Dobbs repeatedly makes Obama birth certificate claims his CNN colleagues call "total bull"
SUMMARY: Addressing an issue promoted by the far-right "birther" movement, Lou Dobbs repeatedly said on his radio show that President Obama needs to "produce a birth certificate" and that Obama's birth certificate posted online has "some issues" -- claims that have been dismissed and even ridiculed by his CNN colleagues.
During the July 15 edition of his radio program, CNN host Lou Dobbs devoted substantial airtime to the issue of President Obama's birth certificate, asserting repeatedly that the president needs to "produce" it. Dobbs said that the birth certificate posted online by FactCheck.org "purporting to validate the president" has "some issues ... I mean, it's peculiar," and stated that he wants to see a "long form" birth certificate, which he called "the real deal." By contrast, Dobbs' CNN colleagues have repeatedly debunked claims that Obama has yet to produce a valid birth certificate, calling them "total bull" and "a whack-job project," and have characterized those who make these claims as "conspiracy theorists" who wear "tin foil hat[s]."
Dobbs also mentioned the issue of Obama's birth certificate on the July 15 edition of his CNN television show. Referring to the document that FactCheck.org posted, Dobbs said, "It is, in fact, the so-called short form, not the original document. It is really a document saying that the state of Hawaii has the real document in its possession."
Media Matters for America has noted that Dobbs has a history of pushing conspiracy theories and numerous falsehoods and distortions.
Dobbs' radio show
During his radio program, Dobbs stated: "[S]hould he produce his birth certificate -- the long form, the real deal? Should he be a little more forthcoming? ... What is the deal here? I'm starting to think we have a -- we have a document issue. Do you suppose he's un -- no, I won't even use the word undocumented. It wouldn't be right."
Dobbs later stated that when examining the birth certificate issue, at first he "thought, 'Here we go with the lunatic fringe. This is a bunch of quackeroos going after him.' " However, Dobbs said he now believes that there are "some issues here that should be really resolved" with Obama's birth certificate.
During his program, Dobbs repeatedly faulted Obama for what he said was Obama's failure to definitively answer questions raised about his birth certificate:
- Dobbs stated: "The first thing is to determine whether or not his birth certificate is valid. And what I don't understand is why that has not been released and given over to the public record."
- After a caller said "something doesn't smell right" with Obama, Dobbs said that the "way to get rid of those odors is always just open the windows and let the sun shine in. And all we need here is a doggone document, but for some reason the president doesn't want to release that."
- Dobbs said that in contrast to efforts undertaken by Sen. John McCain "to determine that he met the standard of natural-born citizen," there is "absolutely, you know, no effort to do so on the part of Barack H. Obama. Nor, as also our callers have pointed out, this president would not release his medical records. And the national media seemed to be fine with that, whereas they probably would have eviscerated John McCain for failing to do so."
- After a caller theorized that Obama is rushing through programs because Obama "knows what's coming" with regard to the birth certificate lawsuits, Dobbs said: "Certainly your view can't be discounted at this point, because this president refused to provide the documentation that would settle all of the controversy here."
- After a caller said she initially thought the birth certificate controversy was "the dumbest thing ever," Dobbs replied:
DOBBS: Well, it is a dumb thing. I think we have to all admit this is a dumb thing either way, because, I mean, I can't understand why the president wouldn't just move to get this stuff out of the way. Show the documents, get it done -- I mean, he -- think about it.
Dobbs also claimed that a soldier questioning Obama's citizenship "should be taken seriously. There are real questions here that need to be answered" and "reasonable people should be interested" in the birth certificate issue:
DOBBS: I mean, because I got to be honest with everybody. When I started looking at this and the lawsuit -- Orly Taitz his attorney, for Major Cook, when he -- you know, I thought this is kind of peculiar. But I thought we should find out what's going on because, you know, it's a lawsuit -- a major who is -- he is, by the way, a combat veteran. Some people in the media have called him a coward; they are fools for doing so. But they're fools, anyway; it isn't this one instance that makes them fools.
This is a man who should be taken seriously. There are real questions here that need to be answered. And people talk about, quote-unquote, the lunatic fringe are the only ones interested in this, and it turns out that reasonable people should be interested, and reasonable -- excuse me -- reasonable minds have to understand what's going on. And this can be dismissed with one -- the production of one simple little document, and that's a birth certificate. It's extraordinary.
During the show, Dobbs also repeatedly cast doubt on Obama's birth certificate posted online by FactCheck.org, saying that it is a "peculiar little document" that has "some issues." In the first hour, Dobbs hosted Temple Law School professor Peter J. Spiro, who said that there's "absolutely no doubt that [Obama is] eligible to be president of the United States." Dobbs replied to Spiro that he has "got the problem that other people looking at the only document that's available say, 'Wait a minute,' " to which Spiro replied:
SPIRO: I'm not sure what the "wait a minute" is about. I think what's fueling these theories is the counter-factual of if he had been born in Kenya, under the citizenship statute as it was then written, he would not have been a citizen at birth.
DOBBS: Right.
SPIRO: So that gives these theorists something to work with.
DOBBS: Right.
SPIRO: Even though at the threshold there's a basic factual problem with the theory.
Dobbs also said: "We have a certification of live birth that doesn't have a signature or an attestment of any kind attached to it." Spiro replied:
SPIRO: You know, I'm not an expert on Hawaii documents, but my understanding is that this is the real thing.
DOBBS: Right. No, no, I understand the same thing, too --
SPIRO: And that, you know, at this point, the claims are fringy enough that, again, in the absence --
DOBBS: My word exactly.
SPIRO: -- in the absence of any proof to the contrary, he's satisfied any burden of proof here.
Dobbs later said of Spiro to a caller skeptical of Obama's citizenship: "I was sort of taken by the fact he declares President Obama to be a natural-born citizen without having looked at any of the real documentation that would make it so." Another caller also asked Dobbs if he had seen the birth certificate online, and Dobbs replied that it is a "peculiar little document, this certification of life birth that everyone is purporting to validate the president" and "there's some issues with this."
Dobbs also dismissed the "certification of live birth" because it says "that this is evidence that another document exists somewhere at some place at some time":
DOBBS: There's some reason -- there's some reason that they don't want to do this. I mean, I don't know what the heck it is. But this whole -- you and I agree no matter what you believe about this other stuff -- we agree, do we not, [caller], that if we just looked down at a certificate of birth that had the signature of the doctor, the testament of the hospital, the name of the hospital, the seal, whatever, you know, that would be sufficient.
But what we've got here is a certification of live birth that says that this is evidence that another document exists somewhere at some place at some time.
Dobbs also hosted former presidential and Illinois senatorial candidate Alan Keyes and lawyer Orly Taitz. The Orange County Weekly described Taitz as the "queen bee of people obsessed with Barack Obama's birth certificate" and the "the most controversial figure in the effort to prove that President Barack Obama is foreign-born." Keyes has filed a lawsuit against Obama.
On the July 16 edition of his radio show, Dobbs was asked by a caller why Obama is "refusing to show his real birth certificate. What has he got to hide?" Dobbs replied:
DOBBS: Well, you know, that is the real question, isn't it? I mean, why not just get this silly, you know, nonsense out of the way? I mean, let's just say you put your birth certificate out there. You know, you have to present a birth certificate to get a passport. You've got to have a birth certificate drivers licenses in some places. We use birth certificates all the time. Why is there such a special need to keep that birth certificate out of the public eye?
Kathy, I think you're asking a very important question. It gives the appearance he's hiding something. I personally don't think he is, but I also think it's so silly of the Obama administration and this president not to just put it out there, get all the nonsense out of the way. It's the smartest thing he could do.
Dobbs' CNN television show
Dobbs discussed the Obama birth certificate issue on the July 15 edition of his CNN program, noting the remarks about the birth certificate by Cook, FactCheck.org, and the White House:
DOBBS: Well, new questions are raised about the president's eligibility to be president. The latest from U.S. Army Reserve Major Stefan Cook, who refused deployment to Afghanistan. Cook claimed his orders were illegal because President Obama wasn't born in United States, which makes him ineligible to be president and commander in chief. The major's orders for deployment to Afghanistan were rescinded. An Army spokeswoman told us the major volunteered to go to Afghanistan for one year and could rescind his request at any time right up to his deployment. This is what the Army said: "Based on the fact that he no longer wished to serve on active duty and at the request of central command his orders were revoked on July 14."
Now the major's attorney is challenging the legitimacy of the Obama presidency in court. She joins a lawsuit by former presidential candidate Alan Keyes, who wants documentary proof the president was born in the United States. President Obama was born in Hawaii, according to state officials, and copies of his certification of birth -- FactCheck.org, investigating those circumstances prior to the election, and they have a copy of what they say is the original birth certificate posted on their website. It is, in fact, the so-called short form, not the original document. It is really a document saying that the state of Hawaii has the real document in its possession. White House press secretary Robert Gibbs in May said Hawaii provided a copy of the birth certificate with the state seal that's posted on the Internet.
Documentary proof needed to run by office, by the way, varies from state to state. The Federal Election Commission -- you may be surprised to learn -- does not require any kind of certification or proof of citizenship in running for president. They leave that to the states. And in the state of Illinois, for example, where President Obama first ran for office, proof of citizenship is not required for either the state Legislature or to run for Congress or for the United States Senate.
Dobbs' CNN colleagues have debunked claims that Obama has not released a valid birth certificate
On December 9, 2008, CNN host Kiran Chetry said: "A New Jersey man claimed that Obama could not be sworn in because his father was from Kenya, therefore, a British subject. He claimed that because of that Obama is not a natural born citizen. Obama's birth certificate shows he was born in Hawaii."
In a June 11 article, CNN.com reported that "online postings attributed to James von Brunn promoted the claim that Obama has no valid U.S. birth certificate, a debunked theory rejected by U.S. courts and refuted by a certified copy of his birth certificate from the Hawaii Department of Health."
During the December 8, 2008, edition of CNN's Campbell Brown: No Bias, No Bull, CNN contributor Dana Milbank said: "Now, for all those conspiracy theorists out there, do not lose hope. They're plenty more cases in the pipeline. My favorite says that Obama himself was actually born in Kenya, adopted in Indonesia, and has a forged birth certificate. Now, the independent group factcheck.org, suggested if you're going to pursue these theories, you might want to do so wearing a tin foil hat."
On the December 5, 2008, edition of No Bias, No Bull, CNN senior legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin criticized the merits of a lawsuit questioning Obama's citizenship:
BROWN: So, before we get into the I guess how on earth this ended up potentially going before the Supreme Court, just explain the merits of the case, if there are any in your view. Is there any evidence at all to support this?
TOOBIN: Well, you know, I'm a lawyer. So, I have got to be a little cautious in responding to this. So, this much I will say. This is a joke. This is ridiculous.
BROWN: OK.
TOOBIN: This is absurd.
BROWN: Don't hold back.
TOOBIN: This is a whack-job project. And the reason there are lots of lawsuits is, they all keep losing appropriately and they are now winding up before the Supreme Court.
Look, there are two -- let's look at two documents. One is his birth certificate, which shows that he was born in Hawaii, in the United States.
BROWN: OK. Right. Which we have all known, right.
TOOBIN: And end of story. That's it. He is eligible to be president.
And if you are not convinced by that, there is a newspaper announcement of his birth in -- there it is -- in Hawaii on -- in August 1961. There is no merit to this lawsuit at all.
BROWN: So, if it's total bull, which is what you are saying --
TOOBIN: Total bull.
PolitiFact.com and FactCheck.org have also debunked claims that Obama has not released a valid birth certificate or needs to release additional documents.
From the July 15 edition of United Stations Radio Networks' The Lou Dobbs Show:
DOBBS: Well, later this hour I'll be talking about the Alan Keyes lawsuit. Folks, this is something -- I have to tell you. When David -- when Major Cook, Stefan Cook -- decided to resist his deployment to Afghanistan -- we learned of it yesterday -- on the basis that Barack Obama is not legitimately president of the United States because he's not a natural-born citizen, I thought, "Here we go with the lunatic fringe. This is a bunch of quackeroos going after him."
It turns out that the Army just rescinded the deployment order to Afghanistan for the major. Alan Keyes -- we talked with his attorney -- Major Cook's, and Alan Keyes' attorney, Orly Taitz -- I mean, I've learned more here in the last day about natural-born citizenship, what documents are available for the president of the United States,and what aren't -- I mean, it's truly crazy. And I decided we'd do something on this, you know, on this show, just to get it out of the way.
But you know what? This isn't one of those things that goes away quite as easily as I -- at least I thought. I thought we were talking about a bunch of folks that were on the left, or on the right, you know, the fringe that gets a little excited about, you know, tinfoil on their heads and that sort of thing. Well, guess what, folks? There are some issues here that should be really resolved. What's really crazy about this is all the president of the United States has to do is produce a birth certificate. That's all that has to be done, and it would be over. So, we're going to be talking about that this hour. We're going to be talking with you.
As a matter of fact, I want to go to the phones right now. I want to talk to Jay in Reno, Nevada. Jay, good to have you with us on The Lou Dobbs Show.
CALLER: Hey, Lou, it's great to hear you. The reason -- there's a whole bunch of points that the media has overlooked. The only thing that the Obama people have is ridicule; they don't have answers, they just make fun of anybody who asks a question. But, you know, his birthday is coming up -- I'll point out a few things nobody mentions. His birthday is coming up in a few weeks, and everybody in the media is going to be telling us he's 48 years old. I would like to know how they know that.
DOBBS: Well, because it says that on the certification of live birth, which I have in my hands right in front of me, Jay. I have the actual document that says that this is a document certifying that there is another document.
CALLER: Shown to be fraudulent, but I'll get to that in a minute. Orly Taitz's going to tell you about that.
DOBBS: All right, but you don't have a whole bunch of time now, partner. I'm not contracted with you for a long run here. Just gotta -- gotta get to the point, if you will, Jay.
CALLER: What could be more personal than somebody's tax return? Barack Obama gladly showed his tax return on April 15, but he won't show his birth certificate. I would like to know the very simple question. Why is he spending millions of dollars in court cases all over America to prevent anyone from seeing it? His lawyers have even threatened people for even asking to see his birth certificate, not to mention all the other records that he refused to show.
DOBBS: Well, if they want to sue The Lou Dobbs Show here, if they want to sue me personally, come on down. But we're going to keep talking about this until we get some straight answers. You know, I can afford a lawyer or two myself, you know. But I really want to know what's going on. I have no idea what the real -- what the reality is here, but I'm one of those morons who, when I look at something that says "certification of live birth" on FactCheck.org, I assume it's certification of live birth, not -- you know, that's it.
FactCheck.org is a terrific website, and they do a wonderful job. But when I'm looking at a certificate of live birth that is certified to be a certification that there is another document that I haven't seen, I get a little annoyed. Especially when John McCain, born in Panama, went to all of the trouble to make certain that the solicitor general rendered an opinion and a determination that he was a natural-born citizen, so why not do the same thing for President Obama? Produce a doggone long -- so-called -- I don't even know what it a long-form birth certificate looks like -- but just produce it and be done with it. I mean, that'd satisfy you, wouldn't it, Jay?
CALLER: It certainly would, but he is going out of his way not to show that there's a reason why he won't show it. American people have a right -- the people --
DOBBS: One of our callers, Jay, by the way, pointed out a lot of people in states all over the country have to produce their birth certificates to get a driver's license, for crying out loud.
CALLER: Every single thing he's done as president, if he is not eligible, will be deemed illegal and have to be undone. What a catastrophe.
DOBBS: Yeah, well that would be a little annoying, wouldn't it?
CALLER: From spending us into oblivion with trillions of dollars that nobody should have ever spent --
DOBBS: Now, wait a minute. You know what I would really like to find out is that George Bush wasn't a natural-born citizen, because that means we could get back about $12 trillion under his authorization that went into the economy. What do you think?
CALLER: I agree, but he would show his -- you -- George Bush, me, you, and everybody else would show a birth certificate.
DOBBS: Yeah.
CALLER: This guy refuses.
DOBBS: You got it. Well, I appreciate the call, Jay, there in Reno, Nevada. We're going to take a quick break; we're going to be taking your calls, we want to hear you. What do you think? Is President Obama -- should he produce his birth certificate -- the long form, the real deal? Should he be a little more forthcoming?
One of our callers, by the way, pointed out that he didn't release -- he didn't release his medical records, either. Now isn't that interesting? And hasn't produced some other documents. What's the deal? What is the deal here? I'm starting to think we have a -- we have a document issue. Do you suppose he's un -- no, I won't even use the word undocumented. It wouldn't be right. We'll be right back.
[...]
DOBBS: Professor, I have to be honest. When we started this, going -- following the lawsuit by Major Cook, I thought, "My gosh, you know, this is crazy stuff. Let's get this, you know, get into it and get out of it, and we'll get the truth and we'll be done." This is not quite that easy, is it?
SPIRO: Well, I think it is pretty easy, actually.
DOBBS: All right.
SPIRO: I don't think there's much of a case here.
DOBBS: All right.
SPIRO: It's pretty clear that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961.
DOBBS: Right.
SPIRO: And there's absolutely no doubt that he is eligible to be president of the United States on that basis.
DOBBS: All right.
SPIRO: Now what's --
DOBBS: Now you've done that, but you know what? I've got the problem that other people looking at the only document that's available say, "Wait a minute."
SPIRO: I'm not sure what the "wait a minute" is about. I think what's fueling these theories is the counter-factual of if he had been born in Kenya, under the citizenship statute as it was then written, he would not have been a citizen at birth.
DOBBS: Right.
SPIRO: So that gives these theorists something to work with.
DOBBS: Right.
SPIRO: Even though at the threshold there's a basic factual problem with the theory.
DOBBS: All right, here's my problem as I look at it. And I respect very much the fact that, you know, you've declared him to be a, you know, a natural-born citizen. But my question is: Are you making such a judgment based on his birth certificate that we see on the Web?
SPIRO: Well, as far as I know, nobody has offered up any evidence to the contrary.
DOBBS: Correct.
SPIRO: So there's no evidence that he was born in Kenya.
DOBBS: Right.
SPIRO: And so the best evidence we have is the birth certificate, which has been attested to by various state officials and others with knowledge of what birth certificates from Hawaii look like.
DOBBS: Right.
SPIRO: So there's no reason to believe that he wasn't born in Hawaii.
DOBBS: So, you -- what you're saying is then the burden of proof rests not with the individual or the statement that he is or is not a natural-born citizen, but rather on those who would disprove that he or she is?
SPIRO: Well, I think he's supplied adequate evidence for his birth in the United States, that the burden has certainly shifted to others to prove otherwise.
DOBBS: All right. And here is part of -- you know, I'm not sure how one does that. In this case, we're talking about disproving a negative. But rather than going to the merits of this, I want to get back -- well, first of all --
SPIRO: It's not proving the negative; it's proving an allegation that he was born in Kenya.
DOBBS: No, I understand what you're saying, but I'm actually not saying that that would be the problem here. The first thing is to determine whether or not his birth certificate is valid.
SPIRO: Right.
DOBBS: And what I don't understand is why that has not been released and given over to the public record. We have a certification of live birth that doesn't have a signature or an attestment of any kind attached to it.
SPIRO: You know, I'm not an expert on Hawaiian documents, but my understanding is that this is the real thing.
DOBBS: Right. No, no, I understand the same thing, too --
SPIRO: And that, you know, at this point, the claims are fringy enough that, again, in the absence --
DOBBS: My word exactly.
SPIRO: -- in the absence of any proof to the contrary, he's satisfied any burden of proof here.
[...]
CALLER: The professor who was on is like a mouthpiece for the Obama administration.
DOBBS: Yeah, I agree --[caller] -- I gotta say. Peter Spiro, he is the foremost authority on citizenship, but I was sort of taken by the fact he declares President Obama to be a natural-born citizen without having looked at any of the real documentation that would make it so.
CALLER: That's correct. And the other thing is there have been lawsuits that have -- that they have been attempted to force the legislators and the Electoral College to validate his eligibility. And it's like you have said, there have been millions and millions of dollars spent to quash all of these lawsuits in every legitimate inquiry.
DOBBS: Yeah.
CALLER: And, you know, if it smells like a skunk, it probably is a skunk, and something doesn't smell right with all of this.
DOBBS: Well -- and the way to get rid of those odors is always just open the windows and let the sun shine in. And all we need here is a doggone document, but for some reason the president doesn't want to release that.
[...]
DOBBS: First of all, we got to figure out what's going on. You know, we heard Professor Peter Spiro, who's a professor of law at Temple. He's the foremost -- one of the country's foremost experts on citizenship. He says in his judgment that the president is a natural-born citizen. I think most of us would say, as a matter of fact, that he is a natural-born citizen until proved otherwise.
David [caller], we have no proof that he isn't a natural-born citizen, and what's really frustrating here is that he seems to be resistant to the idea of proving that he is -- that is, providing the full-form birth certificate. Why, I don't know. What do you think?
CALLER: Well, all the lawsuits that he's squashing -- it's possible, and probable, I think, that the president knows what's coming.
DOBBS: Well, you know, the way you frame that -- it is possible to say it's probable, you know, as a matter of your opinion or mine, it doesn't matter. You know, I think it's improbable, you think it's probable. The issue is we're talking about it. Wouldn't it be helpful if the president would simply set this aside? Because there's a number of callers have said on this broadcast -- you know, here is John McCain, 72 years old, running for president of the United States. He knows he was born in Panama, because his father was in the Navy and his mother was with his father in Panama, and he was born there. He sought out a ruling by the solicitor general to determine that he met the standard of natural-born citizen.
Absolutely, you know, no effort to do so on the part of Barack H. Obama. Nor, as also our callers have pointed out, this president would not release his medical records. And the national media seemed to be fine with that, whereas they probably would have eviscerated John McCain for failing to do so.
CALLER: Well, I think it's probable. And I think that he's rushing through all these programs through by whatever means because he knows, by virtue of all the lawsuits that are generated, that we the public, we the citizens of the United States, have a mission, and we don't have to wait until the votes -- the voting for 2010.
DOBBS: Well, you obviously are intent upon that. And, David, you know, we'll see if you're right. Certainly your view can't be discounted at this point, because this president refused to provide the documentation that would settle all of the controversy here. David, thank you a lot for the call from Freeport, New York.
[...]
DOBBS: There's some reason -- there's some reason that they don't want to do this. I mean, I don't know what the heck it is. But this whole -- you and I agree no matter what you believe about this other stuff -- we agree, do we not, [caller], that if we just looked down at a certificate of birth that had the signature of the doctor, the testament of the hospital, the name of the hospital, the seal, whatever, you know, that would be sufficient.
But what we've got here is a certification of live birth that says that this is evidence that another document exists somewhere at some place at some time.
[...]
CALLER: Good to hear you, Lou. I DVR your show every day; I watch it on television. I just found out you had this on your air, and I'm -- this has been an issue on the blogs for over a year now.
DOBBS: Right.
CALLER: When I first heard about it, I thought, "Oh, come on, leave this guy alone. This is the dumbest thing ever."
DOBBS: Well, it is a dumb thing. I think we have to all admit this is a dumb thing either way, because, I mean, I can't understand why the president wouldn't just move to get this stuff out of the way. Show the documents, get it done -- I mean, he -- think about it. Well, actually, when I sit here thinking about it, he did not release his medical records, did he?
CALLER: No medical records.
DOBBS: That's right.
CALLER: He spent over a billion -- million dollars to fight this. Why? McCain has shown his birth certificate. Do you realize to get my license renewed in Oregon I have to show my birth certificate?
DOBBS: You know what? This is really very interesting, isn't it? I mean, because I got to be honest with everybody. When I started looking at this and the lawsuit -- Orly Taitz his attorney, for Major Cook, when he -- you know, I thought this is kind of peculiar. But I thought we should find out what's going on because, you know, it's a lawsuit -- a major who is -- he is, by the way, a combat veteran. Some people in the media have called him a coward; they are fools for doing so. But they're fools, anyway; it isn't this one instance that makes them fools.
This is a man who should be taken seriously. There are real questions here that need to be answered. And people talk about, quote-unquote, the lunatic fringe are the only ones interested in this, and it turns out that reasonable people should be interested, and reasonable -- excuse me -- reasonable minds have to understand what's going on. And this can be dismissed with one -- the production of one simple little document, and that's a birth certificate. It's extraordinary.
CALLER: That's all we're asking for. And have you looked at the birth certificate that is online?
DOBBS: Yes, I have. I've got it in front of me, as a matter of fact.
CALLER: Look at the verbiage. Does that look like '60s verbiage for a birth certificate?
DOBBS: Sixties verbiage?
CALLER: The nationality of his father.
DOBBS: OK, under race?
CALLER: Yes.
DOBBS: Yes, African. Mother's race: Caucasian. It's peculiar, I have to say. But, you know, hell, I can tell you this, in a career in journalism and broadcasting, I've seen a lot of peculiar things that turned out to be just as true as they can be. And things that seemed as true as they ought to be were the phoniest son-of-a-guns in the world, so we'll find out. We appreciate the call, [caller]. Thank you very much.
But this is a peculiar little document, this certification of life birth that everyone is purporting to validate the president. I think there's some issues with this. I mean, it's peculiar.
From the July 16 edition of United Stations Radio Networks' The Lou Dobbs Show:
CALLER: I have a question; it has to do with why Obama is refusing to show his real birth certificate. What has he got to hide?
DOBBS: Well, you know, that is the real question, isn't it? I mean, why not just get this silly, you know, nonsense out of the way? I mean, let's just say you put your birth certificate out there. You know, you have to present a birth certificate to get a passport. You've got to have a birth certificate drivers licenses in some places. We use birth certificates all the time. Why is there such a special need to keep that birth certificate out of the public eye?
Kathy, I think you're asking a very important question. It gives the appearance he's hiding something. I personally don't think he is, but I also think it's so silly of the Obama administration and this president not to just put it out there, get all the nonsense out of the way. It's the smartest thing he could do.
Actually, two announcements...
Honululu Advertiser on Aug. 13 , 1961: http://88.80.13.160.nyud.net/leak/obama-1961-birth-announcement-from-honolulu-advertiser.pdf
and in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin the next day: http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/ObamaBirthStarBulletin.jpg
It's very easy how the birth announcements got into the papers.
Someone, we don't know who yet, turned in information to obtain a "certification" of live birth. Simply said, someone notified the health department that a baby was actually born and ALIVE, and the health department released the information to the papers and was published as such. Check your local papers and you will see announcements from the hospital as a source or the health department. They are published daily. No doctor is necessary to report a birth.
As far as the "certification", the president of China has the same document as Obama and he really was born in China. How did that happen??
Obama: British born, NOT Natural Born!!
Like I said, we don't know who notified the health department of the "live" birth. It appears that it did not come from any hospital because no hospital is listed in the papers which indicates it came from the government based upon the "Certification" that a live birth had occured. We don't even know the hospital of his birth, We have two choices in Hawaii and Obama claims both hospitals as the hospital of his birth. Isn't that strange?
Obamas' Country is Kenya, Not america, and his citizenship is British, Not US.
Obama: British born, NOT NATURAL BORN!!
Any records that would show an original copy of his birth certificate are SEALED and no one besides OBAMA has access to this information.
Stop and think... when you entered you child into school... were you required to provide a birth certificate, if you attended college did you have to provide a birthertificate, grants, selective service documentation, scholarships, military entrance exams.
Or were you simply able to check a box.. (LIE) because no one would question your citizenship.
WHY are his medical records SEALED. How did a B- student in High School get into Occidental, and a less than stellar student get into Columbia, rooms with Muslims while in college...
There are TOO MANY unanswered questions about Obama... and guess what NO ONE IS ALIVE to provide any information... There are no requirements of ANYONE checking the background of a State Senator... just check the box.. none for a US Senator... because everyone ASSUMES that they were a citizen or would not be a State Senator..
In any court of law... FACTS are what they are looking for... WITHOUT FACTS there is no case..
OBAMA controls the facts, has lawyers and not the entired OBAMA ADMINISTRATION insuring there are no FACTS AVAILABLE.
The MSM is AFRAID to inquire into the FACTS of Obama's life... because THERE ARE NONE AVAILABLE.
Where's your original birth certificate? And why exactly is it that Mrs. Obama or some other person felt the need to place a birth notice in the Hawaiian newspapers in August of 1961. Are you suggesting that it was pre-ordained that Mr. Obama was the Muslim who would be elected President of the US in 2008? Was he the chosen one? There is absolutely no reason whatsoever that anyone would put a birth announcement in the paper for their child being born someplace that they weren't born.
FWIW, you and your conspiracy theorist friends are being used as tools by people who want to undermine our government by dividing our country over what has to be the stupidest argument since Joe McCarthy ruled Western Civilization. Get a clue you moron.
The whole thing seems silly to me. I don't care if McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone and that may technically disqualify him from the Presidency. Was he strongly influenced by Panamanian culture and politics? If not, I don't see the problem. It's not like we're going to have a war with Kenya and Obama's going to be conflicted because he lived there until day 5 of his life or whatever. By that logic, having family that came from or currently lives in another country should also be disqualifying, since that's just as much of an influence.
I also wonder how many of the same people who dismissed concerns about the legality of the Iraq invasion ("International law? Treaties? Supremacy Clause? Who cares?") are up in arms over the technicality of the possibility of being born in another country and having a mother who was not yet 19 years old.
We would like a president who grew up pledging his allegiance to our flag and nation, which Obama did not.
He attended college on a scholarship for the foreign born.He went on an international trip at in young manhood which was off-limits for US citizens. He could not have gone to Pakistan in 1981 if he were a US citizen.
He stuttered over the number of states in our country on national TV - "51? 52?" - remember that? We want a president so American in his background that he does not stumble over anything THAT basic! Now if he had said "48? ..49 ..50?" I could have given him some slack because I am old enough to remember when we only had 48. Sorry, Hon, but he just flat didn't know.
Being American strikes me an after-thought for Obama, an affectation, nothing but a cloak he just decided to pick up and put on when he was 25. With as many people in this country as we have, Democrat and Republican and otherwise, who really did grow up here and who are unquestionalbly American, it isn't necessary for us to cast about for someone to be at our helm who is so marginally American.
I worry about his core and what formed him as he grew during all those years before he decided to use his father's name instead of his step-father's name. You who support him so strongly are in love with the color of his skin and his current name. We who ask these birth certificate questions and passport questions and Indonsian adoption law questions think that only the outside of him is American, and not his heart and core.
What is the flaw in this line of thought??
I think it was wrong of Obama not to have put put these things to rest at their first mention way back during the election, and that it has become haughty for him to continue not putting questions to rest that he knows disturb a portion of US citizenry. Doesn't he know that it makes him look more guilty to us? And shouldn't he want to irradicate that?
The reason I feel it is "haughty" for him not to comply is that the requests are so low level; the papers needed to settle us down would take zero time or effort on his part to produce.
According to who? There were no flags in Hawaii and Kansas?
Citation for the scholarship, please? And there was never any question that Obama is a citizen. The only question was regarding "natural-born".
No, cite that. What I do remember is that he had visited 47 states and he said 57. It's more plausible to believe that's a simple misstatement than proof that he doesn't know how many states there are. I've never heard of an incident where he was asked that question and he "just flat didn't know". That's such incredibly basic information that it's impossible to believe anyone with a respectable amount of education is ignorant of it.
What are you basing that impression on? Is he supposed to literally wrap himself in a flag, or what? What significant difference is there between the way any Republican talks about this country and the way Obama does? And where do you think Obama "grew up"? You mentioned a trip to Indonesia. Was he there from age 5 to age 18, or what?
You can always doubt someone. By itself, it doesn't mean much. There's no basis for thinking that it's any real concern here.
Who cares if you're disturbed if your concerns can't be shown to be reasonable? Supposedly his Americanism is an affectation, but there's nothing to base that on. So why should he give a damn what your type thinks?
Hawaii has vouched for the validity of his COLB. Unless you think there's a conspiracy afoot here, there's no need for you to be anything but settled down now.
But YOU don't respect this country OR it's laws, do you?
The latest Supreme Court ruling:
Oct 30 2008 Petition for a writ of certiorari before judgment filed. (Response due December 1, 2008)
Oct 31 2008 Application (08A391) for an injunction pending the disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Souter.
Nov 3 2008 Supplemental brief of applicant Philip J. Berg filed.
Nov 3 2008 Application (08A391) denied by Justice Souter.
Nov 18 2008 Waiver of right of respondents Federal Election Commission, et al. to respond filed.
Dec 1 2008 Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Bill Anderson.
Dec 8 2008 Application (08A505) for an injunction pending the disposition of the petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Souter.
Dec 9 2008 Application (08A505) denied by Justice Souter.
Dec 15 2008 Application (08A505) refiled and submitted to Justice Kennedy.
Dec 17 2008 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 9, 2009.
Dec 17 2008 Application (08A505) denied by Justice Kennedy.
Dec 18 2008 Application (08A505) refiled and submitted to Justice Scalia.
Dec 23 2008 Application (08A505) referred to the Court.
Dec 23 2008 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of January 16, 2009.
Jan 12 2009 Motion for leave to file amicus brief filed by Bill Anderson GRANTED.
Jan 12 2009 Petition DENIED.
Jan 21 2009 Application (08A505) denied by the Court.
The highest court in this nation has ruled this a NON ISSUE, not worthy of consideration. And yet, YOU, who demand Obama pledge his allegiance to this country, FAIL or CHOOSE to INGORE what the Supreme Court has ruled?
BUY A CLUE!
We held an election in November 2008 where the MAJORITY of AMERICANS CHOOSE their president.
1. Barack Obama certainly did attend Occidental College on scholarship, however, that scholarship was NOT a Fulbright Scholarship, regardless of what the long-since discredited junk mail whisper campaign might have said.
2. Pakistan in 1981 was NOT of limits for US citizen when Obama traveled with his friend to pakistan. There where warnings for travelling there at the moment and that is about it. And he did not travel there using his american passport but his indonesian one with his muslim name.
It certainly made it more easy and convinient for him to enter pakistan that way.
3. You want a president that american in background not stuttering about the number of the amount of states?
Aboiut half of america doesn't. On international standard america is quite stupid. Even college graduate level. I learned in school all states of the U.S, including their capital, main source of income, environment, main mountains and rivers etc.. i can give you a topographie from the west to the east, tell you all about your winds,... and learned that in europe during college as part of the standard school curriculum.
I give you point 3 he should have known, but overall obama is a very bright and smart individual and i believe he only has the best in mind for americans and the rest of the world.
and about being american. i think he does not believe in 'God bless america' but in 'God bless the world'. which is the right way.
And on all other points you tried to make, read up on them before you make false statements, specially being an old fart who is supposed to know better.
And what is all the fuss about his birth certificate? What wee see is proof of him being born in the U.S.
ibwilliamsi is explaining this in a very understandable way, so i save myself this part again.
unless there is no evidence showing him born in kenya there should not anything else being undertaken in this investigation exactly like spiro says.
And i would also like to see some kind of proof, that obama spent millions (i could not find info that he spent any kind of money) on lawyers preventing to show the original birth certificate and not only the certificate of live birth.
Facts get invented, news get created, history gets made.
But even before that, the first thing that is quite obvious to me, a computer graphics expert, is that the typeface printed on the "certificate" was designed in 1982 by Robin Nicholas and Patricia Saunders for Monotype Typography, about 20 years AFTER BHO's birth. The typewriters in 1960's and 1970's simply were not equipped with this font.
The "certificate" is a recent concoction using post-year-2000 certificate and computer font.
I do not give a damn 'bout who's on top -- Republican or Democrat liers and thieves. But the "document" is a crude falsification, and there are plenty of morons and true believers in this country who won't let facts to get in the way of worshipping the new true religion. Obamanation!
Incidentally, if we're talking about a reprinted document, wouldn't it be done using current technology?
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;.......
(the clause, "or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution" refers only to the Founders themselves)
I believe that many who are stating that obama is indeed qualified are confusing Amendment XIV of the Constitution with the requirements set for the president alone in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5.
Amendment XIV
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States .......
Why would the Framers of the Constitution go to the extra trouble of clearly defining the presidential requirements?
I have little doubt that obama is a citizen of the US, but very much doubt that he meets the requirements as one parent at the time of his birth was not a US citizen.
What is a natural born citizen? When asked to define natural born citizen, John Bingham, the author of the 14th ammendment which extended the bill of rights to former slaves, stated, "Any human born to parents who are US CITIZENS (PLURAL, EMPHASIS MINE) and are under no other jurisdiction or authority." The Naturalization Act of 1790, also passed by this congress, declared "And the children of CITIZENS (PLURAL, EMPHASIS MINE) of the US shall be considered as natural born, provided that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been a resident of the US." Neither of these definitions, one from US law, mentions birthplace, only the PARENTS' (PLURAL, EMPAHSIS MINE)citizenship.
This is why many of us have concerns about whether the Constitutional requirements to become president of the U.S. were lawfully followed when obama was elected. This is why the many lawsuits. This is why the concern. It has nothing to do with race, as some on this board have alluded to. It has EVERYTHING to do with following the intent of the Founders and the document called the Constitution that has stood for our freedoms since its inception.
It always was like that.
Since that time, this basic Naturalization Law has been adapted to be more inclusive, and at times more exclusive. I am not aware of an 1860 Naturalization Act, however, there are several examples too extensive to go into details of each here, but some include the Naturalization Acts of 1795,1798,1802,1870,1905. The intent of the 14th amendment was meant in the Framers minds, in that Congress of the 1860's to afford ALL Citizens equal rights and protections under the original Bill of Rights.
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<
This makes no sense to me. Perhaps you have some evidence it is true. Since except for voting the rights in the Constitution and bill of rights are given to PERSONS and not CITIZENS I dont even see how that is supposed to make sense.
Not that i am a fan of him, but so far i am more than suprised of his exellence work. and he can talk properly too. No ebonics and no bushish, just plain understandable english so far.
The FEC report says he spent $678,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2009 for legal fees and nearly $400,000 for the three months ended December 31, 2008 for legal fees.
By my American math, that's over $1,000,000 in legal fees to seal documents and a birth certificate which he has stated in his book is in his possession of. WHY???
All that is being asked of Obama is what is required of all of us.
Prove you are who you say that you are. Provide the required documentation.
It would be interesting to see if someone born in Hawaii in 1961 took their "short form" a.k.a. "certification of live birth" and attempted to get a driver's license with it. Would they find that it was acceptable documentation?
He has met every requirement for office, and needs to show the gabbling jello-minded wingnut fringe on the internet EXACTLY NOTHING!
Either accept the legitimacy of Obama's presidency, or admit you hate America and move to Russia.
If they'd have you.
Thank you so much for airing this very enlightening subject that so many, due to the malaise of the national media, are reticent (or afraid to approach). I'm so happy that you have seen this as a troublesome but legitimate issue that is facing us all. I do not wear a tin foil hat, but have been following this for many months now. I'm so glad that someone of your stature has decided to take up this issue and see it through. As you know, a Certification of Live Birth falls far too short of proving anyone was actually born in the State of Hawaii. What is needed to prove that is a Certification of Birth which will also include information such as the attending physician, time of birth, etc.
I am no raging rightist but am very hopeful that this issue can be put to rest. This is an important issue for every citizen of this great nation.
Ric
by bintx (4 hours and 37 minutes ago) 2
There are many reasons. First, your comment makes no sense. the "original" document IS the birth certificate. Birth certificates are created by the reporting of the mother, in most states, to the state official. In Texas, that official comes to the hospital every day and gathers information FROM THE MOTHERS. The birth certificate is then created by the state and a certified copy, usually a short form, is made available to the parents a few weeks later. NOBODY has their original birth certificate, it is the property of the state . . . The State of Hawaii has VERIFIED that the original "long form" birth certificate of Mr. Obama is in their archives. Second, I know that, in Texas, people are advised AGAINST obtaining their long form birth certificates because there is too much information on it which makes the person open to identity theft.
Mr. Obama has produced a birth certificate which has been verified by the State of Hawaii as being an official record produced by them, and as being representative of the original birth certificate that they have in their archives.
Mr. Obama does not have to prove anything . . . he has presented the record of his birth in Hawaii. The folks who are making these ridiculous charges and claims have the onus to prove that he is not. That's why they keep getting their cases dismissed . . . they can't prove something which is not true.
A CTL does not fall short of showing someone was actually born in the US. How does knowing the name of Dr. make it more authentic? If the passport agency in NJ accepted mine to obtain a passport and a driver's license, why should Obama's be any different? You cannot get a US passport if you are not a citizen.
Ummm, Lou? You just did use the word.
Typical winger crud: using loaded terms while trying to deny responsibility for them.
Temple Law School professor Peter J. Spiro walks Dobbs through the logic. He even notes the experts and state officials in Hawaii attest to the veracity of the birth certificate.
I resort to the following logic bomb as far back as 2007,
"Would you agree that Hillary Clinton would DO ANYTHING to be president?
"Would you agree that she had nearly unlimited money, unlimited supporters, and extremely good opposition research?
"Would she have allowed Barack Obama to continue running for president, and eventually beat her, without challenging his place of birth if he wasn't born in the US?
"Therefore, are you saying Hillary Clinton wouldn't do anything to win, or is this literally the fantasy of Alan Keyes and Lou Dobbs?"
The argument about Hillary is probably better. Considering the tone of her campaign, she probably would have brought it up. Even if she still lost, she could try to dampen any negative effects to Obama by bringing up McCain's birthplace.
"Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S."
Even if Obama was born in Kenya, they ignore this line of the constitution;
"Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)"
This is why the supreme court refuses to hear these cases. According to the constitution, none of this matters. You have to remember to the GOP, slaves born in this country weren't citizens.
As for going above and beyond in order to take the wind out of the birthers' sails, don't be so naive, Wesley. Have you read some of these morons' theories? They're already talking about Obama planning to use some top-secret process that can "age" new documents to fool the public into thinking he's released the "original" certificate. Anyone who can't accept the logic of the abundant proof that's already out there (the statements by Hawaiian officials, the newspaper announcements -- I work for a newspaper; these are sent by HOSPITALS, not families, so the conspiracy is mighty broad, I guess -- etc., etc.) is too stupid and paranoid to live and shouldn't be indulged -- and won't be persuaded anyway. Until proof of eligibility is required of every other president and presidential candidate going back to Washington, according to whatever the standards of the day were, with subsequent invalidation of any presidential bill signing or executive order by any of them found to be illegally elected (to the delight of lawyers everywhere), then it should not be asked of Obama either. Unless, as soapm says, someone wants to defend a separate standard for African-American presidents only.
Has there ever been a serious concern about it with anyone in the past? I think that makes a difference. I also think that if McCain was a Democrat, there would be a similar (if not quite as fervent, perhaps) effort against him from the right. That's just how the politics are now, think about how Clinton was treated from the start for an example.
I think we're entering some dangerous territory here as well. The logic of "this has never happened before, therefore it's only happening here because Obama is black" ignores potential factors of legitimacy. If there was some unprecedented scandal for Obama, that logic wouldn't take into account any indications that the scandal might be genuine. So we have to be careful with that sort of thinking, because his race shouldn't be used as a shield against criticism.
President Obama was born in the state of Hawaii. Period. That fact alone makes him a natural born US citizen. Regardless of anything else.
You birthers are idiots on stilts and embarass yourself. Do you actually imagine Obama would have been sworn in as the POTUS without being checked out by people much smarter than the likes of you and your ilk? It really must be tiring to be as dense as you are. Sheesh.
I'll provide the link for you in case you're smart enough to cut and paste. The article also mentions John McCain and others who have had their US citizenship challenged, and it answers all your dimwitted questions.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp
I have to reconsider the Hillary argument above, because of that. She co-sponsored that resolution. Once she did that, it would be difficult for her to beat Obama based on eligibility and then use the same argument against McCain. And if she didn't want to use that argument against McCain, then that would come off as hypocritical, if not racist. A PUMA-style movement from disgruntled Obama supporters would surely be very vocal in pointing out that the man from Kenya can't serve, but the man born to two white parents in the PCZ can. Based on strategy, there could be a very good reason that she didn't pursue this against Obama, whether she thought it had merit or not.
I agree completely that an effort to disqualify McCain would be ridiculous. There's really no practical effect at hand here, and it goes against all common sense that the Founding Fathers would want to deny the child of military personnel the right to serve their country in any capacity.
IT ISN'T!!! The matter at issue here is whether the man is eligible under the U. S. Constitution to hold the office he now occupies.
For a thorough grasp of what relly is involved in the eligibility issue I'd suggest you have a session with the Lead Plantiff and his attorney for the legal action "Kerchner et al v. Obama et al" to obtain some straightforward, factual information about the situation - and why a BC is merely a necessary (but not sufficient) part of the matter.
Obama could have been born on the steps of the Capitol Building and still not be eligible under the Constitution. All of the Obama supporters hope to obfuscate this fact and try to pretend that being born in the US ends the matter when that is not true.
Professor Spiro is obviously one of those attempting to promote that sort of misleading spin.
If President Obama was born in the United States, and is therefore a Natural born citizen, why wouldn't he be eligible to be President?
Where is it defined that the sole qualification for one to be considered a natural born citizen is to be born within the United States?
The qualifications are what is in question here. "Natural born citizen" is not defined in the Constitution. The 14th Amendment does deal with citizenship in the general sense. Even from this general definition of citizenship, one could question whether Obama meets these qualifications.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."
The key phrase there being "AND subject to the jurisdiction thereof." Obama the senior was a British subject. From what I can gather on British law (until 1983 when this was changed), the status of a "British Subject" was conferred from the father, to his children. Therefor, Obama the junior would have been considered a British Subject, and thus not "subject to the jurisdiction thereof."
The part of the story that bothers me the most is the underlying issue at hand. The 22% of Americans who can't accept the fact that a black man won the presidency over the old white guy and will do anything to overturn the election. They can't stand it and they use the words tyranny, slavery, revolution, bullet box, tea party, take back our country through any means necessary - like they are the patriots and are defending the country against invaders. This kind of thing scares me and now with the whole, he isn't a legitimate citizen and therefore not our president - brings the bar a little higher.
Never mind that the rest of the country does not believe the same way - these 22 percenters are worse than the radical muslims. I can't write this enough, if something should happen to our president, American will be lost forever. There will be no going back and the country will split in two - 78% on one side and the remaining 22% creating their own lily white land of hate and bigotry. I say we give them southern Texas, all of Missouri, and 10% of Alabama and be done with it.
Why doesn't Pres.Obama release the "original" document that was used to produce the "official" document?
That will reduce the howl from the birthers and marginalize those remaining to the lunatic fringe.
The reasonable question still remains...why doesn't Pres.Obama release the "original" documents that were used to produce the "official" documents?
Laughable, you're dolt that claimed Obama should release something that he already has been released and you're just regurgitating the same old stuff that has been posted many times before. You never even made it to the plate.
Obama released the official document. Don't let facts stand in the way of your ignorance.
Sure he did...but still doesn't answer the question posed by Dobbs.
I'm not arguing one way or the other on the birth status of Pres.Obama but like Dobbs, I'm curious why he won't release the "original" document that produced the "official" document.
That's the question...not his birth status.
Why? Seriously. What is the basis of, the cause for, this curiosity if his "birth status" as a natural-born American is not in question?
Saying "I just think it's interesting" or "I just wonder" or the like is not an answer as that is merely repeating "I'm curious" in different words. What is driving this curiosity?
The question is relevant because the only "reason" anyone has actually advanced is in the context of questioning his legal qualification to be president. If that is not your intention, then what is the point?
After you've answered that, perhaps you'd like to tell us just what "original" document you mean that is different from the "official" one. If I ask for a birth certificate from my state government, I get a copy of it, not the "original" that was physically signed by the attending doctor. So what "original" is it that should be released?
Finally, what in heaven's name makes you think that this "original" document, whatever it is, is in Obama's possession? You must think that, or you wouldn't keep wondering why "he" won't release it.
Until and unless you can satisfactorily answer those three questions, your "curiosity" will and should remain unaddressed.
That "original" document was used to produce the "official" document that he released...that is how Hawaii works. The documents are not the same.
Now, since you failed to comprehend the original post...I'll repeat it for you..."Theories and opinions aside about Pres.Obama's eligibility"...
If you want to argue the citizenship of Pres.Obama...find another dance partner. The question remains a simple one.
Pres.Obama could short circuit the issue by releasing the "original" document that produced the "official" one. Why won't he?
You didn't answer my questions. What is the source of this curiosity? Why does this matter? If what was released is an official record, what is the point of going on about a so-called "original" document?
And don't give me that "theories and opinions aside" line unless you can explain what it is you think would be revealed that would in any way matter but which has nothing to do with his eligibility to be president. "Why won't he?" is not an answer - it is simply another repetition of the same innuendo in different words.
You also didn't explain why you apparently think this "original" document is in Obama's possession and is therefore his to release.
Frankly, this "I throw out some innuendo and now the burden is all on you to disprove it" business is a crock. The burden of proof is on the claimant. You want to suggest that there is some document which he possesses but has refused to release? Prove it. You want to suggest that there is something relevant in this other document? Say what you think it is and why it's relevant. Otherwise it remains what I have twice labeled it: innuendo.
And don't bother trying to deny that by saying "I didn't say..." because going on about "why won't he" in a context where the claims are that what has been released has "issues" and is "peculiar" is innuendo. It is classic innuendo.
Put up or shut up.
I've never said or even hinted that he has the document in his possession...all he has to do is instruct the state of Hawaii to release it.
You ducked the issue like the others...by answering my question with your own questions...LOL.
If you want to take a stab at the question posed...go for it...otherwise I'm bored with your efforts.
Dobbs has you all buffaloed with a simple question...you all make good candidates for political jobs.
I've never said that he has the document in his possession
You repeatedly said "why won't he release it?" [Emphasis added.] There is no other rational interpretation of that repeated statement than that he held the document in question. If you now want to say you meant something else entirely, fine.
Except, not fine. If you ask the state of Hawaii to release a birth certificate, you get what has already been released. If you are going to say Obama should "instruct the state" to go beyond that to releasing some supposed "original" document - Are you saying he has the authority to order the state of Hawaii to change its rules? - you need to say why, to state what relevant information could be revealed. You have repeatedly failed to meet that base requirement despite being specifically asked twice.
answering my question with your own questions
Others have already answered your bogus "question" by saying, in various ways, "Why should he?" There is already an official record out there. Why should he let the wingnuts and conspiracy mongers and innuendo-slingers (like you) determine his course of action? Why should he waste his time trying to satisfy people who have already proven themselves unwilling to be satisfied by facts?
There was neither reason nor point to me repeating the answers you have already ignored.
I'm bored with your efforts.
Translation: "I've run out of places to hide. Run away! Run away!"
and to get to the previously stated point of the doubters would not accept the "real document", dobbs and a caller find it "peculiar" that his father's race is listed as "african". [because the term "african american" was not used until much later?] but it's the parents who provide the information on race, and i doubt his dad was going to list "negro". so since the "african" designation of race comes from the "real document", then why is the release of that going to stop any of this? time to move on.
You want to somehow discredit a person you do not like and are hiding behind the Dobbs statements.
You make a good candidate for current day republicans.
God bless you for trying your best to enlighten all these sheep who follow their Messiah blindly. I've given up talking to these types because they will (like their leader, BHO) call you names and try to dodge the question. Hopefully, Lou Dobbs will continue to follow this thread and pursue it till the great one has no other choice but to give the State of Hawaii his permission to release the 'original' Birth Certificate they have in their files. How embarrassing for all these blind sheep when they find out there is a usurper in their White House!
Ric
You might want to take that name calling whine from your list in light of :
all these sheep their Messiah blindly usurper in their White House!
The Supreme Court has rules this a NON ISSUE, not worthy of consideration, yet YOU can't seem to accept it?
My advice.....don't stop taking you medication.
I will attempt to answer your questions in a reasonable way, however, what will happen is you will start calling me names, and try to intimidate me with strong arm tactics, it's just the way you folks are, and you have proven it here.
But again, I will attempt to answer your questions in a well informed manner. I have studied this issue since December of last year, not saying I am an expert by any means, but that I have done some homework, and I believe that I have some of the answers.
Your first question:
Why? Seriously. What is the basis of, the cause for, this curiosity if his "birth status" as a natural-born American is not in question?
The basis of my curiosity is the FACT that Hawaii allowed the registration of births outside of the State of Hawaii, and if Stanley could prove residency in Hawaii at the time of the birth, the birth certificate would have been alterd, and sealed, and a new original produced and placed in the file. It's that simple. It would be legal, and it is my contention that Obama COULD have as many as 4 "original" birth certificates.
1. His original birth certificate
2. The birth certificate that was altered to state he was born in Hawaii
3. The birth certificate that changed his name to Barry Soetoro
4.The birth certificate that changed his name back to Barack Obama
Call me whatever name you like, all of these have some validity. Obama was enrolled in an Indonesian school under the name of Barry Soetoro, so this would be prima facia evidence his name was changed to that, and now Obama is using Barack Obama, which is prima facia evidence that he changed his name back.
The statutes of Hawaii are very clear that once you alter a birth ceritficate the "original" is sealed, and the altered placed in your file.
Then you ask:
Saying "I just think it's interesting" or "I just wonder" or the like is not an answer as that is merely repeating "I'm curious" in different words. What is driving this curiosity?
The curiosity is being driven by Obama himself. Did he not state in one of his books that he came across his birth certificate in some book while searching through stuff? Did Obama not state when he announced his candidacy for President that he would "bring integrity and transparency back to Washington"? Try to get him to keep his word, and you are ridiculed and called names. Why aren't YOU as outraged as I am about his pledges he has not kept? Or like me, do you think the time has come to simply put these down in the "Just words" catagory?
The question is relevant because the only "reason" anyone has actually advanced is in the context of questioning his legal qualification to be president. If that is not your intention, then what is the point?
It IS a question of him being the legal President. To me, there are four areas which HE has brought in to question
1. Where was he born?
2. Did he receive grants or scholorships reserved for foreign students while he attended Occidental, Columbia or Harvard?
3. What passport did he travel to Pakistan using back in 1981? (when he was an ADULT)
4. Did he register for the Selective Service in the thirty day grace period that those of us who were granfathered in to the law were given to register?
Answers to these questions COULd make Obama ineligible to be President.
After you've answered that, perhaps you'd like to tell us just what "original" document you mean that is different from the "official" one. If I ask for a birth certificate from my state government, I get a copy of it, not the "original" that was physically signed by the attending doctor. So what "original" is it that should be released?
The "original" document would be the one that Stanley registered with Hawaii. Your explaination of "original" and a "copy" is simply immature. Of course we do not think the state should take the "original" and give it to him. Of course it would be a "certified copy" of the "original". What a really idiotic and immature comment this is. And it should be the "original" "original", the first one that Stanley registered with the State of Hawaii. The one that states the hospital and doctor, would be nice, and answer alot of questions.
Finally, what in heaven's name makes you think that this "original" document, whatever it is, is in Obama's possession? You must think that, or you wouldn't keep wondering why "he" won't release it.
Well because Obama stated in one of his books that he came across his birth certificate while cleaning an attic, or closet, or something. I believe that he stated it was in some book. But again, this is an immature statement of why "he" won't release it. Obama has to authorize the state to release his original birth certificate. That's why NO ONE can get their hands on it. Geesh, you people just kill me with your simplistic crap, that you think you can manipulate folks' words. You know what he meant, you just like to twist and use strong arm tactics to make him back down. Obama ("HE") has to authorize Hawaii the permission to release his LONG FORM birth certificate.
Now before you make this idiotic reply:
Well what you are asking is for the State to go out of their way for Obama when they wouldn't do that for an "ordinary" citizen..........blah blah blah.
HE'S THE PRESIDENT!! He's not an "ordinary" citizen. Airports, roads, businesses are closed DAILY when the President comes to town. Police give escorts to the President, and not to "oridinary" citizens.
I've argued this point many times before. Obama isn't an "oridinary" citizen, so don't try that crap.
Until and unless you can satisfactorily answer those three questions, your "curiosity" will and should remain unaddressed.
All questions have been answered in a reasonable, informed manner.
Now answer the question wesley asked.
All it would take is a phone call from the President. I'd even venture that the State of Hawaii would waive the fee, and gladly release the "original".
Before you argue this point also, I will address it also.
NO STATE OFFICIAL HAS VERIFIED THAT WHAT HAS BEEN RELEASED IS WHAT IS ON OBAMA'S ORIGINAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE.
What they DID do is verify that they have the ORIGINAL on file. Now I will give you that what is on the Certification of Live Birth, is what it states on his birth certificate on file, but I will argue that what they have on file is more than likely an altered original.
I want to see the original birth certificate, Obama's college entrance papers, his passport he used to travel to Pakistan in 1981, and his Selective Service card where he registered with the Selective Service in the thirty day grace period.
It would be called "transparency", you know what the President pledged to be when he announced his candidacy for President, and what he has proven to be anything but.
Or do you not hold Obama to his word?
Now what LarryE? The ball is in your court.
I will attempt to answer your questions in a reasonable way, however, what will happen is you will start calling me names, and try to intimidate me with strong arm tactics, it's just the way you folks are, and you have proven it here.
For quite some time the right has tried - for a good part of that time successfully - to intimidate the left with faux outrage and "How dare you use such language, sir! How dare you!" even as the right accused the left of everything from stupidity to treason and of being everything from sheep to Satanists to saboteurs. Over the past several years some of us have gotten fed up with that and have taken the attitude of "Hey, right wingers, you set down these rules of discourse, now you're going to have to play by them." The result, to what should have been no one's surprise, is conservatives routinely whining about "calling names" and sniffling about how "mean" lefties are. Well, bro', there's a saying about heat and kitchens which I expect you have heard. So suck it up. (I note in passing that your non-name calling comment used "immature" three times, "idiotic" twice, and "simplistic crap" and "that crap" once each. Oh gracious me, I am so very wounded. You're so mean!)
But to the point, it is obvious from your comment that the "basis for your curiosity" is the embracing of a paranoid conspiracy in which you do, by your own admission, insist "It IS a question of him being the legal President." Facts don't sway you. Official documents don't sway you. Contemporaneous birth announcements in Hawaiian newspapers don't sway you. Oh no, there's always something else, something more, something hidden, something concealed by some huge conspiracy. Indeed, by your own words, even releasing some "original" document held by Hawaii would not be enough.
I don't know if the impetus is that Barack Obama is a Democrat, that he is liberal on some issues (but definitely not on executive power), or that he's black. I do know it's not grounded on established fact.
I say with a high degree of confidence that even if everything you wanted was out there, every bit of information in your expanding fishing expedition was in your hands, and if every single bit of it was consistent with Obama being "a natural-born citizen of the United States," it would still not be good enough for you and you would both question the veracity of the documents and demand more.
So you will get no point by point reply because, quite bluntly, you do not deserve one.
I will, however, say that if you ever get tired of this business, the one about the Moon landing being a hoax is still going on. So you'll still have something to occupy you.
Oh, one other thing: As for Wesley's question, already asked, already answered by Wesley himself:
"He doesn't have to do anything more than he's already done."
Exactly. And period.
This is what has become of the Republican party - secession, torture, tax cuts for the wealthy, and our duly elected president is the Manchurian Candidate from...Indonesia? Kenya? It's never really clear. What is clear is that the wheels have come off the Republican party and they are now led by radio and TV entertainers/shock jocks rather than statesmen. Truly sad.
This is what has become of the Republican party - secession, torture, tax cuts for the wealthy, and our duly elected president is the Manchurian Candidate from...Indonesia? Kenya? It's never really clear. What is clear is that the wheels have come off the Republican party and they are now led by radio and TV entertainers/shock jocks rather than statesmen. Truly sad.
He meet the criteria established by the election commission which is the same as the other 43. Why should he be treated different? Because there are opposer that want him to be treated differently?
Mr. Obama has produced a birth certificate which has been verified by the State of Hawaii as being an official record produced by them, and as being representative of the original birth certificate that they have in their archives.
Mr. Obama does not have to prove anything . . . he has presented the record of his birth in Hawaii. The folks who are making these ridiculous charges and claims have the onus to prove that he is not. That's why they keep getting their cases dismissed . . . they can't prove something which is not true.
and.. the cover up will continue if we allow it.
"Progressives now say US Born requirement for Presidency should be abolished". http://libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com/2009/07/liberal-defenders-of-obama-in-full.html Maybe I should go to Factcheck.org to see the truth of the daily politician spout.
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
The form released by Pres.Obama was not in existence at the time of his birth...proving that there is an "original" document used to produce the "official" document that he released.
Another swing and a miss.
Your splitting hairs between the words original and official shows a motive that is beyond curiosity irregardless to what you claim. Official has always been good enough in this country and Obama's official was validated by those who saw the original which is more than normal.
If someone has proof he is not a citizen, it is for them to come forward and be hard.
Also, even if he were born in Kenya, it doesn't matter according to the constitution. You do honor the constitution, right?...
"Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)"
I didn't say it wasn't good enough. I've not even argued about his birth status. I just posed a question that you can't come to grips with.
One little innocuous piece of paper...that's all...one that you and your cohorts have howled is impeccable.
Why wouldn't Pres.Obama release the "original" document used to produce the "official" document? You've failed to provide any reasonable explanation which leads me to...
Well King, this case is closed.
Do you believe the state of Hawaii is conspiring with President Obama here?
The requirements for being an American citizen are different than the requirements for being president. The Constitution mentions that the president should be, among other things, a "natural-born" citizen - and, AFAIK, natural-born means born in the United States. Yes, Obama would be a US citizen irregardless of his place of birth. He would not qualify to be president - otherwise nobody would care.
I hate to find myself agreeing with CNN talking heads, but their thoughts and mine are the same re: the legitimacy of this case.
NO, you're wrong, but that's not surprising!
We beg to differ. FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. We have posted high-resolution photographs of the document as "supporting documents" to this article. Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.
The document is a "certification of birth," also known as a short-form birth certificate. The long form is drawn up by the hospital and includes additional information such as birth weight and parents' hometowns. The short form is printed by the state and draws from a database with fewer details. The Hawaii Department of Health's birth record request form does not give the option to request a photocopy of your long-form birth certificate
The truth about Obama's birth certificate...
At PolitiFact.com, we're all about original sources. We don't take anyone at their word or take the reporting of other media organizations as proof. We go to the heart of the story, the source of the truth — original, corroborating documents.
When the official documents were questioned, we went looking for more answers. We circled back to the Department of Health, had a newsroom colleague bring in her own Hawaii birth certificate to see if it looks the same (it's identical). But every answer triggered more questions.
And soon enough, after going to every length possible to confirm the birth certificate's authenticity, you start asking, what is reasonable here?
Because if this document is forged, then they all are.
If this document is forged, a U.S. senator and his presidential campaign have perpetrated a vast, long-term fraud. They have done it with conspiring officials at the Hawaii Department of Health, the Cook County (Ill.) Bureau of Vital Statistics, the Illinois Secretary of State's office, the Attorney Registration & Disciplinary Commission of the Supreme Court of Illinois and many other government agencies.
Obama's birth certificate: Final chapter...
People aren't dismissing you folks because they don't want to answer your ENDLESS questions. It's just no matter who has seen, touched and examined Obama's birth certificate, no matter which official says it's a real birth certificate, no matter what newspaper show a birth announcement, you folks will NEVER accept Obama as the US President. NOTHING, no document or swearing in blood will stem your insanity over the fact that the MAJORITY of AMERICANS elected Barack Hussien Obama.
So keep on with your conspiracy theories and we'll keep on trying the fix the mess left by 8 years of Republican governing!
Because according to the law, he is innocent until proved guilty. The burden of proof is not on him, it is on those who feel he doesn't qualify to prove their belief to be fact or to at least provide reasonable doubt which would qualify to be heard in court.
We can say anything about anybody but that doesn't make it true and it doesn't mean I have to go to court to prove you wrong. If that were the case, the McCarthy era would have been a real witch hunt.
Of course he is...and he doesn't have to do anything more than he's already done...but that isn't the question.
The question remains...why won't he produce the "original" document used to produce the "official" document.
I see lots of flailing about by his supporters but no one producing a credible answer to his reasoning...don't waste my time with the reply that he "doesn't have to"...he has avoided a request that is perfectly reasonable...and one that would snuff the life out of the birthers.
He doesn't have to...
And even if he did, it would also be questioned.
BECAUSE...
"he doesn't have to do anything more than he's already done"
The reason Pres. Obama isn't "snuffing the life out of the birthers", is because he wants opponents he can marginalize.
Instead of intelligent opposition to issues, Pres. Obama wisely chooses his "straw man" opponent, one that can be easily discounted, ridiculed, and ignored.
So, you and all your comrades at World Nut Daily have been put into a freak show box for the amusement and distraction of the masses.
Happy now, wesley? Now go and write your rants on some more message threads, to awaken the populace to this menace to the Constitution. ROFL!
That will reduce the howl from the birthers and marginalize those remaining to the lunatic fringe.
No it won't and you know it wesley!
All that would do is give undeserved credibility to a bunch of racist hacks who can't come to grips with the reality that a black man with a variety of nationalities that are different from their own now resides in the White House!
Stop feeding into this kind of stupid wesley
From a practical matter, the distinction is irrelevant. The US Constitution doesn't change meaning just because we don't have an original document to read. The official document suffices to convey the legal meaning as well as the veracity of the original.
I work most days with official patent documents and rarely with originals, even when I am the originator of the patent. Again, the official conveys the veracity of the original.
The State of Hawaii has verified chain of custody to an original document. Through a set of trusted relationship a person skilled in the art of official documents has been entrusted to validate an official representation.
Since Wesley (along with Lou Dobbs, Alan Keyes and Orly) literally don't know that there is effectively no distinction, they literally can't take yes for an answer.
The President of the United States MUST be a Natural Born Citizen.
US Constitution
Art. II, Sec. 1, Cl. 5
Citing
U.S. v. Wong Kim Ark,
169 U.S. 649 (1898)
and
Perkins v. Elg,
307 U.S. 325 (1939)
Obama therefore is not a "natural born citizen" because his father was a Kenyan national and a British subject on his Certificate of Live birth it states that his father was African not Negro.
To be a natural born citizen, a person's parents must BOTH be citizens of the United States of America. Further, that person must be born in the United States.
Obama is a "citizen" because his mother was an American citizen. There are question about his birthplace and whether he was naturalized after his period of time as an Indonesian citizen.
He also may be a "native born citizen" -- a child born in the United States of foreign (non-citizen) parents. He will have to release his birth certificate, which he hasn't, to ascertain this status.
I cant believe that he made it this far without documents--- it is impossible, so these documents exist but because they may revel ineligibility all are being hidden.
Thank you Mr. Dobbs for this observation. Once I began checking this fact it just became a quagmire of misdirection and half truths. Remembering a half truth is a whole lie.
Why can't we just see the birth certificate he says he has from his book. He has the Original birth certificate in his possession based upon his own book, an autobiography. Something like, " I found the papers with my birth certificate" Where's that document now?
Why Can't we see that document???
How does one whose father was a British citizen of Kenya as per Obama book, become a "natural born" citizen? I believe you have to be 100% American to be president. Obama is only 50% at best.
This all smells so bad. Where's the Watergate media with their blood stained teeth??
Guy4013
Melbourne, Fl 32901
Most of us refer to our certificate of life birth as a birth certificate.
I have myself gotten a "certificate of birth" for my daughter months after she was born, by showing her original birth certificate from the hospital. So one would assume (perhaps incorrectly?) that Obama's original BC must have been shown to generate this certificate of live birth. If his long form BC matches what's on the COLB, then why the refusal to show the hospital's birth certificate? There would be nothing to hide, right?
And for the eleventeenth time on this thread alone, HE DOESN'T HAVE the hospital's birth certificate. Even if he did, he doesn't need to produce it to satisfy this stupid (and racist) obsession.
I was willing to let the birth certificate thing go once Barry got elected (for fear of President Pelosi), but the more I read into it, the stranger it became.
I'll give you the birth certificate, because, as another comment mentioned, did Ms. Dunham really run announcements in Hawaiian newspapers anticipating that her son would need to run for president one day. But why did he go visit his dying grandmother over a weekend and then the state announce that his records were sealed on the following Monday.
But that aside... Barry lived in Indonesia for a time. Did he renounce United States citizenship? On what country's passport did he travel to Pakistan?
Another piece missing from the puzzle is his college records. Ok, we have his account of what he did at college, but why has he refused to release his records? Did he apply to Occidental or Harvard as an Indonesian citizen? Did he do worse than W?
From the Right Wing perspective, there are more questions than answers, and you're right to say that for some there will never be satisfactory proof of any of the above.
For me, the biggest red flag is that he's spent literally millions of dollars and thousands of man-hours to keep this under wraps.
Thanks!
That's why i'm glad we have open forums like this so we can discuss and exchange information.
I had a question -- you provided an answer. thanks!
Yes the new world order antichrist devils are ruling the world and breaking down the American and world economy so they can have their One World Government and their One World Currency and Economic System; and their One World Church where even lucifer, who is their god will be worshipped and respected.
But don't worry!! Jesus and His Mighty Angels from heaven will return and defeat them all in hours after He has poured out His plagues upon the Earth because they would have martyred millions and millions of His Children; because they wouldn't take their zombie making and soul cursing Mark of the Beast Chip that is spoken of in Revelation 13 and 14 chapters!!
I'm glad I don't live on their cloud.
At the time of Obama birth, the State of Hawaii could issue certificates of live birth to those born of an American citizen if requested, even if they weren't born in Hawaii. Also, the status of being "natural born" is more connected to the fact that Obama Sr. was not an American citizen and was born in Kenya which was at the time British ruled. For your own edification, look into why the founding fathers wanted presidents to be "natural born." Add to that the serious questions raised as to why so many of Obama's "historical" documents, including his college transcripts from Occidental and Columbia, his passport to allow travel to Jakarta, etc. etc...the list is rather long, and anyone with rational thought should wonder about this man's background, imo. The big question is, why does a man who preaches "transparency" hide so much? If you don't hear any alarm bells, or at the very least have any curiosity, why not? This man has been voted in to what equates to "leader of the free world" and yet, what do we really know about his past, other than what he wrote in books about himself. Another strange thing, a man writes two books about himself before he has even really accomplished anything.
But here is the moral of the story....
Certainly if a young man joining the military must show an actual certificate even if it means going to a lot of trouble...
Why should we NOT hold a presidential candidate up to the same standard?????
Why? Why? Why?
I am sick of the lefts silly arguments to the contrary....
Grow up... I know the colleges taught you to worship socialism and the federal government... But try and learn critical thinking like they taught us in the service...
Note: there is a reason a 21 year old soldier is a decade ahead of his stay at home friends in maturity.....
So for all of you fat heads with fat bodies who failed civics class in high school..... OH! thats right they stoped teaching civics 25 years ago.... hmmmmm I wonder why.....
Lou Dobbs is the only show on CNN I watch anymore... It's no wonder the servicmen in uniform call it the communist news network....
Sorry, just havin' a bit o fun with our dimwitted conspiracy theorists. Ha!
Are you OYGB?
State does in Olympia. Secondly, the official document you get from Washington State is a Certificate of Live Birth, not the original document. That document is kept safely on file in Olympia. The hospitals sometimes give you a decorative "birth cetificate" suitable for framing, but this has no legal bearing.
You are a fraud.
On the back of my birth certificate is this-
"The information appearing on the certified copy of birth is exactly transcribed from information contained on the original birth certificate as filed with the Office of Vital Records.
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania-Department of Health
Vital Records
Certification of Birth
Lets get something right, birthers, you don't get the original record. You get a certified copy-of the record on file with the state, in this case Pennsylvania. I can't get the record because if I need a new copy, they have to refer to the birth record, in the dept. of Health.
This is what a birth certificate should have-
Date of birth, County of birth, sex, Date Filed, Date issued.
Fathers full name, Mothers maiden name.
There is NO mention of the hospital I was born at on my certificate, just the county and state.
The signature of the Secretary of Health is on there(but not my doctor). Also, the State Registrar's signature is on there.
Pennsylvania State Seal is on the right bottom side.
According to these birthers, I'm not a citizen, either, because it's not the record I have, just the Certification of Birth.
If I remember right, Obama's certificate has all that information. Now, I think I've settled this waste of time. Can we get back to real issues?
Mike may have beat Moses747 in the crazy derby
What do I get?
Ok I'll bite YOUR A COWARD!
Now, I know it's not fake because the birth certificates for all states have the same information required. And, President Obama's has the same information that mine does.
Most of the commenters here who would like to see the long-form certificate neatly (and respectfully) lay out the reasons why they would like proof (i.e., donnalah).
Those who wish the matter dropped aggressively attack the character and intelligence of anyone who doesn't agree with them.
Granted, this observation will not help answer the question of Obama's elligibility, but it is quite interesting none-the-less.
Having said all that, what would it hurt for the president to provide the requested proof? It is a burdon he tacitly accepted when he threw his hat in the ring. Isn't it his campaign who promised transparency?
It's incredible to me that so many people think this isn't important. Us "little people" get to deal with the "Real ID" act, but the POTUS gets a free pass. Unfortunately, the US educational system is rated 65th in the world, and that goes a long way toward why people don't understand this or any other issue of any importance.
There is no doubt the usurpers actions will be null and void. There is also no doubt many of those in his "can do no wrong hypnotic trance" will seriously protest. If they take it to the next level be assured there are many who took, and take their oaths to the constitution seriously.
I do have a question though: Are those who help hide his offence guilty of treason or high crimes, and as it is obvious to those not in a trance, that the MSM is amongst this group, what sort of accountability would be deemed appropriate for them?
He is HIDING something, no doubt about it.
1. The last Politifact article MMFA links to is misleading.
2. The announcements didn't list where or in what hospital BHO was born. They only had his parents' supposed address. No one has ever presented proof that those announcements could have only come from the hospital. And, if BHO were born outside the U.S., his grandparents would have motivation to plant those announcements in case of a custody battle. (You know you're dealing with a hack when they fail to mention that possibility)
3. BHO hasn't really released his cert. He's simply posted a picture online and supposedly shown it to Factcheck. There's no guarantee that what's online matches what he supposedly received. And, FC aren't document experts, they didn't call in document experts, and the camera data attached to the images they posted had a date months before they said they took the photos. They also later silently changed those images by recompressing them and removing that camera (EXIF) data.
4. No one from the state of HI or any other government entity has verified that what they have on file matches what's shown on BHO's site.
5. Snopes, Wikipedia, and even BHO himself can't even get their stories straight on which hospital he was born in. All have given different accounts.
For all those facts and more, see my completely fact-based coverage of this issue. Let me be very frank: that page is an IQ/integrity test. If you don't understand the difference between something that's been proven and something that hasn't or you're willing to lie, then just staying here at MMFA is probably the better choice.
Furthermore, many sensible people who voted for Obama now realize that he has not kept his promises. In the senate, contrary to a senate campaign promise, Obama voted to renew the Patriot Act (when the sunset clause matured and it was time to renew or send this completely UNPATRIOTIC ACT to the garbage can where it belonged). This broke one promise that he had made. He promised to close down Guantanamo and END THE TORTURE, but Guantanamo is still open and Obama continues the rendition flights to send prisoners to other countries to out-source the torture, Obama also refuses to hold Bush and his cabinet responsible for torture, crimes against humanity, lies about weapons of mass destruction, cronyism in awarding no-bid contracts to their friends (ie. Halliburton et. al.), exposing an undercover CIA agent and operation in order to get revenge when their WMD lies and malfeasance were exposed and for other reasons, unconstitutional wiretaps of U.S. citizens, etc. Obama has expanded the wars and increased troop numbers in Afghanistan. One of Obama's advisors and supporters is Zbigniew Brzezinski. Read his books Between Two Ages: America's Role in the Technotronic Era, in which he promotes the use of mind-control technology to control the American population and The Grand Chessboard, in which he promotes American military encirclement of Russia and China, the seizure of the Caspian Basin oil reserves, and in which he apparently wishes for a catastrophic event to get the American public behind these clever and crafty schemes. Talk about right-wing! He sure got his wish. As if that is not egregious enough, look for the part of Between Two Ages where Brzezinski says that blacks should be held in controlled ghettos and subjected to mind-control. This brings to mind Holdren, Obama's "science Czar." His book Ecoscience advocates eugenics, the elimination of undesirable groups and especially poor people. He advocates the forced sterilization of undesirable people and poisoning the water supply to that end. Talk about racism! If you don't believe me, get off of your lazy duff and borrow the books or buy them. Then read them. If you don't read these books but you say that I am lying, you are the liar and remiss in your duty as a citizen.
Obama and this very unpatriotic congress have put through unconstitutional bills that will destroy the economy and impoverish even more Americans as well as put beaurocrats into your homes to do inspections that will determine whether you will have to pay thousands of dollars in renovations and possibly lose your house because of the cost (ie. the climate bill), create more protected classes of people and thought-crimes in this country (the hate-crimes bill), and are putting forth a bill to force everyone to take dangerous unproven vaccines with dangerous and poisonous ingredients while giving immunity to the pharmaceutical companies, even though you will be forced to take the vaccines, at gunpoint, or put in a prison-camp if you refuse. According to the widely accepted right-left paradigm, these measures are, by definition, FASCISM. Talk about right-wing! According to the commonly accepted paradigm, fascism is as right-wing as you can get.
I, and many of the people who are truly patriotic, reject the false right-left paradigm that is being promoted. Most of you who do believe in the false paradigm and who squabble amongst yourselves over relatively minor issues, as compared to major issues like our loss of liberty and our constitutional rights as well as massive vote fraud and unconstitutional legislation, corporate power, and globalism and loss of American sovereignty, are merely two barely different sides of the same collectivist coin. But even if the false paradigm were correct, how dare this paper vilify someone for believing that the constitution should be observed. How dare anyone claim that adhering to the constitution is extremism! Anyone who supports such behavior is neither liberal nor conservative.
The false paradigm is incorrect. Fascists and communists, and many republicans and democrats, are virtually the same, both advocating total power to the state or to the state and corporations, and group vs. individual rights, which always results in totalitarianism, mass murder, and crimes against humanity. Unfortunately, supporters of this false paradigm also support this agenda, sometimes unwittingly. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. And don't you dare call me names without researching what I have said and without reading these books!
*no name calling required.
Through ardous experience I have decided I don't have to slog thru material that heavy hitters such as yourself decide someone MUST read to understand in GREAT DEPTH...we have Obama's books at our house, as a matter of fact. As in any book including the Bible, one can interpret passages to mean anything, and of course, you cipher all kinds of sinister things in Obama's. I am also aware of the RIGHT-WING spin on his voting record, which is quite moderate.
Have a great day!
PLEASE, BUY A CALENDAR!!!!! He's only been in office 6 freaking months!!!
It took Bush and Dickw**d 8 freaking years to screw up this country, so it's gonna take a little longer than 6 months to fix it!!!
Good grief!! It looks like a 10 way tie for the grand prize of insanity posts today.
The best part is that each new crazy poster drops his load, then disappears when asked relevant questions, and the next one posts the exact same bs.
I salute those of you who actually took the time to point out the facts, and I admire your ability to treat the birthers as if they're sane. Very generous.
I imagine a decent shrink could have a field day reading over the Birfer's comments here. It's not just the psychology of starting off with a conclusion (Obama bad!) and working backward to accept everything that supports that, no matter how nutty, it's the ability to ignore all of the facts and repeatedly bring up the robotic Birfer talking points as if they haven't been mentioned and debunked in the same discussion.
I recently watched Expelled, the Ben Stein anti-science propaganda flick (yeah , I'm a masochist), and it's a fascinating look into the mind of the wingnut.
Using the same tactics as many conservative posters here, Stein constantly claims victory through his own confusion, and mocks the words of those who are politely trying to dumb things down to the level of his bird-brained questions.
I had some free time the other day, and wasted quite a bit on a thread here about the GOP health care chart, trying to help a couple of the Hannitized to understand simple logic. It was funny for a while, but ultimately a waste of time.
Ooh, sounds like that Pointy character from that thread the other day. He kept doing his little victory dance. Hey, maybe this crowd just likes to dance, eh? ;-0)
That movie sounds lethal, but I might take a gander since I'm a bit of a lay social scientist.
Hey, since you're in the business of predicting the future......Will I win the Publishers Clearing House $100,000 a week prize?
Seriously, the courts, even the Supreme Court, HAS seen your "evidence", sorry, really conspiracy theories, and decided NOT TO WASTE THEIR TIME!!!
And that common sense suggestion you gave?...TRY IT YOURSELF!!!!
Fair enough, Sub. Have you seen the long form, original document birth certificate for every presidential candidate since the founding of the country? If not, why have you been so lenient? Why aren't you demanding to have the documents from every one of the hundreds of candidates placed in your hands?
Because that would be crazy, right?
by solon (July 17, 2009 7:51 pm ET) 9 6
Oh my GOD. This is the stupidest non issue issue of all time. Dobbs needs to grow up. Obama has shown his Certificate of live birth which is what you get. Officials IN Hawaii have said they have SEEN the original birth certificate. An anouncement in the local paper OF HIS BIRTH at the honolulu hospital at the TIME of his birth has been reproduced and shown. Its over. Only the stupidest and most brainwashed morons are still going on with this birther nonsense.
So as it turns out, it actually doesn't even matter if Obama was born in Hawaii, Kansas, Indonesia, Kenya, or Trinidad! He was a US Citizen at the moment of his birth. Period.
He's nuts.
Can you find out how the president of China has a "certification" of live birth from Hawaii because he was born in China.
How is that possible?
Obama's father was from Kenya by his own admission and not by certification. Citizenship is passed on by the father, a British citizen from Kenya
That make Obama British born and citizen and NOT Natural Born.
The Constitution under Article II does not allow British citizens to be eligible to president.
That makes Obama a Usurper under law and occupying the office without any legal authority,i.s a Usurper
I quote from Vattel, chapter nineteen, paragraph 212 as he discusses "Natural Born" citizens.
"I say that, in order to be from the COUNTRY, it is necessary that a person be born of the FATHER who is a citizen, for, if he is born there of a FOREIGNER, it will ONLY be the place of his BIRTH and not his COUNTRY" (Emphasis added).
Accordingly, Obama's COUNTRY is Kenya, not America, his citizenship is British, not U.S. His BIRTH PLACE may be Hawaii but we don't know without an original birth certificate (Which he has in his possession).
For sure, Obama is British born by his father being a FOREIGNER, and he can NEVER be a "Natural Born" American.
Thus, he is NOT Article II eligible to the office of president.
By law, he is a Usurper!
How so??
The bill's in the mail.
The quote you find wrong happens to be the historical authority on citizens.
Even with a Hawaii birth certificate, Obama is still British born and NOT Article II eligible to president.
Your comments are mere psycho babble.
Obama's country is Kenya and he is British born, NOT NATURAL BORN!! He is by law a Usurper!
Try some history books instead of reading "Mad" magazine all the time.
For your next homework assignment you can explain why an 18th Century Swiss jurist and Philosopher should be giving the definition for natural born according to the US constitution. Then increase your medication and let the nice men in the white coats lead you back to your room for some rest.
However, if I was critiquing conspiracy theories I'd have to say that the South Park version of Obama and McCain teaming up to win the White House so they had access to secret tunnels that would allow them to steal the Hope diamond, ala Oceans 11, is more plausible.
I know the birther nuts will ignore this. They are inflicted with a peculiar form of stupid.
Obama is a Kenyan, his father's country, and his citizenship is British (his father's citizenship).
You can only think of him as American because he speaks english well. Something unusual for a politician.
However, Obama remains British born , NOT NATURAL BORN!!
I gather from your comment, you believe, that a "certified" birth certificate is the same thing as "certification" of live birth.
I would love to see a "certified" birth certificate or the birth certificate Obama talks about in his book and is in his possession. Either one would be ok.
Please continue your research. You will soon discover that Obama is British born ,NOT NATURAL BORN!! Regardless of any certified birth certificate. His mother was very careless at 18!! Shame. Shame.