Mr. Obama Stop Calling the Kettle Black with Mr. Romney

Commentator · Aug 18, 2012

I am sick and tired of Mr. Obama pressuring Mr. Romney for a report on his back taxes and then condescendingly making an offer if he will do this he will drop the matter.

How absurd can an individual be when that individual refuses to allow the public to see his college and Selective Service and constantly boasts his administration will be one of openness and transparency. What has Mr. Obama to hide by allowing the public to see these documents. Even Mr. Bush under court order allowed us to see his and his academic record was certainly not one of great accomplishments.
Mr. Obama has gone so far as not to allow the public to see these records that he had them sealed by by judicial process. Why, oh why do I ask?

We the people have the legal right to know the academic achievements of those who run for public office as well as other areas of the candidates' lives. I want to know how bright Mr. Obama was and what were his academic pursuits. Even when we apply for employment we must give such details to the employer and WE ARE MR. OBAMA'S EMPLOYER AND THUS HAVE A RIGHT TO KNOW! Remember they are public servants and work for us and not the other way around.

I have called and e-mailed Romney's headquarters and demanded they have Obama release those records before Mr. Romney releases his tax returns. Mr. Romney should not be degraded in such a manner as Mr. Obama is doing when Mr. Obama won't release his college and Selective Service records. I believe if Mr. Romney does not pursue this matter it will be like McCain not pursuing an issue that if he had it would have cost Mr. Obama the election. It looks as if the Power Elite as usual are pulling the strings to the point they will force a candidate to deliberately an election.

The rhetoric cannot get any uglier so lets ratch it up to its full potential (in a positive fashion) and demand that Mr. Obama release those records before Mr. Romney releases his tax returns. I do not intend to vote for either candidate because they sleep in the same bed together on so many issues. However, I do believe in principle and what is fair is fair and that is both candidates release those records

If you feel as I do here is the contact information for each candidate. You can either phone or e-mail and I would suggest both.

Mitt Romney For President - Help Mitt Win The 2012 Election

Barack Obama

Copy and paste the above into your web browser and following instructions on how to contact them.

We need to have candidates that will come clean with the public on any issue over which the public is concerned. The time for calling the kettle black in this matter is over. The time for truth, openness and transparency in our government officials and those running for public office is NOW and not later.
Mr. Romney should echo in a similar fashion as Mr. Reagan did to Mr. Gorbachev. "RELEASE THOSE RECORDS AND RELEASE THEM NOW"!!!

Friendlyword · Aug 24, 2012

You assume a formal education is required to be President

"The eligibility requirements for President are: be a natural born citizen of United States, must be thirty-five years old minimum, and must have been a permanent resident of the United States for at lest 14 years."

But, if he's hiding his school records; I want to know why just as much as you do. It can't be that bad, he did get two degrees. Maybe it's just some kind of embarrassing hazing incident.

Nemo · Aug 27, 2012

President Obama's college records are confidential and not abailable for public review under the Family Educational Privacy Act of 1974. You don't have the right to see the records. Nor do you have standing to challenge his eligibility for re-election to the office of President of the United States.

Commentator · Sep 3, 2012

Irrespective of whether or not that current law does not allow disclosure of his educational records, the fact remains the same why does he have to go to the trouble of getting a court order to permanently seal those records from the public when he states his administration will be one of openness and transparency. What is the reason he is going to such extreme lengths and spending so much money to conceal.

Maybe it is not a constitutional requirement for a candidate to disclose his educational records to the public but to me and others who actually in fact are the president's true employer, it is definitely a criteria I would use to determine whether or not I would hire an employee. In fact such criteria is on all application forms for employment. I do intend sending him such an application form and demand he fill it out in full before I decide to hire him for another 4 year term as president. I definitely would want to know how much educational experience he has and what subject he covered. I think his educational resume would be quite shocking to read.

Concerning the statement that I hold no standing in court regarding his place of birth or whether or not Mr. Obama qualifies as a true natural born citizen according to U. S. Constitutional requirements in that area I or any other citizen if we have enough evidence to prove he or anyone else is breaking the law or violating the U. S. Constitution has not only the right but the obligation to present such evidence in a court of law. What good is it that we citizens no longer have standing in any situation in a court of law that bears such grave consequences as this issue does.

Nemo · Sep 3, 2012

Please provide the name of the judicial forum and case number for the action in which President Obama had his college records permanently sealed. If such action exists, I should be able to access the court records through PACER and confirm the fact.

As for the standing issue, you should know that the erstwhile controversy over Barack Obama’s birth certificate was - from the beginning - a nonissue. The reason that President Obama has not produced his original birth certificate is because it is a record of vital statistics that is the property of the State of Hawaii, which under state privacy laws is subject to restricted access, and not available to the public. See HRS § 338-18(b). President Obama has disclosed a certified copy that has been authenticated by officials of the State of Hawaii; and which would be admissible under Rule 803(9) of the Federal Rules of Evidence in any action in which such issue was relevant. However, you don’t even get there because the federal courts do not have subject matter jurisdiction for lack of anyone with standing to challenge his eligibility to be President.

Commentator · Sep 14, 2012

Since there have been numerous articles by writers I considered to be reliable sources of information concerning the sealing of Obama's records by court order, I have done a search and could not find any court taking such action.

From what I could find out colleges in their concern for privacy of student records have the right on their own to seal such documents from public scrutiny. It does seem from my search that Mr. Obama has spent over a million dollars in legal fees possibly fighting these "allegations". Again if the money was spent defending the sealing what is in those records he doesn't want the public to see. Something doesn't smell right in Denmark is all I can say.

However the fact of the matter remains if Mr. Obama claims his administration is going to be one of openness and transparency he certainly should make available those records if enough public pressure builds and particularly if it could concern his re-election chances. It seems if Donald Trump is joining the growing number of those who want Mr. Obama to release those records. Hopefully Mr. Trump will be as successful in this endeavor as he was in forcing Mr. Obama to release his so-called birth certificate.

It is my right to determine the criteria for whom I vote, even though the Constitution doesn't specify it in its requirements, but we are technically the employers of our government officials and our taxes definitely pay their salaries so that is going to be one criteria in my selection of prospective "employees" for the job. I still intend sending Mr. Obama an application form for employment with a good cover letter.

In fact when Mr. Obama leaves office and applies for a job at any large corporation if they require he fill out an application form it will be required of him to list his educational background no ifs and buts accepted. If he does release it to a prospective employer then again I ask why can't he do so if the public demands it.

If my educational records should be sealed by the educational facility I attended (high school)and a prospective employer needed them I would certainly sign any form to get them released. Mr. Obama has the power and he certainly should exercise it in this case.

I still hope Mr. Romney will challenge Mr. Obama but I have my doubts and Mr. Romney is already flipping out on Obamacare. The power elect are still firmly in control of both parties and until we can get of both parties and have parties totally free from outside control this nation's march toward one world government will continue. Again the proof of the matter is will Mr. Romney take the ball and run with it--its his only trump card and if played well could result in the defeat of Mr. Obama and open the door to all the questions regarding the legality of his presidency.

David · Sep 14, 2012

Fun fact, the president is elected by the EC, not the people. Indeed the EC was created so the people wouldn't have a say at all. Nobody cast a vote for president until after Jefferson was elected.

Nemo · Sep 15, 2012

The confidentiality of President Obama's college records is provided under federal law; and no legal action would be required to "seal" the records to protect their privacy. Nor does anyone have standing to demand their production in contravention of the law.

Likewise the "birther" claims have no legs. Barack Obama’s birth certificate was authenticated by the State of Hawaii; no other evidence is admissible. However, as I previously explained, the claims challenging the eligibility of President Obama cannot be heard for lack of standing to sue. In this regard, what standing means is that the plaintiff must be the owner (or holder) of a claim for an '"injury in fact - an invasion of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized, . . . and (b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical."' Goode v. City of Philadelphia, 539 F.3d 311(3d Cir. 2008), quoting Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992). Without proper standing, the court does not have "subject matter" jurisdiction. For example, a prior case filed by a voter who sued Senator John McCain and the Republican National Committee alleging that Senator McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone and therefore ineligible to hold the office of President of the United States was dismissed for lack of standing. See Hollander v. McCain, 566 F.Supp.2d 63 (2008).

Iolo · Sep 15, 2012

Nemo said:
The confidentiality of President Obama's college records is provided under federal law; and no legal action would be required to "seal" the records to protect their privacy. Nor does anyone have standing to demand their production in contravention of the law.

Likewise the "birther" claims have no legs. Barack Obama’s birth certificate was authenticated by the State of Hawaii; no other evidence is admissible. However, as I previously explained, the claims challenging the eligibility of President Obama cannot be heard for lack of standing to sue. In this regard, what standing means is that the plaintiff must be the owner (or holder) of a claim for an '"injury in fact - an invasion of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized, . . . and (b) actual or imminent, not conjectural or hypothetical."' Goode v. City of Philadelphia, 539 F.3d 311(3d Cir. 2008), quoting Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlife, 504 U.S. 555, 560 (1992). Without proper standing, the court does not have "subject matter" jurisdiction. For example, a prior case filed by a voter who sued Senator John McCain and the Republican National Committee alleging that Senator McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone and therefore ineligible to hold the office of President of the United States was dismissed for lack of standing. See Hollander v. McCain, 566 F.Supp.2d 63 (2008).

Thanks. Racism seems to go with madness about other matters as well, doesn't it?

Nemo · Sep 15, 2012

You’re right, racism is part of it: there are some people that just can’t stand the fact that there is a black man in the White House. But there is a more mercenary side as well. I know some of the lawyers that filed those frivolous lawsuits and appeals. They well knew that they lacked standing to sue, and that such actions would be dismissed; and only did so to generate publicity (not to mention money) for themselves. What is interesting is the number of gullible people that have been taken in by this champerty. Indeed, one would think that P.T. Barnum’s estimate on the birthrate of suckers should be adjusted for inflation.

clax · Sep 15, 2012

Iolo said:
Thanks. Racism seems to go with madness about other matters as well, doesn't it?

Nothing in that statement pertained the slightest to race. that false accusation of racism is loosing its effectiveness in debate.

what a weak argument.

clax · Sep 15, 2012

If he has nothing to hide why does he hide. His right to privacy dose not trump his duty to our nation. If he didn't want his record examined in public he should have thought twice about holding public office.. If he seals public out of it than we are left to our own devices to find out why, or to come up with the most likely reason. basically put if I can convince people that he was born in Afghanistan and he means to do the nation harm, and that causes him not to be elected that is his fault. Not showing credentials allows me to make them up. Based on what we know of him I can reasonably assume that he is hiding something. Romney is too, but then again people have made up stories about him. Why he doesn't just release his info, I don't know. But it isn't enough to keep me home on election day. I still think the obamas mean harm to our nation. Directly or in directly, so who ever runs against him will get my vote. Even if they were a satanic transsexual draft dodger, tax cheat. Their personal crap only concerns me if they seek to "reshape" our nation. I liked it more before jerks decided to "reshape" it.

Nemo · Sep 16, 2012

Barack Obama's college records (nor Mitt Romney's tax returns) are not "credentials" for their candidacy for the Presidency. As for President Obama's birth certificate, a certified (and authenicated) copy of the record has been provided, and there is no one with standing to challenge it. How you vote is your right and your business; but you have no right to what is none of your business.

myp · Sep 16, 2012

clax said:
or to come up with the most likely reason.

The thing is that the "birther" theories are not the "most likely reason". Far from it if you are looking it at it statistically (or logically).

Nemo · Sep 16, 2012

No. You must look at it "legally".

myp · Sep 16, 2012

Nemo said:
No. You must look at it "legally".

In the context of eligibility, yea, but I think clax was talking about in the context of truth.

Nemo · Sep 17, 2012

The truth is that the birthers, like their teabagger cousins ("Dumb and Dumber"), are not concerned about the Constitution or the law. Their alleged "Constitutional crisis" belies their real purpose, which is to subvert its provisions for the rule of law. In the United States, the right of national citizenship is defined by federal law; which legislative authority, under the Constitution, resides in Congress. In this regard, Congress enacted 8 U.S.C. §1401, et seq. defining nationals and citizens of the United States at birth. These provisions, some of which apply retroactively, govern a person’s status as a natural born citizen; which federal statutes supercede prior case law (including decisions of the Supreme Court) on the subject of citizenship to the extent inconsistent with the congressional legislation. Under this law, both Barack Obama and John McCain were eligible to be President of the United States. (NB: Prior to the enactment of § 1403(a) of title 8 of the United State Code in 1952, Senator McCain would not have been deemed a "natural born citizen" eligible to be President.)

Iolo · Sep 17, 2012

clax said:
Nothing in that statement pertained the slightest to race. that false accusation of racism is loosing its effectiveness in debate.

what a weak argument.

Only with racists, I fear. The obsessive - incredibly obsessive - hatred expressed everywhere by your Republican extremists for your rather right-wing President can surely have no other explanation except widespread insanity? You might note that those who might favour a US under Romney more are: France 5%, Germany 4% and UK 3%, those who would be less favourable France 38%, German 48% and UK 47%. I know that the extremists claim not to care about world opinion except when it helps their racist crusade, but it might perhaps nevertheless suggest how phony their pretences are, mightn't it?

Nemo · Sep 17, 2012

deleted/off-topic

myp · Sep 17, 2012

Nemo said:
The truth is that the birthers, like their teabagger cousins ("Dumb and Dumber"), are not concerned about the Constitution or the law. Their alleged "Constitutional crisis" belies their real purpose, which is to subvert its provisions for the rule of law. In the United States, the right of national citizenship is defined by federal law; which legislative authority, under the Constitution, resides in Congress. In this regard, Congress enacted 8 U.S.C. §1401, et seq. defining nationals and citizens of the United States at birth. These provisions, some of which apply retroactively, govern a person’s status as a natural born citizen; which federal statutes supercede prior case law (including decisions of the Supreme Court) on the subject of citizenship to the extent inconsistent with the congressional legislation. Under this law, both Barack Obama and John McCain were eligible to be President of the United States. (NB: Prior to the enactment of § 1403(a) of title 8 of the United State Code in 1952, Senator McCain would not have been deemed a "natural born citizen" eligible to be President.)

I don't like to make generalizations like that- it is a subset of the Tea Party that is so anti-intellectualist and obnoxious- just as there is a subset of the Occupy crowd that is the same way on the other side. Both movements have their intelligent, rational thinkers too though.

Mr. Obama Stop Calling the Kettle Black with Mr. Romney

Similar threads