Who Do You Blame (The MOST) for 2016?

[PleasePeesMe]

From afar

I don't think there' one reason. Voting on a Tuesday doesn't help; in Australia, election day is always Saturday - and voting is compulsory. And third, I think the Dems had the wrong candidate.

 

[Aglaopheme]

The LEGAL challenge to his eligibility based on a claim that he is not a natural born citizen required that Obama PROVE he was eligible to assume the Office of President of the United States in all aspects necessitated by the Constitution.

So, dudly, contrary to your illogical thinking he DID have to "show it". Failure to do so would have meant he'd lose the lawsuit filed against him. Which would result in an OFFICIAL declaratory judgement that he is not a natural born US citizen and thus ineligible.

Wrong

“The Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills“

Every legal challenge was laughed out of court.

 

[cowslinger64]

Wrong

“The Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills“

Every legal challenge was laughed out of court.

Nuh Uh, dudly.



Sincerely, Hisderpy

 

[Luk]

The perfect example of what I was saying here:
http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=90801210&postcount=158

You've been caught lying over and over again. No one here believes a word you say. Remember that.

 

[Aglaopheme]

Nuh Uh, dudly.



Sincerely, Hisderpy

Hey! I’m sure the is a list somewhere that touts incessant name calling as.....something.

I keep saying I am going to ignore the drivel, but then the say something do monumentally wrong I find myself calling them out, again.

 

[Luk]

Hey! I’m sure the is a list somewhere that touts incessant name calling as.....something.

I keep saying I am going to ignore the drivel, but then the say something do monumentally wrong I find myself calling them out, again.

Us rational and sane people appreciate your efforts.

 

[HisArpy]

I understand that you're a fucking idiot. Is that nuance enough for you?

You failed miserably last time you tried to make a point. If you wanna play silly semantics, go ahead. You're a birther, just like the other right wing nut jobs.


Hawaii Department of Home Lands

"In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL."

That's actually a misnomer, said Lloyd Yonenaka, a spokesman for DHLL. In order to be eligible for their program, you must prove that your ancestry is at least 50 percent native Hawaiian. And when he says native, he means indigenous. They don't even care if you were born in Hawaii. They use birth certificates as a starting point to look into a person's ancestry. Very different.

Here's what the DHLL site says now: "The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts both Certificates of Live Birth (original birth certificate) and Certifications of Live Birth because they are official government records documenting an individual’s birth. The Certificate of Live Birth generally has more information which is useful for genealogical purposes as compared to the Certification of Live Birth which is a computer-generated printout that provides specific details of a person’s birth. Although original birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a request is made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of Live Birth."

When we spoke to a spokeswoman for the Hawaii Department of Health, she said too much was being made of the difference between the so-called "long" and "short" forms.

"They're just words," said spokeswoman Janice Okubo. "That (what was posted on the Internet) is considered a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii."

"There's only one form of birth certificate," she said, and it's been the same since the 1980s. Birth certificates evolve over the decades, she said, and there are no doubt differences between the way birth certificates looked when Obama was born and now.

"When you request a birth certificate, the one you get looks exactly like the one posted on his site," she said. "That's the birth certificate."

As for the theory that Obama's original birth certificate might show he was foreign-born, Okubo said the "Certification of Live Birth" would say so. Obama's does not. Again, it says he was born in Honolulu.

You're a birther, timmy. Be a man about it, at least. You had MULTIPLE opportunities to deny it before. But didn't.

Technicality is the soul of the law.

No matter HOW you try to spin it, a "Certificate of Live Birth" isn't a "Birth Certificate".

Whether you, or anyone else, chooses to believe they are equivalent is irrelevant to whether they ACTUALLY ARE the same thing.

Again, technicality is the soul of the law.

'Slinger, I don't care where he was born, if he says he has a "Birth Certificate" he needs to produce it. A "Certificate of Llive Birth" isn't a "Birth Certificate". Either he/you/everyone needs to change what they're saying to reflect what he ACTUALLY HAS or Obama doesn't have one.

That doesn't make me a birther, it means YOU cannot PROVE the fact of what you're trying to show.

 

[Que]

Technicality is the soul of the law.

No matter HOW you try to spin it, a "Certificate of Live Birth" isn't a "Birth Certificate".

Whether you, or anyone else, chooses to believe they are equivalent is irrelevant to whether they ACTUALLY ARE the same thing.

Again, technicality is the soul of the law.

'Slinger, I don't care where he was born, if he says he has a "Birth Certificate" he needs to produce it. A "Certificate of Llive Birth" isn't a "Birth Certificate". Either he/you/everyone needs to change what they're saying to reflect what he ACTUALLY HAS or Obama doesn't have one.

That doesn't make me a birther, it means YOU cannot PROVE the fact of what you're trying to show.

That whole thing puzzled me. No document expert can render a very good opinion without seeing the original but from what I've seen it appears that the digital rendering that he supplied is actually a forgery.

When I heard that I figured that he was going to wait and have some sort of big aha moment after he baited everyone into jumping on the birther train and supply the original document. Which would have been pretty good trolling. Not Trump-level, but good.

He never did.

So there are several possibilities.

1) He just never got around to dropping that bomb.

2) He believes himself to have born in Hawaii, but just has no record.

2a) He was
2ai) The record was not recorded properly
2aii) The record was lost or damaged
2aiii) His hippy mother didn't record it.​

2a) He wasn't​

3) He is unsure of his POB.

4) He is aware his mother travelled elsewhere to give birth. I am skeptical, because that would be easier to trace, if that were the case.

That still leaves who created the false version, why, and did he know?

It is an unsubstantiated rumor* that he applied and was accepted Elizabeth Warren-style as a black, foreign national. I have no idea about how reciprocity Works between Canyon in the US but I have a sister who is both a Canadian sister Citizen and a an American citizen. He could legitimately claim Kenyan citizenship while having been born here, possibly, but that would confuse the issue. I don't know to what extent that when you claim privileges under your foreign dual citizenship that you lose your American Citizenship. My sister's understanding has always been that if she votes in a Canadian election she forfeits her American citizenship. Not that I have any idea how anyone would know that she did or didn't.

*to be fair, until he was bestowed the historic honor of being the first black editor of the Harvard Law review and being the historic first granted that honor, having have never contributed to the publication, and then shows up as a guest lecturer it is merely an unsubstantiated rumor that he attended any of the schools because no one from any of his school's remembers being in class with him.

All that it's a side how come these anti birthers are not outraged that Joe Biden said that Trump is not a legitimate president? Or for that matter the anti scotus contingent the claim the same about bush?

The other thing I'm not completely clear on is I'm not so sure that no matter where he was physically born having an American mother makes you an American citizen as far as I know.

 

[HisArpy]

That whole thing puzzled me. No document expert can render a very good opinion without seeing the original but from what I've seen it appears that the digital rendering that he supplied is actually a forgery.

When I heard that I figured that he was going to wait and have some sort of big aha moment after he baited everyone into jumping on the birther train and supply the original document. Which would have been pretty good trolling. Not Trump-level, but good.

He never did.

So there are several possibilities.

1) He just never got around to dropping that bomb.

2) He believes himself to have born in Hawaii, but just has no record.

2a) He was
2ai) The record was not recorded properly
2aii) The record was lost or damaged
2aiii) His hippy mother didn't record it.​

2a) He wasn't​

3) He is unsure of his POB.

4) He is aware his mother travelled elsewhere to give birth. I am skeptical, because that would be easier to trace, if that were the case.

That still leaves who created the false version, why, and did he know?

It is an unsubstantiated rumor* that he applied and was accepted Elizabeth Warren-style as a black, foreign national. I have no idea about how reciprocity Works between Canyon in the US but I have a sister who is both a Canadian sister Citizen and a an American citizen. He could legitimately claim Kenyan citizenship while having been born here, possibly, but that would confuse the issue. I don't know to what extent that when you claim privileges under your foreign dual citizenship that you lose your American Citizenship. My sister's understanding has always been that if she votes in a Canadian election she forfeits her American citizenship. Not that I have any idea how anyone would know that she did or didn't.

*to be fair, until he was bestowed the historic honor of being the first black editor of the Harvard Law review and being the historic first granted that honor, having have never contributed to the publication, and then shows up as a guest lecturer it is merely an unsubstantiated rumor that he attended any of the schools because no one from any of his school's remembers being in class with him.

All that it's a side how come these anti birthers are not outraged that Joe Biden said that Trump is not a legitimate president? Or for that matter the anti scotus contingent the claim the same about bush?

The other thing I'm not completely clear on is I'm not so sure that no matter where he was physically born having an American mother makes you an American citizen as far as I know.

There is a school of thought that no one actually "knows" their own name because it's completely based in hearsay. You were "told" your name and you have used that statement as fact even though you have no actual first hand evidence of it being true. I suspect the same could be said for your place of birth.

The documents which say your name/place of birth/etc are hearsay. There are exceptions which allow them to to be used as proof of such, but they are still hearsay - allowed hearsay.

Thus, Obama doesn't actually "know" where he was born.

I take no stance on the forgery issue. I'm not a forensic tech and haven't ever examined the original or the produced electronic document with an eye toward proving or disproving it's authenticity. In a battle of experts on the issue, I would tend to side with the State of Hawaii though, which said that he was born there.

The place of your birth is where your citizenship rests. If it's on foreign soil, you are foreign born even if your mother is American. There are exceptions for US personnel in foreign lands (military, diplomats, etc) but if your mom was vacationing in Paris when you were born, your citizenship is French, not American. You would be REQUIRED to be naturalized or get a green card to stay here.

 

[spacekowboy]

The perfect example of what I was saying here:
http://forum.literotica.com/showpost.php?p=90801210&postcount=158

You might want to brush up on your vocabulary, Sharpie.
It generally helps if you actually know the definitions of words before you use them publicly.

 

[Comshaw]

There is a school of thought that no one actually "knows" their own name because it's completely based in hearsay. You were "told" your name and you have used that statement as fact even though you have no actual first hand evidence of it being true. I suspect the same could be said for your place of birth.

The documents which say your name/place of birth/etc are hearsay. There are exceptions which allow them to to be used as proof of such, but they are still hearsay - allowed hearsay.

Thus, Obama doesn't actually "know" where he was born.

I take no stance on the forgery issue. I'm not a forensic tech and haven't ever examined the original or the produced electronic document with an eye toward proving or disproving it's authenticity. In a battle of experts on the issue, I would tend to side with the State of Hawaii though, which said that he was born there.

The place of your birth is where your citizenship rests. If it's on foreign soil, you are foreign born even if your mother is American. There are exceptions for US personnel in foreign lands (military, diplomats, etc) but if your mom was vacationing in Paris when you were born, your citizenship is French, not American. You would be REQUIRED to be naturalized or get a green card to stay here.

Would you please tell us where you got the bolded bit of information above? After looking into it this is what I found:

U.S Citizenship and Immigration Service
Policy Manual
Chapter 4 - Automatic Acquisition of Citizenship after Birth (INA 320)

A. General Requirements: Genetic, Legitimated, or Adopted Child Automatically Acquiring Citizenship after Birth [1]

A child born outside of the United States automatically becomes a U.S. citizen when all of the following conditions have been met on or after February 27, 2001: [2]

The child has at least one parent, including an adoptive parent [3] who is a U.S. citizen by birth or through naturalization;

The child is under 18 years of age;

The child is a lawful permanent resident (LPR); [4] and

The child is residing in the United States in the legal and physical custody of the U.S. citizen parent. [5]

https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-h-chapter-4


Comshaw

 

[HisArpy]

Would you please tell us where you got the bolded bit of information above? After looking into it this is what I found:

U.S Citizenship and Immigration Service
Policy Manual
Chapter 4 - Automatic Acquisition of Citizenship after Birth (INA 320)

A. General Requirements: Genetic, Legitimated, or Adopted Child Automatically Acquiring Citizenship after Birth [1]

A child born outside of the United States automatically becomes a U.S. citizen when all of the following conditions have been met on or after February 27, 2001: [2]

The child has at least one parent, including an adoptive parent [3] who is a U.S. citizen by birth or through naturalization;

The child is under 18 years of age;

The child is a lawful permanent resident (LPR); [4] and

The child is residing in the United States in the legal and physical custody of the U.S. citizen parent. [5]

https://www.uscis.gov/policy-manual/volume-12-part-h-chapter-4


Comshaw

"Automatic citizenship" doesn't mean "birthright citizenship".

In your defense, they both sound similar and one could be easily confused for the other. They are not. A natural born citizen doesn't need to be "granted" citizenship.

There are lots of legal hurdles too depending on different possibilities:

https://travel.state.gov/content/tr...s-policies/citizenship-child-born-abroad.html

Notice that most of those categories say that the child can acquire citizenship, not that the child is a citizen. In addition, such acquisition of citizenship occurs when the child enters the US via a US passport (obtainable at a US counsel office if all the requirements are met). An adult, who never obtains such a passport while a child and who doesn't enter the US while still a child, might eventually be granted citizenship, but that's not a guarantee even if all the preconditions are met. Thus, an ex pat who has a child outside the US and who never returns with the child may not have a child who has US citizenship.

It's very complicated and not something I would want to chance or deal with were I an expectant parent.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

Wow.

The birther bullshit is still going on.

and why?

https://i.pinimg.com/originals/4b/c2/07/4bc2070573acd2665efcff0d1ba2e544.gif

perpetual shitty whiteness always needing to "other." always ginning up excuses to "other." because it can't ever EVER share space, resources or quality of life with those it deems unworthy. never fucking ends.

http://media.tumblr.com/7f49af67374e45355d02de2fe0c44bac/tumblr_inline_mus7bztC1J1rpbzy6.gif

 

[Kantarii]

Today, I’m just gonna blame 2016 on one of the posters on this thread. Take your pick

 

[cowslinger64]

Technicality is the soul of the law.

No matter HOW you try to spin it, a "Certificate of Live Birth" isn't a "Birth Certificate".

Whether you, or anyone else, chooses to believe they are equivalent is irrelevant to whether they ACTUALLY ARE the same thing.

Again, technicality is the soul of the law.

'Slinger, I don't care where he was born, if he says he has a "Birth Certificate" he needs to produce it. A "Certificate of Llive Birth" isn't a "Birth Certificate". Either he/you/everyone needs to change what they're saying to reflect what he ACTUALLY HAS or Obama doesn't have one.

That doesn't make me a birther, it means YOU cannot PROVE the fact of what you're trying to show.

Dude... this is about you being a birther. We've had this stupid discussion before, and you continue to play semantics and argue something that I never intended to. This is what someone does when they try to bullshit someone...I'm not biting.


Queball just admitted he is a birther with the forgery comment.



Are you a birther?


Choose one:


Yes_____

No_____

 

[Comshaw]

"Automatic citizenship" doesn't mean "birthright citizenship".

In your defense, they both sound similar and one could be easily confused for the other. They are not. A natural born citizen doesn't need to be "granted" citizenship.

There are lots of legal hurdles too depending on different possibilities:

https://travel.state.gov/content/tr...s-policies/citizenship-child-born-abroad.html

Notice that most of those categories say that the child can acquire citizenship, not that the child is a citizen. In addition, such acquisition of citizenship occurs when the child enters the US via a US passport (obtainable at a US counsel office if all the requirements are met). An adult, who never obtains such a passport while a child and who doesn't enter the US while still a child, might eventually be granted citizenship, but that's not a guarantee even if all the preconditions are met. Thus, an ex pat who has a child outside the US and who never returns with the child may not have a child who has US citizenship.

It's very complicated and not something I would want to chance or deal with were I an expectant parent.

You're really going with that? Automatic doesn't mean birthright? So WTF does automatic mean? Let's see....

According to Merriam-Webster:

definition: Automatic
a : largely or wholly involuntary

definition: Birthright
a right, privilege, or possession to which a person is entitled by birth

IN other words the parents (or parent) need do nothing else other then to inform the nearest consulate of the birth and present proof of their citizenship. With that done, the child is automatically, by virtue of being born to an American citizen parent (birthright) a citizen of the U.S. It's pretty damn plain and it can't be legitimately spun any other way.

So essentially you are dead wrong. Birthright and automatic citizenship are the same.
If you still insist they aren't the same I'd appreciate some factual cites to verify your claim. I doubt very much if you can find anything to back it up.

Also as to the reference about applying for citizenship, if you will carefully reread that section you will discover that is in reference to step children and children of those being naturalized, but not yet citizens.



https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/automatic

Comshaw

 

[Que]

There is a school of thought that no one actually "knows" their own name because it's completely based in hearsay. You were "told" your name and you have used that statement as fact even though you have no actual first hand evidence of it being true. I suspect the same could be said for your place of birth.

The documents which say your name/place of birth/etc are hearsay. There are exceptions which allow them to to be used as proof of such, but they are still hearsay - allowed hearsay.

Thus, Obama doesn't actually "know" where he was born.

I take no stance on the forgery issue. I'm not a forensic tech and haven't ever examined the original or the produced electronic document with an eye toward proving or disproving it's authenticity. In a battle of experts on the issue, I would tend to side with the State of Hawaii though, which said that he was born there.

The place of your birth is where your citizenship rests. If it's on foreign soil, you are foreign born even if your mother is American. There are exceptions for US personnel in foreign lands (military, diplomats, etc) but if your mom was vacationing in Paris when you were born, your citizenship is French, not American. You would be REQUIRED to be naturalized or get a green card to stay here.

My mother was not vacationing but actually living in and a legal resident of Canada when my sister was born. My sister is definitely a US citizen has a social security card and votes in US elections. No action was needed whatsoever to accomplish any of that.

 

[SissySalina]

There is a school of thought that no one actually "knows" their own name because it's completely based in hearsay. You were "told" your name and you have used that statement as fact even though you have no actual first hand evidence of it being true. I suspect the same could be said for your place of birth.

The documents which say your name/place of birth/etc are hearsay. There are exceptions which allow them to to be used as proof of such, but they are still hearsay - allowed hearsay.

Thus, Obama doesn't actually "know" where he was born.

I take no stance on the forgery issue. I'm not a forensic tech and haven't ever examined the original or the produced electronic document with an eye toward proving or disproving it's authenticity. In a battle of experts on the issue, I would tend to side with the State of Hawaii though, which said that he was born there.

The place of your birth is where your citizenship rests. If it's on foreign soil, you are foreign born even if your mother is American. There are exceptions for US personnel in foreign lands (military, diplomats, etc) but if your mom was vacationing in Paris when you were born, your citizenship is French, not American. You would be REQUIRED to be naturalized or get a green card to stay here.

Actually you are wrong, America is only one of 2 countries that give citizenship to those born to a foreign national in that country.

 

[HisArpy]

My mother was not vacationing but actually living in and a legal resident of Canada when my sister was born. My sister is definitely a US citizen has a social security card and votes in US elections. No action was needed whatsoever to accomplish any of that.

According to the law something had to have been done if your sister was born on foreign soil. Although, on further reflection, it might have been different at the time of her birth than it is now.

 

[HisArpy]

Dude... this is about you being a birther. We've had this stupid discussion before, and you continue to play semantics and argue something that I never intended to. This is what someone does when they try to bullshit someone...I'm not biting.


Queball just admitted he is a birther with the forgery comment.



Are you a birther?


Choose one:


Yes_____

No_____

What someone else "admitted to" is irrelevant to what I'm saying.

You want to label me with something because you're angry. It's your anger which prevents you from seeing beyond your fantasy outcome.

Seek help.

 

[HisArpy]

You're really going with that? Automatic doesn't mean birthright? So WTF does automatic mean? Let's see....

According to Merriam-Webster:

definition: Automatic
a : largely or wholly involuntary

definition: Birthright
a right, privilege, or possession to which a person is entitled by birth

IN other words the parents (or parent) need do nothing else other then to inform the nearest consulate of the birth and present proof of their citizenship. With that done, the child is automatically, by virtue of being born to an American citizen parent (birthright) a citizen of the U.S. It's pretty damn plain and it can't be legitimately spun any other way.

So essentially you are dead wrong. Birthright and automatic citizenship are the same.
If you still insist they aren't the same I'd appreciate some factual cites to verify your claim. I doubt very much if you can find anything to back it up.

Also as to the reference about applying for citizenship, if you will carefully reread that section you will discover that is in reference to step children and children of those being naturalized, but not yet citizens.



https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/automatic

Comshaw

dudly, learn to read. Even your sources for definitions blows your argument out of the water.

"Wholly or largely" is not "entitled". You may choose to believe they are the same, but they are not.

As an example: Being rich doesn't "wholly or largely" make one royalty. ONLY royalty is "entitled". IF one wishes to be "entitled", and is not such at birth, one must apply. Even if said application is a rubber stamp process, one must STILL apply.

Acquisition of U.S. Citizenship by a Child Born Abroad

That's the TITLE of the information in the linky. It has separate sections covering various instances.

Birth Abroad to Two U.S. Citizen Parents in Wedlock

Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock

Birth Abroad Out-of-Wedlock to a U.S. Citizen Father – “New” Section 309(a)

Birth Abroad Out-of-Wedlock to a U.S. Citizen Mother:

Note that ALL the sections are about birth abroad of a child of at least 1 us citizen parent.

 

[HisArpy]

Actually you are wrong, America is only one of 2 countries that give citizenship to those born to a foreign national in that country.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jus_soli

 

[cowslinger64]

What someone else "admitted to" is irrelevant to what I'm saying.

You want to label me with something because you're angry. It's your anger which prevents you from seeing beyond your fantasy outcome.

Seek help.

I'm not angry at all. Calling you on it. Period.

You slinked away the other times too. Birthers are some of the biggest idiots on the planet...and you don't want to admit to it.

Are you a flat earther too?

 

[HisArpy]

I'm not angry at all. Calling you on it. Period.

You slinked away the other times too. Birthers are some of the biggest idiots on the planet...and you don't want to admit to it.

Are you a flat earther too?

dudly, I'm right here refuting your bullshit. You try to use labels as a weapon against those whose debate arguments you cannot defeat. Then you ignore their arguments and claim they were never made. After which you fantasize and make your fantasies public so you can proclaim them to be fact.

All in all, Bad Form.

https://media2.giphy.com/media/SvOrq4OA7TQTC/giphy.gif

 

[Rightguide]

dudly, I'm right here refuting your bullshit. You try to use labels as a weapon against those whose debate arguments you cannot defeat. Then you ignore their arguments and claim they were never made. After which you fantasize and make your fantasies public so you can proclaim them to be fact.

All in all, Bad Form.

So sad to see so much down right, fucked up, ignorance in America. They can't even read the friggin' law.