News Flash! Barack Hussein Obama was not born in Kenya or Hawaii but on a grassy knoll in Dallas or possibly at Graceland in Memphis. No, really, just as some expected, he was born in Bethlehem, ....Pennsylvania.
Obama not born in the USA; this story is covered thoroughly in Wikipedia but save yourself some time and as with all conspiracy theories consider the ludicrous lengths the conspirators would have to go to pull off such a hoax. Proving conclusively his lack of citizenship would overwhelm even the skills of CSI New York and Miami combined.
But let's say the "Birthers" were successful in disqualifying Obama from holding the office of President. How long would it take for two thirds of the House and Senate and three fourths of the state legislatures, in response to national and international outrage, to approve a retroactive amendment to the Constitution allowing a non native-born citizen to be President; maybe a week, two at the most?
Before anyone gets too excited about the possibility of removing Obama from the Oval Office over the authenticity of a birth certificate, consider who would replace him. Read the Constitution and U.S. law which specifies the order of succession to the Presidency if the office is vacated by death, resignation or inability to serve. The next four in line are one, VP Joe Biden (get serious); two, Speaker Nancy Pelosi (get even more serious); three, the President Pro Tem of the Senate, 92 year old Senator Robert Byrd of West Virginia and yes, coming in fourth but standing at the ready, Madam Secretary Hillary Clinton.
Better to spend one's time working to wrest control of the House from the Democrats in 2010. That would put a check on Obama's leftist ambitions until 2012 when the people can vote for "Change" again.
Posted by warrenpeterson at July 26, 2009 11:16 PM | Email ThisLet the conspiracy theorists and their lawyers fight this issue out in the courtroom(s) and wake us up if and when there is a revelation and shut up about it for now.
Posted by: KDS on July 27, 2009 12:51 AMThe same with his college records. Why keep them sealed? To what purpose? From a "transparent administration," yet?
Or is the dirty secret in Obama's closet the fact that he claimed foreign citizenship to enter college? There must be something there.
As promised in the campaign.
P.T. Barnum was correct...
Posted by: joebandmember on July 27, 2009 05:42 AMI don't use my time for this issue. I don't talk to people about it, ever. It's not really productive at this point. I do find it interesting though. I almost think the deal about keep college records secret even more interesting.
I also find it interesting that a soldier who was fighting his deployment orders on these grounds had his orders rescinded by the Army the night before his hearing in federal court.
Still the question remains not just unanswered by the major news outlets but not even asked, not even reported: THERE'S A LONG-FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE THAT EXISTS. IT IS DIFFERENT AND MORE DETAILED THEN THE SHORT FOR BIRTH CERTIFICATE that he has released. OBAMA REFUSES TO LET THE PUBLIC SEE THE LONG-FORM AND IS SPENDING LOTS OF MONEY TO PREVENT ITS RELEASE.
WHY WON'T HE RELEASE THE LONG-FORM CERTIFICATE?
Why is the major media working so hard not to state this issue with this amount of clarity, in the most basic journalistic terms.
Posted by: jet on July 27, 2009 06:43 AMStill the question remains not just unanswered by the major news outlets but not even asked, not even reported: THERE'S A LONG-FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE THAT EXISTS. IT IS DIFFERENT AND MORE DETAILED THEN THE SHORT FOR BIRTH CERTIFICATE that he has released. OBAMA REFUSES TO LET THE PUBLIC SEE THE LONG-FORM AND IS SPENDING LOTS OF MONEY TO PREVENT ITS RELEASE.
WHY WON'T HE RELEASE THE LONG-FORM CERTIFICATE?
Why is the major media working so hard not to state this issue with this amount of clarity, in the most basic journalistic terms.
Posted by: jet on July 27, 2009 06:44 AMNo, I don't believe Obama is a Natural Born Citizen of the U.S. Why should I or anybody else? Until, he is able to prove Positive that he is a Natural Born Citizen, why would you think anything else? After all, he's a Politician.
My thinking on this matter is that Obama is either a natural born citizen or an illegal alien. In theory if he were born outside of this country, there should be some paperwork somewhere in the INS that was created when he was brought here. While it might be possible to get rid of all that paperwork, the likely hood of it happening is slim. The only other option is that he is indeed a natural born citizen. All he has to do to quell these issues is to release his real birth certificate.
As to who would succeed him if he were removed over not being a natural born citizen, it would be Pelosi. The whole Obama/Biden candidacy would be invalid. We vote for the person to be president not vice president. Obama was elected not Biden. The next in the line of sucession is Pelosi.
Yet another major quandry that would happen if Obama were removed due to non-citizenship is what would happen to all the laws that he signed. Those laws would be invalid. I think at that point there would be civil war.
Posted by: William on July 27, 2009 07:24 AMIf the shoe fits...
Posted by: demo kid on July 27, 2009 07:45 AMI doubt if any of the Republican national officeholders believe the birther claims, although there are some who try to be artfully ambiguous in discussing it. Obviously, Warren doesn't put much credence in it and I would guess that's true for Jim Miller, pudge, and the rest. But the main tactic of these opinion leaders is to keep the Republican "base" whipped up in a permanent state of outrage, so anything goes in the service of that goal. The result is the nuttiness you see in the comment threads of this site. And of course, as the discourse becomes nuttier, anyone with a lick of sense abandons the party and you wind up with the concentrated lunacy that now defines the right.
Posted by: scottd on July 27, 2009 07:52 AMit's not going to help the republicans by any means, especially with the economy actually turning around. onoz!
ladyexec, who is calling you a racist?
it sounds to me like you're just a ct wingnut, so you're in the norm.
Actually that is more representative of the left than the right. Which explains why the leftist children that got seemingly everything they wanted in November are still soiling their diaper over the Palin family.
As for Obama's long form birth certificate, the clown keeps the issue alive by not producing it. It doesn't seem like a whole lot to ask of a former constitutional lawyer now does it? What is there to hide?
Posted by: Rick D. on July 27, 2009 08:14 AMAre you serious? Have you read any of the posts from the left over the course of the last nine years? This site is tame and sane compared to Huffington, Kos, or HA.
I could care less about the birth certificate.
What I do have a problem with is that Obama loudly proclaimed that he would have the MOST transparent administration in the history of man, yet he has released fewer personal records than his opponent or his predecessor.
Still waiting for the "O" to walk the talk.
Posted by: SouthernRoots on July 27, 2009 08:19 AMI think there are indeed issues with the certificate but I can't tell whether it would mean something or not.
Besides, under "standing" protocol, it seems no one has "standing" to sue to remove him from office.
Posted by: swatter on July 27, 2009 09:16 AMI don't know why they did that, but I think the hearing didn't take place.
Posted by: Gary on July 27, 2009 09:24 AMIt is to his advantage to keep the conspiracy theorists chattering on this point, as it makes them seem crazy, and they will be disregarded when they make more legitimate points.
Posted by: Josh R on July 27, 2009 09:26 AM
I don't know. Just seems that he's gone to some lengths, and with some cost, to keep it private. But, I only peripherally know about the details in any case.
Posted by: Gary on July 27, 2009 10:05 AMMy question is do we trust the administrator of the hospital who said he looked at the real certificate and says it is real? If so, maybe another staffer has looked at it, but then, other than politics, why doesn't Barry release? It seems so easy and yet he wants to drag it on.
Posted by: swatter on July 27, 2009 12:53 PMAs I pointed out in @11, point 4, the talking point about both parents is wrong. There was a court case in late 1800's that address the "Natural Born" question relating to one or both parents. The court case defined "Natural Born" as one parent of US citizen ship. When I get a chance, I will get the specific court reference, or you could simply look up the rebuttals articles that point this simple fact out.
As far as the age of Obama's mother, that argument is also incorrect because it is partially based on the argument of a law put into effect after Obama's birth relating to how long one lives in the country as an adult. The argument is wrong because: (a) the law mentioned by the birther's wasn't in place in 1961, and (b) even if it was in effect, good luck arguing that Obama's mother wasn't a US citizen just because she hadn't lived enough years in the US after she became an adult. She was a US citizen by fact of her birth. The law in question has no bearing.
Posted by: tc on July 27, 2009 01:20 PMThe final acts are electing him president, and reofmring health care, which as you all know, having a government role leads straight to loss of all freedom, no elections, reeducation camps, and gulags for conservatives, after we confiscate your guns. For that we've all ever-so-cleverly ALLOWED the NRA to win the gun rights debate over the last 25 years, so that you would all join and put your names in its database, which we already have copied!
BWA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
You'll all be put into Camp Mao & Stalin in about 6 weeks, because now that you're onto the plot, we can't wait anymore. We will put the GOP congressmen in there too, that's how we'll break the filibuster on health care. And get this:
WE ARE WATCHING all conservative blog sites like this one to get your e mails to be able to round you up.
BWA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!
Posted by: Torture Lawyer on July 27, 2009 02:51 PMDred Scott v. Sandford in 1857
Elk v. Wilkins in 1872
Slaughterhouse Cases in 1872
Minor v. Happersett in 1874
US v. Wong Kim Ark in 1898
In the last case, the court concluded:
The constitution nowhere defines the meaning of these words [citizen and natural born citizen], either by way of inclusion or of exclusion, except in so far as this is done by the affirmative declaration that 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.
It further concluded:
It thus clearly appears that by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country, and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, and the jurisdiction of the English sovereign; and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject, unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign state, or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born. III. The same rule was in force in all the English colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the constitution as originally established.
The birthers would have you believe that the 14th amendment is wrong or somehow doesn't apply (it does apply), they also want to throw out English Common Law, from which the original meaning for much of the constitution was based. The last case is of particular problem for the birthers.
It answer the one question about producing the "original" birth certificate. The State of Hawaii went digital several years back. This is probably like most states. If I ask the State of Washington for my kid's birth certificates, I the one similar to what Barack has already produced (the so called short form). When I requested a copy of my own from my home state, it too was a similar (short) form, electronically produced version.
Posted by: tc on July 27, 2009 03:29 PMGary, maybe it's because he is so transparent?
Honestly, how can the media allow these things to remain sealed? Well, we know how. Same team and all.
Posted by: Gary on July 27, 2009 04:17 PMhttp://www.salon.com/politics/war_room/2009/07/27/hawaii_resolution/index.html
Posted by: cat on July 27, 2009 05:17 PMThe only reason for not showing an original "Certificate of Live Birth" rather than a computer generated "Certificate of Live Birth" is that there is something on it that would be a real game changer for Obama. Or not. McCain produced his even though he was born in Panama. It is really a very simple act and would cut right through any confusion.
There is a real Hawaiian "Certificate of Live Birth" from 1963 that would be easy enough to produce for Obama if it exists. If not, I'm sure there are a few typewriters from that era lying around somewhere.
Why continue to draw this thing out - just show the certificate and get it over with? The truth will come out eventually.
It would be the American thing to do. All of you should be ashamed of yourselves for trying to make this a race thing or a political party thing. It is the right thing to do. Anyone who denies it knows that they are wrong.
Obama - clear this thing up now. It is the craziest thing I have ever seen in American politics and you are THE ONE person who can settle it in just minutes.
What possible motive could you have Mr. President for not showing it. Here's a chance for you to show some real leadership and gain respect and legitimacy in the eyes of many.
Posted by: Fox Goodman on July 27, 2009 07:47 PMAlso a question for anyone with experience in travel around the time of Obama's birth: how difficult would it be to fly from Kenya, to the U.S. with a newborn child. Maybe fly into the U.S. where just maybe one of the child's parents has some relatives? Then present the child to a hospital claiming he was born at the relatives home just a couple days ago. Just asking.
The question above is meant to piss-off the Obama-duped folks who seem to think this line is questioning somehow beneath Republicans. Well, I'm not a Republican, and you simpletons will continue to lose elections until you get off your moral high horses, get down, dirty and nasty as the Democrats and get questions answered or at the very least, get questions asked.
And don't denigrate us with your "birther" labels; that is a Democrat's trick - applying belittling labels those who disagree with you. That won't gain you the support of independents. As an independent, I am only asking a simple question. Where can I find a valid, legal copy of the current president's birth certificate so I know that he meets the legal requirement for the job?
P.S. I don't spend a lot time with this issue, but is important to me. It is just another reason that demonstrates that the system is breaking down even worse than I had realized.
Posted by: CNC on July 27, 2009 07:52 PMBTW, I bet demo kid is a Truther.
Posted by: Jeff B. on July 27, 2009 08:52 PMIn that case, wasting the time of the legislature would make the common people better off!
In my opinion, about 80% of what the government does makes us worse off. It hurts us, and it especially hurts the poor by destroying jobs and increasing prices. Even worse, welfare dependency destroys lives.
I'd love to see a general, legislative shut-down. Maybe they can have a power failure?
But if this birther-issue slows down congress, or the Obama administration, or the state legislatures, then I am all for it for that reason!
I am only sad that there was not such an issue to slow down the Bush administration as well.
Posted by: Bruce Guthrie on July 27, 2009 09:01 PMFact 2: Obama could have requested a copy of the original birth certificate, and apparently did not, even when questions arose.
Fact 2 is not enough to overwhelm Fact 1, and any other facts you might have in support of Fact 2 pale in comparison to Fact 1, especially when you throw in the newspaper clipping from when Obama was born.
Also, the election cannot be undone: if Obama is removed from office for ANY reason, the Vice President becomes President. It would not be Senator McCain.
If they were simply flinging mud and hoping that it would stick, what does Hillary have to say about trumping up false charges against him, now that she is part of Obama's cabinet?
Posted by: PeggyU on July 28, 2009 12:36 AMCNN wouldn't be working on behalf of a politician would it?
If you want to impeach someone for not producing his birth certificate, even though he HAS produced legal proof that he was born in the United States, be my guest, but you won't get very far. In order to make any progress you need to show that the legal proof -- the certification -- is flawed, and no one's seriously done that.
Posted by: pudge on July 28, 2009 08:38 AMI do know when I requested my birth certificate from my home state in order to apply for a passport, what I got is similar (slightly different formatting) to what Obama has put out and verified by Factcheck (and WDN). It also meets the US Code (see my earlier post on this reference).
The fact of the matter is the "birthers" need to address the US Code first and foremost. This is where they should be starting. If they don't agree with it then they should bring court action to have it overturned.
I agree with Robert Gibbs statement yesterday that nothing will satisfy the birthers. It is time for Republicans to distance themselves instead of stating that the movement has its points. They are sworn to uphold the Constitution and the laws of the US. The US Code specifically spells out the requirements for citizenship (including Natural Born definition). The state of Hawaii has certified Obama's citizenship. End of story. It is time for Republicans to end this charade. Only they can shut up their fringe supporters by stating unequivocally their opinion. Either they believe the US Code (stated law) or they don't. If they don't then they need to rewrite it.
Posted by: tc on July 28, 2009 09:28 AM"The website TVNewser reported today that Klein sent an e-mail to staffers of "Lou Dobbs Tonight" just as the program went to air, informing them that CNN researchers had determined that Hawaiian officials discarded all paper documents in 2001."
-
Discarded means that they no longer exist. Did CNN researchers really determine this? A state official says they have seen the "original vital records". I assume that means the paper certificate. I think CNN botched something.
I would think the media would want to see it. And his college records also. Don't you?
I know the "original" (assuming it is what people mean) of my birth certificate (e.g., one doctor signed) does have "private" information like previous births and miscarriages by mother. Do we need to "snoop" into these private matters. Most of the "other" information, at least in mine, is information about my parents, the doctor, and the facility. I don't know what the hospital in Honolulu used. I am just stating that my so called "original" has personal information that is not necessary for the main issue at hand (i.e., citizenship). The official certificate already produced has all the information the State Department requires for passport. What is wrong with it?
Posted by: tc on July 28, 2009 11:37 AMWhat public records of Obama are sealed?
Can you identify a public record available to you for G. W. Bush which is not available to you for Obama?
This isn't a matter of conspiracy or speculation; it's simply a matter of historical legal fact.
Attorneys Leo Donofrio and Mario Apuzzo are good sources on this particular argument.
Yet not a single one of the 50 states where Obama/Biden were on ballot read the law that way, and none of Obama/Biden's opponents challenged his natural born citizenship, nor did attorneys Leo Donofrio and Mario Apuzzo or anybody else submit a successful challenge.
OK, here's what you and the rest of the birthers should do. Send 50% of your weekly gross salary each payday to the attorneys, Leo Donofrio and Mario Apuzzo, to have them fix this. Because this is the real issue requiring resolution.
America and Donofrio & Apuzzois counting on YOU!
Check you're local CNN listings for Lou Dobbs - DEFENDER of America
Give it up.
Posted by: Westello on July 28, 2009 08:25 PMA newspaper record isn't that useful, I wouldn't think. My baby book has a birth announcement in it from a newspaper from my grandparent's town (I was not born there). It lists my parents and grandparents, and the date and that's about it. So, who knows where the papers got their information. It might have been phoned in by the grandparents, as I assume mine was. It seems kind of strange to me, but maybe that's how they did things in the early 60's.
Frequently, in our small local paper, there will be birth announcements for families who live in other states - but who still have relatives living here. I think it may just be part of small town living.
Posted by: PeggyU on July 28, 2009 09:25 PMObama didn't seal his records, they are just not public. No school records are public. All the hot air from Dobb's etc. not withstanding.
And why should Obama release anything? There is no legal requirement to do so, whether he is POTUS or not.
Just because some wing nut wants to go on a fishing expedition does not mean Obama has to provide a fishing pole, especially when there are no fish in the pond.
If you want to dig, then pay money and dig. I really dont care.
Posted by: Dorf on July 29, 2009 11:42 AMObama didn't seal his records, they are just not public. No school records are public. All the hot air from Dobb's etc. not withstanding.
And why should Obama release anything? There is no legal requirement to do so, whether he is POTUS or not.
Just because some wing nut wants to go on a fishing expedition does not mean Obama has to provide a fishing pole, especially when there are no fish in the pond.
If you want to dig, then pay money and dig. I really dont care.
Posted by: Dorf on July 29, 2009 11:42 AMWhat the hell, let's have plain old fashioned anarchy. That will fix everything.
I have a copy of MY long-form BC, obtained from the State of Washington. Only cost me $20 and a phone call to have it mailed right to my house. Imagine that.
What the nay-sayers don't realize is that a lot of us are really sick and tired of having the laws apply SELECTIVELY to us and not to the "elites" that think they know better than us on how to run the country.
Want another civil war? Keep it up, it's coming.
Yes, the president SHOULD follow the same laws we have to follow, and that includes releasing information that shows he is legally qualified to hold the office.
If that makes me a "birther", I wear the name proudly.
See you on the firing line......
Posted by: Elmo on July 29, 2009 11:17 PMI check my birth state (WI), here is there information on birth certificates. There is no "long-form" versus "short-form." What I received from them looks very similar (state seal different and ordering slightly different) as what I have for my children (from State of WA) and what Barack has posted (and was looked at in person by Fact Check). There is not "other" birth certificate to be obtained.
If you go to Hawaii's Health Department website and click the form to request a birth certificate, you will see there is no "long-form" option. This is all hogwash about a different birth certificate being available. Yes, there may be hospital records and the original documentation filled out that is on file, but that isn't what an individual is provided when the request a birth certificate.
Posted by: tc on July 30, 2009 12:08 PMFunny! You're trying to have a reasonable dialog with someone who says Want another civil war? Keep it up, it's coming and See you on the firing line.......
ps. rhymes with 'kingtut'. :-D
Posted by: MikeBoyScout on July 30, 2009 03:33 PMI have both so I know there is a difference. Incidently, the "long-form" version is a photocopy of the original document signed by the doctor.
Does that clear it up for you?
As for those who laugh about a possible civil war brewing, you might want to rethink that. I know a lot of folks who are not satisfied with the status quo. This is not a right vs left issue, it is one of citizen vs government intrusion, regardless of political party.
So glad you find this all to be so funny. We'll see who has the last laugh.
Posted by: Elmo on July 30, 2009 08:55 PMBARACK BARRY HUSSEIN MOHAMED ABDULLAH SOETORO ONYANGO 0BAMA
ILLEGAL ALIEN, k e n y a / mombassa
-
PUBLIC E-PETITION:
-
www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81550
-
WWW.HOUSE.GOV
WWW.SENATE.GOV
Posted by: Spqr on July 31, 2009 08:29 AMOK there. See you on the firing line
or in jail like the nut job Shawna Forde. She knew a lot of folks too. :-D
Ba-de-ba-de-pa-de...That's all folks!