It was asserted this past May on this site by commenter Retired Intelligence Officer that the 1930 US Census showed that Spiro Agnew’s father, Theodore Agnew, was a citizen who naturalized in 1903.
Theodore Agnew was naturalized in 1903 as a American citizen long before Spiro was born in 1918. See 1930 census, Line 65. Son Spiro was a NBC.
In support of that assertion, a link was provided to a page from the 1930 census, a page listing Agnew, father and son, and clearly showing the 1903 date. There are other postings that indicate from the 1920 census that the father was an alien. I didn’t check out the details at the time and left with the impression that there was contradictory information between the two census reports.
I forgot rule number one: never trust a birther.
While the 1930 Census image from Retired Intelligence Officer does clearly show the 1903 year under “Citizenship” on the form, the image resolution is too low to actually read the titles under that category. Looking at a higher resolution image, we see that the 1903 date is not the date of naturalization, but the “Year of Immigration to the United States.”
The results for Agnew’s father are:
showing that he was a naturalized citizen (code “Na”) citizen as of 1930. However, the 1920 Census says that he was an alien (code “Al”).
So Agnew’s father naturalized between 1920 and 1930, which is after the VP was born; that is, Vice President Agnew did not have a father who was a US Citizen when the VP was born. Was the Vice President a natural born citizen? Of course he was.
But there is a 1910 Census record from New York for one Theodore S Anagnost [a shortened version of the elder Agnew’s Greek name] that shows him as naturalized. This time there’s no little Spiro to make sure we have the right census record. [sigh]
Other commenters on this site caught the mistake at the time, but somehow it didn’t register. In any case, it bears repeating that according to the US Constitution, the eligibility requirements for Vice President are the same as for the President. So if Agnew was eligible to be VP with a Greek father, then Obama is certainly eligible with a British father.
You know what this means???
Spiro Agnew was a sekrit Constitutional usurper! Just like Chester Arthur!
That’s probably why he resigned; not because of scandal, but because a 27-year-old Jerome Corsi was going to out him as an illegitimate office-holder.
Loren, I suspect you have a point as to how many Birthers will respond to this news. “It means that Spirow Agnew and Chester Arthur were both unconstitutional.” As opposed to realising that since no law actually defines different kinds of citizens beyond ‘natural born’ and ‘naturalized’, then anyone who is born a citizen is eligible.
I mean, who before the Birthers actually thought that it was necessary to have two citizen parents to be eligible to run for the presidency? Apparently no-one, and they only came up with the canard because they realised that the idea that Obama was born in Kenya is now pretty much dead in the water. Though they tend to still use both when it suits them.
The 1920 census population schedule shows an immigration date of 1887 (He would have been about 7 years old). There is also a notation in the space for alien/naturalized for his mother, but she was born in the US.
I told “Retired Intelligence Officer” he was wrong. The fool can’t even read a simple document, He must have been one of those “Intelligence Officers” who read reports of Middle Eastern gentleman taking flying lessons but not bothering with takeoffs and landiings and decided it wasn’t worth investigating further.
I think that you should read the bottom of the page…
Under Naturalization, it has three entries – 1. “Na” for Naturalized, “Pa” for 1st Papers, and “Al” for Alien.
So, Spiro Agnew’s father was Naturalized in 1930, but that doesn’t prove his naturalization in 1920.
The 1920 census has him listed as al – presumably that means he was an alien.
That would make sense at the time – an American woman marrying an alien would become an alien. The same notation appears on George Agnew’s wife’s entry on the same page.
If this is true, then Agnew isn’t an NBC. Apparently no one questioned the definition of NBC back then about Agnew. Agnew was not the POTUS, there was not an extreme hatred and fear of Agnew and there was no Internet. It should also be pointed that while birthers do claim that to be an NBC both parents have to be US citizens at the time of the person’s birth, it should be pointed that these past examples do provide the fact that the parents did in fact become US citizens later by naturalization. Arguably, I would submit that one could be considered NBC. Obama’s father was alien and remained an alien. He was a foreigner. Obama Sr. never naturalized and he wasn’t even a permanent resident. I view this as large consideration of difference of NBC versus those would did in fact become US citizens later. Clearly Obama was born under foreign influence and heritage as a son of an alien and that was never reliquished.
Excellent point. That would have changed with the Cable Act of 1922.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_Act
Gorefan, it definently lists it as an Al, meaning Alien. However, there’s a 1910 Census record for a Theodore S. Anagnost (the full last name for Theodore Spiro Agnew was Anagnostopoulos, which he later shortened to Agnew) in Schenectady, New York, living with his brother (George S. Anagnost) who is listed as a Naturalized Citizen in 1910. (Immigrated in 1902) Here’s the record on the Family Search database: https://familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.1.2/92SH-8DH/p_611038074
Should give you enough information to find the Census record and find it yourself.
Like I said, there’s conflicting data.
Sigh.
Thanks very much. Since I have no editorial staff, commenters here provide a valuable contribution, insuring the eventual accuracy of the articles for posterity. The article has been updated.
So, all Obama needs to do in order to become a Natural Born Citizen is pass a resolution to retroactively naturalize his father as a U.S. Citizen? Are you listening to yourself? You’re so convinced that Obama cannot be a Natural Born Citizen, that you try to fit any theory around what you already have determined…
Also, isn’t that against what Senator Bayard wrote to A.P. Hinman is that if a father gets Naturalized, the son does not retroactively become a Natural Born Citizen?
Are you sure this is the right person? The year of immigration differs markedly and the age is off a little.
Spiro Agnew was born on September 25, 1878 (WWII Draft Card).
The 1930 census puts the year of birth as 1875 (saying he was 45 in 1930). Not too far off.
The 1910 census puts the birth date as 1878 (28 in 1910).
The 1920 census puts a Theodore Agnew in the correct place (Baltimore Maryland). The age (which is a nice round number) would have been only 2 years off (putting it in 1880). Furthermore, this Theodore Agnew is married to the correct name (Margaret). Both parents were born in the correct place (Greece and Virginia respectfully).
There’s a strong case to be made. Like I said, the evidence is contradictory.
true, false, false, true.
Agnew was an out and out, no apologies given, gangster. As a politician he was completely shameless about his influence peddling. He took bribes by the bagful and didn;t really try very hard to hide it. He was the single most corrupt person to ever be ‘a heartbeat away from the most powerful job in the world’ in the history, and yes, that assessment includes Cheney.
He was hated and feared by his opponents and sycophants alike. Nixon’s impeachment was delayed for months while the case against Agnew was mounted to ensure that he would not be in a position to take over from Nixon.
Yes, Spiro Agnew, was an NBC. He was born on American soil and his parents were neither diplomats nor in an invading army. He was an NBC. End of story.
Please stop this nonsense. It is boring and it does not lend any serious grievance you may have with the Obama administration any credibility.
There was extreme hatred of Spiro Agnew BY LIBERALS and DEMOCRATS. Agnew was the first of the modern conservative flame throwers. I remember his expression for the liberal media: “nattering nabobs of negativism.” Liberals were “effete intellectual snobs” and “pusilanimous pussyfooters.”
John seems unaware of the Constitutional requirement that the Vice President MUST meet the exact same eligibility requirements as the President.
The Birther movement seems divided over whether a President must be the child of two natural born American citizens or if a President can be the child of one or two naturalized American citizens. That division in the birther movement weakens their overall position that parents play a role in natural born citizenship status for persons born in the United States.
Jupiter?
There was also a very good caricature of him in POGO, if I remember.
My God, by today’s standards, Agnew looks positively enlightened…
Now you’re leaving the field of Constitutional law altogether. But it shows your motives.
I don’t think one can be a birther and “hand-wave” some people who are not NBC according to Vattelists into being “OK nevertheless because they were kinda ‘more American’ than Obama’s parents”.
The Founders’ requirements for presidency didn’t care squat about “how American” someone was, otherwise they’d have defined stronger definitions than just (talking Vattelist again) being born to people who happened to be citizens at the time of birth.
I always tell birthers that their Vattel definition
(a) excludes people who happened to be born one day before the naturalization of their parents who then proved themselves as true-blue American God-fearing patriots who never left the country again, but
(b) includes people who renounce their US citizenship the day *after* the birth of the child, raise it as an America-hating satanist in some cave in Afghanistan and simply return him to the US 14 years before the child runs for President
and therefore “allegiance of the parents at birth” is a meaningless concept when it comes to, as birthers like to put it, “the highest possible standard to ensure the President is faithful only to the US”.
John, the Founders obviously made no such objections as “the child is more American if his parents naturalized very early as compared to very late”.
So I don’t understand why you are arguing Agnew might have been “more NBC-ish than Obama because…”. Either both are NBCs (by the sane standard) or neither of them is (by the Vattelist craptard).
Wow, what lawyer talk. I’m truly impressed. Did you learn that phrase watching TV?
No, Mars.
When the moon is in the Seventh House
And Jupiter aligns with Mars
You owe me a new keyboard and screen.
No, birthers consider Agnew to be NBC because he was white. Obama’s father was from Kenya. That’s the difference.
Agnew pleaded ‘Nolo contendere’ to one count of income tax evasion, and resigned. The final nail in the coffin was testimony from a Baltimore county contractor, that he drove into DC from Baltimore and gave Agnew $5K cash in his Executive Office Building chambers, as final payment for a contract received when Agnew was governor.
Maryland sent Agnew a $250K income tax bill, which Agnew paid off with one check. It was estimated that Agnew took at least $100K in bribes, as Baltimore County Executive and governor. Agnew died in Berlin, Maryland – an appropriate name. Also, Agnew turned out to be a first class anti-Semite.
Ann Coulter is his protégée.
Got a few typos there – it’s Theodore not Spiro, WWI draft card not WWII, 45 in 1930 implies 1885 not 1875, 1910 shows age 32 not 28.
I wouldn’t put too much credance in the ages on the census forms. The Agnews appear to have have been a bit creative on them – not only does Theodore give the ages 32,40 & 45 on successive censuses but Margaret/Margaruite who’s in the 1910 census under her first married name “Pollart” (s/b Pollard) gives 26, 34 & 40!
Both the WWI draft card and SSA death index give birthdates in Sept 1878 but different days.
More interestingly from our point of view – the draft card shows him as naturalized although there is something written under the tick that I can’t read.
Throw in that Spiro Agnew is shown in the 1920 census as Spiro Pollard (just a clerical error I think) and it’s amazing the confusion that this one little family causes.
The Agnew family history is even more confused and contradictory than the birther’s claims against the Obama family history.
If Agnew were black, the birthers would want to dig him up and deport his skeleton.
John said Agnew was not feared or hated, showing another fine example of the birther’s grasp of history.
Census data is notoriously squirrelly. So much depends on who is giving the response (not always the family), their state of mind that day (cooperative, uncooperative), who was taking the information, *their* state of mind that day, language differences, how careful the transcription was, etc., etc.
I would take the Agnew census data with a grain of salt.
Huh? I don’t think so.
This, I think, points to an important observation.
When confronted with the Agnew argument, the Birther response is typically to rely on the Census records that suggest Theodore *was* naturalized. The inconsistent records that say he *wasn’t* are deemed trivial, and the inconsistency itself is declared unimportant.
Meanwhile, what is the Birther response to trivial inconsistencies in Obama’s personal history (such as, where did his mother live during his first six months of life)? They insist that any such inconsistencies are evidence that Obama is ‘hiding something’ and should be considered justification to doubt Obama’s entire life story. And they consider any inconsistent accounts to be credible, no matter how few or how far removed they are from Obama himself (e.g., the handful of African news sources that falsely stated he was born in Kenya).
I stand corrected. But there is also a WWI draft card that shows a birthdate of 12th September 1878.
Somehow I messed up my blockquotes – sorry hope it makes sense.
It actually was his WWII Draft Card that I got the birthday information from: https://www.familysearch.org/pal:/MM9.3.1/TH-267-11756-49486-95?cc=1861144&wc=11815998
I didn’t see the WWI Draft Card.
You’re right on the other stuff, though.
Once again John puts his ignorance on display for all to see.
He would now have us believe that it is possible to be born in the U.S. but not be a natural-born citizen because the parents (or a parent) is not a citizen, but that same child can be transformed into a natural-born citizen later if the parents become citizens.
Astonishing.
When you’re white, you can get away with anything – even murder:
William “Wild Bill” Janklow is the current governor of South Dakota. In 1955, at the age of 16, he was convicted of the sexual assault of a 17-year old woman. As a juvenile offense, this conviction carried little weight under U.S. law. However, in 1966, while working as the tribal attorney for the Rosebud Sioux, Janklow–aged 27–was accused of raping his children’s 15-year-old babysitter, Jancita Eagle Deer. He avoided prosecution.
http://www.dlncoalition.org/dln_issues/strangecaseofjanklow.htm
Bill Janklow, who was convicted of second-degree manslaughter and resigned from office after killing a motorcyclist in a collision last August, was released from jail on Monday after serving 100 days. Mr. Janklow, a Republican, was found guilty in December of speeding, reckless driving, running a stop sign, and other charges in the death of Randy Scott, 55, who was killed on a rural South Dakota road on Aug. 16, 2003. He got his law license back.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/18/us/national-briefing-plains-south-dakota-jail-term-ends-for-former-legislator.html
Hm. I guess I too stand corrected. I was thinking of the late 19th century. To be fair, though, the 1907 act was successfully challenged in some areas of the West and Midwest where women applied for final land deeds under the Homestead Act.
The Wikipedia article on Janklow is interesting. Prior to the fatal accident he had been involved in three other accidents and had accumulated twelve speeding tickets, but the jury was never told about them. And because Janklow was on official government business at the time of the accident, Scott’s family had to sue the Federal government. The taxpayers ended up paying $1 million for Janklow’s actions. Janklow blamed the accident on low blood sugar.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Janklow
Try low tolerance for others.
“Then peace will guide the planets,
And love will steer the stars.”
Wasn’t that a time? Just to extend the game a bit . . .
“Ah, but I was so much older then,
I’m younger than that now.”
Let’s also point out that Obama Sr. died in the early 80’s. By John’s logic, a candidate having a deceased parent (before they had a chance to decide to be a US citizen) would disqualify them from being President.
Adds a whole ‘nother dimension to the discussion.
I just want to second what Rennie says. US Census data is full of errors. It’s no surprise if you find something in there that isn’t right.
I did, ever since I was a little boy. So did everyone I know! Now ask me to provide a source so I can change the subject to cake. I like cake.
If Obama’s Original LFBC wasn’t sealed by court order after the Soetoro adoption, then we would see Stanley Ann Dunham Obama, the hosptial admin, and delivery doc attest to the fact Barack Hussein Obama was Obama’s birth father.
After the Soetoro adoption was finalized, the Soetoro COLB showed Lolo Soetoro as the birth father with Barry Soetoro born on Aug 4, 1961.
After the Soetoro adoption was annulled, the judge could have unsealed Barack’s Original LFBC, but he did not. The hearing to annul the Soetoro adoption was contentious. It is likely Stanley Ann Soetoro testified Barack Hussein Obama was not Barry Soetoro’s birth father. Consequently, Barack Hussein Obama did not have the right to complain the Soetoro adoption violated his parental rights.
As we all know, the court found Barack Hussein Obama was in fact the birth father of Barack Hussein Obama II. Instead of reinstating Obama’s Original LFBC after the Soetoro adoption was annulled, the court ordered a new COLB to be created to remove the attestation by Stanley Ann Dunham Obama, the hospital admin. and the delivery doctor.
I’ve bolded what is important to your claim.
“IF”
Everything that follows is supposition on your part, based on no facts or evidence whatsoever.
Soetoro never adopted Barack Obama. And adoption doesn’t necessarily mean that your birth records are sealed.
evidence? Got any?
EVIDENCE? Got any?
No court has weighed in on who was Barack Obama’s father, since his birth certificate lists who the father was. Please cite the case #.
Evidence? Got any?
And once the invisible purple spotted unicorns from Betelguese IV had finished altering the time line to remove all traces of Elven interference in the plan to establish the lizardmen in the top levvels of government by way of electing Obama to POTUS, they proceeded to spawn the 9/11 conspiracy to deflect attention away from the growing suspicion that Obama was born in Kenya, in an alternate universe, of three different birth mothers, of a native of Ganymede for a father.
dr_taitz@yahoo.com
September 2nd, 2011 @ 6:33 am
that is a complete BS
Obama was never a foster child
by the way, where is his Indonesian citizenship documentation? Where is proof, that he returned to US as an Indonesian citizen in 1971? show me a shred of evidence of what you are claiming
Lolwut?
Obviously ImaObot has grown tired of arguing and tries to test possible plots for his next book here. 😉
I was listening to CSPAN radio this morning and I agree; we must get together and support this President.
But, first, we must remove suspicion and doubt by unsealing and publicly releasing the Original LFBC, the Soetoro COLB and, for educational purposes, the Soetoro adoption annulment court order.
I would like to know what SAD Soetoro’s response was to Obama Sr’s complaint.
“unsealing and publicly releasing the Original LFBC” – Done
“the Soetoro COLB” – never existed, therefore – Done
“the Soetoro adoption annulment court order.” – no adoption, so no adoption annulment – Done
“I would like to know what SAD Soetoro’s response was to Obama Sr’s complaint.” – NOYB – Done
Now you can throw your complete support behind President Obama.
Did you give your birther hero, Orly Taitz the answers she demanded?
Orly is calling you a liar. Are you lying again, Sven?
dr_taitz@yahoo.com
September 2nd, 2011 @ 6:33 am
that is a complete BS
Obama was never a foster child
by the way, where is his Indonesian citizenship documentation? Where is proof, that he returned to US as an Indonesian citizen in 1971? show me a shred of evidence of what you are claiming
Clearly we are seeing Sven’s latest chapter of “Barry and the Pirates”….
Chapter 5- ‘The Pirates adoppt young Barry and give him the pirate name: Soetoro
The Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster has proven a link between pirates and glacier melting.
If there’s a link between pirates and glacier melting, does that mean we need to hire Ninjas to get rid of the Pirates?
I don’t think that’s doing Obama any favors.
It is a fact that Obama Jr. Is not a natural born citizen. His website Fight The Smears stated his birth was governed by the British Act of 1948 which leads to the question:
Why did Obama feel compelled to state that his birth status was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 rather than the 14th Amendment?
Oh hi poster who used to identify himself as “Apuzzo” on Politicalforum.com
You know that answer because you posted the same misinformation there, had it answered, all before you were banned for using sockpuppets.
One of the reliable sign of a Birther is that they have no regard for the truth.
Of course anyone raised here in the United States knows that anyone born in the United States is a natural born citizen. Thats why no one had any qualms about Obama being eligible.
Since when did anybody assume that foreign law had anything to do with Presidential Eligibility? Are you stating that each and every country has an ultimate veto power over who can and cannot be elected President? Are you saying that if Britain didn’t want Rick Perry to be President, all they’d have to do is pass a law declaring him to be a citizen of Britain?
Lets not forget his other identities claiming he was a black soldier, master sergeant, etc.
It really is hard to believe that they don’t get this point. I think England should pass a law making all white people in America British citizens. Maybe, they would get the point then.
Birthers are such ridiculous little bigots and liars.
It’s incredibly pathetic that they haven’t figured out why sane people look at them with scorn, pity and disgust.
Really? Where does it say this?
they can’t afford to figure that one out; then they’d have to admit to being ridiculous little bigots and liars.
In RIO’s wet dreams.
Fight the Smears quotes FactCheck.org saying:
http://www.fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate
And it goes on to say:
“Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”
Two things there. First, Obama didn’t say this; FactCheck.org said it, and Fight the Smears included this as part of a longer quotation. Second, that longer quotation is about whether Obama remains a British Citizen or not and in that context the 14th Amendment is not relevant.
I just wonder why you ask a question that you could have easily answered for yourself.
Like I posted before- he knows the answer- he made this claim repeatedly- probably a dozen times over at Politicalforum.com- and was repeatedly slapped down for misrepresenting the truth- he would just dance away and go off and make another similar claim.
Until he got banned f using sockpuppets.
Like most of the birthers, he is just a willful and intentional liar.
FTS also says, “The truth is, Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen of the United States of America.”
After Obama returned to America when he was 10 years old as an unaccompanied minor refugee from Indonesia, he became a Permanent Resident Alien of the U.S. under the care and custody of a Catholic Social Service agency located in Connecticut.
Although Obama lived with his grandmother, who had been appointed his guardian, he was under the jurisdiction of the State of Connecticut as an unaccompanied minor refugee. Consequently, he has a Connecticut based SSN. (See 45 CFR Part 400 Refugee Resettlement Program)
I could write a textbook on clinical insanity, from your comments. Orly’s too.
A minor child cannot lose US citizenship. In order to lose US citizenship a person must appear at a US Embassy and convince a consular officer of one’s intent to relinquish US citizenship. A ten year old child is going to have a great deal of trouble doing that!
Citizens of the United States at birth are not refugees and Indonesia has never allowed dual citizenship.
If Barack Hussein Obama II had ever relinquished or lost his US citizenship, there would be a public record of that relinquishment. If Barack Hussein Obama II had ever been granted refugee status, there would be a public record of that status which would be available under a Freedom of Information Act request.
Renunciation of US Citizenship: http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html
dr_taitz@yahoo.com September 2nd, 2011 @ 6:33 am
that is a complete BS Obama was never a foster child by the way, where is his Indonesian citizenship documentation? Where is proof, that he returned to US as an Indonesian citizen in 1971? show me a shred of evidence of what you are claiming
Poor Sven. Over 3 years trying to peddle his Barry and the Pirates fiction and still no takers…
Thanks, G. It’s obvious someone has highjacked my email and WiFi accounts. A usurper is posting under pseudo-name(s) to discredit me. Everyone knows I’m an Obama supporter.