ADDED: Here's what the Governer said today when asked about his plans "to release more information regarding President Barack Obama's birth certificate":
I got a letter from someone the other day who was genuinely concerned about it; it is not all just political agenda. They were talking on Olelo last night about this; it has a political implication for 2012 that we simply cannot have.... It was actually written I am told, this is what our investigation is showing, it actually exists in the archives, written down... What I can do, and all I have ever said, is that I am going to see to it as governor that I can verify to anyone who is honest about it that this is the case. If there is a political agenda then there is nothing I can do about that, nor can the president.Wow.
पोस्ट्स
२२३ टिप्पण्या:
223 पैकी 1 – 200 नवीन› नवीनतम»I knew it! Obama wasn't born -- he was made.
By SkyNet.
And he's self-aware!
Althouse should stop reading the NYT.
World Net Daily: all the news that's fit to print.
Just ask Bill Ayers to write him up a new one.
Hey Ann, do you bother to check your source material anymore? Jerome Corsi is the same guy who has been pushing the birther agenda from the start. He's also the guy behind the Swiftboating of John Kerry (listed as author for "Unfit for Command"). This is a credible source worth your time and attention to repeat?
"Donalyn Dela Cruz, Abercrombie's spokeswoman in Honolulu, ignored again today another in a series of repeated requests made by WND for an interview with the governor."
Maybe WND being batshit crazy has something to do with these repeated rejections...
What's the difference between the White House dog Bo and the president?
Bo has papers.
wow, I didn't think you would go there. You should perhaps link to the main interview where the governor said that. What does he mean by "written down"?
Q: You stirred up quite a controversy with your comments regarding birthers and your plans to release more information regarding President Barack Obama’s birth certificate. How is that coming?
A: I got a letter from someone the other day who was genuinely concerned about it; it is not all just political agenda. They were talking on Olelo last night about this; it has a political implication for 2012 that we simply cannot have.
(Abercrombie said there is a recording of the birth in the State Archives and he wants to use that.)
It was actually written I am told, this is what our investigation is showing, it actually exists in the archives, written down …
…What I can do, and all I have ever said, is that I am going to see to it as governor that I can verify to anyone who is honest about it that this is the case.
If there is a political agenda then there is nothing I can do about that, nor can the president.
Here is the original interview.
Now why am I not surprised?
PS PB&J wants everyone to overlook the fact that the article links to a story in the Honolulu Star-Advertiser.
PPS The so-called Swiftboating of John Kerry was guys who were actually there telling the truth. Kind of like Sarah Palin being attacked for inciting the Tucson shootings and, having defended herself, then being accused, since she kicked the Lefties' collective ass, of "making it about her".
yeah what's wrong with news from the most prominent newspaper in Hawaii quoting the governor. Don't act stupid PB&J
Sigh.
It's World Nut Daily.
I wouldn't believe them if they told me the sun rose in the East and set in the West
Sheesh. I was hoping that he'd dig it out, parade it around, and end the Birther issue once and for all.
As for the Kerry nonsense -- my dad served two (2) tours of duty over in Vietnam, each lasting close to a year. I'll take the 'Swiftboaters' story over Kerry's version any time.
Also, the article that WND links to reference to a search for the original birth announcement, not the birth certificate.
As usual, that hack Joe Farah is lying
@whytri:This is a credible source worth your time and attention to repeat?
---------
Hey, Ann just deleted my comment. I want to know why.
Corsi is not the source. The interview with the governor took place with the Star Advertiser.com editorial where he said that, link here.
Well the Gov certainly stepped in it didn't he.
More politicians should be military officers as part of their training like Truman.
"Promise very little, but deliver everything you promise"
Truman would have understood that old military axiom. You average Pol operates by a different set of rules.
And he's self-aware!
He's not all that self-aware, unless maybe you're comparing him to people who still think "Swiftboating" means anything other than "inflict justified damage to a blowhard's reputation based on testimony from lots of reputable sources".
It's a proven fact that the Honolulu newspaper ran a birth announcement a short time after Obama's birth. Now, it surely is true that his grandparents could have placed that item even if he had been born in Kenya or somewhere else outside the United States ... but why? It's absurd to think that they may have wanted to make a newborn baby eligible to run for President decades later.
Peter
If it turns out Obama wasn't born an American (maybe he was adopted), can we declare his Presidency null and void, and make the last two years a do-over?
Let's see the birth certificate. Problem solved. Or not.
Loved this part: The governor only suggested his investigations to date had identified an unspecified listing or notation of Obama's birth that someone had made in the state archives.
"It was actually written, I am told, this is what our investigation is showing, it actually exists in the archives, written down," Abercrombie said.
Giggle. "An unspecified listing or notations someone had made ...it was actually written ..."
I get a mental picture of a penciled in notation in the margin of some documents that say "The Won is born!"
ironrailsironweights: Now, it surely is true that his grandparents could have placed that item even if he had been born in Kenya or somewhere else outside the United States ... but why? It's absurd to think that they may have wanted to make a newborn baby eligible to run for President decades later.
Perhaps the person we assume to be Obama's mother faked her pregnancy for some reason, then stole a baby when everyone expected it be born.
(How could this idea have gotten into my head?)
The other interesting tidbit in the WND piece was that Stanley Dunham bailed for Washington State when Barack was 3 weeks old. I knew she left pretty quickly as she went to college *there.*
And she didn't return to Hawaii until after her "husband" had graduated and left for Harvard.
OK.
In a previous article the Hawaiian governor stated that he had seen Barack and his parents at "social events." (Plural.)
Sounds like ... maybe not so much.
He's like the Pima County sherriff. Maybe he shouldn't talk so much.
I've never been too concerned with the "birther" issue one way or the other, but it is passing strange that the only dude in the country who doesn't have a birth certificate is the President. Hasn't everyone else you know used theirs for everything from Little League registration to marriage licensing to passport control?
Weird.
In Minnesota every winter, they hold a treasure hunt for a medallion. Clues are printed in the paper, and there's a prize for the one who finds it.
Maybe the governor of Hawaii should do that.
Now, it surely is true that his grandparents could have placed that item even if he had been born in Kenya or somewhere else outside the United States ... but why?
Because that's what people did back then? Neither of the birth announcements give any information about birth place, just the parents address.
"Stanley Dunham bailed for Washington State when Barack was 3 weeks old."
Adding this to Jason's speculation: Is it possible that she was in Wa when her water broke, and she flew to HI for the delivery?
Swiftboating of John Kerry
And that was a bad thing?
Kerry is a lying liar and there was evidence that the MSM failed to look for and tried to ignore and smear people over.
Where's that magic hat again?
How was Christmas in Cambodia that year?
Good grief.
When you finally figure out the MSM has been creating a fake narrative for you, are you going to be surprised?
Either Obama is a really big tease or there is no birth certificate. This idiot governor is Obama's worst nightmare. Obviously, if Obama wanted to produce the original, he could have done so. He didn't. Now, there is heightened interest and a public official guarantying that it exists and he will show it to us.
Hilarity ensues.
I've got a friend who keeps saying, "What gives? I can produce mine in 5 minutes!"
The story of Obama's birth is everything an episode of Murder, She Wrote should be: absurd, intriguing, populated with morons. Lost in this swirling vortex of suspense and intrigue is any serious discussion on the merits of requiring the president to be natural born in the first place.
For what it's worth, I think Obama is the animated afterbirth of someone else, whose birth certificate is readily available.
"an episode of Murder, She Wrote"
Coke,
Are you a million years old?
Let me guess your other must see programing on the picture box: Lawrence Welk and Matlock.
Not that there's anything wrong w/ that. You old folks need to have "fun" too.
But he promised he would find it and clear up all this birther nonsense once and for all!
Re Swift Boats:
There were 4 and only 4 charges against Kerry by the Swift Boat Vets.
1) Kerry testified before Congress badmouthing his fellow servicemen. There is video of that.
2) That Kerry spent Christmas in Cambodia. He has admitted that he was mistaken.
3) That he was ever in Cambodia. He admitted that he was mistaken about that.
4) That 300(?) of his fellow swift boat sailors had a low opinion. There doesn't seem to be any doubt that they held that opinion. Its an opinion, it can't be either true or false.
So what was it the Swift Boat Vets lied about again?
John Henry
@ 1jpb
Do you really not know that Stanley Dunham-Obama (or whatever name she used) transferred from Hawaii and was a student at the University of Washington from September 1961 to June 1962? ~2600 miles away. Mmmmm....
Let's see -- Barack was -- let's do the hard math here -- maaaaybe as old as 6 weeks old when she started, if classes started in mid September as they did in those days.
There is a reason *Michelle* Obama referred to Stanley Dunham as a "single teen mom," you know.
@1jbp: I'm 24! But the golden ago of sappy mysteries--Murder, She Wrote; Father Dowling; Matlock--has not been recreated for my generation.
Neither of the birth announcements give any information about birth place, just the parents address.
Grandparents' address.
JAL,
Take a deep breath.
I was continuing w/ Jason's mocking of Sully.
Sheesh.
But since she was a teen mom and "husband" was a loser, their address probably was Stanley Dunham's address.
Oh please. Of course he can find the birth certificate. There is both phone and mail service to Kenya.
whytri,
Kerry promised to release his entire service records to the public. Where can I find them on the internet?
Sorry 1jpb. It did occur to me that you were kidding.
But I dismissed it out of hand.
[Note to self: 1jpb can play with others.]
I did an update quoting what the Governor said. It's a lot of blather, but I think it's fairly summarized as: he can't find the birth certificate. He specifically said he would do what he could to produce the birth certificate and end the controversy.
The governor of Hawaii be-clowns himself. Another lib, another tard. What else is new? Maybe Obama senior isn't Obama juniors dad. Who knows? Who cares. It's not the potential illegitimacy of his birth that concerns me but the illegitimacy of his policies.
Maybe Obama senior isn't Obama juniors dad. Who knows?
The Shadow knows. (That predates Murder She Wrote)
Frank Marshall Davis is the conspiracists' theory. (There goes Dreams of My Father!)
"Jerome Corsi is the same guy who has been pushing the birther agenda from the start. He's also the guy behind the Swiftboating of John Kerry (listed as author for 'Unfit for Command')."
We thank whytri for pointing out the liberal technique involved in demonizing those who expose the lies of the left.
We know for sure that John Kerry (let us be clear that he served in Vietnam) never spent Christmas in Cambodia as he claimed . . . proven fact!
Hell or high water and sooner than later, it will be proven that Barry Soetoro has violated the Constitution of the United states, unless of course, his real father is "Uncle" Frank Marshall Davis, the avowed Communist.
whytri wrote: [Jerome Corsi] also the guy behind the Swiftboating of John Kerry.
The "swiftboating" was totally accurate and Kerry totally deserved it. And vis. Obama's missing documents the source is not Corsi, it's the left-wing Honolulu Star-Advertiser. Later today Abercombie, seeing the damage his admission of failure had caused, assured that newspaper that the records do exist. Yet he still hasn't produced them, which can only fuel birther theories.
There have been many conspiracy theories broiling in backwaters of American politics, the Kennedy assassination, the Apollo moon landings, the 9-11 terrorist attacks come immediately to mind. Most of these conspiracy theories emanate from the Left and the calumnies they propagate serve to elevate the left wing Weltanschauung. Who murdered JKF? It was Lyndon Johnson and the CIA. Why? So they could wage war on the peace-loving Viet Cong. Who faked the moon landings? Nixon and NASA. Why? To justify NASA's $10 billion budget at the expense of social programs for the poor. Who brought down the WTC towers? Bush and Haliburton. Why? To justify a war to seize and control Iraq's oil. Enemies of the Left routinely get this treatment, and while leading Democrats do not open embrace these lies, they don't go out of their way to refute them because they are part of the glue that holds their coalition together. They leave that to Right.
And refuted they are. Nobody with an open mind can be fooled into buying the JKF murder conspiracy (even with prominent leftist film director Oliver Stone's best efforts) because the facts that sink the theories are available had have been published. The same may be said for the moon landing hoax and the "truther" lies. The plain scientifically discovered facts totally destroy these calumnies.
However, the "birther" conspiracy is different, at least so far. The defenders of Obama's citizenship have done nothing but insult and demonize the theorists. In fact they have erected barriers to skeptical inquiry. The Obama campaign spent millions in legal fees to thwart investigation into his background. The State of Hawaii has made it illegal to inquire for Obama's birth records. Only Obama himself can authorize such an inquiry. What little they have done to refute the theorists (Refute, mind you -- the Obamanoids don't do refutation very well, but they're past masters of denigration) specifically the short form certificate that has made the rounds as a nearly unreadable JPG is nearly worthless. Just try applying for a passport with that kind of documentation, the State Department will laugh in your face. That type of birth certificate is not considered proof of citizenship.
Either this is all some brilliant scheme by Axelrod to keep birtherism alive at a low boil to help brand Obama critics as cranks and nutcases...
Or...
The governor of Hawaii is completely off his rocker.
Is there another explanation?
The NY Daily News (left wing) also carried the story. The money quote, IMO, is this: "On Tuesday, he again promised he would do 'what I can do' to publicly verify that records show Obama was born in Hawaii and is a citizen of the United States, making him eligible to be President." This was after the story's header is this: "Record of President Obama's birth in 1961 is 'in the archives': Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie" in the NYD, and this: "Wait, we found them..." on Drudge.
In sum, Abercrombie thinks he knows Obama was born in Hawaii but has no proof. Like OJ looking for Nicole's killer, Abercrombie is still looking "in the archives" for what he thinks he knows.
How is it that people older than Obama and who are born in Hawaii have no trouble showing a BC, but Obama's lost "in the archives"?
As far as official documents go, I have some doubt that anyone commenting here can actually produce their official birth certificate, long-form, that the hospital generated (as is the concern in this case). I know the birth certificate I have in my possession is an official COPY that has been endorsed by some official person. Also, it's a short form, which is what has been produced multiple times, and authenticated, for President Obama as well (even though Mr. Corsi still seems to disbelieve such a document could exist). If you've ever attempted any geneaological research, you'll recall quickly that documents, prior to everything being computerized initially and/or scanned (in the case of older documents), have a tendency to disappear or get damaged in some way, shape, or form. Even into the mid-20th century, it wasn't uncommon for entire rooms of paper records to be destroyed by flooding or fire, with no backup other than those log books indicating what once was.
As far as my initial comment, if the point was that the birth certificate couldn't be found, quote the initial article instead of the Corsi version. Yeah, the link was there in Corsi's article, but why direct the traffic to him instead of the reporter who did the real work?
Gadfly, it seems to me he looks a bit too much like Malcolm X for Frank the Communist to have been his father. He looks like his mother, head lift and all. When I look at the Obama family, there's NOTHING there that connects him to them. It would be interesting if someone did a DNA test.
Weirder and weirder
I was nearly a teenager when he was born, Ann is about the same age. The way things were done was that pregant girls went off out of state for 6-8 months to an "aunt", had the baby, gave it up for adoption, and came home.
They didn't stay home, have the babe, then go off to school for a year, 3 weeks later...
I'm still not a birther, but Obama's mother must be about the only woman in the world who leaves her newborn after three weeks rather than taking a quarter off and starting in January... Unless the babe was not a newborn, but was born elsewhere, etc etc. see now you have me believing :)
I don't understand why Obama just doesn't produce the actual birth certificate. What's so hard about that?
quaestor wrote: Just try applying for a passport with that kind of documentation, the State Department will laugh in your face. That type of birth certificate is not considered proof of citizenship.
Actually, did just that. The short form certificate is a perfectly valid proof of citizenship, as long as it bears an official seal -- and all you'll ever have is an official copy.
whytri wrote: As far as my initial comment, if the point was that the birth certificate couldn't be found, quote the initial article instead of the Corsi version.
Bullshit. If that was you point why didn't you make it in your first post? You're walking it back because you've been nailed. Grow a pair and admit it.
Crack wrote:
I've got a friend who keeps saying, "What gives? I can produce mine in 5 minutes!"
I agree. I tend not to believe the whole birther thing, but that being said, what gives with not being able to produce such a common document to put the story to rest.
And, to be honest, I was under the impression that Obama had revealed some documentation that showed that the birthers were crazy. But if he hasn't then it's his fault that the birthers continue to think he's not legitimate.
"Grow a pair and admit it."
If a pair is good, tri is better.
quaestor wrote: Bullshit. If that was you point why didn't you make it in your first post? You're walking it back because you've been nailed. Grow a pair and admit it.
Walking it back, hardly. Corsi has not done much to present himself as an impartial or unbiased source. He's a man with an single-track agenda, and the courts have told him more than once to give it up. He refuses. Why should anyone take him seriously, let alone direct traffic to his personal news outlet? Since there was a more legitimate *source* behind the material, link to that directly.
Let's leave the ad homs out of this.
whytri said...Actually, did just that. The short form certificate is a perfectly valid proof of citizenship, as long as it bears an official seal -- and all you'll ever have is an official copy.
I agree but.. who has this raised seal short form in their hand and why hasn't anybody produced it?
and I don't mean some jpg of some potentially photoshopped copy. I mean a raised seal notarized issued form...
and if that exists, it had to have been created from a real paper record which the Giv can't find, right?
mine is up stairs next to my SSN Card, my DD214, marriage license and my passport
Quaestor: the short form certificate that has made the rounds as a nearly unreadable JPG is nearly worthless. Just try applying for a passport with that kind of documentation, the State Department will laugh in your face. That type of birth certificate is not considered proof of citizenship.
Well, you're right about that. They wouldn't even let my son play Little League baseball with only the hospital certificate. I had to drive across town and stand in line for an hour to get the "official" one.
oh, and my most recent SF-86. always keep that, it saves time and you always need to tell the same story...
My first passport application was rejected because of the birth certificate. When I was 16 and ready for a driver's licence my father got four official, notarized copies of my birth certficate. One went to the DMV where I assume it remains in a file folder somewhere. One went to the UNC admissions office as proof of residency (to get in-state tuition rates). One went to the State Department for my passport, and the last copy is still in my desk. State rejected the certificate I sent them. I had to get an official copy the long form, the one with my foot print and doctor's signature.
And the swiftboating wasn't even really about Cambodia anyway. It was about Winter Soldier and Kerry throwing away his (someone else's) medals and then having his proudly displayed on his wall.
It was about Paris and Genghis Khan and Senate hearings.
It was about three purple hearts for bandaids equaling a ticket home.
None of that is at all disputable. Most of it's on film for pete's sake.
One of the most notable things was the way the veterans who were there with him or who were POWs refused to say, even with prompting, that Kerry was a coward. No one could be a coward on a swiftboat.
And while it's not heroic, who can blame someone for taking the opportunity to go home early?
But none of his contemporaries had forgotten what he'd done when he got home even if the rest of us either had forgotten or weren't born yet to remember.
It's revealing that someone thought that Kerry's military creds made him a good war-time candidate. What it reveals is myopia.
Sixty Grit said...
cubanbob wrote "It's not the potential illegitimacy of his birth that concerns me but the illegitimacy of his policies."
The former created the latter. He is a damaged human being, a drug addict, a leftist and a pal of terrorists. He hates this country and my guess is that all of that stems from being illegitimate and knowing it.
1/19/11 9:57 PM"
I think you are going to a bridge too far. What makes him dangerous isn't that he hates his country, I cannot bring myself to believe the American people can ever elect a man who hates his country and is intentionally treasonous (albeit its no practical difference in effect) . Rather more insidious and dangerous is that we elected a man who truly believes what he is doing is really in the best interests of the country. A broken clock is right twice a day and Obama has yet to reach that level of accuracy. As for illegitimate parentage, Alexander Hamilton was also born illegitimate. It's not Obama's possible illegitimacy of birth that is the root of the problem but rather the ideals and ideas he has been inculcated with and that he appears to believe in.
jeff wrote: Oh please. Of course he can find the birth certificate. There is both phone and mail service to Kenya.
Just a thought: if people are so convinced that Obama was born in Kenya, why hasn't a Kenyan certificate of live birth (or what ever their version is actually called) ever surfaced?
Mick, Call your office.
Anyway, by "natural born citizen" didn't the founders mean to rule out anyone reared by Marxists, Communists, and just everyday run of the mill America haters?
Whytri:
If Jerome Corsi has no credibility, would you say the same for Dan Rather and the Texas Nat Guard fake letters?
AJ Lynch wrote: If Jerome Corsi has no credibility, would you say the same for Dan Rather and the Texas Nat Guard fake letters?
You tell me, did Rather generate the letters, or did someone do an excellent job duping him (or people that worked for him?) Should Rather have done his due diligence checking his sources, yes. Did it kill his credibility, yes again.
whytri wrote: Let's leave the ad homs out of this.
Good and wise advice.
Do you think the anti-birthers can take thing to heart and properly refute the theories?
While it's true that no evidence can shake a conspiracy nut's conception of reality, it is also true that the anti-birthers' strategy has only fueled the fires of doubt by relying on "ad homs" as their chief weapon of defense.
Can't we just give President Obama credit for winning the election, whatever his provenance?
I want him to turn out to Kenyan-born mostly just to see what happens. It would be damned cool if the nuts were vindicated. Broken clock and all that. What would happen legally, create a black hole, reverse the magnetic poles? No, much worse: President Biden! That possibility might get a retroactive constitutional amendment passed.
Rather still thinks the letter is genuine, doesn't he, or at least wants to believe it bad enough to claim he does. Either way, he's a punk.
I don't think Obama hates his country. And if he did he certainly changed his mind (as did his wife halfway through the campaign when it dawned on her one day, oh my god, this fool of mine might actually win).
On the other hand, he may very hate his mother's parentage, as evidenced by his first book (a big call out to Bill Ayers) and his willingness to throw his grandmother under the bus during the Rev. Wright affair for being afraid of an aggressive panhandler at her bus stop.
"Fake but accurate" was Rather's final bid for respect.
Obama is a Keynesian for sure
Now the Mayor of Whoville* has found it.
He looks Seussian.
"Natural born citizen" means no c-section, no fertility drugs, no underwater opening numbers, no pyramids, nor candles. It requires florescent lights, forceps and fathers in another room or drunk or both. That's American!
AA cited her source. Maybe it is not plagarism to omit where she obtained story but with internet ethics it is better say where she found story.
Rather and CBS lied when they said where forged letter came from and that they were validated by experts. They co-operated with DNC and uttered forged documents on the Americsan People
But that Constitution thingie is more than a hundred years old. Obama was at least born in a penumbra of the United States.
In case anyone has gotten a wrong impression about me let me state this for the record: I'm not a "birther". I do not believe that Obama is not a natural born citizen as required by the Constitution. I am, however, skeptical, and it's because Obama and his myrmidons in the media have gone to extraordinary pains and measures to obscure his background, extraordinary pains and measures for which I can think of no innocent explanation. It worries me that Obama expects me to take his word for it.
Maybe I'm stupid. Please spell out the innocent explanation, very carefully.
President Biden.
Guys, are we SURE we want to take this any further?
traditionalguy makes a good point, one that whytri may be unaware of. Internet ethics stipulate that you quote and link back to the website where you got the information first. You don't cut out the middleman, even if he's a looney.
wv: inesso - "Inesso we trust, all others pay cash." - the Rockefeller credo.
Let's leave the ad homs out of this.
So, saying we should ignore Corsi (despite the fact that he's right on this story) because of an unrelated, seven-year-old story (where he was right again) - that's out?
quaestor wrote: traditionalguy makes a good point, one that whytri may be unaware of. Internet ethics stipulate that you quote and link back to the website where you got the information first. You don't cut out the middleman, even if he's a looney.
I'd be very interested to see a documented citation for this "ethics" form. Standard practice in most every other medium and citation format I've worked in requires attribution to the original source material...so you can make sure that the intermediate source didn't err in their citation.
A good reason to go with the dissenters in Won Kim Ark. Making soil or place at birth the key feature of citizenship, rather than basing it upon social compact theory is what makes this a mess. According to compact theory, its perfectly to consider the child of any American citizen to be a natural born citizen. New citizens, in compact theory, are created by mutual consent between current citizens and the person who wishes to become a citizen. It is perfectly reasonable, along those lines, to make the child of any current citizen a citizen.
In short, the trouble he is the idea that soil makes citizenship--ie: "birthright citizenship." Harlan dissented from that, two years after Plessy, for good reason.
WND: Weapons of News Destruction.
bgates wrote: So, saying we should ignore Corsi (despite the fact that he's right on this story) because of an unrelated, seven-year-old story (where he was right again) - that's out?
Nah, right or wrong on the Swiftboating (threw that term in for all you who like the red meat), Corsi has lost most, if not all, of whatever credibility gained then by his blind pursuit of some truth he knows but can't effectively explain on this "birther" agenda. He demands proof, but then rejects proof shown to him. He rejects the court determinations that the evidence shown to them is valid.
I'm not a "birther" per se, I just don't believe Obama was born in or anywhere near Hawaii.
Almost Ali wrote: I'm not a "birther" per se, I just don't believe Obama was born in or anywhere near Hawaii.
Prove it.
Prove what?
That President Obama (he won the election, he's the president, he's earned the respect of using the title when using his name) was NOT, as you believe, born in Hawaii -- I'm going to reiterate my request from earlier -- if it's such common knowledge he was born in Kenya, show his Kenyan birth certificate.
In case you haven't noticed this is a new medium compared to all the others. It's called hypertext and it allows something called links which allows anybody to establish the provenance of any assertion, claim or opinion back to its source, virtually instantaneousness. This system is far superior to the print conventions because if a news item, claim, assertion or opinion is distorted it call be easily determine where and when the distortion occurred, and for many more reasons than I care to list.
However, if you fail to link back to the immediate source, and instead link to the ultimate source, as you would have Ann do, you will have broken a unwritten, but nevertheless real, rule of ethics and common courtesy, and as a consequence you will earn the opprobrium of the blogging community.
Don't be concerned about the lack of a written code, this is the blogosphere. We don't do written rules here.
Of course he's the president. He was elected on January 8, 2009. He just shouldn't be elected again, that's all.
Whytri,
Proof of Obama's birthplace is up to Obama.
Meanwhile, I'm convinced he's simply a jive turkey.
""Hawaii governor can't find Obama birth certificate.""
Maybe he's looking in all the wrong places.
But allow me, an undergrad Constitutional Law professor at a piddly-ass west coast college, ask you, a law school professor at a Big-10 university, who on earth, even hypothetically, has standing to bring a birther claim?
He provided the proof...you rejected the proof. What's the next step? It's a classic Catch-22. Every proof offered will be rejected as fabricated, so why keep offering the proof if it will just be rejected as fabricated. I'd just like to see the denouncers offer some contrary evidence other than their "beliefs".
Kevin Dujan posited the most interesting idea I've seen over at Hillbuzz. He's certain Obama was born in Hawaii, that it suited Axlerod to gin up the right and have them tied up in knots about the issue. It neutralizes criticism of Obama by painting anyone who questions his birth a lunatic.
Kevin thinks the document contains something embarrassing or compromising on it and therefore must stay out of sight. Possibilities:
1) Race listed as Causacian-Arab, not as black, the way he needs for his whole schtick to work. Kevin elaborates at length as is his wont.
2.) Obama's adoption by Lolo Soetero in the '70s complicated the dealio and the WH is afraid it cannot explain that to the American people. + elaboration
3) Obama Sr. is not Obama's real father. The craziest of the three theories. + a really cute elaboration.
Kevin, ever the activist, urges his readers to abandon the issue of the existence of the document and focus instead on its content. I presume he means the original, not the copy that was provided, the one that copies the proscription "this document is not to be copied."
I had to get an official copy the long form
In '85, I used a certified copy of a short form, IIRC. Haven't seen it since.
Do we know if Stanley left Baby O with her grandparents when she went to Washington state? It would be odd for her parents to send an 18 yo back to school with a newborn. It also explains his tenuous connection with his mother later.
Not your standard Presidential upbringing in any case.
Well, to finally and emphatically set the "birthers" straight, the current governor of Hawaii has been rooting around for Obama's so-called proof, and he's come up empty.
The "proof" (COLB) you refer to does not constitute lawful proof under presidential circumstances. And until Obama releases his [fictitious] long-form birth certificate, it simply does not exist.
The important questions is, "How was Hawaii born?"
Like everything else in politics, it is going to turn out that the cover up was the true "crime" here.
A lot of us are betting that there is some form of personally embarassing information on the birth certificate, and that is why it hasn't been released. I bet that some (Democratic) employee has hidden or "lost" the certificate at this point.
Almost Ali writes: The "proof" (COLB) you refer to does not constitute lawful proof under presidential circumstances.
According to what source? If the State of Hawaii issued a certified copy of his short form (their own document), based on the full faith and credit clause why wouldn't that constitute proof of birth?
Recently one Lt. Col. Terry Lakin refused to deploy to Afghanistan when ordered on the grounds that President Obama is constitutionally ineligible for the office and therefore his orders are not lawful. An Army courts martial barred Larkin's use of that defense because the Commander-in-Chief is not responsible for individual deployment orders, and therefore not in the chain of command regarding the charges and specifications. However, if an officer who does receive direct orders from the White House, such as the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, were to refuse an order on similar grounds, for example, ADM Mullen is ordered to kill a US citizen in Yemen suspected of terrorist activities and then refuses the order, it might have to be entertained in court
Entertained yes, but the question becomes where the burden of proof lies. As an affirmative defense, in civilian court, that would lie with the defendant. So, even if the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs claimed that President Obama were not qualified to be President, therefore could not lawfully give an order, it wouldn't be the responsibility of the government to provide proof he was qualified -- it would be up to the defense to provide substantive proof (other than assertions and allegations) that he wasn't.
Here's the proof.
Question 1 - Where's the seal?
Question 2 - Why is the certificate number redacted?
Why is the certificate number redacted?
Because it would be kind of uncool if the President of the United States was the victim of identity theft? :)
1) An official seal may only be a raised impression without any inking involved. Try scanning a raised seal sometime, especially on paper with that kind of pattern, and see if it shows up. I kind of think it won't.
2) Personal privacy. There's probably a lot someone can do with an official document number. Scan and post your official birth certificate and don't redact any information. President Obama is still entitled to some personal privacy.
While the COLB (Certificate of Live Birth) may be acceptable under ordinary circumstances, the document itself is based on the actual birth record, or long form, which should be easy to produce - that is, if it actually exists.
I suspect the only document in existence is the COLB, which originated as an article of faith - rather than fact taken from an actual birth record.
I the simplest terms, Obama's Hawaiian birth was phoned in. There is no long form, which explains why he can't produce it.
In fact, Obama himself may have been a victim of circumstances - which made/makes him ineligible to be president.
It's called discovery, whytri. If an officer is charged with willful disobedience or mutiny and his defense is "Obama is a fraud" he would have the right to subpoena Obama's long form birth certificate, assuming it exists, unless the subpoena is quashed, as it was in the case of Lt Col Terry Larkin v. U. S. Army.
I don't see "possession of a certificate of live birth" mentioned in the Constitution, Ali. Bit silly to claim it's a requirement for the Presidency.
As for the notion that he needs to be able to prove he's President -- er, no. The burden's on the accuser. If you think he's foreign-born, prove it in court.
"...does not constitute lawful proof under presidential circumstances."
I'm fairly certain Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution was never codified into federal law as most other Constitutional issues are, and therefore the concept of lawful proof is rather nebulous here.
And I've always thought a literal reading of that clause would require those running for president to be hundreds of years old. No really, look at it:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution#Clause_5:_Qualifications_for_office
Corsi has blah blah blah
Do you know what "ad hominem" means?
Discovery, yes, of course...and if the document cannot be produced, then what? Hold Hawaii in contempt of court? Failure to produce the document does not alleviate the burden of an affirmative defense to prove that President Obama was ineligible, especially considering that Hawaii can provide a certified copy of the short form...or are you rejecting the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution?
...or are you rejecting the full faith and credit clause of the Constitution?
Why not? The Left routinely rejects the 2nd Amendment. I thought the meme de jour was the Constitution is a ancient document that nobody understands.
whytri,
It turns out that under the special extended director's cut of the Constitution that the Birthers are reading from, if the current government of whatever state you were born in can't produce the original copy of your long-form birth certificate on demand you're instantly disqualified from office and stripped of all Presidential authority.
Damn, the Republicans really screwed up with Clinton. All that effort with impeachment when they could have just slipped a couple of grand to some dude in Little Rock to run a few pieces of paper through the shredder. :)
Discovery, yes, of course...and if the document cannot be produced, then what?
In the case of the hypothetical courts martial action the court would be forced to dismiss the case against the officer, but that wouldn't prove anything about Obama's citizenship, one way or the other.
"The Left routinely rejects the 2nd Amendment."
What has Obama or the last Congress done that affects your gun rights beside expand them to allow you to carry in National Parks?
There are constitutional requirements, Rev. However, I will concede that - as a practical matter - we've moved beyond such requirements regarding Obama.
Having been duly elected, he's now effectively immune because of our adherence to the political Doctrine of Greater Good. Which states that we should avoid looking like a banana republic, much lass a colony of Kenya or Zimbabwe.
Still, the concept of greater-good is complicated when it runs afoul of the Constitution. In other words, naive (i.e., gainfully employed) citizens may rightfully wonder if our very foundations are simply an elaborate expression of classical lip service.
If it were proven that the circumstances of a sitting President's birth does not qualify him for the office, he would still be President until removed from office by the constitutionally mandated procedure. It's already been used twice and is well understood. What is not well understood is the "natural born citizen" requirement for the office because no President has been so challenged in court, though Minor v. Happersett is probably definitive.
House would be free, of course, to decline to pass a true bill of impeachment even if Obama admitted under oath that he was born on foreign soil, and the Senate is free to acquit the President no matter what the evidence. Removing a President is a political matter, not a judicial matter, despite the trappings and ceremonies.
jimspice wrote: What has Obama or the last Congress done that affects your gun rights beside expand them to allow you to carry in National Parks?
Oh, please, no obfuscation, ok? The history of the controversy surrounding the 2nd Amendment is clear.
Now, it surely is true that his grandparents could have placed that item even if he had been born in Kenya or somewhere else outside the United States ... but why?
Because even crazy Lefties know the value of American citizenship, especially ones already gaming the system. Billions of other people around the world know it too. Are you that out of touch? That ungrateful for the accident of your birth and the wonderful gift of US citizenship?
Since Obama's mother was a citizen, does it matter where he was born? As the child of an American citizen, doesn't his citizenship start at birth? And wouldn't that make him a natural born citizen?
Some commenters seem to be confusing natual born with native born. Does the Constitution require being born in the US? I ask for 2 reasons.
John McCain was born in Panama. It was on an Army base, but is an Army base considered American soil like an Embassy?
Does anyone remember Nelson Rockefeller (Ford"s VP)? He was born in Mexico city while his mother was there as a tourist. He was found to be elegible to be President in case something happened to Ford.
And.....Just to throw another log on the crazy fire. What if the woman we believe to be his mother is in fact not his biological mother? Hows that for crazy?
Where's Mick? If he shows, please ask him about the big, fancy federal case he was touting that there was no way on a cold day in hell was going to get cert.
Goju -- Birthers are cognitive dissonance par excellence. "Natural born citizen" has a specific meaning for them that does not mean what natural born citizen actually means.
There are constitutional requirements, Rev.
None of which require a birth certificate, long-form or otherwise. Obama is recognized by Hawaii as having been born there. That ends the discussion.
Where's Mick?
Mick doesn't care about the birth certificate. His schtick is that Obama isn't a natural born citizen because his dad wasn't American.
Seven, when it comes to difficulties with definitions, birthers are not unique. Seems to be a problem on both sides of the line.
I have no legal training nor expertise. My questions about citizenship are serious. Perhaps Ann can clear it up when she gets up this AM.
Rev, Hawaii saying Obama was born there does not in any way end the discussion in and of itself. Saying something is fact does not make it fact. Proof makes it fact.
Goju wrote: "And.....Just to throw another log on the crazy fire. What if the woman we believe to be his mother is in fact not his biological mother? Hows that for crazy?"
We really ought to get Sully on this right away!
"Hey Ann, do you bother to check your source material anymore? Jerome Corsi is the same guy who has been pushing the birther agenda from the start. He's also the guy behind the Swiftboating of John Kerry (listed as author for "Unfit for Command"). This is a credible source worth your time and attention to repeat?"
Um, last time I checked, the Swiftboat charges against John Kerry were truth.
As was the infidelity charges against John Edwards that you guys said was made-up horseshit only the National Enquirer would print.
Last time I checked, Bill Clinton put a cigar up Monica Lewinsky too ... and you guys were saying we couldn't trust Matt Drudge.
Every time actual an actual news organization attempts to retrieve from the government the public records we pay them to keep for us that might shed light on Barack Obama's birth ... the media are shut down by the very same government and denied access to our fucking public records.
The Governor of Hawaii is unable to produce a birth certificate. He has said so.
You can play "shoot the messenger" all you want ... but your protests that we can't trust the media ring hollow.
Barack Obama cannot prove he is an American.
Period.
He therefore does not meet the requirements to be the President as set forth in our constitution.
Our government therefor is rogue and illegitimate.
Just when you thought it couldn't get any wierder...
What is it about this obama character that nobody seems to be able to find anything out about him? Birth certificate? Grades in college? Ayers association? Annenberg money wasting fiasco? When this whole birth certificate controversy first started, my response was "wouldn't surprise me." This governor isn't helping, and there is no way in hell that he's going to show anybody ombama's birth certificate. I'm now convinced, it doesn't exist.
Goju,
Rockefeller was not born in Mexico.
Wikipedia says he was born in Bar Harbor Maine, USA.
John Henry
To be fair, the U.S. presidency should now be open to all comers - not just Americans and Kenyans. Although it would look pretty ridiculous if our president actually lived in Moscow or Peking. I think that would be going too far.
What is it about this obama character that nobody seems to be able to find anything out about him? Birth certificate? Grades in college? Ayers association? Annenberg money wasting fiasco?
Or his Illinois Senate papers, or his bar application, etc., etc. For me that's the crux of the issue: we simply didn't know enough about Obama. The murmuring media myrmidons (thanks, Quaestor) provided most of the cover. But even useful idiots like Colin Powell stood witness. (Powell, who turned his back on his fellow Vietnam vet, also lied about Obama on Meet the Press when he said that Obama had "always been a Christian." Obama was purportedly baptized in the early 1990s at Trinity UCC. So, at best, he's been a Christian less than half of his life.) The real issue is that the American people voted--on the basis of worthless media assurances--for an unknown, a cypher, a surd.
And now we're reaping what we have sown.
"You tell me, did Rather generate the letters, or did someone do an excellent job duping him (or people that worked for him?)"
Actually, they did a piss-poor job of counterfeiting and the MSM lapped it up. That episode was very instructive regarding the lack of integrity in the MSM.
On the surface, it's easy to understand how illiterate countries and cultures were led down the garden path. How easy they were destroyed by smoke-blowin' charlatans.
But think about Obama, how effortlessly he was put into office by the most educated class in modern history.
Which goes to prove that "education" is seriously overrated, that the most educated super-power in the history of the world elected a man of absolutely no previous accomplishment or consequence. A man who in the practical world couldn't get a job running a local McDonald's for fear he would redistribute their hamburgers. To deadbeats and classmates.
nor, as I recall, did mr obama release his medical records instead relying on a letter from his doctor.
That said, I have lived thru many consipiracy theories. The governor is not doing mr obama any favors here--Abercrombie may want to pay more attention to the governance of his state than to mr obama's birth certificate--
As pointed above, there are established rules for removing a president from office, not of which require any "legal" protections.
Which goes to prove that "education" is seriously overrated, that the most educated super-power in the history of the world elected a man of absolutely no previous accomplishment or consequence.
Then a collection of the "most-educated" from another continent gave him a peace prize just before he authorized sending another 30,000 troops into a war zone.
Goju said: "Since Obama's mother was a citizen, does it matter where he was born? As the child of an American citizen, doesn't his citizenship start at birth?"
This is correct, isn't it?
I agree with Goju. It shouldn't matter where Obama was born since he was born to an American mother. Moreover he was raised by his American mother and raised in America by his grandparents. Obama is 100% American despite the stupid book he wrote about travelling to Kenya and all that. It would be different if Obama had been mostly raised in a foreign country. The point of the rule was to prevent non-Americans from becoming president (it was common in earlier periods of history in europe for foreigners to become the rulers (was the King of Poland ever Polish? Why were the Normans ruling Sicily?)
Saying all that though doesn't give Obama a pass for the disaster he brought to this country the last two years - Obamacare being the number 1 disaster.
Goju said: "Since Obama's mother was a citizen, does it matter where he was born? As the child of an American citizen, doesn't his citizenship start at birth?"
This is correct, isn't it?
I don't think so. My son was born in Japan when I was in the Air Force and we were told that we had to go down to the US Embassy and get his "Certificate of Birth Abroad" or he wouldn't get his US citizenship.
The military made a big deal out of the fact that you had to go to the embassy and get this done, or else risk not getting citizenship for your kid. Not sure if they were bullshitting us or not, but that's what we were told.
I've posted this before.
Is anyone here familar with colsed adoptions? When a child is adopted, his birth certifcate is changed to put his ADOPTED parents on it. Whatever form it is they give you at the hospital when you are born, that has your footprint on it, is NOT your legal birth certifcate. Your legal parents are your adopted parents and your legal birth certificate has them on it.
I know this, because I was adopted. I have never seen an "original long form birth certificate", I have no idea if such a document exists, and it does it is legaly invalid.
I hold a passport, a driver's license, and all the other things a valid birth certificate is required to get.
Thos of you demanding the "original long form" don't know what the hell you are talking about. Are all the adopted kids in this world to be denied their rights as citizens because of a piece of paper, with no legal force, that didn't exist when the Constitution was written?
Deny everything!
"I don't think so. My son was born in Japan when I was in the Air Force and we were told that we had to go down to the US Embassy and get his "Certificate of Birth Abroad" or he wouldn't get his US citizenship."
But the fact remains that your son was entitled to citizenship due to your citizenship, right?
The trouble with conspiracy theories it seems to me is they really accomplish nothing in the long term except making the theorists look like cranks, and ultimately damaging any future disclosures that could ultimately prove their case--The case of Alger Hiss comes to mind--it took the fall of the soviet union to establish that Mr Hiss was, in fact, a soviet spy. And that took 40 years.
Now, it surely is true that his grandparents could have placed that item even if he had been born in Kenya or somewhere else outside the United States ... but why?
I read this somewhere, and can't remember where, so don't blame the messenger:
The reason for that MIGHT be that Obama's grandparents wanted to further cement his ties to this country and thus his mother. They didn't trust the father and thought he might make trouble later on if he split and went back to Kenya. Perhaps in a fight with Stanley, he threatened to leave and take Barack with him or to go back to Kenya and get the government to petition the American gov't for custody (and they were afraid no one would fight very hard for a mixed-race boy born overseas, even if it was to an American mother).
Anyway, perhaps they thought that the father would be able to use the circumstance of Barack's birth to strengthen his claim to his son.
They were scared that this guy -- who had a troubled relationship with their daughter and had some status in his home country -- would lay claim to the boy and they wanted to have as much ammo (am I allowed to use that word?) as possible to block him.
As it happened, he did leave Stanley and go home to Kenya, but didn't petition for custody.
That's about the only thing I ever heard that made any amount of sense - and that's a stretch.
Kevin DuJan's theories are probably closer to the truth if there is, indeed, an issue with the mysteriously missing long form.
But the fact remains that your son was entitled to citizenship due to your citizenship, right?
Entitled? Absolutely. But again, we were told that citizenship wasn't awarded automatically and that there were actions we needed to take as parents to make it happen.
The Rt. Hon. Barack Abraham Delano Fitzgerald Obama: a man who rose without trace.
Original Mike,
Yes, CBS lied about the source of the forged documents because the man who faxed them to CBS was vouched for by DNC and was known to be as loony as Loughter.
Whytri, unaware of the rules and evidence? Google best evidence.
Synova,
The Swiftboaters did not accuse Kerry of being a coward; to the contrary, they accused him of being careless and reckless and so endangering his crew and others, and that is why they (some of the Swifties) arranged for his 3d Purple Heart and pointed out to the Navy that he should be sent home.
As for his Navy records, I think he won't produce even his DD214 because there is something on it, such as that the discharge date does not match the official story, or there is an asterisk by his hnorable discharge, that would cause more of a ruckus to arise.
As for Obama, the whole thing may be rooted in just normal bureaucratic stupidity and general foolishness, but there is a chance that there is something on it (or them, for the hospital long forms) that might cause embarrassment to the President and his family when compared to the official story.
We could not possibly be so lucky as to have Obama declared ineligible. Frankly, given the state of the judicial system these days I am certain that the law would be ignored in favor of The One's Divine Right of Rulership. We are all hoping that some deus ex machina will descend from the heavens and save us from this mess we created but in the end we are going to have to dig our own way out.
BTW, has Andy Sullivan gotten around to looking in Sarah Palin's womb for Obama's birth certificate yet? According to him lots of odd things happen in there.
The term "natural born citizen" in reference to our Constitution has been attributed to the legal treatise “the Law of Nations,” written by Emerich de Vattel in 1758, and indicates that the parents are also citizens. Vattel was well known to the founders (in 1775 Benjamin Franklin ordered three copies of the book in the original French). A comprehensive discussion of the origin of the term can be found at the link below:
http://www.birthers.org/USC/Vattel.html
"Native born" and "natural born" are often conflated; the Wong Kim Ark decision pretty well muddied the waters IMO.
Since Obama's mother was a citizen, does it matter where he was born?
This is where I am on this whole thing, as far as eligibility goes, however…
What is it about this obama character that nobody seems to be able to find anything out about him? Birth certificate? Grades in college?
It is totally weird that none of the usual stuff has come out. Usually, we hear something.
You know the real tragedy in all of this?
Mick isn't here.
He's probably on vacation, at a birther convention or something. He'll get back in a week, find this post, and fill the long-dormant thread with I TOLD YOU SO and "you all said I was insane" and so on.
Imagine if Althouse had a post about muffs or merkins or female personal grooming habits, and ironrails missed it.
@Shanna: Yeah, it looks like the MSM is covering for him. And I bet they don't even know what they're covering up.
MSM: "Where are Obama's _________?
Gibbs: "Don't go there"
MSM: "Go where?" (smiles slyly).
Gibbs: "Atta boy."
Hey do you think it is possible that they switched babies at birth in the Hospital in Hawaii and well.....maybe Steve McGarret should be president?
Just think how Chinese president Hu is currently cleaning Obama's Kenyan clock - knowing Obama is a tiny-time Maoist of failed African inclinations. That if Mugabe could so thoroughly destroy the once thriving farms of Zimbabwe, Obama will just as preternaturally do the same to America.
Rev, Hawaii saying Obama was born there does not in any way end the discussion in and of itself. Saying something is fact does not make it fact. Proof makes it fact.
You've missed the point.
The entirety of the Constitutional requirement here is "No person except a natural born Citizen [...] shall be eligible to the Office of President".
The power to track and record births within a state is not granted to Congress or to the Executive, which means it belongs to the states. In Hawaii this power is delegated to the executive branch of the state government, which has issued a finding that Obama was born in Hawaii. So that's the end of the discussion. Hawaii doesn't need to provide "proof" he was born there. Under the Constitution, if a state says someone was born there then that's good enough.
You could, if you wished, sue Hawaii to overturn their finding. In court, you would be required to prove that their finding was wrong. Good luck with that.
Maybe the WH called him off. After all, this is a great way to make the opposition look crazy.
Quaestor --
"Internet ethics stipulate that you quote and link back to the website where you got the information first. You don't cut out the middleman, even if he's a looney."
Um, those are just bloggers with their hands down each other's pants fronts in order to get clicks. More anti-ethical than ethical. Ethical would be linking to both the first rumor and then the actual source, keeping your readers from having to daisy-chain a dozen or more clicks.
Why is the Obama birth certificate myth still going on?
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/
Three links, found within 20 seconds. It's not even difficult. Come on people; there are better things to choose to confront than some myth about no birth certificate existing. This is stupid, and a complete non-issue.
Hagar,
I have two of Kerry's DD 214s. Neither of which is his original. They are a joke. The first one that was provided says under AWARDS -- Awarded National Defense Service Medal (Not Received). And that's it. no other awards are listed. Also that was on a DD 214, which wasn't what he should have had, because only the Army has the DD 214. Kerry should have had a DD 214N because he was in the Navy. The second DD 214 he provided, said DD 214N. Liar, bullshitter.
If he wasn't born here, does that make us any less responsible for electing him?
Also that was on a DD 214, which wasn't what he should have had, because only the Army has the DD 214.
Kerry's one of my least favorite people, so don't take this as a defense for him. When I got out of the AF, I don't remember a DD214AF or A or anything other than the form saying DD 214.
Scott,
Do you have your DD 214?
If a state says someone was born there then that's good enough.
Not quite. The maintenance of vital records is a crucial national issue with far reaching implications. Thus such federal agencies as NOVS (National Office of Vital Statistics).
A state may not simply declare or claim births absent proof and verification. Or create voter roles out of whole cloth (except in liberal precincts).
Thus far, the state of Hawaii has offered no lawful proof of Obama's birth. Only hearsay. Which is why Gov. Abacrombie is/was seeking to provide lawful proof once and for all. But is in a state of shock because he now realizes he and all of Obama's supporters were hoodwinked, big time.
Not quite. The maintenance of vital records is a crucial national issue with far reaching implications. Thus such federal agencies as NOVS (National Office of Vital Statistics).
Just because something's important doesn't mean the Constitution requires it or delegates that power to the federal government.
Sure, maintaining vital records is useful for all sorts of reasons. Nevertheless, our founders didn't make possession of vital records a requirement for the Presidency -- so it doesn't matter if Obama has them or not.
A state may not simply declare or claim births absent proof and verification.
You're quite wrong.
The people reporting the birth have to prove to the state that the birth happened. The state itself doesn't have to "prove" jack shit. They're the authority on the matter.
Not handy here at work, but I know where it is at home. I fully plan on checking tonight.
Bottom left hand corner.
In between the DD and the 214, it should say FORM then below that a date. What date does yours say.
There's only one kind of DD 214 right now - your department, component and branch are specified on the form. No idea whether there were different forms back in Kerry's day, though.
U.S. Constitution: Article 2, Secetion 1:
No person except a natural born Citizen... be eligible to the Office of President...
Before he enter on the Execution of his Office, he shall take the following Oath or Affirmation:
"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States." (Except the parts I, Barack Hussein Obama, disagree with - like the stupid birth certificate stuff - like Kenyan hut dwellers walk around with notary stamps and proof-of-birth forms in their palm-leaf haversacks)
Maguro,
My friend up the street who was a Marine in Viet Nam, has a DD 214MC.
I didn't realize there were rappers as far back as Vietnam.
Also, Scott, when were you in? According to Maguro, there is only one DD 214 for everyone. Didn't used to be that way, admittedly, a long time ago.
1990-1994 - Air Force
1994-1996 - Army Reserve
I'll guess that you have a DD 214, because of your final service was in the Army. Getting back to Kerry, who in the fuck has a DD 214 and a DD 214N? Notice that the first one that he had, had no awards. That was one he probably had made up after he threw all of the medals over the WH fence when he was embarassed to be a veteran. The original one that he was issued should have said DD 214N. When he wanted one to show that he was reporting for duty, he had another one made up. He's a puke.
Juba Doobai! said...
"The NY Daily News (left wing) also carried the story. The money quote, IMO, is this: "On Tuesday, he again promised he would do 'what I can do' to publicly verify that records show Obama was born in Hawaii and is a citizen of the United States, making him eligible to be President." This was after the story's header is this: "Record of President Obama's birth in 1961 is 'in the archives': Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie" in the NYD, and this: "Wait, we found them..." on Drudge."
Of course this is ALL nonsense political theatre. The question is not whether Obama is an "American Citizen", it's whether he is a natural born Citizen, eligible to be POTUS according to A2S1C5.
By the facts already known and admitted he is not, since his father was not a US Citizen, and was married to is mother (there is an official 40 year old divorce decree listing him as the child of the couple).
The fact that Abercrombie cannot even state the correct issue, and neither can the media, says volumes.
Obama was born a British subject, as such, NO MATTER if born on the Oval Office desk, delivered by JFK, he is not a natural born Citizen. Obama was born ADMITTEDLY with Dual Allegiance.
Unless you are born in the US of 2 US Citizen parents (Original Common Law US Citizen) then you are naturalized in some way by statute (maybe passively by election of residence).
Natural Born Citizenship is a CONDITION of Birth, not a type of citizenship. All US citizens have the same rights, but only natural born Citizens are eligible to be POTUS.
Obama is Ineligible.
Everything he signed would be null and void if ejected from office, including the 2 Communist appointments to the SCOTUS.
...and Mick finally surfaces.
Tibore said...
Why is the Obama birth certificate myth still going on?
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/
Three links, found within 20 seconds. It's not even difficult. Come on people; there are better things to choose to confront than some myth about no birth certificate existing. This is stupid, and a complete non-issue.
HAHAHAHA. Pics on a website are proof of nothing, see my post above. Birth in the US is only half the equation.
Original Mike said...
"I don't think so. My son was born in Japan when I was in the Air Force and we were told that we had to go down to the US Embassy and get his "Certificate of Birth Abroad" or he wouldn't get his US citizenship."
But the fact remains that your son was entitled to citizenship due to your citizenship, right"
The son would be a US Citizen by statute, not a natural born Citizen, eligible to be POTUS. Just like McCain. This treasonous congress gave us 2 ineligible candidates.
ironrailsironweights said...
" It's a proven fact that the Honolulu newspaper ran a birth announcement a short time after Obama's birth. Now, it surely is true that his grandparents could have placed that item even if he had been born in Kenya or somewhere else outside the United States ... but why? It's absurd to think that they may have wanted to make a newborn baby eligible to run for President decades later.
Peter"
Nonsense strawman argument. If Obama 2 was born in Kenya, the grandparents probably would have wanted him to be able to acquire US Citizenship. Ann Dunham would not have been old enough to confer US Citizenship to a foreign born child.
("Rolls," not roles)
cubanbob said...
" The governor of Hawaii be-clowns himself. Another lib, another tard. What else is new? Maybe Obama senior isn't Obama juniors dad. Who knows? Who cares. It's not the potential illegitimacy of his birth that concerns me but the illegitimacy of his policies."
And of course you're wrong. His policies are the result of his Usurpation of the office. He has breached a security wall inserted by the framers to prevent foreign influence. If the very qualifications for POTUS have no meaning, then of what value is the Constitution? Obama is EXACTLY the kind of man that the framers were trying to prevent from the office.
There is a reason he was chosen for the destruction of America, i.e he lacks the allegiance and attachment necessary for the CIC of our armed forces.
Jason (the commenter) said...
"If it turns out Obama wasn't born an American (maybe he was adopted), can we declare his Presidency null and void, and make the last two years a do-over?"
YES
bagoh20 said...
" Mick, Call your office."
Darn, to the party late again.
jimspice said...
"...does not constitute lawful proof under presidential circumstances."
I'm fairly certain Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution was never codified into federal law as most other Constitutional issues are, and therefore the concept of lawful proof is rather nebulous here.
And I've always thought a literal reading of that clause would require those running for president to be hundreds of years old. No really, look at it:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Article_Two_of_the_United_States_Constitution#C
Wrong. You are referring to the "grandfather clause", which allowed anyone who was a Citizen of the Colonies AT THE TIME THAT THE CONSTITUTION WAS RATIFIED to be eligible to be POTUS. No One born after 1787, who is not born in the US of US Citizen parents, is a natural born Citizen eligible to be POTUS. The earliest Presidents were the benefactors of this clause, since most were born in the colonies as British subjects, like Obama. They trusted themselves, since they fought the Revolution, but no others. Besides that, there would have been no one eligible then.
Maguro said...
"Either this is all some brilliant scheme by Axelrod to keep birtherism alive at a low boil to help brand Obama critics as cranks and nutcases...
Or...
The governor of Hawaii is completely off his rocker.
Is there another explanation?"
It's both. Axlerod, and the treasonous co conspirators use the BC issue to cloud the real issue, that is already known and admitted. That is that Obama's father was a Kenyan who imparted Obama 2 w/ Dual British Citizenship, which makes Obama ineligible, no matter where he was born.
And Abercrombie is a Leftist, which implies brain damage in itself.
World Net Daily
Next to the Birther news , look for the ongoing Shapeshifter debate.
(birthers forget that BO's birth was announced in the Honolulu paper. Was that part of a conspiracy as well? un f-ing likely)
whytri said...
"That President Obama (he won the election, he's the president, he's earned the respect of using the title when using his name) was NOT, as you believe, born in Hawaii -- I'm going to reiterate my request from earlier -- if it's such common knowledge he was born in Kenya, show his Kenyan birth certificate."
No proof of birth in Hi. is needed, since that in itself wouldn't make Obama a natural born Citizen. The BC would be needed to prove the stated story of a Kenyan father, who would have imparted British citizenship on Obama 2. By the testimony already given he is Ineligible, given his dual allegiance at birth.
Revenant said...
"Where's Mick?
Mick doesn't care about the birth certificate. His schtick is that Obama isn't a natural born citizen because his dad wasn't American."
Aw, I'm glad you guys missed me! He has already admitted the fact that makes him ineligible. BC is only relevant to prove paternity, and a pic on a website is proof of nothing.
J said: (birthers forget that BO's birth was announced in the Honolulu paper. Was that part of a conspiracy as well? un f-ing likely)
I'm not a "birther," but my skepticism is piqued by these stories. Maybe you should read them before you comment on them:
But the birth announcements offer no proof of citizenship, because they might reflect nothing more than information a family filed with the Hawaii Department of Health to obtain a state Certification of Live Birth for a baby born outside Hawaii. Any parent presumably would see the benefit of securing American citizenship for their child.
Roger J. said: The trouble with conspiracy theories it seems to me is they ....
There are legitimate questions about The Zero's birth quite apart from any "conspiracy theories."
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा