Some conspiracy theorists have observed that the recently-seen diplomatic passport for Barack Obama shows his name as “Barack Hussein Obama” but his Certification of Live Birth shows the name as “Barack Hussein Obama II.” In conspiracy theories, any inconsistency is proof of the conspiracy, whatever it is.
How is it possible that the names do not match? Is it proof that one of the documents is fake? Unlikely, according to this from the US Department of State’s Foreign Affairs Manual governing names on passports:
Families sometimes change name suffixes when an older generation dies. You may accommodate such a request provided the suffix on the identification documents presented corresponds to the name requested.
A birth certificate is not an identification document.
H/t to Scientist.
Imagine that I have four names and they called me to inquire about the dropping of one name on my application even though my previous passport had the exact same name. I didn’t notice any mention of this in the guidelines.
Barack Hussein Obama Sr. isn’t with us anymore.
7 FAM 1300 APPENDIX C
NAMES TO BE USED IN PASSPORTS
(CT:CON-311; 08-07-2009)
The FAM was updated during the Obama administration. 7 FAM 1300 APPENDIX C didn’t exist in 2008.
Wonderful Sven Babes
Err, one minor issue, when was Obama elected President and threfore be issued this passport, would that be before or after that date…?
Updated means there were previous versions. There have been Jr.s and Sr.s around for ever and dropping Jr when Sr dies is a long-standing custom. Are you saying there were no policies in effect until August 2009 as to how to handle those suffixes? Besides, as Bovril noted, Obama was President from January 2009 and had travelled abroad several times by August.
Why not simply accept the reality that Obama was born in Hawaii? It’s really not so unusual that someone whose parents resided in Hawaii (even temporarily in his father’s case) was born there. Every single person I know was born where their parents lived and gave birth to their children where they lived. All the married foreign students I knew in grad school had their kids here; not a single one flew back home to have a baby. Your scenarios fail the tests of logic, experience and evidence.
Yes, Scientist, the FAM has been around a long time and is updated frequently. 7 FAM 1300 APPENDIX C was birthed in 2009, a few months after BO usurped the Presidency.
Why must you ignore Barry Soetoro’s school record. I’ve embraced it. And it states Barry was born on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, HI. I’ve accepted it. Why can’t you?
Is it because the record indicates Barry is a muslim and Indonesian National? You know, I looked it up and about 94% of the population in Indonesia is muslim and the other 6% is running for their lives. It is not unusual or difficult to believe anyone who voluntarily moves to Indonesia will most likely convert to the Religion of Peace or be killed.
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/21/results-of-investigation-made-possible-by-donors-to-the-post-email-legal-fund/comment-page-1/#comment-18926
Lot’s of interesting rsearch has been done by P & E regarding Obbama’s birthing records on what it publically available. However, the most significant and key point in the article was the following observation made by the P & E researcher:
“I don’t know where I’ve seen the statement supporting the Department of Health’s contention that it now issues only a Certificate of Live Birth, but it’s not true. When I was at the Department of Health, I observed a woman who was directly in front of me in line order a copy of her long-form birth certificate. She was told that it would take about a week to obtain. She made arrangements to pick it up at the DoH office in lieu of having it mailed to her since she worked across the street.”
—
If true, this will catch Hawaii DOH in a major major lie. Is Hawaii DOH lying about Obama’s records too?
Because I know that parents frequently lie to get their children into better schools. What was the verification process done by school officials in Indonesia in the 1960s? Do you know? If there even was a verification process, could it be circumvented by a small “gift” to the school? I’ve heard that even in the US, you can get a kid who’s dumb as a post into Harvard if you make a large enough “donation”.
So, if you want to establish that he was ever an Indonesian national show me an Indonesian nationality certificate or passport. Where are they?
As for whether Obama was a muslim when he was 7 years old, I have no idea. There are millions of children with parents of different religions (I know quite a few) and most of them follow some mix of the 2 (they get presents for Christmas and Hanukah, the lucky devils). Then when they become dults they make their own choice. I suggest that in these matters, you follow the Constitution, which says “No religious test for public office”.
You’re saying a 6 year old Barack Obama voluntarily moved to Indonesia? Was Stanley Ann a Muslim? Why did Obama’s Indonesian school have both a Christian Church and a mosque if they are running for their lives? Why did the school indicate that putting the father/stepfather’s religion on the admissions paperwork is standard practice? We now know Obama never became an Indonesian national so why repeat this debunked notion? How did Obama usurp the Presidency? He won both the electoral and popular vote.
Could I make a polite suggestion? Perhaps you could improve your “I looked it up” assertions by trying a different approach… like actually looking it up maybe. Google and Wikipedia are only a few keystrokes away.
The word usurp implies that somewhere out there lies a rightful claimant to the office (like Bonnie Prince Charlie). The only person that could possibly have such a claim is Joe Biden, and he seems not to be interested (perhaps, wisely).
There is no one besides Obama with a credible claim to the White House, hence usurper is simply an erroneous term.
“We now know Obama never became an Indonesian national so why repeat this debunked notion?”
Are you for real? You don’t know anything except for what Obama wants you to believe! DEBUNKED? Show me!
“There have been Jr.s and Sr.s around for ever and dropping Jr when Sr dies is a long-standing custom.”
Only one problem here, Ace. Obama didn’t just go by Jr. His legal name from birth was Barack Hussein Obama II.
“Because I know that parents frequently lie to get their children into better schools.”
Beautiful! They will lie to get them into better schools, but to lie in order to obtain the blessings of U.S. Citizenship is somehow out of the question???
“The word usurp implies that somewhere out there lies a rightful claimant to the office”
Where do you get your definitions? The word usurp doesn’t “imply” anything. It is the exercise of power by an entity who has no right to do so. If Barack Obama is not a “natural-born citizen”, he has usurped the power of the presidency. -I’m not saying that he has, but I get pretty sick of the know-it-all Obots who try to redefine everything they come across in order to provide support for their “Chosen One”.
This is hate speech, pure and simple, and loathsome.
This is not a “my god is more bloodthirsty than your god” contest, but when it comes to killing members of other faiths, Christianity has quite a record. I live in a region in Southern France where people still remember that in the 13th century, Pope Innocent III launched an armed crusade against the Cathars or Albigenses.
When the besieged city of Beziers fell, soldiers reportedly asked their papal adviser how to distinguish the faithful from the infidel among the captives. He commanded: “Kill them all. God will know his own.” This is the origin of this sinister cliché.
Nearly 20,000 people were slaughtered — many first blinded, mutilated, dragged behind horses, or used for target practice.
Don’t lecture us about “religions of peace” you loathsome racist.
in order to provide support for their “Chosen One”.
Only a wingnut would use the term “Chosen One”
Are you a wingnut?
And here comes another member of the KKK brigade.
The Indonesian citizenship has been THOROUGHLY debunked; for a start because a child cannot renounce his US citizenship. Dr. Conspiracy has written on the topic and will point you to places on this site which explains why this is pure bunk.
Two, Barack Obama *IS* a natural-born citizen because of his Hawaiian birth, by any commonly and widely accepted judicial definitions, and there is not a shred of evidence to the contrary. (And don’t bring in Vattel who wrote the exact opposite of what you Klansmen are trying to argue.)
I’m not in a good mood having to watch all the loathsome racists crawling from under their rocks in America right now.
Jews were better off in the Ottoman Empire, than in Europe; they did not live in fear.
“On the Jews and Their Lies” is a 65,000-word treatise written by German Reformation leader Martin Luther in 1543. In the treatise, Luther writes that the Jews are a “base, whoring people, that is, no people of God, and their boast of lineage, circumcision, and law must be accounted as filth.” Luther wrote that they are “full of the devil’s feces … which they wallow in like swine,” and the synagogue is an “incorrigible whore and an evil slut”. He argues that their synagogues and schools be set on fire, their prayer books destroyed, rabbis forbidden to preach, homes razed, and property and money confiscated. They should be shown no mercy or kindness, afforded no legal protection, and these “poisonous envenomed worms” should be drafted into forced labor or expelled for all time. He also advocates their murder, writing “we are at fault in not slaying them.”
The prevailing scholarly view since the Second World War is that the treatise exercised a major and persistent influence on Germany’s attitude toward its Jewish citizens in the centuries between the Reformation and the Holocaust. Four hundred years after it was written, the Nazis displayed “On the Jews and Their Lies” during Nuremberg rallies, and the city of Nuremberg presented a first edition to Julius Streicher, editor of the Nazi newspaper Der Stürmer, the newspaper describing it as the most radically antisemitic tract ever published.
It is the blueprint of the Holocaust. I was raised by survivors.
My mother and grandfather told me the pogroms on Easter Sunday were the worst of the year, and the pogroms in Poland were the worst in Europe. Many Jewish people equate Christianity with suffering.
You guys have never shown proof that he ever became an indonesian citizen. So you want people to prove a negative. This is a common tactic of birthers instead of them having to prove their baseless accusations are true they want you to prove the opposite.
Ozwald it is standard practice for entry into the school that they put down the child’s stepfather’s religion. The school has already stated as such.
No usurp is the wrong word. We’re not in a monarchy. Obama was legally elected.
“The Indonesian citizenship has been THOROUGHLY debunked; for a start because a child cannot renounce his US citizenship.”
Are you really as ignorant as your words?
Do you think that a child cannot acquire Indonesian citizenship by formal adoption, or as a consequence of marriage and residence? I did not say that he relinquished any other citizenship.
You would be much better off if you thought before you typed!
You’re mighty defensive for one who claims foreign citizenship. I really like how you claim that Obama is definitely an NBC without the Supreme Court of the United States having EVER had a case before it in which that question was presented.
I don’t know about Obama, but McCain is a space alien.
From Emily Post:
Men’s Names and Titles
* A man with the same name as his father uses “Jr. after his name as long as his father is alive. He may either drop the suffix after his father’s death or, if he prefers, retain it so that he won’t be confused with his late father.
THOROUGHLY and WIDELY debunked. Whole chapters and verses quoted on this site–and elsewhere for that matter. Only fools or weak-minded ignoramuses believe in the Indonesian citizenship hoax.
I don’t “claim” foreign citizenship, I AM foreign. In fact the reason I ended up here in the first place was because of the gross misrepresentation of Vattel’s writings by legal hacks like Mario.
As for NBC status, again, this site is full of quotes and references, including the recent Ankeny decision. That boat has sailed. There’s no shred of evidence to support your views.
Is it hot under your hood?
Gordoc mad. Gordoc will crush puny Misha!
Well yes that’s pretty engraved in Indonesian citizenship law. One does not become an automatic citizen through marriage. You have yet to prove Obama was ever adopted. So again you say stuff but haven’t proven anything. The Supreme Court already decided on this when its Chief Justice swore Obama in. Also there’s the Wong Kim Ark case and several other cases that were never appealed where Children born of foreigners on US Soil were considered NBC
For Ozwald to consider:
3. Marriage with an Indonesian national does not automatically confer Indonesian nationality to the foreign wife. The foreign wife, however, will obtain the Indonesian nationality if within one year of the marriage, she declares her intention to become an Indonesian national, provided that she will not be holding another nationality (or will not have dual nationality). Such declaration is to be submitted to the competent District court or the Indonesian Embassy. If the foreign wife has not made such declaration to opt, she will nevertheless acquire Indonesian nationality after the first year of marriage, provided that the Indonesian husband has not in the meantime renounced his nationality.
Now you have to prove that Stanley Ann Dunham renounced her US Citizenship.
http://www.expat.or.id/info/familylaw.html
The statement the P&E is looking for is from the Honolulu Star Bulletin newspaper from June 6, 2009, and is no longer available online. The text is:
However, at this point, there is no reason to believe that this anecdote about an anonymous person overhearing a conversation at the Department of Health is any more credible than the many other made up stories that inhabit the Obama conspiracy milieu.
It is possible that part of Okubo’s remarks refer to “current births” where the paper document doesn’t exist from the start. It certainly appears that Okubo is saying that it is impossible to get a copy of an existing “long form” but Okubo is not always as precise as the nit-picking conspiracy theorist might hope.
There is an infinite universe of things that are true without the Supreme Court saying either way. They are not a Constitutional commission, and not the arbiter of anything except cases that appear on the docket. In the case of the birthers they denied all appeals without comments. If they wanted to take the cases they could and would have.
There is a case that specifically ruled that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen-Ankeny vs Daniels. It could have been appealed to the US Supreme Court, but no one bothered. Time has now expired. Therefore, it stands. Obama is a natural born citizen. You guys can try again in 2012. If you do, I suggest linig up better attorneys than the dentists the drunk driver’s pal and the poker player.
“The Supreme Court already decided on this when its Chief Justice swore Obama in.”
I’ve got better things to do than deal with overt ignorance.
Presenting an oath of office is not a judicial decision.
If Dr. Conspiracy would ensure that no speculation was permitted to be represented as fact, and that ad hominem attacks would not be tolerated at all, you Obots would be silenced.
Have a nice day! How well have your efforts worked so far? Is the birther movement getting larger? You know it is.
Ozwald: I really like how you claim that Obama is definitely an NBC without the Supreme Court of the United States having EVER had a case before it in which that question was presented.
There is an infinite universe of things that are true without the Supreme Court saying either way. They are not a Constitutional commission, and not the arbiter of anything except cases that appear on the docket. In the case of the birthers they denied all appeals without comments. If they wanted to take the cases they could and would have.
There is a case that specifically ruled that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen-Ankeny vs Daniels. It could have been appealed to the US Supreme Court, but no one bothered. Time has now expired. Therefore, it stands. Obama is a natural born citizen. You guys can try again in 2012.
Languedoc? I’ve heard it’s a gorgeous area. Someday I’d like to see Carcassonne and Toulouse.
And a hearty Klaatu barada nikto to you!
<Make sure you contact me through here or DailyKos and we'll show you around.
As it happens, so do we.
Must be hard to type with the hood on.
While I would prefer to have a civil discussion without ad hominem remarks and personal attacks, it is not practical to enforce such a policy and at the same time allow a free and open discussion. As far as I am concerned speculation is the basis for Obama conspiracy theories, so how could I not entertain speculation?
I am only be responsible for what I say myself.
Obviously Roberts had no problems with Obama’s credentials. Multiple times the supreme court has had a chance to hear an appeal on the failed birther cases each time they rejected it. What do you think that tells you? The only ones being ignorant are your cultlike brethren who come to this site to do hit and runs and flee when they are challenged. Things are working out well Obama is still president and you’re still a tiny fringe movement shunned by most of the country.
“They are not a Constitutional commission, and not the arbiter of anything except cases that appear on the docket. In the case of the birthers they denied all appeals without comments. If they wanted to take the cases they could and would have.
There is an infinite universe of things that are true without the Supreme Court saying either way. They are not a Constitutional commission, and not the arbiter of anything except cases that appear on the docket. In the case of the birthers they denied all appeals without comments. If they wanted to take the cases they could and would have.
There is a case that specifically ruled that Barack Obama is a natural born citizen-Ankeny vs Daniels. It could have been appealed to the US Supreme Court, but no one bothered. Time has now expired. Therefore, it stands. Obama is a natural born citizen. You guys can try again in 2012.”
At least you’re not claiming to be a lawyer! I hope your knowledge of science is better than your knowledge of the law.
A little irony here. Perhaps you are the one who typed without knowing the facts. Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship; that’s why Obama could not have become a citizen of Indonesia without renouncing his US Citizenship, something that a US 6-10-year-old simply cannot do.
I suggest you refer to the following article to see why folks here say that the Indonesian citizenship issue has been thoroughly debunked.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/02/hollister-v-indonesian-citizenship-law/
Wow, this thread really attracted some winners. Bleh.
And you? What are you? You didn’t dispute my statement. Ankeny v. Daniels said Obama is a natural born citizen. Name any decision that says otherwise.
Let’s say it again: 1 court says Obama is a natural born citizen, 0 courts say he isn’t. Therefore he is.
If you duck this I will keep repeating until I get an answer.
If you would be so kind, please use the “Quote” link so that your replies will be in a similar format to others. The way you’re doing it now doesn’t show who you’re replying to.
Also be aware that I sometimes delete vacuous personal attacks such as yours. The emphasis is on vacuous.
I was lucky enough to go into the Grotte Peche-Merle and see the paintings done 30,000 years ago by our early ancestors. I’m not sure we have surpassed them to this day. Looking at the birthers, one could argue that human culture has been downhill since then…
why would he answer that he skipped over indonesian citizenship laws when they were pointed out to him
“I’ve got better things to do than deal with overt ignorance.”
Get a mop. Irony is oozing all over the place.
Couldn’t agree more.
Who would that unnamed P&E “reasearcher” be?
Is it the P&E researcher who lives in a cardboard box under the Honolulu interchange, or the P&E researcher who is also president of the Flat Earth Society?
Has “Oswald” chosen his nom-de-birthdom after the classic animated rabbit or Lee Harvey?
Inquiring minds would like to know.
Without speculation there would be no birthers. It is their lifeblood.
The question is whether the P&E researcher has ever been to Hawaii.
It started as “Ozwald” then became “Oswald” cf. 10:59 or 11:09 am. It caught my eye.
Good Article which sums up the birthers in a nutshell….
“Like a bad toothache, dentist, lawyer and birther Orly Taitz just won’t to go away without some professional attention. And she got some recently.
The clan of the denier is spread across the U.S. but Taitz, of California, is nothing if not its heart and soul. She’s harder to ignore than that space in your mouth where a tooth used to be. No matter how hard you try, you can’t keep your tongue out of it.”
…..
“But I don’t expect Taitz or her followers to go quietly. I don’t expect them to go at all. This is a passionate, although unreasonable, quest for them. If the governor of Hawaii, the tooth fairy or even a burning bush told the birthers that Obama is really a citizen, they wouldn’t believe it. No matter how much evidence is produced, they can simply call it faked or not extensive enough or claim some conspiracy or whatever they want to make up. It’s much easier to accuse someone of something than for someone to prove otherwise.
Even after some advice and admonitions from the judicial equivalent of the nation’s top dentists, it looks as if Toothache Taitz and her loyal, if misguided, patients are not going away anytime soon. Pass the nitrous. ”
http://www.tulsaworld.com/opinion/article.aspx?subjectid=213&articleid=20100822_213_G1_ULNSit829383&allcom=1#commentform
And of course look who shows up in the comments….
Borderraven, (2 days ago)
Mike Jones says, “Never mind that it has been proven over and over that, indeed, the president is a citizen born in Hawaii.”
Hey Mike, when was the last time you read the US Constitution? Ever read Articles 1 and 2? Article 1 requires a Legislator be a citizen, but Article 2 requires the President be a Natural Born Citizen.
For the sake of discussion I’ll say Obama was born in Hawaii, to a US citizen mother and a British citizen father. Tell me Mike, do you consider a dual citizen born in the US, to be a US citizen or a Natural Born Citizen?
Me personally, only accept a person born on USA soil, to a USA mother and a USA father, to be US Natural Born Citizen. Mike, you are free to believe as you wish, but please consider the long term consequences for the USA, if we allow dual-citizens to be US presidents.
At least there was a commenter that challenged our friends nonsense….
William Shelton, Stroud (2 days ago)
Borderraven,
I suggest that you read the 14th amendment to the United States Constitution. Besides, what you “personally accept” makes no difference in this case. The United States Supreme Court has overruled you.
Just for the record. You would deny my three children their US citizenship by birth, and one of them, God forbid!, wasn’t even born in the United States. I do not “personally accept” your right to deny that. So there!!!
true2form, Grand Lake (2 days ago)
There are many birther jokes to be made, but the problem is that birthers don’t think they’re funny and other people don’t think they’re jokes.
Eagle 4, Tulsa (2 days ago)
“There’s a reason why 25% of Americans (and growing) think Obama is a radical leftist and a Muslim…”
Yes, Elena, it’s called Fox News, or the Gospel Hour by the 25%.
25% and a buck’ll get you four quarters.
Sure you can. If you’re younger than 5. Obama was 6.
I don’t like ad hominen arguments any more than Dr. C. does, and I admire his refusal to use them, but when responding to those who have little interest in factual or rational discussion, and have, instead, hitched their minds to long-discredited talking points, phony legal arguments, and outright lies, then it’s difficult to separate the trash-talking messenger from the garbage-strewn message.
If people spread lies, they’re liars; if they spread racial or religious intolerance, then they are a bigots–it’s as straightforward as that.
During the last several years, a small number of disaffected people have sought to discredit first candidate, and then President Obama. Whenever their accusations have been but to the test of fact and reason, they have been discredited. Yet this insignificant clamoring crowd refuses, with a schizophrenic passion, to acknowledge anything but the volatile yammering of their own delusions.
In all sympathy, and with respect for the fact that Ozwald and others like him are fellow human beings, I say without malice and in all honesty that they are ignorant fools.
Which one of them was on the grassy knoll?
And yet no birther has ever produced a recent long form? I wonder why that would be, because after all, we have never seen a birther make an unsupported claim of fact, with nothing to back it up, and later shown to have pulled it entirely out of their back side.
Obama is a spce alien too. He even admits it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vws9fTtQgz4
My analogy is that a cop who only stops black drivers is generally considered a racist. So is someone who only questions black presidents.
As you say it’s that simple.
I’m still waiting for a single birther to show proof of having cared a fig about constitutionality or legitimacy issues before Obama.
Well, it would certainly be dead around here, since all birthers have is speculation (and bogus legal theories), and not a shred of facts, whereas, on the other hand, we have the COLB saying he was born in Hawaii (supported by Hawaiian gov’t officials, who happen to be Republicans), US law saying that no actions of a parent can impact the citizenship of a minor, and a clear legal consensus that being born in the US is sufficient to impart natural born citizenship, all but a few exceptions.
Or how many birthers had ever heard of an obscure, 18th century Swiss philosopher prior to the most recent election.
I am inevitably reminded of the scene in “History of the World, Part I,” where the world’s first art critic “comments” on a cave painting…..
How convenient! The Pest & EFail’s anonymous researcher goes to Hawaii for a few days, and just happens to show up at DOH on the same day as someone who is requesting a copy of her “long-form” birth certificate! Not only that, she is standing in line directly ahead of him!
Also, it is highly unlikely that this phantom woman was told that it would take “about a week” for her to obtain her records. The DOH website says that vital records requests “will normally be available for pick-up about 10 working days after the request is approved.” 10 working days is two weeks.
This doesn’t pass the smell test.
I had a $200 donation bet to the conservative blog “FreeRepublic.com” for anyone who would post a scanned image of a Hawaii long form Certification of Live Birth that was issued after 2001, the year that Hawaii says it went “paperless” and stopped issuing copies of original documents. A freerepublic.com member screen-named “Danae” said that she was born in Hawaii and would order hers. I waited the maximum amount of time that Hawaii says it needs to issue certified copies of birth records, six weeks, and no response from Danae. Finally she said that her father had died, she couldn’t get through to the Department of Health on the phone to place the order and other excuses. I provided her with a link to where she could order the certified copy of her birth record via email. To date, now eight weeks later, no response.
Again, if the long form was still available, birther blogs would be littered with scanned images of them. There has been not one single recently issued long form posted anywhere.
Have you ever heard of Wong Kim Ark? White the SCOTUS decision does not specifically reference “natural born citizen,” the Court of Appeals in that case did declare that Wong Kim Ark was a natural born citizen. In fact, in its SCOTUS brief the government conceded that if Wong Kim Ark was a citizen, he was eligible to run for President.
From the government’s brief:
The question presented by this appeal may be thus stated: Is a person born within the United States of alien parents domiciled therein a citizen thereof by the fact of his birth? The appellant maintains the negative, and in that behalf assigns as error the ruling of the district court that the respondent is a natural-born citizen… (p.2)
Are Chinese children born in this country to share with the descendants of the patriots of the American Revolution the exalted qualification of being eligible to the Presidency of the nation, conferred by the Constitution in recognition of the importance and dignity of citizenship by birth? (p. 34)
SCOTUS upheld the Court of Appeals ruling without exception. That means that SCOTUS affirmed the District Court ruling that Wong Kim Ark was a natural born citizen, even though his parents were citizens of China.
So much for the “two citizen parents” argument.
That is correct, only if the child is below a certain age can the child become an indonesian citizenship through adoption. Otherwise, the child will have to wait until reaching 18 years of age. Such wass the Indonesian Constitution and its immigration laws of those days.
Again you show some unfamiliarity with the facts, in this case, the ruling in Wong Kim Ark provides the guidance that allows one to draw this conclusion. In addition to WKA there are many rulings, included at the level of SCOTUS which indicates that a child born on US soil is a NBC, regardless of the status of its parents.
Does this help?
Unlikely, the more likely is that the ‘researcher’ is wrong. Of course it would be trivially simple to confirm this. Did the ‘researcher’ ask the clerk? Did the ‘researcher’ or someone who was born in hawaii, request a long form?
Of course not, speculation is best done in ignorance.
Well done. And the same is true of the lie that “anyone” can obtain a Hawaii birth certificate which says that the person was born in Hawaii, even if that person was born in another state or another country.
I have repeatedly challenged birthers to prove this by producing such a birth certificate, but so far not a single one has surfaced.
I’ve decided that I am going to write to the New York State DOH and request a copy of my original (presumably long-form) birth certificate. It will be interesting to see if it exists and is available to me.
“… by the P & E researcher”
based on my experience, this was not a comment by the researcher but an embellishment by Post&Fail. Made up stories are the identifying characteristic of a Birrher (or a right winger) (see “Appeal to Authority”)
“I’ve decided that I am going to write to the New York State DOH and request a copy of my original”
.
awhile back, I requested a “long form” of my daughter’s Hawaiian Birth Certificate, she was born in 1965, they sent a COLB with the comment, “This is the only birth certificate currently issued”
.
So I claim P&E lied,
Which undoubtedly baffles most of the birthers. Your command of English is superb, whereas theirs tends to make one question how they made it through elementary school.
Keith, Keith, Keith … those numbers are made up (You’re numbers, not mine).
But, let’s move on. Hawaii has a name problem. I’ve often wondered why Obama didn’t usurp the popularity of MMA by becoming a fan of Native Hawaiian UFC fighter BJ Penn. It must be the name thing.
BJ’s father and brothers are named Jay Dee Penn and are registered as Native Hawaiians. The youngest Jay Dee Penn is called BJ, “Baby Jay.” The oldest brother is called Jay and the middle brother is called JD. But they are all registered as Jay Dee Penn.
‘splain that to me, tough guy.
“This doesn’t pass the smell test.”
Post & Email has never passed the smell test! Never, Ever!
That’s interesting. I’m going to try that in California.
Sven, Sven, Sven………..That story was just made up. You completely made up those names.
But let’s move on………..
– a minor can’t renounce his US citizenship without proving to a consulate that they are aware of the ramifications of their actions and are under no influence from a third party.
– no action by a parent, step-parent or any other third party affects US citizenship.
http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html
– indonesia only started offering dual-citizenship to minors who had an indonesian birth parent on nov 21, 2006. neither of obama’s birth parents were indonesian . at 18 a person must select a single citizenship.
http://www.indonesiamatters.com/830/dual-nationality/
– indonesia requires a person to be 18 ( or married ) and have resided in indonesia for 5 consecutive years or 10 non-consecutive years. dual citizenship for an adult is not accepted under indonesian law.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_nationality_law
That’s nice. It’s also totally irrelevant.
Also, “you’re” is a contraction of “you are.” The possessive is “your.” You might wish to keep this in mind to avoid looking like even more of an illiterate bozo than you already are.
I think of it this way:
“You’re wrong because you are a racist” is an ad hominem argument, and not valid. A person can be a racist and still be right about something. However, “you’re wrong to be a racist” is a valid moral statement and issue that should be raised on every occasion where racism appears. Another example would be “you’re making up stories and spreading lies because you’re a birther” is not something I would say, but rather “you’re a birther because you’re making up stories and spreading lies about Obama’s eligibility.”
Just remember that if someone comes here for the sole purpose of getting people upset, angry, and writing long replies to things long resolved, they win if they get the response they want (DNFTT).
mabey george foreman can ‘splain…….or george foreman, george foreman, george foreman, george foreman or george foreman.
i’m not sure your point sven but it’s looking like texas has issues to work out with juniors.
But, but, but, Leo & Orly & Phil said …
I’m starting to think George Foreman is the only name he knows. George is a God, he’s spread his name across continents through his children and his synthetic grill children spreading his name around.
honestly, i couldn’t care……. well, i will allways care about the usual crew but……
???
Who knew that a successful boxer would be more famous for a kitchen appliance with his name on it than his boxing.
Reminds me of Jimmy Dean. I didn’t know until recently that he was a musician.
No Sven, Keith’s figures are validated by the CIA Factbook, one of the most widely-cited sources of demographic data: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/id.html
What’s the source for *your* numbers, pray tell?
The case you are looking for is called United States v. Wong Kim Ark. Ozwald you are just wrong.
What an unoriginal comment. Is it in birthers’ minds that every citizen one by one have to be confirmed by the SCOTUS to be a natural born citizen? Or, Is it in birthers’ mind that every presidential candidate has to be confirmed by the SCOTUS to be a natural born citizen?
At times it feels as though birthers thing that a revolutionary comment will undo the facts, and legal opinions.
With the recent trolling increase and the resulting DNFTT thoughts, I found this Esquire article somewhat interesting:
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politics/cant-we-all-just-get-along-082410
there is also the possibility he is a large blue octopus who owns a wiener dog.
No, they are not. But in any case, I showed by source. What is yours?
What?
I also found the article interesting, and in particular the remark:
When the Obots respond to outrageous comments with commensurate counterattacks, any chance of dialog is ruined.
Very true in some cases. However, for every semi-reasonable birther, there’s a Borderraven or an NC1 who simply isn’t interested or reachable.
Sad but true.
Doc has asked me not to feed trolls, Keith. You’ll have to do your own research.
So in other words Sven your source was your rectum. Keith got his from the CIA worldfactbook
An octopus who has guessed wrong 71 times, then.
I’d rather go for Mosley and his American comrade, Francis Perker Yockey.
Then you’ll starve to death.
SCOTUS had the opportunity to judge this case and they TURNED IT DOWN!
from what i’ve seen browsing these interwebs of the world…. borderraven is stuck on repeat. nothing will change his stance . NC1 on the other hand…….. will change her opinion ( or modify it ) when shown facts, wait a few days/weeks, then come back with the original claim.
It’s a ruse. NC1 starves for attention like many birthers desperate to be heard and taken seriously. Gerry is just purely a lunatic at the farthest end of the bell curve (imo).
The only thing I’d add to this is that Gerry Nance has a lot scarier friends than NC. I really expect him to show up in court one of these days for assaulting someone with brown skin and a non-Anglo surname.
I really think this is NC1
http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1939591
Oh my. That’s good TV.
Actually, I picture her as something closer to this.
Cantaloupe?
Cantaloupe is funnier than “COUNTY LAW! COUNTY LAW! COUNTY LAW!”
I think Boris was a secret squirrel diver. But the picture is misleading. The wall is the metal plate in her head. The birther troll is Boris Badenov, Natasha Fatale, AND Fearless Leader and probably Snidely Whiplash as well.
I couldn’t figure out what the heck she was chanting.
Unfortunately, I speak redneck. As a college student, I once worked on the back of a truck for the public works division of the university I was attending. My coworkers spit tobacco and bragged about the number of deer shot and women abused. I was o.k. with the deer part. I love venison. I stopped going to reunions.
What about this?
http://www.jrj-socrates.com/Cartoon%20Pics/Cartoon%20Network/Grim/Doctor_Ghastly_300.gif
P&E lies so much. NO one can ask for a long form because there is no such freaking thing.
James stop spreading lies.
And why would this “anonymous” researcher be at the Dept of Health in Hawaii if he/she has no business being there? Was this researcher born in Hawaii? Was he/she getting married in Hawaii? Did he/she have a relative who died in Hawaii? Was he/she reporting the DoH about any contracted illness that he/she brought to Hawaii?
The smell test on this one reeks.
That’s like asking a cottonmouth to stop biting–it’s against his nature.
“Can you catch a falling star without burning your hand? Can you put the sky in your mouth? Can you say to an earthquake..’hey hold still for a second’? No! Such is Mango!””Can you know the m
Excellent!
The Post and Fail seems to be moving the goalposts now….This article is regarding their attempt to get a copy of the original handwritten birth index….Because you know that the usurper has probably had his brownshirts hack and change the computerized one….
“On August 7, 2010, The Post & Email responded to an Associated Press story in which it was reported that the Hawaii Department of Health could make available the Hawaii General Birth Index in one-year increments at a cost of $98.75. The Post & Email was accurately quoted as having said, “No one here is requesting Obama’s birth certificate, since it is obvious that he doesn’t possess a valid one,” although our statement contradicts the main contention of the article.
However, the Hawaii Department of Health has now indicated that the AP report is incorrect.”
…..
“We noticed several days ago that the Associated Press had removed Mr. Niesse’s story from its website, so we located the story elsewhere and substituted it in our August 7, 2010 article.
We are still waiting to hear from both Mark Niesse and the Hawaii Department of Health. How much of either story is true? Perhaps legal action against the Department will uncover the truth.”
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/26/hawaii-department-of-health-contradicts-ap-story/
More nonsense from the Post and Fail….wingnuttery at its finest….
“On July 27, 2010, former Army Capt. Neil Turner addressed the Carlsbad, CA City Council during the “Public Comment” period, at which time he spoke about the question of Barack Hussein Obama’s constitutional eligibility to serve as President of the United States and the lack of vetting prior to the 2008 election.”
“On 27 July, 2010, I informed this Council of major voter fraud and citizen disenfranchisement that occurred in the 2008 elections, at all City of Carlsbad polling stations, and of the high crime of treason that was occurring here in the City of Carlsbad and the Nation, due to the aforementioned voter fraud not being addressed by our public servants, our elected representatives – from City Council members all the way up through the State and Federal levels. Since the State and Federal levels have refused to respond to repeated peaceful and lawful petitioning to address these issues on the merits of the charges, that leaves it up to you, Council members, as our first, and apparently last, line of defense, to enforce our Constitutional rights.
I therefore asked you to:
1. Present the charges (with the evidence provided) to the County Criminal Grand Jury, and;
2. File charges against our Secretary of State – for placing an unvetted and ineligible candidate for President on the ballot, thereby disenfranchising every voter in the State (Presidential candidates SHALL BE Natural Born’ U.S. citizens, per Article II of the Constitution);”
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/25/carlsbad-ca-city-council-refuses-to-act-on-obamas-ineligibility-and-election-fraud/
And the usual birther Vattel nonsense….
Spaulding says:
Thursday, August 26, 2010 at 12:34 AM
Captain Turner has helped by explaining that what the media has dismissed has substance. Most people have only heard the derision of those with eligibility concerns. They are too preoccupied by economic failure which only a few realize will reach us all eventually. Even illegal alliens are a remote threat unless one lives in border states. Who knew that illegals keep teachers employed while consuming up to half the state budgets of several border states with their demands upon the jails, health care, and social services, which justify those union employees. The common denominator is unions. They found a salesman who didn’t have allegiance to our Constitution, and whose allegiance was shaped by his alien father, and a mix of Islam, Marxism, black nationalism, and very wealthy patrons. We can’t fight them all, but our Constitution gave us a weapon, only a weapon because Obama and his team ignored it, he was born a British subject.
This is what we need to do, explain the issues coherently to people who have been intentionally dissinformed. The coupling of Obama’s allegiance to other causes is beginning to sink in as his state department sponsors a Wahhabist Immam’s fund raising tour for the famous symbol of Muslim victory. If someone’s parents are not citizens, that someone’s allegiances must be suspect. Our framers tried to protect the nation of laws (and not men) by insisting on guarantees of allegiance as best they could, and like every parent asked to bless a marriage, they wanted to know about the parents.
Officials are afraid. If all of those complicit hang together, it will be hard to prove misprison.’ They probably figure they can use the ploy used by Leahy, “Because natural born citizen was never defined in our Constitution…” A quick look through the Constitution reveals dozens, or hundreds of words dependent upon the common language and common law for definition. Some, like ‘Militia,’ are still being debated. But Chief Justice Marshall cited the source for the definition of natural born citizen that the supreme court found the most concise – Vattel.
We still have a chance to force our courts to honor our original Constitution without having recourse to violence, violence which Obama’s backers may be seeking. We need more Captain Turners and Commander Kerchners and Major LaRoques.
“This is what we need to do, explain the issues coherently to people who have been intentionally dissinformed.”
Nice, that functional illiterates are now babbling about coherence….
“Dr.”,
Do you say that Obama has legally proven that he was born in the United States?
I just want to be clear. If yes, tell me what legal authority has proven it. If no, why do you give the skeptics such a hard time being that there is no agency that checks for NBC status (in any form)?
Joseph Maine: “Dr.”,Do you say that Obama has legally proven that he was born in the United States?
Much more than any previous president has.
The American People (in voting for him), the Electoral College (in casting the official votes) and Congress (in certifying the vote). Those are the institutions that are constitutionally set up to elect the President.
By the way, let me turn it back on you. What institution has declared him ineligible? Under what constitutional authority have they done that? And what evidence did they use to base that decision? I’d really like to know this.
And do not come back with the answer of “the American Grand Jury”. If you’re stating that it’s a constitutional institution, then what is the difference between them, and 20 Ku Klux Klan members getting together and indicting every black person in America as guilty of treason?
Birther trolls are never interested in the truth. For example, it’s too painful or difficult for a delusional birther to recognize U.S. law and the legal authority of the state of Hawaii because it contradicts their paranoia and hate driven fear.
It’s part of the mental illness.
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
News Release
LINDA LINGLE
GOVERNOR ______________________________________________________________________
CHIYOME LEINAALA FUKINO M.D. DIRECTOR
Phone: (808) xxx-xxxx Fax: (808) xxx-xxxx
______________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release: July 27, 2009 09-063
STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai’i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
###
If you will be very specific about what you mean by “legally proven” then perhaps I could address your question. Members of your tribe are all over the map (and off the map) on this question, and I do not pretend to be able to read your mind.
If, for example, your measure of legal proof is meeting the requirements to get on the presidential ballot, then I would say that Obama proved it 50 times. If, your measure of legal proof is the vote of the Electoral College, then I would say that Obama proved it. If your measure of proof is the vote of the joint session of Congress where the election is certified, then yes Obama proved it. Off hand, I cannot think of any other “legal” opportunity that President Obama has had or would have under our laws to prove what you are asking.
I know that in Hawaii, for example, the state requires that the chairperson of the national political party swear that the candidate is eligible. So that is the burden of proof in Hawaii, and it was officially met by Barack Obama.
Personally, I think your extraordinary (meaning OUTSIDE the ordinary) demands for proof are not worthy of consideration.
The State of Hawaii says so. States are granted the authority under the law to maintain records and verify those who are born, die, marry, divorce, adopt, etc. with thier borders. That’s the law. If you wish to transfer that responsibility to the federal government, write your Congressman. I don’t think a Federal registry of births would violate the Constitution, but there is no law establishing such a registry at present. had there been one in 1961, it would show Obama as born in Hawaii as well, since they would use the same source data as the states do.
Yes. The state of Hawaii.
“Do you say that Obama has legally proven that he was born in the United States?”
I would say yes- to the extent that any Presidential candidate is required to prove his eligibility- then yes, he has proven he was born in the United States.
“why do you give the skeptics such a hard time being that there is no agency that checks for NBC status (in any form)?”
I have no real objection to creating some legal mechanism to confirm that a Presidential candidate is eligible to be President. As long as the mechanism was applied uniformly and required rational, and obtainable proof for future candidates, and wasn’t up to the descretion of political appointees, I could support it.
But those who wish to apply a new standard, one that doesn’t exist, and one that hasn’t been applied in the past to the current President are in my mind clearly doing so for political purposes
Dr. C:
While I can’t speak for Joseph Maine, when I try to put myself in his shoes, the demand of “what has Obama” done to “legally prove” that he’s a natural born citizen, may call for something other than what you provided. Your examples described how important bodies in the government recognized and approved Mr. Obama as a legitimate candidate; then as the President-elect; and finally , as President.
But I think that Joseph is interested in something else, i.e., did President Obama physically provide information that was objectively and competently reviewed, perhaps by an indepedent board of review consisting of, or I don’t know . . . . Alex Jones, Orly Taits, Glenn Back, and Rev. Manning. I’m sure that thise diverse group would examine everyone’s documents fairly and without rancor.
Perhaps James is right; perhaps this is the only way to erase the dark shadow that has fallen across the face of America. A shadow that says, “I don’t like blacks, I don’t like Muslims, and I don’t like Mexicans, but I loves me the Con’si’too’shun! So get ‘er done, bro!”
At least you are honest, Dr. Conspiracy.
Clearly, he has met all of the so-called requirements to be president … because he currently is president. What I’m opposed to is the total and utter lack of transparency of a) the process and b) the president.
I am for defining NBC, finally. I am for a transparent federal entity that (by definition) can show the people that the candidates for whom they may vote are eligible under the criteria set forth, whatever that may be [currently].
Why am I crazy for this?
The Kenyan parliament has said that Obama was born there. They are a “legal” entity. What’s the difference between Hawai’i and them if neither will actually show us the real documents? Documents, might I add, that ARE NOT PRIVATE.
Do you guys actually not think that, even if he is certainly, in your minds born here, he is hiding something?
You call me crazy. I’d rather be crazy than naive or sheepish. Putting two and two together (Obama is hiding something and won’t show a non-private document) leads to a … failure of the sniff test.
That’s why we ask all of these questions.
Good point. Is LTC Lakin an undocumented worker? Click here to find out.
The laws of the U.S. apply in the U.S. including UIPA in the state of Hawaii and not any law or statements of any foreign country however misconstrued, misinterpreted or of any intention whatsoever.
http://www.state.hi.us/oip/uipa.html
Where did the kenyan parliament say such was it just one member or the entire body with a resolution saying such? How exactly would the kenyan parliament have the authority to know where Obama was born as opposed to a kenyan equivalent to the department of health in Hawaii? So you’re telling us you trust a foreign source more than you would trust your own country. I get it so under the cloak of respecting the constitution, you disrespect it. The department of Health in Hawaii would be in a position to know as they are in charge of vital statistics. I’m sure the Kenyan parliament isn’t in charge of vital statistics.
You should stop sniffing glue otherwise you’ll keep failing that sniff test. Show us your long form birth certificate.
Oh yes. The latest World Nutjob Daily article, which is actually from the Post and Fail, about this is saying that President Obama’s mother was in classes in Washington state in September of 1961 shortly after the president was born. They say that it’s virtually impossible for her to have made her way from Hawaii to Washington so soon after the president’s birth.
Now, you’re saying he was born in Kenya, yet Kenya is MUCH further away from the college in Washington where she was in class in September of 1961 than Hawaii is. If it’s virtually impossible for her to have made it from Hawaii to Washington so soon after the president’s birth, as the latest spin says, then it would be IMPOSSIBLE to make it to Washington if she gave birth to him in Kenya.
Good point. Here’s my authentic birth certificate, from Kenya.
Of course, there’s always Canada, and maybe Dudley Doright really isn’t just a cartoon character after all. 🙂
The President isn’t hiding information any more than a birther who doesn’t want to be a victim of identity theft. But birthers want dirt on the President so badly they can taste it. They want to terrorize anyone ever connected to him to their twisted and sick satisfaction.
What the President is doing is the right thing. He is IGNORING birther lunatics and political enemies.
And they are pissing on themselves in hatred and anger like toddlers.
And I am LMFAO at birthers who have let the world know that they are petulant, puerile fools with enough spare time to whine endlessly and lacking a lick of common sense or any respect for U.S. law.
“I am for defining NBC, finally. I am for a transparent federal entity that (by definition) can show the people that the candidates for whom they may vote are eligible under the criteria set forth, whatever that may be [currently].”
See here is an area that we can find agreement on. I suspect we may disagree on some slight details, but conceptually I agree with what you say. I don’t call you crazy for your desire for this.
“The Kenyan parliament has said that Obama was born there. They are a “legal” entity. What’s the difference between Hawai’i ”
And this is where yes, I suspect your sanity. The only thing I have seen is a single member of Parliament making that statement- without any clarification or indication of how he had actual knowledge of this.
What is the difference? Dr Fukino made a declaration in her official capacity and said she had examined the actual documents. Actually she made multiple declarations. And unlike this Kenyan Parliament member, Dr. Fukino could actually go to jail for making a fraudulant statement in her official capacity. In addition to Dr. Fukino, the governor of Hawaii has stated that President Obama was born there. This all supports the facts shown on the COLB.
If you cannot rationally tell the difference between the legal weight of the two statements, then I have to say in my opinion you are either willfully deluding yourself or you are an idiot.
“and them if neither will actually show us the real documents? Documents, might I add, that ARE NOT PRIVATE”
Dr. Fukino cannot legally show you the documents you are asking for. They are indeed private. And as far as I know, no one has asked the Kenya Parliament member for a copy of the Obama’s BC, but it would be legal for him to produce one. If this is really an issue for you, I suggest you pursue this with the Kenyan parliamentary member who made the statement.
“Do you guys actually not think that, even if he is certainly, in your minds born here, he is hiding something?”
I haven’t seen any evidence that President Obama is actively concealing anything. Certainly he is not concealing anything that I think the public is entitled to. If President Obama chose to share it, like he did with his COLB, that would certainly be his perrogative.
Show me the official Kenyan government page that states Obama was born in Kenya that backs up the claim as forcefully as this official Hawaiian government source claims that Obama was born in Hawaii:
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html
Unless you have anything close, any word from someone in Kenya should carry as much weight as the claims of the nearest drunk-tank visitor.
No, that is not correct. Your ilk ask these questions because you cannot stand the notion that a black man with an allegedly muslim sounding name was legitimately elected president; otherwise you would have ashed the very same questions before.
You’re like a cop who let ten white drivers go but stop the 11th because he’s black. There’s a name for that.
If you want to leave Obama alone, but campaign for future reforms to better define NBC applicable to future presidents independently of their race, you have my support.
But that is not what you want, is it?
Go back to burning crosses.
I don’t think anyone here would oppose a well-crafted law to verify presidential candidate eligibility. There’s nothing crazy about verifying qualifications, although I’m not aware of any ineligible president ever being elected and I don’t personally think the current system is broken.
In answer to your question, no, I do not think Obama is hiding anything. Further I don’t think his actions (what little there are) point to his having something to hide. If someone sues him, his attorney moves to dismiss. That’s standard legal practice whether he has something to hide or not.
Certainly the first release of a birth certificate by the Obama campaign, an unprecedented act of transparency, didn’t resolve any questions. If you’re “crazy” in any way, it is that you believe that a long form from Hawaii would quell the birther doubts. It has been said that insanity is doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting different results. Release birth certificate: doubts rise. Release another birth certificate: what do you think happens?
How is any constitutional term defined? Say “freedom of religion”? It’s a general principle, but how is it applied in particular cases? Are there practices of certain religions that can be forbidden? About 20 years ago, a group of native Americans (the pre-Columbian kind) were busted for using peyote; they contested their conviction by claiming (accurately) that peyote use was part of their traditional religion. The Supreme Court upheld the government. So, we now know that “freedom of religion” doesn’t include drug use. But until that court case, involving persons with legal standing, we didn’t.
So suppose one set out to define NBC precisely and to cover all possible situations. Who would do so? The Supreme Court lacks the constitutional authority to issue advisory opinions-they are limited to ruling on actual cases. So you could have some group of legal scholars draft definitions and have Congress write them into law. But those could still be challenged in court by any candidate who was denied a chance to run. So, that would be no different than where we are today. Plus, any standards could be rendered obsolete by new technologies. How do IVF, surrogate motherhood and human cloning affect NBC status? I think we can be pretty sure that no one considered those when the Constitution was written.
The current system contains numerous checks and balances. Candidates have to be put on the ballot. Opposing candidates can challenge their placement and candidates denied a place on the ballot can challenge their denial. Then the voters vote. Then the electoral College votes. Then Congress certifies. Good enough for government work, as they say…
Joseph
You have views, beliefs and opinions just like every individual.
The issue is that in this specific area you expect that your needs, wants and desires to over rule the Constitution, case law, Supreme Court rulings, Founding Fathers published statements, English Common Law of the period and the 14th Amendmemt (I seem to remember saying this before….)
The current POTUS has made available on line a scanend image of a certified copy of his birth certificate, in the only format available from the government of Hawai’i.
This legally sufficient document was made available for inspection to any interested party and widely announced as such. Not even WND or the Pest and Fail deny this document was available for inspection.
Only one organization made the effort and took the time to actually go and see this “purported” document and they wrote extensively about it as well as took a wide selection of photographs of the document, which matches exactly the image that is posted on line.
None of those organizations or individuals who question the birth of the President availed themselves of the opportunity. Why?
Next, a group of Birthers, not Ebil Lieberal Obots, discovered, under their own steam, microfiched, archived, read only images of the newspaper birth announcement of the President.
Next we have the published statement from the official, legal custodian of the Hawai’in birth records confirming the birth of the president in Hawai’i and his inherent citizenship status.
Next we have the law etc I allude to above which lays out in explicit detail that birth in the environs of the USA makes one a citizen.
Then there is the fact that in law the phrase Natural and Native as used in NBC are legally the same and interchangeable with no difference in them.
The law also explictly states that dual citizenship or more accurately in the case of the President, the POTENTIAL to take up of dual citizenship via parental natuionality does not invalidate the inherent NBC status of the President or those in the same situation.
These are facts not beliefs or opinions are as such are whole and sufficient.
If you feel that more needs to be doen, feel free to petion your political representatives and request as such.
I might add, that the current various proposals mooted by folks all stand on the provision of “legally sufficient” documention which would be explicitly satisfied by the original certificate that has been the subject of such Birfer noise.
In other words, nothing whatsoever would change…….
Aw … Eligible candiates are actually put on the ballot. … If you want to be crazy that is fine, it is your choice.
No, actually I don’t think he is hiding anything. His life’s narrative appears to be pretty much what he has described. In fact, everytime some new facts comes out, they tend to verify his story.
How can you equate what a Kenyan politician said on the floor of the Kenyan Parliament, with the statements made by the Director of the Hawaiian DOH? Do you totally discount the Resolution passed unanimously by the House of Representatives that stated Hawaii was the Presdident’s birthplace?
Being the President, we know for a fact that there’s lots of things he is hiding. We also know that there’s no way that you will ever attain the clearance where you will know any of it.
Well the process is the product of states rights. They control the nuts and bolts of the election process for the most part. As for the transparency of the President….he’s been far more transpartent than any of the prior presidents.
There is little debate in the legal community as to what the definition of a NBC is. By every accepted definition, Obama, being born in Hawaii, would qualify. There is a small amount of debate as to what some call “naturalized at birth” those born abroad, but statutorily made citizens, but as those tend to be the children of the military, is not exactly a cause many are willing to take up. There is an additional level of doubt on McCain, as he wasn’t even arguably “naturalized at birth” but rather the statute was passed years after his birth, and applied retroactively. But again, this is mostly the fodder of academics and law journals.
Your desire for a federal agency to show the people the candidates qualify, may be unconstitutional. The nuts and bolts of elections fall to the states, and arguably such an agency would be dictating to the states how to run their elections. Haven’t really given it much thought, but hey, Bush v. Gore got by, I suppose you could craft an argument that would take another chunk out of what’s left of the10th Amendment (and here I though most folks on the opposite side of the ailse were big on that one).
Maybe not for this in particular, but the rest of your statements are another story.
This is where the crazy comes in. First, ONE member of the Kenyan parliament said Obama was born there, not THE Kenyan parliament. And he did not support his statement with how exactly he came to that conclusion. Do you honestly believe every statement made by a legislator is true? Just look at our own congress…that means global warming is either true, or a hoax…depending who is speaking at that second. It means the earth is millions of years old, or 6,000 years old…again depending on who holds the floor at that exact second in time. Just because a legislator makes a statement, a) does not make it true, and b) even mean he knows what he’s talking about. As was pointed out, unlike the member of parliament in Kenya, you have statements from the person in charge of the agency maintaining the documents that said what the source of her statement is, and that she saw those documents. And beyond that, how Anti-American is it to take the world of a member of parliament from a third world nation over that of government officials from a State of the US?
Oh…and just saying to documents are not private doesn’t make it so. The law disagrees with you. They are private. Why do you scoff at the laws of the US? Do you hate our country that much?
No. I see no evidence that he is hiding anything. Why would I think that? Just because he ignores a bunch of nutters who will never be satisfied no matter what he gives them? I don’t recall GW answering the questions of the “truthers” either, and I don’t think he was ignoring them because he was hiding something.
It’s a shame that you only see two options. Just one more reason why you land on the crazy side. Why is it sheepish to look at the huge body of evidence showing President Obama was born in Hawaii….evidence sufficent to establish in a court of law that he was born in Hawaii, and then look at the complete lack of any evidence showing he was born anywhere else, and determining that he was born in Hawaii? Seems what any rational, sane person would do. It is you how are failing the sniff test. Not the President (and your math is off as well). You confuse ignoring you and your like with hiding something. He has established his status as a natural born citizen more than any other prior president. He has nothing further to prove to you or anyone else. What cater to those who will never be statisfied.
And again, repeating over and over that it is not a private document doesn’t make it so. All it does is flaunt your ignorance. Perhaps you should look into the law a little bit before making such definitive statements that are utterly wrong.
Was that English or homemade liquor?
Here’s the complete story:
http://www.hulu.com/watch/3517/saturday-night-live-uncle-jemimas-pure-mash-liqour
Interestingly enough, this site focuses primarily on the issue of whether Obama is and was eligible for the office of President of the United States. We occasionally branch out to debunk peripheral issues. Here you’ll find people who love him, people who are neutral, and people who don’t like him. The single unifying characteristic is that we believe that he is a natural born citizen and thus eligible for the office he currently holds.
So it doesn’t matter if he’s done amazing things or is running the country to Perdition. I suggest other sites may be more appropriate for those discussions.
Did someone say Perdition?
The Dumbbells comment was blog spam advertising a product in the URL (like 34,000 others like it most of which get filtered before you see them). It uses an Obama subject because that keyword appears on this site a lot. The original comment with its URL has been deleted.
Ironically, it was as substantial as a birther troll.
Ah well, at least I was able to show off my ability to be civil without degenerating into ad hominem attacks and name-calling. Think of it as a shining example of how to deal with dissent. (Hint to some of us out there…)
OK, OK.
In all seriousness, it is becoming increasingly difficult to tell the difference between a spam and a troll.
The Post and Fail creates nonsense regarding Obama’s aunt….Some excerpts…
“Kenyan officials are displeased about the judge’s decision, claiming that “The allegations made against the country are not only untrue but unrealistic to any person who understands our country.” Onyango had argued during her hearing in February that she would be “persecuted” if deported back to her “home country” of Kenya.”
The decision to grant Onyango asylum was made in May, but the judge’s order was made public earlier this month by means of a Freedom of Information Act request made by The Boston Globe. The judge reportedly agreed with Onyango that if returned to Kenya, she would be “a target.” According to a legal website, “Political asylum is available to people already in the United States who fear returning to their home country due to actual persecution or have a well-founded fear of actual persecution….”
Obama’s step-grandmother, who reportedly stated that she was in the delivery room when Obama was born in Kenya, reportedly is now “a celebrity” there, and electricity was provided to her following Obama’s questionably illegal, but overt win, in the 2008 presidential election.
The “violence” which Onyango reportedly cited as a reason for asylum in 2008 stemmed from the post-2007 election chaos after Obama’s cousin, Raila Odinga, lost the presidential election in Kenya in which Christians were burned to death and more than 350,000 people displaced. One report describes the strife which occurred as “Kenya’s worst crises (sic) since independence from Britain in 1963.”
Onyango is reportedly a “large character” in Obama’s book, Dreams from my Father, and is quoted in the memoir as having said to Obama upon his arrival in Kenya in 1988, “Welcome home.”
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/29/kenya-angry-over-ruling-granting-political-asylum-to-obamas-aunt/
Wow its morphed into his step grandmother being in the delivery room? Wow where did she say that *scratches head* birthers are veird
Birthers statements reminds me of “throwing what every can be thought up against the wall, and hope nobody notices.” Interesting she would have been 10 at the time Obama was born. The article is just strange.
Its like a birther game of telephone
Agreed. But with Rondeau and the Post and Fail, it goes beyond that. Whatever possible accusation she can dream up she throws at Obama. Her screeds are so far over the edge that it is almost humorous. However if there is one thing we have learned in 2 years is that the birthers are not interested in factual evidence. They just hate Obama, and will use whatever means to attempt to diminish him and his administration….