foreign country.

    Obama’s wife called Kenya his “home country”.

    He is a “foreigner”. And our first Chief Justice warned against such a person commanding our country and our military.

    “Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American Army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.”

    Where in the world has Obama been a subject/citizen?

    U.K. (already admitted by Obama’s campaign),
    Kenya (already admitted by Obama’s campaign),
    Indonesia (school records),
    U.S.A??? (only if he proves his claim that he was born at a U.S. Hospital)

  20. Ryan says:

    Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. You have still given me no answers to my two questions.

    Ban me all you want Mr. Pill, but I’ve exposed your motivations here, as if anyone didn’t know them.

    You’ve made an accusation against Obama that he has violated the law. I challenge you to find ONE I-9 form from a person employed by any government anywhere. These things are not made public, and you know it.

    Saying that you are his employer is technically correct, but in the same way, each shareholder of a company is an employer of the board of directors, but they need not submit I-9 forms to each shareholder. That’s just not how things work.

  21. To put this to rest, the Courts must rule on this and clarify the legal definition of “natural born citizen”.

    The US Supreme Court has ruled on this four times to my knowledge, and in each of the four decisions cited, Vattel was supported.

    This matter has been settled since 1814.

    RWR
    http://www.rightwingrocker.com

  22. Other things we don’t have proof for:

    – Obama is from Jupiter
    – Obama skinned and ate a Golden Retriever last night.
    – Obama shot JFK

    We also don’t have allegations of these, or court subpoenas demanding proof thereof or over a million dollars in attorney fees spent keeping any of it from the courts.

    RWR
    http://www.rightwingrocker.com

  23. By the way did you know that Glenn Beck will not provide evidence that he did not kill a young girl back in 1990? It’s shocking that he will not answer these allegations.

    The burden of proof is on those who say he did.

    Can you not see how you undermine your credibility when you go on about such things as burden of proof and then use something contrary to your position as an example?

    RWR
    http://www.rightwingrocker.com

  24. Math says:

    Saying that you are his employer is technically correct

    Is it, though? Like Mr. Pill likes to remind us every time he can use it to his advantage, the US are a republic, not a democracy. The only Americans who actually voted for Obama are the electoral college members. So technically, “We the People” hired an electoral college, who in turn hired Obama.

    So let’s pretend that the I-9 argument makes sense. Wouldn’t the electoral college members be the only ones who have standing to ask for it?

  25. Ryan says:

    Mr RWRocker,

    Obama has not spent money hiding any documents, and nobody has any evidence of that.

    There are no court subpoenas either, asking for Obama’s I-9 form.

    The only accusation that he has not submitted this form is from this blog, so if I say Obama is from Jupiter, I suppose it is up to him to prove he is not? Seems you don’t feel the same way about Glenn Beck, and his failure to prove he did not kill a girl back in 1990.

    And by the way, advertising your website on every blog comment, even if disguised as a signature, is extremely poor form.

  26. Math says:

    And by the way, advertising your website on every blog comment, even if disguised as a signature, is extremely poor form.

    One could even call it spam. Let’s see if Mr. Pill is as eager to ban someone who agrees with him.

  27. justthefacts says:

    You said: “Submit an I-9 form with substantiating hardcopy documentation. He has not done so, and he is in violation of current immigration law.”

    How did you know that he didn’t?

    You also said: “The I-9 does not accept newspaper birth announcements as documentation. The I-9 does not accept URL links to a web page with .JPG images of a COLB as documentation.”

    NO, but it does accept the OFFICIAL birth certificate of a state, in Obama’s case Hawaii. Obama has the physical copy of that document as well as the image of it that he posted. He showed the physical copy to both FactCheck and Politifact.

    You also said; ‘ Regardless of where you think Obama was born, why does anyone who respects the Rule of Law think that Obama should be allowed to present to his employers (We the People) a web URL instead of a hardcopy Birth Certificate? ”

    Because we can see a Web page but it is difficult to distribute the actual physical copy to 300 million Americans. Because Bush and Clinton and other presidents did not even show the image of their birth certificate. Obam did, he posted an image of the official birth certificate of Hawaii, and the officials in Hawaii TWICE said that the facts on the posted document are confirmed by the facts on the original in the files and that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    Then why not show the original? Because Hawaii does not send it out anymore (http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html)

    No one who respects the rule of law should blindly accept what has been presented by Obama to date.

  28. justthefacts says:

    Obama was never adopted. the US State Department says that he was never adopted, and there is no proof of adoption (which requires court action in Indonesia), and if he had been adopted the blood children of Soetoro would call him “brother,” but they all call him “step-brother.”

    Obama was never a citizen of Indonesia, the unsigned application does not prove that he was a citizen. It may have been filled in by a clerk without the family having anything to do with the claim that he was an Indonesian citizen. In any case, both the US State Department and the Indonesian government have said that he was never an Indonesian citizen.

  29. skeeter says:

    Where are the official documents that support your claim the Indonesian government and/or the US State Department both deny Obama was ever an Indonesian citizen? Prove it. Where is your official proof Obama was never adopted by the Indonesian, Lolo Soetoro? Prove it. There are a number of attornies who would gladly pay for that evidence, but not for heresay.

  30. Ryan says:

    Where is your official proof Obama was never adopted by the Indonesian, Lolo Soetoro?

    People here seem to have a great deal of trouble with the burden of proof, and who is in possession of that burden.

    Of which other countries must we prove Obama was not a citizen?

  31. The Hypocrite-in-Chief “Failed to Provide Critical Documents as Part of the Record”.

    Let me also say that I remain distressed that the White House during this confirmation process, which overall went smoothly, failed to provide critical documents as part of the record that could have provided us with a better basis to make our judgment with respect to the nomination. This White House continues to stymie efforts on the part of the Senate to do its job.

    Remarks of Senator Barack Obama on the Confirmation of Judge John Roberts

  32. People here seem to have a great deal of trouble with the burden of proof, and who is in possession of that burden.

    The burden of proof is on Obama to submit an I-9 form with documentary proof of U.S. citizenship.

    The burden of proof is on Obama to “qualify” as a natural born citizen.

    if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified;

  33. So let’s pretend that the I-9 argument makes sense. Wouldn’t the electoral college members be the only ones who have standing to ask for it?

    There were 1,075 people involved in the election, certification, and swearing-in of Barack Hussein Obama II:

    538 Electoral College Electors,
    435 Representatives,
    100 Senators,
    1 Vice-President, and
    1 Chief Justice of the Supreme Court

    Not a single one of the 1,075 claimed to have inspected a hard copy Certificate of Live Birth for Barack Hussein Obama II, to verify that he was born at Kapi’olani Medical Center in Hawaii as he has claimed. But remember that Obama first claimed to have been born at the Queen’s Medical Center, then later claimed to have been born at Kapi’olani Medical Center …

    On June 7th, this website reported that the Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children in Honolulu posted on its website a letter on White House stationery dated January 24th (since scrubbed), in which Obama wrote, “As a beneficiary of the excellence of Kapi’olani Medical Center — the place of my birth — I am pleased to add my voice to your chorus of supporters” — even though Obama himself has previously claimed to have been born at Queen’s Medical Center in Honolulu, a claim backed up by his sister Maya.

    Until June 7th, even United Press International (UPI) and Snopes.com contained statements that Obama was born at the Queen’s Medical Center in Honolulu. Here is a screen capture from Snopes.com that says, “Barack Hussein Obama was born at the Queen’s Medical Center.” Today, Snopes.com claims that “Barack Hussein Obama, was born on 4 August 1961 at the Kapiolani Medical Center.” Snopes claims they made the change because Wikipedia made the change.

    Here is the UPI screen capture that claims Obama was born at Queens — but now the UPI claims Kapiolani. Remember, Obama, himself, told UPI that he was born at Queens.

    Not a single one of the 1,075 explained why they thought someone who admits that they were born a British subject (because their father was a British subject, not a U.S. citizen) should, in their opinion, be considered a “natural born citizen” of the United States.

    All 1,075 of them, representing all three branches of our federal government, had sworn an oath to support and defend the Constitution, but all 1,075 of them failed to do so.

    Not a one of them did their due diligence to ensure that “a President shall have qualified”.

    And Dick Cheney broke the law in the process of certifying the Electoral College vote.

  34. Ryan says:

    The burden of proof is on Obama to submit an I-9 form with documentary proof of U.S. citizenship.

    Why will you not answer my question? Why do you believe that Obama has not submitted such a form back when he first became a government employee? These forms are not part of the public record. Nobody has accused him of this violation but you. What is your reason. I’m not even asking for evidence here – just a reason to make this accusation.

    Not a single one of the 1,075 claimed to have inspected a hard copy Certificate of Live Birth for Barack Hussein Obama II

    The body responsible for Hawaiian birth certificates has stated publicly that the President’s birth records, as he has presented them, are valid. We are talking about a body who could easily print out a valid hard copy birth certificate for every member of the electoral college. These people, unlike you, seem to realize that when an authority states publicly the contents of one of their records, that statement is as valid as any hard copy birth records. There is no higher authority on birth records than the people who have spoke. You think they are lying or “misleading us” but what you fail to realize is that in a few short years, NEW PEOPLE will be in charge of those birth records, and will be able to LOOK AT THEM TOO. Do you think that the current people in charge would lie, knowing that new people get to look at the records soon enough?

    As for the “British subject” crap you keep bringing up, that’s been public for the man’s entire life. Lawyers have had years to convince the electoral college, numerous judges, senators, and political opponents that he is not a natural born citizen, and they have all failed miserably.

    When everybody but a couple of failed lawyers disagree with you, it’s time to find another hill to die on.

  35. Aaron says:

    “Don’t try to pretend that you want to see previous presidents’ forms, this is not about them. It’s about Obama, not previous presidents, not the constitution, not the law, and certainly not about patriotism.”

    Since Ryan is so high on his “burden-of-proof” soapbox, it’s high time for him to show some proof to back up his accusation to his above claim.

    Hypocrite.

  36. Ryan says:

    Aaron, try to keep up. I’ve already proven that Mr. Pill is discriminating against Obama simply by his refusal to say why he believes Obama is in violation. He’s got nothing to back it up, has wholly assumed this violation, and is making accusations all over the internet. He made no such accusations against other presidents until I brought it up, even though he admits all of them, including Obama are in possession of the documentation to easily submit a valid form.

    If you’re going to back him up on that somehow, I’d sure like to hear your reasons, if he’s not going to tell me.

  37. Aaron says:

    Wrong, Ryan.

    When one is attempting to access employment in national security positions, the baseline is that (s)he does NOT meet the requirements to fill that position until the person in question is proven otherwise.

    It’s no different than a any skilled trade job where you won’t be hired if you can’t prove that you have the requisite certifications. Your burden of proof interpretation applies only in a court of law where a person is accused (and charged) of a crime and thus are innocent of the charges until proven guilty. Being unqualified for a job is not a crime under US law, (though maybe in Canada, I’m not familiar with the legal codes of other nations).

    It does NOT apply your way when the question is about standards of qualification for employment. In fact, the burden of proof is on the applicant/employee (even in a high political post) for a good reason. Consider how unsafe you would be every time you stepped on an airliner if all the pilots, maintainers, air controllers, and ground crews were hired without first needing to show absolute proof they meet the job’s requirements, such as what you are claiming. “I get to fly this hundred-million dollar aircraft, with 300 lives aboard because the airline and FAA couldn’t PROVE that I was unqualified.” Now consider the same with regards to nuclear weapons. It’s no different with political posts.

    Sorry Ryan, but the burden of proof does not work the way YOU claim it to in this case.

    Further, consider the issue of “probable cause”. There is no reason to suspect either of the Bush presidents or Clinton might have been unqualified. Their geneologies are public record and if a reason to call it into question had ever surfaced, the Democrats would have posted it all over the TV, internet, newspapers, etc… (except for Clinton) However, there IS reason to suspect Obama could be unqualified due to his geneology and the public claims of foreign nations’ leadership. Probable cause IS sufficient justification to open an investigation, and DOES exist in Obama’s case.

    Our host doesn’t have to prove why Obama is not qualified, unless you are OK with me flying the next airliner you board simply because you didn’t PROVE me to be unqualified for the job…buckle-up.

  38. The body responsible for Hawaiian birth certificates has stated publicly that the President’s birth records, as he has presented them, are valid.

    False.

    Provide a link showing where the Hawaiian Depratment of Health stated publicly that “the President’s birth records, as he has presented them, are valid.”

    You can’t, because they have never done that.

    They have never said that the COLB produced at and by the Obama campaign headquarters in Chicago is authentic and valid.

    Did they say, “Obama was born in Hawaii”? Yes, but only AFTER the U.S. House of Representatives said so first.

    Fukino could have said in October 2008, “Obama was born in Hawaii”, but she did not do so. She only said that many months later, but mere hours after the U.S. House gave her “cover”.

  39. Lawyers have had years to convince the electoral college, numerous judges, senators, and political opponents that he is not a natural born citizen, and they have all failed miserably.

    “They have all failed miserably”?

    No, the issue has never been argued on the merits. Three ineligible candidates were on the ballot for President:

    1. John McCain (born on foreign soil in Colón, Panama)
    2. Barack Obama (born a foreign subject due to his father, birth location yet to be validated by an initial birth certificate showing delivering doctor’s signature)
    3. Róger Calero (born on foreign soil in Nicaragua)

    I’ve been saying this since before Obama was inaugurated. You accuse me of singling out Obama. Wrong again.

  40. Ryan says:

    Aaron, once again, try to keep up. Yes, you are correct that the burden of proof is on the employee to prove he is eligible for a job. Nobody disputes that. I don’t go to a liquor store and tell the clerk that it is up to him to prove that I am not of age to purchase beer.

    What I am disputing is that Mr. Pill has made a claim that Obama is in violation of this law. He has stated that Obama has NOT submitted an I-9 form. I am asking for a reason to believe that he has not submitted this form, since the records are not public. He must have some reason to believe this.

    I cannot state publicly that I believe you have not paid your property taxes, simply because I have not seen proof that you are paid in full. Do you see what I’m getting at?

    And to Mr. Pill,

    The state of Hawaii has stated publicly that the original records they have on file show Obama to have been born there. It doesn’t matter who said it first. The body in charge of the records has stated they are there, and that he was born there. You can’t wriggle your way out of that. It’s fun to watch you try though. You must be a lonesome person clinging to ridiculous conspiracy theories. Try to think clearly about this, and you’ll be much happier.

  41. BirtherLover says:

    Not part of this thread, but I’d love to hear Mr. Pill’s take on the whole “drill, baby, drill” business, now that the Gulf of Mexico is filling up with oil on an unprecedented level, with the head of the Coast Guard saying it’s not if, but when the slick makes landfall with Louisiana, Mississippi or Texas.

    Just saying, haven’t heard a peep out of Sarah Palin. She’s been AWFUL quiet about this whole thing. Can’t imagine why.

  42. skeeter says:

    Does Hawaii affirm that Obama was born in Hawaii? Or does Hawaii simply state that a certificate of live birth was requested and received by someone for Obama?

    “If you have evidence that Obama has submitted an I-9 form in compliance with the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, please provide that evidence.”

    So far Obama has only provided evidence he is an undocumented worker. The $1,750,000 he has invested in attorney’s fees to keep his citizenship status out of the courts testifies he is more concerned about being illegal than he is about being legal. The cost in Wisconsin for the search and a copy of Birth Certificates is $20.oo, additional copies are $3.oo, not $1.750,000.

    Request for Birth cerificates at 2:00 pm will be completed at 10:00am the next business day. Americans are required to have their birth certificates in order to obtain a first drivers license (among other things), entering any branch of the Armed Forces, and public school(s). What does the CIC of the USA and its Armed Forces have to show to prove their citizenship? A COLB, a request for food stamps? A degree from Howard University? A degree in Community Organizing? A course in the Alinsky “Rules For Radicals”? No, the CIC is supposed to be approved by a certified BC and the United States Congress, IE its representatives.

  43. skeeter says:

    The “drill baby drill” is a good action to take to reduce our dependence on foriegn oil (the middle east). The response to the blowout crisis in the Gulf of Mexico is just another example and evidence of the lack of understanding and good judgement on the part of an incompetent Obama administration. There is an emergency program that was established in the 1990s to deal with problems just like the one in the Gulf. Obama dropped the ball. His EPA did not respond for 9 DAYS AFTER THE WELL BLEW OUT!!!!! WHAT PART OF EMERGENCY DOES HE NOT UNDERSTAND!!!!

    In the oilfield, the oil industry, when mistakes are made it is always the fault of “WORMS” , because they are always at fault. A worm being an ignorant s.o.b. Obama is a WORM, a WEAVEL. An incompetent. An example is the one I witnessed in Laredo Texas in 1984 at a drilling site. There was a crop duster spraying the fields around the drilling site and all the roughnecks (all illegal aliens with no oilfield experience) were standing around watching the crop duster plane spraying for boll weavels (worms) in a cotton field. The tool pusher begin to yell and scream, “run boys run! that plane is spraying for worms!”

    Hopefully the American people will see the wormy results of this wormy administration and replace them with competent legislators and actors in the NOV. election and certainly in the 2012 election. America, at this point in time is WORMY! The Gulf crisis today is not a Katrina, the Gulf crisis today is an American Harmageddon, not just one city but possibilly the entire Gulf and Atlantic coast. Hows that for hopey changey?

  44. Ryan says:

    Skeeter, Hawaii has been really really clear about this. They say the president was born in Hawaii, and is a natural born citizen. You can disagree with thme, but don’t pretend they didn’t say that.

    As for the rest of your two comments – The accusations that Obama has spent money to hide his birth certificate is absolute BS, and there is no evidence that he has spent a penny. His finances are pretty much public record, so it should be easy to prove – so be my guest, and give it a try.

    On the oil spill front, the spill was caused by a private company, and is the responsibility of that company to clean it up. The company hid the magnitude of the disaster. These are oil companies. They can afford to clean up their messes.

  45. skeeter says:

    Hawaii has been perfectly clear that they have issued the COLBs to any and all illegal aliens who have applied for one. I am not disagreeing with them.

    As for the, almost $2,000,000 Obama has spent on the attornies to keep his elligability issue out of the courts, take it up with the opposing attornies. Some of that money is listed in the public domain because it is taxpayer’s money. Go on, feast your eyes.

    Are you certain the Obama administration has responded to the oil well (spill) crisis in a timely fashion? Would you not hold the Obama administration responsibile for the securityof the USA? Even if the “Private Oil Company” , BP, could not handle this crisis? That is what you have on your hands at this very moment. Obama’s EPA delayed, sat on their asses for 9 FULL DAYS, before they even acknowledged the oil well spill crisis in the Gulf of Mexico.

    Katrina was only a minor prelude to what has happened in the Gulf today. New Orleans is only one city, but the Gulf of Mexico represents a major element of the American food chain and economy that will effect every American citizen in the Fifty States of America, including you. NO! The responsibility of protecting the 50 states rests squarely on the shoulders of the CIC! End of story.

  46. BirtherLover, my take on the whole “drill, baby, drill” business hasn’t changed. We wouldn’t even need to drill in the gulf if we were drilling in ANWR and extracting oil from shale.

    And you’re wrong about Palin. Can’t imagine why.

  47. Hawaii has been really really clear about this. They say the president was born in Hawaii, and is a natural born citizen.

    Fukino did say that. But she only did so after the U.S. House vote, and only after getting an opinion letter from the HI Attorney General. And by law, since that opinion letter was used to make a public statement, then the opinion letter itself must also be made public. Fukino and the HI Attorney General are breaking Hawaiian law by refusing to make public that opinion letter.

  48. Ryan says:

    How do you know she got an “opinion letter”? I expect she had to ask the AG if it was a good idea to go outside of protocol and make a public statement about a person’s private birth records. Do you think the AG was asked where he thought Obama was born?

    If, as you say, Fukino’s statement was made only after the House vote, to “cover her”, then obviously you are saying that she is lying about something. If she is lying about the birth certificate, what you think her long term plan is? To try and stay in office in perpetuity so nobody else finds out? You have placed yourself at the very end of a dead end street with this conspiracy theory.

    Skeeter, if COLB are issues to people born in other countries, do they say list Hawaii as the birthplace on them?

    As fot the oil well response, no, I’m not certain Obama responded quickly enough. That remains to be seem, and if he did not, I hope he is held responsible for that. You, however, have just made the assumption without having any knowledge whatsoever. That makes you a mindless sheep.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s