On the nirthers and the press
You’ll notice I haven’t weighed in yet on the subject of Obama’s birth certificate. That’s because I consider it a non-issue at this point, except as it’s being used to discredit perceptions of Republicans and people on the Right as crazies.
I also believe–along with several commenters on this thread, that the consequences of a finding that he’s not a natural born citizen would be chaotic, and his replacement would hardly be better than he is.
But as far as the merits of the case go, I believe that it is highly likely that Obama was born in Hawaii, just as he’s claimed. That said, I also think it is very odd that he has refused so far to release the long form of his birth certificate (if those who say that Obama and only Obama could obtain a copy from the state of Hawaii, and that the long form is different from and more complete than the certificate of live birth that he has already offered of us, are correct).
This furtiveness on Obama’s part ties into his secrecy about other aspects of his life. I’m referring most particularly to his school records, from Occidental and Columbia and Harvard Law. These, we know he could release. This failure of his leads inexorably to the perception that the man is hiding something, although we don’t know exactly what or exactly why. But our guesses fill the void, and it’s not with innocent explanations.
The situation is rather similar to Kerry’s refusal to release his full military records in 2004; he released a sort of “short form” version instead. And in Obama’s case his actions are especially hypocritical because of his rhetoric about transparency. Of course, the press has completely abdicated its duty to explore (as it did with Kerry, as well). Instead, it has taken on the task of defending Obama and excoriating his questioners (as it did with Kerry and the Swift Vets, as well).
This has nothing to do with whether Obama was born in Hawaii, as I’ve noted. It has everything to do with transparency, however. And it has everything to do with the failure of the press to do its job. Compare and contrast with the way the press (in the person of Dan Rather and associates), not being satisfied with Bush’s full cooperation with the release of his National Guard records, decided they had to help out by either creating a forgery or failing to fully vet a forgery that reflected poorly on him.
The key point on this subject for me is this:
Why would Obama spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to prevent release of his full birth documents?
I can think of no positive reason….
“I also believe—along with several commenters on this thread, that the consequences of a finding that he’s not a natural born citizen would be chaotic, and his replacement would hardly be better than he is.
But as far as the merits of the case go, I believe that it is highly likely that Obama was born in Hawaii, just as he’s claimed.”
I’m not sure what the nuances of legalese would dictate in some kind of high court decision, if he was in fact born out of the country, ie. Kenya, per alleged eyewitness accounts by his grandmother and/or aunt. Considering that an issue so mundane is being stonewalled at such great cost, I have to question whether it is in fact “highly likely” that he is natural born, his failure to present the document is certainly indicative of a failure to act in could faith with the entire American constituancy. If there is so much as a technicality which would have made him ineligible then the worst possible outcome would be to let him slide on this. It would be on par with allowing an illegal alien to rise to the office thru fraud. We have a legal system, including military and police to protect our system from the ensuing chaos. As to the issue of Biden ascending to the office, I can’t see how he could be any worse, and it should not be the guiding issue anyway. Fraud at this level should be a very high priority item. Obungler should release the real document, resign, or be impeached. My preference is resignation…
Neo–If anyone should know “crazy” I would presume it would be a psychiatrist like you, but in the case of Obama and his background, policies, statements and actions, the problem becomes where to draw the line.
Is it “crazy” to inquire closely into the credentials and history of someone vying for the Presidency, and to insist that the Constitutional test of a President being a “natural born citizen” be publicly met? This test, by the way, was set by the Founding Fathers to insure that Presidents be primarily loyal to the U.S., have no other, divided or dual loyalties, be experienced in and cherish the ways of America and Americans, our outlook, history, form of government and democracy, our ideals, lifestyles, character and aspirations, and, in general, have our American mindset. It seems to me that, observing an Obama that more and more people are realizing is somehow “off,”–is not “American” in his viewpoint, assumptions, reactions or actions–shows exactly why this test was put into the Constitution, and why Obama should have been forced to pass it; a test that probably would have eliminated him as a candidate.
Yes, there is political strategy involved. Yes, those on the Left and some on the Right will use these questions about Obama’s citizenship to ridicule those asking the questions as “Birthers,” “Zombies” or “Suspicious Minds,” but if it was not this particular line of questions they would object to, it would just be another.
The fundamental question remains–ridicule or not–do we want to set the precedent that our cowardly courts apparently want us to, that only Party or government organizations (and not even them, in actuality) but not ordinary citizens and voters can inquire about a President’s citizenship status? And, if this line of inquiry is “crazy,” can’t any other questions, say, about his biography, his sealed records, his votes in the Illinois State Senate, his lack of academic achievement or paper trail, his extra-Constitutional appointment of Czars, his truthfulness about his Muslim upbringing and background, or his connections to Tony Rezko or Bill Ayers and his father Tom, his budgets or anything else, be ridiculed as being just as “crazy.”
Something that I have found strange is the total lack of regular people who were friends of Obama at Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard. No one has stepped forward to tell us about him as a young man. I recall reading one man saying he graduated from Columbia in the same year as Obama in the same major. This man could find no one in his class who knew Obama. Let’s hope that Israeli intelligence is working on some of this. It’s a cinch the media are not.
I think the American (is the rest of the world interested in this topic?) professional sphere of investigative journalism, of which houses many philosophical varieties, I think someone would have gotten to the bottom of this during the primaries (remember Bill and Hillary?) if not further in the past, this would be to risky for a political party to gamble — not that I’m against anyone continuing their own research, it’s their right — but this is main stream conservatism batting this ”birth certificate” ball around, it reminds me of paleoconservative and anti-war elements going on about “9/11 was an inside job” Speak freely, but remember you’ll be judged by rational minds.
Neo–may I also point out that in the case of Obama we have evidence of just such “other or divided loyalties” in play.
First, there is Obama’s interference, while a sitting U.S. Senator, in the recent elections in Kenya where, in a little reported trip there, he and Michelle spent several days interfering in the internal affairs of Kenya by actively campaigning for his fellow Luo tribesman and “cousin,” Marxist and Muslim Raila Odinga, and criticizing Kenya’s existing government. Odinga, educated in Communist East Germany and jailed for several years in the 1980s after his failed coup against the government of Kenya, has been called the “Butcher of Kenya,” because of the many murders and mutilations his machete wielding mobs of supporters have committed. It was alleged during the campaign that Odinga had signed an agreement with leaders of predominantly Christian Kenya’s Muslim minority (the Luo, by the way, are a majority Muslim tribe) saying that in exchange for them delivering the Muslim vote he agreed to banning Christian worship in Kenya and placing Kenya under Shari’a law. Odinga denied he had ever contemplated or signed such an agreement, but towards the close of the campaign Muslim leaders released the original document with these agreements in it and with his signature on it to the local press. After losing the election for President of Kenya machete armed mobs of Odinga supporters went on a rampage, at one point burning a Christian church full of 60 some odd parishioners–mostly women and children–to the ground and incinerating them all, killed and mutilated people, set fires and displaced many thousands who fled their homes to escape their campaign of violence. To stop the violence the Kenyan government gave Odinga the post of Prime Minister, which he occupies to this day. Thus we have three divided loyalties–ties and loyalty to Kenya, to the Luo tribe, to Muslims.
The other set of incidents are his odd and highly unusual decision to give his first interview as President to Al Jazeera, Obama’s very plainly bowing to the Saudi King, the fact of his speech, and the content and tenor of his speech from Cairo to the Muslim world, and his obvious hostility to Israel and our other Allies, particularly the UK. Partiality and loyalty to his Muslim roots–that he claims he doesn’t have–but not loyalty to the U.S. or our foreign policy interests.
As you said Neo – and others here- what I can not understand with any rational reasoning is why he has not released documents. People do not do this if they have nothing to hide. For ordinary people it might be said to be a matter of protecting one’s privacy but once in the public arena that can no longer be the proverbial “leg to stand on”.
As far as the school records go my personal opinion is that even a list of the classes he took would point to a philosophical and political bent which would give great credence to the argument that associations with the likes of Jeremiah Wright and Bill Ayres are ones that he would seek out purposefully because of shared values (LOL) rather than, as he and his campaign continually purported, being merely tangential and unimportant.
Once again I will state I told friends (and all who would listen) that even given all the talk of transparency, the Obama administration would make the Bush administration look like a sieve.
I know several families in which the wife is American, a the husband European, and the children were born in Europe. When the family resides permanently abroad and when the children are almost completely raised in that culture, in my mind the kids are (in these cases) German with an American mother. In one case, the mother told me that while the kids were young they loved their summers in America, but during their late teens they realized that they felt foreign there. Another friend was temporarily in Germany, but her preschool kids watched Barney videos and were read the classic American children’s books. The kids know a bit of their father’s language and a few customs, but they are now growing up up in American kindergartens and schools, and will always see themselves as Americans. Their father chose America and does not put them in the position of having to choose.
I realize the law has to be more specific than my general assessment, but it also has to reflect reality. Obama was born in Hawaii and was raised by his American mother and grandparents. They may have had flakey and to our minds unpatriotic ideas about America, but the Kenyan father and Kenyan society did not socialize Obama. We have his American family to thank for the way he turned out.
It is all of Obama’s other hidden records and the almost total failure of the media to report on the accomplishments, failures, and inconsistancies in his career that are the real scandal. Just one good question about the failures of the Annenburg Challenge programs and what Obama learned from them would have revealed far more about Obama’s thinking than any birth certificate in the world.
A final question: Was Winston Churchill British? If all else were the same in his life except that he had been born on American soil while Jenny ws visiting the US, would he have been less British?
Here’s a mundane reason Barack may not want to release his long form birth certificate:
“Dreams of My Father” makes a big deal (a coming of age/significant moment/significant life revelation big deal) about an Occidental days decision to change away from the nickname: “Barry”, to the formal name given at birth: “Barack”.
What if the birth certificate says the given name is “Barry”? Then Dreams of My Father‘s fanciful tale is shown to be a lie, and Barack is covering up the long form for mundane political reason which has nothing to do with not being a U.S. citizen; which has nothing to do with paternal heritage.
I suspect Barack was born in Hawaii. Also, odds are that Frank Marshall Davis was not Barack’s biological father. If these are correct, as they are likely to be (though we don’t know for sure), then why would Barack hide his long form birth certificate? Covering up a Dreams of My Father embellishment is a mundane explanation.
I don’t know where Barack was born, and I don’t know who his father was. I can only speculate. But, we need to move on. There are some things about which we can only speculate: did Clinton Administration gather FBI files for nefarious purposes and then blatantly hide the evidence until after the statute of limitations expired? YEAH I think so. But I can’t prove it. When I can’t prove something, I just have to let it go. This birth certificate thing is one of those things that I just have to let go. That’s life.
Neo,
Regarding his birth certificate, you said, “This failure of his leads inexorably to the perception that the man is hiding something, although we don’t know exactly what or exactly why.”
At this point, one shrewd tactical reason for Obama not to release anything is because it gives the birthers something to rave on about. The more they rave, the stupider they, and by connotation, all who oppose Obama are made to look when they are painted with the same broad brush by the MSM.
The birthers aren’t too far different from the truthers, who thought that 9/11 was an inside job, or the nuts who thought that the Clintons killed Vince Foster.
To me, the obvious reason Obama does not release his school records is because they would show a mediocre student who got into Harvard more on affirmative action and appealing to the psudo-intelligentsia of the admissions board with his overt leftist leanings, than on his own ability. Thus making a mockery of all the Obama worship. Not to mention make fools of all those Obama worshipers. Wouldn’t it be a howl if his GPA were below W’s, as Kerry’s was?
At this point, he gains by keeping his records private and those on the fringes, who insist on pushing this non-argument ruin not only their own credibility, but the credibility of the rest of us as well.
As many astute commenters here have said, even if it were true, it would only allow Joe Biden to assume the presidency. Does anyone really want that?
The simple fact is. Like it or not, he won, let’s get over it. There are plenty of credible and substantive arguments against his policies and positions, and those of his leftist congressional cohorts. We need not invent lunatic conspiracy theories when they are handing us real ammo to shoot them down with by the caseload, daily! Let’s stick to the known facts, they are more than enough.
1. It occurs to me that something on the long form birth certificate may embarrass the memory of his mother. Perhaps the address where she was living would indicate some impropriety?
2. In the event there was some sort of plot to hide Obama’s birthplace, there is no reason to assume Obama knows about it. If you were really born in Kenya and smuggled in to falsify the records, would your parents surely have told you?
3. Obama could appoint a committee of trusted witnesses to examine the birth certificate and issue a report only on his eligibility.
4. At root the problem is that there is a constitutional requirement that is enforced only by the political parties. This could be fixed.
5. Do we have full birth records for all the other candidates?
6. Factcheck.org, which certified Obama’s computer printout, is run by Annenberg, the organization that hired Obama in Chicago.
7. In my life I personally have been required to not only supply the computer-printout birth certificate, but a copy of the original hand-written certificate as well. It was a real hassle.
The particulars of Obama’s birth and citizenship aside (although I have my questions about his Indonesian days which I will air in a subsequent post) and the fawning, subservient MSM which enables and defends all that he does and which played no little role in giving Obama the election, I would point to the psychology of the elections process as it played out in 08 as one reason neither Hillery nor McCain seriously challenged his bona fides.
In McCain’s case I believe it was basically the fact that his psychic make-up made him constitutionally (personality-wise) unable/unwilling to challenge Obama’s background on general principles alone. But when coupled with the “Magic Negro” meme upon which obviously much of white middle-America had seemingly simultaneously, in the manner of schooling fish instantaneously changing directions en mass, groupthink-like seized upon this blank slate to project all their hopes to expiate their white guilt and “prove” themselves non-racist once-and-for-all, as it were–well, it was all too much to overcome.
I am certain that both McCain’s and Hillery’s advisers counseled that any attempt to shatter the hopes and dreams the American public had invested in this vision would risk a major blowback/whiplash from a public who would view such efforts as both petty, devisive (by a war-weary public already deeply divided and chafing at the fact) and racist. And that for the public to allow itself to admit to itself that it had been hoodwinked in exactly the same way that snake-oil salesmen do the rubes–the same way in which white-men had hyped the natives when they sold Manhattan island for a few beads–would be to admit, to think the unthinkable. And for this reason alone, Clinton’s and McCain’s advisers probably had visions of what happens to most messengers who bear dire tidings also happening to their clients at the hands of an outraged public who would view the messenger, not Obama, as it’s betrayer. THAT is why Obama has never been challenged about the details of his bonna fides by his political opponents. Indeed, as grackel has previously pointed out in another thread, already people like Chris Matthews are seizing upon this background radiation of general disgust the moderate MOR public at large feels when the topic is broached to pummel the GOP through ridicule and insinuation of racism and play upon the public’s unwillingness to admit their investment of their psychic capital was all based upon a hoax.
I said in a previous thread that, while I’m not obsessed with the birth certificate, the thing that really bothers me about this is the cavalier attitude that so many people have about the question, especially the courts. If there is a Constitutional requirement that a President be a natural born citizen, then why was he not required to prove it when he announced his candidacy?
I can think of a few occasions when I’ve been required to produce my birth certificate and I never had a problem with doing so. Is this yet another case where there is one set of laws for the elites and another set for us serfs?
Personally, I’m bothered just as much about his sealed college transcripts. Has there been a candidate for President in recent memory about which the public knew so little? The man is a real cipher.
Lay off the Birthers! They’re keeping the pot simmering. Right now there’s nothing much in it but pretty thin stuff, but people will be contributing ingredients, such as the sealed college records. There may well be some good meat there. And who knows what goodies will turn up in the future? The president himself helps now and then; a bow and scrape to the Saudi king, a display of bias in connection with an arrest in Harvard-town, an unseemly eagerness to pass sweeping laws nobody has read. It’s adding up to a spicy stew.
PS to my above post/
My views seem somewhat confirmed by an item in tosay’s SLATE online posting about a recent focus group held about Obama and Health-care in which even the Republicans who DID NOT vote for him were quoted as saying that once elected, they invested all their hopes in him and that, although troubled by this or that aspect of his policies, they are nonetheless still very much supportive of the man himself. The tide/under-tow is evidently every bit as strong as I had feared if this report is representative of the nation at large.
Mr. Frank said, “Let’s hope that Israeli intelligence is working on some of this.”
Good one. Made me laugh out loud. Since Obama is no friend to Israel, they have reason to try to find out where his weaknesses may lie. Wonder if Obama has considered this? The Israelis have quite a rep for getting the goods. Time will tell.
Obama’s Indonesian Days:
Practically everything (truthfully) known about Obama’s stay in Indonesia has been reported first by an American oilman ex-pat living in Indonesia who speaks the language fluently. His blog is entitled: “An American Ex-pat in Southeast Asia” @ http://laotz.blogspot.com
He has quit blogging since the election, but his site is still up and active with a recent April 09 post of a highly currently relevant FDR-era cartoon.
His was the first reporting of Obama’s attendence at a state school reserved only for Indonesian citizens whose records clearly list Obama as “Muslim.” It was this guy who first tracked down and talked to some of Obama’s child-hood friends and class-mates who told of his fluency in Indonesian and the Arabic of the Koran and told of his weekly attendance at prayers. So the question that arises from what was revealed from this man’s reporting was, if he WAS listed a Muslim on official records at an institution that only admitted Indonesian citizens, was/is it possible his American citizenship was abrogated at that time and thus his status on re-acquiring it in doubt? These are
valid concerns, it would seem to me..
Wolla Dalbo:
I’m not a psychiatrist! I don’t even play one on TV!
Nor do I actually think questioning Obama’s birthplace, and especially requesting he provide the long version of the birth certificate, is the least bit crazy (although I’m sure there are some crazy folk among the nirthers). All I’m saying is that it has been effectively labeled as crazy by Democrats, the media, and even some Republicans. Therefore, especially since it seems to have no chance of success, it’s not helpful at this point to keep plugging away at it.
Neo, since no one else has pointed it out, there’s a typo in your headline — it says “nirthers”. Actually I like it. Nirthers: a contraction for no-birthers! But I suspect it was unintentional.
Mrs Whatsit: No, not a typo. “Nirthers” is a nickname for the movement of people who believe Obama wasn’t born in the US and want to see his long-form birth certificate.
The President’s evasion on his past relationships with Rev Wright, Bill Ayers and ACORN, his reluctance to produce key documents from his school days and to be forthwright about his legislative efforts as an Illinois Senator has forced critical thinkers to be skeptical about something even so basic as his birth certificate.
President Obama is a chronic liar.
But the birth certifcate issue should end here. The fact that his mother is a US citizen is proof that he is indeed a natural born citizen – something even his Indonesia step-father can’t renounce on his behalf.
The left loves this. If you remind them of Obama’s 20 year Black Liberation Theology indoctrination you’re a “nirther”. If you question Obama’s choice of self proclaimed anarchist and communist, Van Jones, as the CEQ, Special Advisor for Green Jobs, Enterprise and Innovation you’re a “nirther”. If you’re attentive to the Democrat’s stealth funding of ACORN associated organizations you’re “nirther”.
The “nirther” movement is an issue that all critical thinking conservatives should distance themselves, just as many on the anti-war left wisely distanced themselves from the 9/11 “truthers”.
“I’m not a psychiatrist! I don’t even play one on TV!”
Huh? I thought you were. Must be rumor then.
I have always thought that this blog was a psychiatric experiment, that the results would be published in some journal of medicine in the near future, that you would hit the talk TV circuit with your findings, and that you would become rich and famous at our expense. “MikeLL said this, MikeLL said that. See? He is crazy.”
Guess I have an active imagination.
Well, as of 6:28 PM west coast time that blog no longer exists according to blogger.
Still, I think I remember corresponding with this man (if it’s the one I think it was) about this issue back when I ran Pajamas Media.
As I recall, he really didn’t have the goods at the level of granulation that would cause me to run an item on it.
Correction. It is up and reachable. You left an e out of the URL
The actual url is
http://laotze.blogspot.com/
Oh. “Nirthers.” Good grief. I didn’t know. Thanks for telling me!
Neo,
I had to look up “nirther” as I’d always heard it referred to as “birther”. One explanation can be found on Little Green Footballs.
“Nirthers – Refers to those who believe in the conspiracy theory that Barack Obama is not a legitimate citizen of the United States. Comes from a misspelling of “Birth Certificate” that appeared on a Nirther website. The conspiracy itself is sometimes referred to as the “nirth certifikit” theory.”
“The birthers aren’t too far different from the truthers, who thought that 9/11 was an inside job, or the nuts who thought that the Clintons killed Vince Foster.”
Not really, how about just some up front honesty. If there is a technicality associated with his Kenyan birth, and his mother’s age at the time, etc., then so be it, and if it’s true, it’s not just a little white lie, it’s serious fraud. Let’s see that transparency that was touted, or Obungler should resign.
Well, the US House of Representatives determined that BO was born in Hawaii. And even passed a resolution to that effect.
So, that settles it. Discussion over.
Whilst there are a lot of fishy things about Obama, I wouldn’t read too much into the enrolment requirements for his school in Jakarta. We’re talking about an utterly corrupt nation/culture here. The fact that there are numerous strict requirements for a student to be enrolled in a given school in no way implies that anyone takes these seriously (in presence of ‘wasta’ / cash consideration, etc.) in every day life.
nyomythus Says:
” not that I’m against anyone continuing their own research, it’s their right – but this is main stream conservatism batting this ”birth certificate” ball around, it reminds me of paleoconservative and anti-war elements going on about “9/11 was an inside job” ”
Looking and concluding (re: it WAS an inside job) are not alike things.
“Huh? I thought you were. Must be rumor then.”
IIRC she is a therapist (psychologist?). They have some similar roles but you wouldn’t go to a psychiatrist for marriage counseling and you wouldn’t send a schizophrenic to a therapist.
Then again, I could be wrong too I suppose (I seem to recall some talk about a family therapist at some point too, but my memory is fuzzy on that one).
I have an MS in Marriage and Family Therapy (ordinarily a 2-year program).
Psychiatrist=MD. Psychologist=PhD. Social worker=MSW (usually a 2-year program). There are also 1-year Master’s programs such as MEd.
Ah Ha! You are not denying it. I knew we were all guinea pigs.
But I’m ok with that. Just as long as we get more jello posts.
Jello is a very important part of marriage and family therapy.
LOL
Neo–Obviously I thought you were a shrink, too, but since you specialize in marriage and family therapy, how about working on Michelle’s sour puss?
Just because I haven’t seen it listed yet and for the sake of completeness, it would also be revealing to know who Obama’s clients were during his law career. I understand he represented ACORN on at least one occasion.
I’m of two minds on this matter. I can see the whole “Let’s move on” side, except for the part that involves knuckling under to corrupt and ignorant leftists and MSM. Face it, those hacks will do anything to raise just this sort of suspicion of any and all Republicans and/or conservatives. Alinsky, Cloward, Piven … all that. If we are cowed by their tactics then we have already lost and might as well sit down and contemplate our navels.
I can also see the other side. First, as perfected democrat points out, the Constitution should mean something (no matter what the Supremes say). Second, my life experience is that every time someone goes to a lot of trouble and expense to hide something, it’s because he has something to hide. Smoke, fire … all that. I know that’s simplistic, but sometimes that’s the way I am.
neo-neocon: If you believe that it is “highly likely” that Obama was born in Hawaii, upon what evidence do you base this belief? All of the evidence I have seen points the other way. The only “evidence” of an Hawaiian birth is Obama’s statements. No doctor named, no hospital has verified it, no birth certificate has been produced. Feelings are not evidence. And why would anyone spend almost a million dollars to prevent the release of a document which would end this whole controversy in a New York minute? Something is being hidden. And, IMHO, it is “highly likely” that Obama was NOT born in Hawaii. Show me objective evidence to the contrary and I will adopt your assumption.
Seems as if a poster of Obama as a zombie Joker– anonymously produced–is starting to turn up on walls in LA. I don’t know how to or even if it is possible to put an image of the poster in my comments here, but here is a link to the article, see http://tinyurl.com/mnkvxl
Great Agitprop, and if it could continue and spread, it should bug the hell out of Obama and his supporters, and might even result in lopping a few points off his popularity ratings.
I take the increasingly irrational challenges to Obama’s legitimacy as an ongoing demonstration that the president’s fiercest critics lack the intellectual integrity and or capacity to produce a coherent critique of his policies and their results.
By insisting that Obama is not simply misguided in his politics but, rather, is a nefarious and illegitimate threat to the republic, the GOP base unwittingly removes itself from the role of loyal opposition. The Democrats could not possibly have a more potent force than birthers and their ilk to drive swing voters into Obama’s camp.
“Well, the US House of Representatives determined that BO was born in Hawaii. And even passed a resolution to that effect.
So, that settles it. Discussion over.”
Baloney, they determined nothing, they simply attempted to slip in some wording stating that it was the case, but with no credible demonstration of proof, in order to further obfuscate the reality of this probable fraud; and it is probable, because it would be too easy to address if Obungler was operating in good faith. If it was George Bush the left wouldn’t give it up for a moment, the hypocricy of the dems over this issue is far past obnoxious. Present the real document, allow an appropriate judiciary to make an authoritative determination if there is a possible technicality concerning the legitimacy of Obungler’s occupation of the White House, or resign.
Don,
I believe there was a certificate of live birth. If I understand this correctly, that is what Hawaii normally issues upon birth. I don’t think there is much question that Obama was born in Hawaii.
The question that has flummoxed all of us is Obama’s refusal to hit this head on. Like what Oh, bother talked about a few comments above.
libertas grande Says: blah, blah about addressing “issues”….
Pure crap, we debate endlessly about the issues at this site. The sponsor, Neo, has rarely raised the topic of the birth certificate at this blog. Left-wing fraud is creeping in from too many places, from Acorn voter registration, to global warming, to health care “reform”, to a silly birth certificate issue that could have been settled very simply, as someone previously said, “in a New York minute”.
One piece of evidence I have seen cited is the Honolulu newspaper announcements of births. According to Fox News Obama’s birth is listed there on the proper day. I have not checked that out personally, but it is more convincing than oral statements from Obama or his supporters.
That said, it is still passing strange that this man shrouds his past in such secrecy. Inquiring minds would like to know about his scholastic records, etc.
Perfected Democrat,
I was joking about Congress. Of course their resolution is meaningless.
MikeLL, I must be sense of humor “challenged”, glad to hear that’s what you meant. What can I say, I’m pressing 62, I must be worried that Obamacare is going to dispose of me ten years early…
Perfected democrat,
No problem. If you hang around me long enough you will find that about 90% of what I say is either crap or a dumb joke (redundant?).
Also, if you are a member of a “protected class” I will offend you at some point.
Be warned.
“If I understand this correctly, that is what Hawaii normally issues upon birth.”
No, they normally issue, and did issue at that time, birth certificates with the data which is in issue here. The Certificate of Live Birth could be had by almost anyone under certain circumstances, like being born elsewhere, or in a manger in the forest… The two hospitals alleged to be Obungler’s birth place would have generally issued a proper certificate otherwise. Other people around the same time have those “typical” birth certificates, which show the additional information.
“Protected class”? I’d be ashamed to be a democrat these days….
or in a manger
Too funny.
Oddly enough, three years ago I was able to get my mother’s certificate of live birth (“long form”) from her birth county in Texas without her signature. (At that time it was faster to get her a passport from scratch than to find and renew her old one, and we needed it in less than one month.) I spoke with the responsible county employee, explained the circumstances, paid the necessary fees by credit card, and received the certificate the following day. I was amazed. All of which goes to show this isn’t hard, unless someone decides it should be.
say he isnt valid, and another state knows it. now what? his failure to show now turns into a presidential blackmail risk. on top of that, any state that would know that would also not have to comply with any treaty he signed with them.
say he is valid, and another state knows it, but also knows he is blocking certainty for some reason. again, they can pull the treaties are not valid, and they would have to pony up. but when they do, they now have to figure out whether its the real one from hawaii, or the real one from someplace else.
Ambiguity on things that shouldnt be ambiguous is bad. say the doctor gives you a bottle of medicine, how would you like an ambiguous dosage?
pretty soon one of them is going to argue that we need a new constitution and then list out all the ways things in it have not been followed. maybe that argument might grab enough wingnuts.
its just one more issue in a international game of jenga.
If the controvercy lasts long enough and gains public recognition as a legitimate criticism of Mr. Obama, then if he does eventually display his birth certificate and it proves him to be a natural born US citizen, then all his former critics will look foolish. He will be able to dismiss criticism of his policies as no different in kind, the rantings of conspiracy theorists and similar lunatics. I think that this issue could have been resolved long ago if Mr Obama had wishhed it so. I also think that it is quite possible that he will exploit it at a time of his choosing, to undermine his opponents. I think that it should be ignored, as an issue, by those who wish to oppose his policies on their own merits (or lack, therof). It should be made as difficult as possible for people criticising his policies to become committed to a position which may be rendered untenable.
Perfected democrat Says:
August 2nd, 2009 at 1:12 am
Is that a South Park reference? Because if it is, it’s a damn good one.
http://www.southparkstudios.com/guide/814
The question I’ve never seen posed is who paid for Stanley’s trip to Kenya. I simply can’t imagine a mother allowing her young daughter to travel to Kenya while highly pregnant and to trust the the world-renowned Kenyan health care system would take care of her. The nirthers give credit to a Kenyan relative who wants to get her name in the papers and ignore the reality of a young girl with no money and about to have her first child travelling to Kenya. I have heard no plausible explanation for such a trip.
I don’t believe for one minute that the Clintons would have not found out that Obama was not a citizen. They would have found a way to see that long form. After all, Bill was president.
I think Obama was born in Hawaii. I also think he loves all of this because it distracts people from other things, like his disastrous foreign and domestic policy.
Just to weigh in with my vote. Saying “there must be something to it because he goes to such lengths to hide it” is not an argument. It is an elephant-hiding-in-the-M&M’s argument. Just stop, you guys. Take a walk. Breathe some fresh air.
He is not spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep this secret (and even if he were, it could be for some other reason, such a gcotharn’s).
Yes, the liberals and the MSM (but I repeat myself) would ridicule even a decent question if they could get away with it. But that doesn’t mean their ridicule is an infallible sign that you are onto something.
The courts don’t touch this because there is no mechanism. It’s a hole in the Constitution, which makes a requirement but doesn’t say how it’s to be enforced. Nor is there subsequent legislation to deal with it.
Once it was inaugurated, it was over. He’s the president. Even if it turned out he was born on Mars, that wouldn’t change. In a republic, no one is going to overturn an election on that basis. Nor should they. In a republic, or any other democratic form of government, votes are supposed to matter. If anything would qualify to be called just a technicality, this would be it. It was a debatable point whether Romney’s dad, when he was running, had been born in the US. There was a question about McCain’s eligibility. Our Founding Fathers ratified a Constitution that looked black-and-white, but on this, as on many other issues, time has revealed difficulties.
I agree that Obama’s lack of transparency is deeply related to his general dishonesty. We don’t have his college records, we have enormous spending bills that no one has read. But I wanted nothing more than to see Bill Clinton be made to stand in the well of the Senate and answer questions in 1998, and that didn’t happen either. The general problem of Democrats lying (about three times as often as Republicans, who also lie) is the news that needs to get out. Birth is a dead issue.
Disagree that the nirthers are harming the movement. They’re a catalyst. If it wasn’t the birthers, the enemy would find some other stick with which to pound us. They’re very resourceful at that.
You can have the Brooks, the Frums, the other Uncle Tom conservatives. At least the birthers fight.
Nope rickl it wasn’t a reference to South Park, I hadn’t seen their website prior to your comment, but hopefully it corroborates that great minds think alike!
“…if he does eventually display his birth certificate and it proves him to be a natural born US citizen, then all his former critics will look foolish.”
People focus on what they want to. If he has a legitimate birth certificate that he could have posted a long time ago, then it looks much more like he’s deliberately mocking a significant portion of the serious voting public who have ample reason to be raising these questions.
Regarding McCain not bringing up the issue for validation during 2008 – he was sensitive himself on the subject as he was born in the Panama canal zone I understand, or some similar area.
Still, his birth circumstances resulted in his being a US citizen even though he was born outside of the normally recognized US borders and it was vetted during the election campaign.
Regarding any resolution of Congress “recognizing” his being born in Hawaii, it raises two observations:
First, they actually felt the need to do this!
Second, Congress is controlled by the democrats – ya know, the same guys heavily vested in Obama to begin with. He falls, they fally.
Regarding his scholastic history – who cares. Mildly embarrassing if he’s less than a stellar student, but nothing more.
His original records of birth, on the other hand, are major. He only needs to produce them to settle this once and for all – yet chooses not to?!?!? Why?
Pingback:House of Eratosthenes
I’m with neo on this. As a number of people have pointed out, the Left is about to Alinsky the nirthers, making them the issue and the face of the opposition to Obama. President Obama wears a mask of affability and reasonableness. He let it slip on Gates, Iran, and Honduras. On this issue, all he has to do is say nothing and smile. He is extremely practiced at this; it’s all he has ever done.
If there is anything damaging on the birth certificate, it is almost surely not that he was born outside of the U.S.
Drop it now. It’s a losing hand.
Scottie Says:
August 2nd, 2009 at 2:14 pm
Not necessarily. If his transcript showed that his course load consisted of classes in Marxism, Colonialism, Racial Grievance, and Postmodern Theory or suchlike, that would be pretty damning.
On guinea pigs: A Mad Social Scientist. (Okay, I’m a GG fan … but it’s a lot funnier than anything Saturday Night Live ever did.)
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2009/08/good-news-they-found-hospital.html
The Usurper’s birth certificate may have been found.
“I think Obama was born in Hawaii. I also think he loves all of this because it distracts people from other things, like his disastrous foreign and domestic policy.”
I would mostly agree here with this, I’ll just go one step further – he has *no* political capitol to gain by releasing anything that he doesn’t have too. He can only *loose* political capitol by it.
Bush Jr played this game too – no reason to even give your opposition the chance to find something. There probably isn’t anything in there, he’s probably had others look it over, but why run the risk of missing something to shut up people you would rather have ranting and raving? Further it it *does* become real news then release it and make the other side look a fool.
How many time did Bush Jr do that? I do not think I have enough fingers and toes to count the times. This “nirther” thing is even crazier than the AWOL stuff about Bush (and is following a similar course it seems) and that was probably one of the best tools to show the other side as crazy for those whole 8 years – I’m willing to bet Obama is hoping for a right side version of Rathergate and he may even get it.
The whole point is moot anyway – Obama’s mother was a US citizen. The Supreme court made a ruling that this is all that needs to be. It wasn’t a ruling that only applies from that point on (that is, it wasn’t new law), it was clarification of what the constitution meant. Congress decided to make it even more clear and passed a (useless – the SC had already ruled) law about it.
End of story – you do not loose your rights because your family went on vacation whilst your mother was pregnant. Heck, I would even go so far as lets say he *was* born in Kenya – I shudder to think what a field day the dems would have against “crusaders” wanting him to be invalid for president because his parents were visiting family overseas.
This is (and has been) only a “question” in the minds of people who want it to be that way so bad they loose sight of reality. You can link all you want to “experts” – the 9/11 truthers do too. Yet it still doesn’t change that the SC made a definitive ruling on the subject of “natural born” for similar reasons quite a while back and that decision is fairly plainly written.
If he were hiding it for bad reasons then there is something else that he doesn’t want us to know, not his place of birth.
In connection with the “natural born citizen” issue, I find it extremely suspicious that then U.S. Senator Obama, who basically phoned in his entire truncated 34 month Senate career (on the road in “campaign mode” most of the time, only one bill he sponsored became public law in the almost three years he served of his six year term, and during those 34 months he held no hearings of the Senate Foreign Relations subcommittee he chaired), would be so interested in S. Res. 511, in the 110th Congress (in form this is a “simple resolution,” applicable to the Senate alone, and does not have the force of law) expressing the “sense of the Senate” that Senator John McCain was a “natural born citizen,” that he showed up and that, along with Senators Leahy , Clinton, Webb and Coburn was a cosponsor of Democratic Senator McCaskill’s Resolution. Not coincidentally, during the discussion of this issue, entered into the Congressional Record, far Left Senator Leahy introduced a short legal opinion signed jointly by two eminent legal scholars–one, Ted Olson, a conservative, and one, Lawrence Tribe, a liberal–exploring the definition of the term “natural born citizen,” and giving their joint opinion that McCain, although born outside of the U.S. to parents who were U.S. citizens, living on a U.S. military base in the Canal Zone in 1936, was, indeed, a natural born citizen.
While this non-binding sense of the Senate Resolution, which was passed by “unanimous consent” i.e. no one had his individual vote recorded on this issue–does not have the force of law, the Resolution and the discussions and opinions entered into the Congressional Record document what as known as “congressional intent” and form a “legislative history,” and can be used thereafter as a form of evidence for how members of Congress understand this issue.
If controversy about Obama’s citizenship status grows as he sinks in popularity or in response to some particularly egregious action by him, or as some previously hidden document or witness appears, look for this indication of Congressional understanding and intent regarding the “natural born citizen” requirement of the Constitution to be cited, assume a pivotal role, and to be of great help to Obama if it is discovered that he was not born in the U.S., or had not retained whatever natural born U.S. citizenship he might have had.
“Drop it now. It’s a losing hand.”
Prove it or lose it, show it or resign, the American people deserve the truth. If Obungler is vindicated, all the better for him, as well as the American people, at least we’ll know he’s not a fraud from day one, at least not on that particular issue…
The American people may deserve the truth, but we don’t have many ways to get at the truth of what lies behind the mask.
The Democrats and MSM (but I repeat myself) are sophists. If you choose the wrong point to argue or a tangential point, you will hear about nothing else. The will chatter on and on, creating an echo chamber that takes attention away from what is happening now. I haven’t forgotten how the Oklahoma City bombing helped save Bill Clinton’s political career.
I understand why this story has legs on this thread. It fills a need many of us feel to express uneasiness about what is behind the mask, how hard people have worked to carry him and cover for him, how he is given credit for brilliance and goodness that he has never shown. It’s infuriating. I feel that way too.
But just venting doesn’t help the team.
I’m not venting, I’m simply adding to the challenge. This is not an issue made up out of thin air as the attacks against Palin have been. Neither is it a political issue, taxes a little higher, or a little lower, or split “opinions” on which of our former allies we continue to support, or throw under the bus. This is a very simple, straight forward issue. There is enough background to have created a reasonable doubt, and which may rest on a yet unresolved interpretation of law, but is a bonafide issue of fraud, on par with the voter registration record of Acorn. The solution is too simple, if Obungler is acting in good faith, then he needs to get it done, immediately. Everyday it’s stonewalled is not a reflection on the people who are making it an issue, it’s a reflection on the Democrats, and Obungler in particular, who are evading providing the vindication for their own position. This post by Neo is for the purpose of hashing this particular issue. Release the long form, or resign.
I’m still waiting for my jello . . . . .
Here is one reason why this is all so dangerous, the ultimate Cloward-Piven unintended consequence:
“Prove it or lose it, show it or resign, the American people deserve the truth. ”
Sadly there are more options than this. Whilst one may want those one can not control it. People demanded Bush prove he didn’t go AWOL or resign yet that stance made them loose a midterm election.
“This is a very simple, straight forward issue.”
Yes, it is – so was Bush’s records concerning an AWOL (which he never disproved – though as in this case I’m not sure one could ever disprove it).
“There is enough background to have created a reasonable doubt,”
One could easily argue the same thing with Bush and the AWOL idea – indeed for a large portion of the country there was enough that they believed for a period of time something that was obviously a fake from the get go (Rathergate) and I’ll even bet many out there think this is true yet do not care.
“and which may rest on a yet unresolved interpretation of law,”
No, it’s been resolved in the original case. Were it to *not* be resolved then I would probably mostly agree and I suspect that courts would be willing to hear it. However, once more, I doubt that any court is going to take your rights away because your parents were vacationing (in this case visiting relatives) whilst pregnant. I’m certain that given the implications on military families this becomes even more obvious – what a bummer to not only put your life on the line but your kid suddenly not be a natural born US citizen in the whole process of defending your country (and is why they ruled as they did). As such it is a non-issue either way. At least Bush’s AWOL would have at least had real implications even if both’s main evidence was “They will not release!!!!”.
“but is a bonafide issue of fraud, on par with the voter registration record of Acorn”
Not really- I mean come one here. This reminds me of how long I heard about how bad Watergate was was and how we nearly had our govt tumble and Nixon was seeking to take total control. I would have to say I was …underwhelmed… to say the least when I finally figured out he tried to cover up (but didn’t even order) a recording a strategy session by the dems.
Acorn *should* be a criminal act and the people go to jail, that they are not is real travesty and a mockery of elections. If Obama was really born in Kenya – who cares? Of all the reasons I want to see him gone and of all the reasons that (could* get him gone this is not one. Even if one were to “win” this and prove he was born in Kenya you are going to loose. We lost when we proved Clinton had an affari with Monika, this is even more trivial, petty, and irrelevant than that (and at least in that case the president committed a felony and should have been impeached, in this case not even that).
But alas that advice fell on deaf ears back then too. If the situation were reversed – lets say that Martha had been on vacation to France would *anyone* on the Right truly think that Bush Jr would not be allowed to be president? Given that it also behooves Obama to let this get wild so he can point to “see what my opposition is ” then one would think people would also pretty much drop it.
There are *sooo* many other things that our time could go towards than this that *will* hurt him. Your absolute best case scenario is that he is born in Kenya. This means the courts will decide their original ruling is correct (can’t tell parents that vacationing whilst pregnant removes your kids rights) and you look like and idiot and Obama can use this for at least a good year to deflect opposition to him. Worst case is that he was born in the US, releases record, and people are shown to be raving lunatics along with talking about the above (let alone if he decides to bring overseas military families into it). Frankly it’s an even more absurd version of “Bush is AWOL” meme.
It is telling how, no matter how many excellent reasons for dropping this issue are articulated by commenters like oblio, strcpy, and John McLachlan, others — the “nirthers” on the thread to use the word I just learned here — keep hammering away at the issue without even acknowledging that there are reasons not to do so, regardless of the truth — let alone countering them. People. We have the weakest, weirdest, most worrying president in American history up there in front of us doing things TODAY. Obsessing about what might have happened decades ago makes it look as if that’s all his opponents have. Why do that? Why? Don’t you see how it undercuts the far more powerful, easily proven, convincing and disturbing matters that are taking place today?
If we lose our freedoms to this man because his most passionate critics played into his hands by making themselves look like a bunch of crazies, we have only ourselves to blame.
Interesting that “Rathergate” was raised as a reason to drop the inquiries into Obama’s birth status.
“Rathergate” imploded on the democrats pushing it NOT because they rode that particular horse for too long – but rather that their main inquisitor, Dan Rather, proved to be a corrupt liar who fabricated evidence and was caught redhanded.
Not the same thing with Obama’s birth certificate which instead deals with a lack of documentation.
Also, if I remember correctly, the same guy who first discovered that the main accuser had fabricated the evidence in Rathergate has questioned the authenticity of the online Obama birth certificate.
Beyond that, comparisons between Rathergate and the nirther question are flimsy in that with one accusation, you have what amounts to a technicality that would not invalidate qualifications for being president – they seemed more technicality than a major issue.
With Obama’s birth certificate, you have a clear directive in the US Constitution that requires natural born citizenship status – there is no technicality beyond what constitutes “natural born”.
Obama’s birth status IS murky. It’s not a simple case – as has been repeatedly and oh so hopefully tossed out – of parents going on vacation while the mom is pregnant.
What I like about nirtherism is its simplicity: The guy is not an American. Technically & legally, he may be, but not in his heart. That’s gold.
I think it would be pretty clear that he’s not an American in his heart even if it turned out that he was born in Kansas. Once again, that’s plain from his actions today. No reason even to look at yesterday.
Hi Neo,
BHO wouldn’t be replaced if his BC showed anything disqualifying. He’d simply be ‘declared’ eligible by the Senate, just like McCain was. Neither chaos nor Biden would ensue.
The reason this isn’t a non-issue is that if there is in fact any real reason for BHO to be hiding his original BC, the revelation of that reason would likely geld him for the remainder of his term and destroy the Democrat Party’s credibility for a long, long time – which is precisely what both are crying out for. We shouldn’t feel in any way shy about giving it to them.
All that said, reading through BHO’s very first Executive Order doesn’t give me the warm and fuzzy feeling that he isn’t actively hiding a great many credibility-destroying aspects of his past.
I fully expect someone to attempt to poke holes in the link I’m about to give, but here’s an examination of the document that Obama floated last year as his birth certificate.
The individuals examining the document provide detailed explainations for everything they did, how they did it, and why, as well as their credentials.
There are references to talking to people who did not want to be on the record – which is a hole in their theories as far as I’m concerned – but at the same time there’s a lot of info left to chew over that does not rely upon anonymous sourcing and is much more difficult to refute.
So, if there are legitimate disagreements or legitimate errors in their procedures I’d certainly be interested in having those errors brought to light – but until then there is a lot of explaining to do by The One….
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/07/atlas-exclusive.html
Mrs W,
Kansas, Kenya or on the moon, it doesn’t matter to me. In their maniacal nerdy way, the nirthers have seen the forest through the trees. OHB is not an American. It’s the universal theory that explains everything about what’s wrong with this guy. His past, his career, his friends, his plans, his actions. Instead of carping at the nirthers, we should be thanking them for boiling it all down to such a concise, clear and far-reaching summation.
Hmmm, just had a thought.
What if the BC posted last year WERE a fake cooked up by his supporters as a way of putting to rest concerns about his citizenship – BUT there really WAS a legitimate BC on file and all they had to do was ask for it?
Say some overzealous staffer/supporter cooked this up and The One just ran with it.
If The One brought out the real thing now, it may not match what was tossed out last year – revealing individuals to be less than truthful even if they had been correct in their assertions.
Not saying this is the case, and it would not be something impeachable, but it would be as embarrassing as all hell!
Besides, after watching 6 months of this crowd at the helm, I can safely say competency is not their forte.
So I’m still left trying to figure out why Obama continues to fight revealing his birth documentation….
Scottie (and others), please stop arguing why you think the BC’s not valid and reply to the objections here. If you cannot answer the arguments of friends, you should not be going up against enemies.
and while we waste time in this, they are hiring people who specialize in internment and resettlment…
Corrections Officer – Internment/Resettlement Specialist
Army National Guard
Location: Multiple locations
jobview.monster.com/getjob.aspx?JobID=82289279&brd=1&q=internment&cy=us&lid=316&re=130&AVSDM=2009-07-16+09%3a18%3a00&pg=1&seq=1&fseo=1&isjs=1&re=1000
As an Internment/Resettlement Specialist for the Army National Guard, you will ensure the smooth running of military confinement/correctional facility or detention/internment facility, similar to those duties conducted by civilian Corrections Officers. This will require you to know proper procedures and military law; and have the ability to think quickly in high-stress situations. Specific duties may include assisting with supervision and management operations; providing facility security; providing custody, control, supervision, and escort; and counseling individual prisoners in rehabilitative programs.
By joining this specialty, you will develop the skills that will prepare you for a rewarding career with law enforcement agencies or in the private security field.
“
I brought up the subject of what’s going to happen after we take over the government. We become responsible then for administrating 250 million people … and there was no answers. No one had given any thought to economics. How are you going to clothe and feed these people? The only thing that I could get was that they expected that the Cubans, and the North Vietnamese and the Chinese and the Russians would all want to occupy different portions of the United States. They also believed that their immediate responsibility would be to protect against what they called the counter-revolution. They felt that this counter-revolution could best be guarded against by creating and establishing re-education centers in the Southwest, where we would take all of the people who needed to be re-educated into the new way of thinking and teach them how things were going to be. I asked, well what is going to happen to those people that we can’t re-educate that are die-hard capitalists? The reply was that they would have to be eliminated. When I pursued this further they estimated that they would have to eliminate 25 million people in these re-education centers. When I say eliminate, I mean kill … 25 million people.
I want you to imagine sitting in a room with 25 people, most of which have graduate degrees from Columbia and other well-known educational centers, and hear them figuring out the logistics for the elimination of 25 million people. And they were dead serious.
– Larry Grathwol
Assistant Village Idiot,
Out of 82 comments (at this time) I have only made 5 comments myself.
Of those 5 comments, I:
– noted that there WERE serious questions posed regarding his BC,
– noted some personal speculation as to why Obama may have taken this route rather than simply revealing the documents once and for all and settling the matter,
– linked to a website that gave an indepth analysis that was not hysterical and not based upon anything other than the documents produced by Obama’s supporters being compared to known legitimate BC’s issued by Hawaii.
Exactly where in this thread did I accuse Obama of not being a citizen? I’ve made no such accusations in this thread.
Exactly what “objections” would you like me to respond to?
“Not the same thing with Obama’s birth certificate which instead deals with a lack of documentation.
Also, if I remember correctly, the same guy who first discovered that the main accuser had fabricated the evidence in Rathergate has questioned the authenticity of the online Obama birth certificate.
Beyond that, comparisons between Rathergate and the nirther question are flimsy in that with one accusation, you have what amounts to a technicality that would not invalidate qualifications for being president – they seemed more technicality than a major issue.”
You are misunderstanding why I brought rathergate up – I brought it up because that level of attention/focus on something *irrelevant* ended up with people so sure of being right that they finally took nearly anything. No, the “nirther” movement isn’t there yet, nor were the AWOL people until after several years of ranting. I do believe that they will eventually get that way, though even then not all AWOL people bought the document so I can’t say how any one particular person will do. We see the seeds of that fruiting already, a total unwillingness to see and do *anything* other than attack.
If I wanted a better over analogy I would pick the Monika story with Clinton (and note I did at some point). That’s your best case scenario there – prove you are right and be labeled a partisan witch hunter that can only find those nitpicky things to be wrong (and something most people consider private). Recall that our sitting president lied under oath, lied to us, and then was caught. For that same offence (and for a question not relevant to the case) Mark Furman (OJ trial) served jail time, scooter Libby served jail time (also not relevant to his case), pretty much everyone else gets punished. Our President (or rather the media) turned it into one of the biggest defeats the Republicans have had since, well since modern times. They still retain that amount of power and will for some time.
For people who say if they can prove he lied here it will be a stone to drag him down to ineffectualism recall Clinton and Monika. Really – the sitting President of the US was a *felon* and *no one cared*, indeed they found the politics of the thing to be *in favour* of the President. There should have been an open and shut case – he committed a felony and felons can not be President – yet he finished his term. This one is going to go down worse for the “nirthers” than it ever did for us back then – especially if/when Obama figures out how to paint the whole conservative movement with that brush.
And that is your *best* case scenario, let alone if he lets it go on long enough and has the real goods that says he is telling the truth – that *is* a game breaker for us. Your betting the farm that you can get honeysuckle to grow good – well yea even if you are right you still loose.
The trouble with the Nirther Poll is that it lacks a certain depth:
Let’s see one that asks the Nirther Question along with the best of Bush Derangement Syndrome’s top 10.
Similarly add a set of questions that are completely made up out of thin air by the surveyor that panders to the Nirthers and the BDSers prejudices about both W and O (one positive, one negative about each). For example “Do you believe that GWB was involved in a domestic abuse charge against his wife, Barbara.” “Was Obama a member of the New Black Panther Party.” “Was GWB ranked in the top 5% of his graduating class at Yale” (See, trick question! he went to Hah’vad) “Obama saved a man once using CPR” (another trick question, he rose some deadguy from the dead). You get the idea
The results would be telling — but wouldn’t reflect what the media would like us to hear: That people with entrenched political views (and that definitely includes the Nirthers and Obababots) will believe anything — and I do mean anything.
– “… and that the long form is different from and more complete than the certificate of live birth that he has already offered of us …”
Hi Neo,
The above statement, along with some comments here, make it clear that there are still many people who aren’t yet familiar with the details of Hawaii’s Vital Statistics documentation.
The two documents are indeed completely different, and it’s now almost trivial to discover this. Here’s a Certificate. Here’s a Certification.
BHO didn’t produce a Certificate of Live Birth – he produced a Certification. The latter is not deemed probative in the strictest sense – at least according to the State of Hawaii’s own web site as recently as May (they’ve since – very conveniently for BHO – changed the verbiage that discusses this issue on their site). If it’s not considered sufficient for Hawaii’s DHHL, how can it possibly be considered sufficient to affirm Constitutional eligibility requirements to be elected POTUS?
Information on the Certification can differ completely from the information on the Certificate, per Hawaii law (see the link above for references), which doesn’t specify which items, if any, are not allowed to be amended.
The point there is that if BHO was trying to ‘prove’ something to skeptics by producing the Certification, he’s only fueled further skepticism by doing so. And anyone familiar with the difference between the two documents would have known this prior to the release of the Certification which, itself, was only a facsimile.
Aside from that point, the entire question now seems to be that the so-called “birthers” have to provide some evidence showing that the information on the Certification is different from that on the original Certificate. I’ll remember this line of reasoning next time I go for a passport – which doesn’t even require natural born citizenship – armed with only a xerox copy of my birth cert.
neo
i sent you something on the inversions… the smartest of us can see it… i am trying to show it… but that one was too close to home for me to put up.
here is john galt (ayn rand), and she notes it too, as do many others, yet they gloss over the facts after they hear it as if yesterdays facts were like todays news will be tomorrow.
Then it began apologizing for its greatness and began giving away its wealth, feeling guilty for having produced more than its neighbors. Twelve years ago, I saw what was wrong with the world and where the battle for Life had to be fought. I saw that the enemy was an inverted morality and that my acceptance of that morality was its only power. I was the first of the men who refused to give up the pursuit of his own happiness in order to serve others.
To those of you who retain some remnant of dignity and the will to live your lives for yourselves, you have the chance to make the same choice. Examine your values and understand that you must choose one side or the other. Any compromise between good and evil only hurts the good and helps the evil.
If you’ve understood what I’ve said, stop supporting your destroyers. Don’t accept their philosophy. Your destroyers hold you by means of your endurance, your generosity, your innocence, and your love. Don’t exhaust yourself to help build the kind of world that you see around you now. In the name of the best within you, don’t sacrifice the world to those who will take away your happiness for it.
strcpy,
In all honesty, I don’t put the natural born citizenship issue into the same catagories as either Rathergate or Monicagate – this is something that goes directly to the issue of qualifications for the office as mandated by the US Constitution, and does so in clear terms.
No splitting hairs of the definition of “is”.
I don’t see these constitutional mandates as becoming irrelevant once a fraud (and I’m not saying Obama is a fraud – but I am making the point that it’s important to clear the air about) attains high office.
Either we abide by the constitution or we don’t.
The problem here is that Obama could shut this line of inquiry down today but chooses not to.
Instead, he’s been sidestepping it since the primaries which was LONG before it could have been an issue to make people look foolish for assuming the incorrect assumption.
This is yet another reason – in addition to the money he has spent fighting release of the documentation – that I think there is something really damaging in that documentation (or lack thereof).
As president, we the people should know who this man is, and if it turns out he’s illegitimately in office, then he should be removed.
If not, then I will be the first to say the matter should be dropped once the public is duly satisfied on the issue.
My preference would be he simply release the documents and get it over with. Anything less that not being a natural born citizen will be quickly forgotten in the collective sigh of relief that follows verfication.
Personally, I’m willing to wait and see in re President Obama’s CLB and the theories about it being forged.
As for him not releasing personal records — I don’t think we need to get sinister about it. For one, the man is known to be aloof; other people’s rules don’t necessarily apply to him. If he doesn’t feel like releasing his records, and the press — and his Republican opponent! — aren’t willing to make him, then why should he volunteer?
Two: the man prides himself on being a “mirror”; anyone who looks at him can see whatever they want to see. For that to work, he must provide as few personal details about himself as possible. I’m quite willing to believe that, for this reason, he got into the habit long ago of not releasing any personal details unless he had to. He hasn’t changed because he hasn’t needed to do so.
I also think that, to the Barack White House, his birth certificate is a non-issue. If they thought it was important, they would either produce it… or they would forge one for the purpose. (I’m sure that, with all the resources of the Presidency behind him, he could forge an authentic-looking birth certificate if he really wanted to.)
Mind you, I think it’s disgraceful that a Presidential candidate — and now President — is allowed to keep his personal history a complete mystery by a press unwilling to dig into anything. I think it’s ridiculous that Barack Obama was held to far lower standards than any other Presidential candidate in recent memory.
But I don’t think this proves that he has something sinister to hide. I do think it proves that, in his own mind, rules are for other people… and he’ll follow them only when it suits him.
respectfully,
Daniel in Brookline
I see a lot of people here saying that the “natural born citizen” issue is a non starter. That raises the question of what is. What issues, arguments or actions will slow or halt Obama & Co.’s Blitzkrieg against the Constitution, Democracy, the Capitalist System and our Rights? Who in the Obama , Congress, or the Judiciary will listen to citizen’s protests, arguments and legal actions, and what kinds of actions can such officials, members of Congress or Supreme Court justices take in response?
It seems to be perfectly clear that none of Obama’s inner circle of far left ideologues–Obama himself, his wife Michelle, David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel, the Czars, or any of their other key White House officials, Cabinet members or key executive agency appointees–apparently either real true believers or opportunists–is likely to budge. In Congress, Democrats hold large majorities in both the House and Senate and, thus, all of the officers and leaders of those bodies are Democrats. Does anyone see Harry Reid, Nancy Pilosi, Henry Waxman, Barney Frank, Senator Leahy, or Schumer, the Black Caucus or any other members of their far left crew defecting? That leaves a few Democrats who are closer to the center (in my opinion the “Blue Dog” Democrats are a fiction, since if they were really in favor of basic Republican ideas they would be Republicans) and most of the Republicans minus a few RINOS like Olympia Snow. The fact that the Supreme Court has rejected giving even cursory consideration to the natural born citizen issue tells me that they will not be at all receptive to any lawsuits by citizens against things like the Obama administration’s appointment of Czars, the administration’s bypassing bankruptcy laws, their treatment of GM stockholders, the firing of the head of GM, etc.; I think that after getting burned by their involvement in Gore vs. Bush the Supreme Court has decided to hunker down and not get involved in disputes involving the Presidency any time soon.
So who to appeal to, on what issue, and what kind of results can be expected?
Wolla Dalbo: I wonder the same thing myself. One possibility, though, is that we now have the August recess to work on getting the word to representatives that the public is against the health care reform bill. How to organize that sort of campaign I don’t know. But I know that if enough legislators (especially in the House, since they are up for re-election sooner) saw their jobs as threatened by voting for the bill, they might back down.
Neo–As a preemptive strategy, see Senator Dick Durban here (http://tinyurl.com/mutndo) , telling other Congressmen not to believe that the people they might see at any of their August recess town hall meetings are their real constituents or are genuinely angry, because they will all be hired insurance company plants.
This tells me that Democrats who have voted for, support and will vote again for Obama’s initiatives will not heed any complaints or objections from constituents, and will try to find any excuse they can for ignoring or discounting them.
I have the feeling from the little coverage of various Tea Parties around the nation, town hall meetings, and confrontations at various congressman’s offices that, despite the best efforts of the MSM, are starting to leak through, that more and more citizens are starting to wake up to how Obama and the Democratic Congress are proposing to shaft them, and they are getting increasingly angry. So angry, it seems, that Glenn Beck today on his TV show, explicitly warned people against violence.
I read somewhere, probably iowahawk, about a turd not having a clean end. There is now way to pick it up without……..you know.
The birth certificate thing has cleverly been made a turd. I can’t help but agree with Scottie on one gnawing issue. Why has so much money been spent on keeping this thing under wraps? Why won’t he just show his birth certificate and end all this? Hell, I would. Wouldn’t anybody, unless there was something to hide?
Careful br549, you’ll be accused of wearing a tinfoil hat and detracting from “real issues”….
HEEEEE HAWWWWWW!!!!!
😛
Scottie, detracting from the issue is not all you’re doing and I agree with what had also been said here that you not only look like you’re wearing a tin-foil hat, it makes it look to non political observers, that we all wear tin foil hats. You’re going no where with the birth issue. Start focusing on ideals rather than some mis-guided idea that Obama would just step aside if somehow the long form ever showed up. It’s just not happening.
We need to win with convictions and conservative values (and no, not by shoving your religion down somebody’s throat, and no, not by forcing fake Republicans down our own throats), As someone earlier has said, trying a legal gimmick no matter how relevant is going to make it look like mere maneuvering rather than strength through reasoned argument.
We are better than that. Show people how superior to the mob rule and a demagoguery spouting sophist leader a republic is. Its an uphill climb in which we have to burn our way through the media reinforced narrative. Burn through it smartly and leave the useless counter productive legal gimmicks at home.
Scottie, if you couldn’t see it with one reminder, you’re unlikely to see it with two, but you might consider reviewing the comments of Vieux Charles, strcpy, Daniel in Brookline, expat, gcotharn, Tim P, oblio, and my estimable self. Your contentions that this should all be a simple Constitutional requirement – let’s just get the truth – is appealing but misguided, refuted above.
Secondly, I would not characterise your comments the same way you do.
Thirdly, I should not have singled you out, but you made the first comment, and two of the most recent when I complained.
Assistant Village Idiot,
On second thought.
The left had Diebold conspiracies, oil conspiracies, Texas National Guard conspiracies, and Haliburton conspiracies. They distorted Abu Ghraib and Fallujah. They invented atrocities of our soldiers desecrating the Koran in Gitmo and committing murder and rape in Haditha.
And they still won the election.
I think it’s okay if Scottie wants to pursue this ‘birth certificate’ thing. Who knows, he may be onto something.
> Of course, the press has completely abdicated its duty to explore
They’re too busy applying proctoscope and speculum to Sarah Palin.
The Usurper’s birth certificate may have been found.
Not really. It’s already been proven to be a forgery:
http://washingtonindependent.com/53658/is-this-the-source-of-the-forged-kenyan-birth-certificate
What I like about nirtherism is its simplicity: The guy is not an American. Technically & legally, he may be, but not in his heart. That’s gold
But the nirthers are claiming that “technically & legally” Obama is NOT a citizen. They base their entire theory on legality, not on what’s in his “heart.”
… noted that there WERE serious questions posed regarding his BC …
If the commentor wants to describe rank speculation as posing “serious questions” the commentor is free to do so. If tulips were turnips …
So I’m still left trying to figure out why Obama continues to fight revealing his birth documentation…
… by producing the Certification, he’s only fueled further skepticism by doing so.
One might even go so far as to speculate that Obama meant to fuel skepticism, that it was a strategy to make the GOP look like fools. Well, whether it was on purpose or not, that’s the way it is working out. Crafty Obama or lucky Obama, either way he has tapped into a GOP public relations fiasco, seemingly without half trying.
The problem here is that Obama could shut this line of inquiry down today but chooses not to.
Indeed. If I were Obama I wouldn’t choose to, either. Why shut down something that is so beneficial to his administration? Why shut down something that is so injurious to the GOP? He would be a fool to shut this kookiness down. Yep, it sure is a problem, but not for Obama.
If he has a legitimate birth certificate that he could have posted a long time ago, then it looks much more like he’s deliberately mocking a significant portion of the serious voting public who have ample reason to be raising these questions.
speculation as to why Obama may have taken this route rather than simply revealing the documents once and for all and settling the matter,
Prove it or lose it, show it or resign …
Release the long form, or resign.
What is sort of funny yet sad at the same time is that some people seem to think that Obama has to do something in order to get rid of their suspicions — to settle the “matter” in their minds. Folks, Obama doesn’t have to do a damn thing. To talk as if he does is delusional.
… the money he has spent fighting release of the documentation …
Has Obama spent money on this? I’ll admit to not being totally informed on all aspects of the birther conspiracy theory — so I am curious. When, how and where did Obama spend money “fighting the release of the documentation”?
I just saw Orly Taitz, one of the chief nirthers, on a MSNBC clip. “Incoherent” is the kindest adjective that comes to mind. And this person is an attorney? Hard to believe.
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/34355_MSNBC_Mocks_Nirther_Queen_Bee
Sheesh. i leave for a year and you become a de-facto birther. Doesn’t the Right have any arguments that aren’t conspiracy theories?
I imagine Obama hasn’t released his birth certificate because it’s stupid. neither he nor anyone else should be forced to hand over every single piece of their personal information because some nutjobs invented something out of thin air. Perhaps you’d like to see him (and by extension every other elected official) take regular drug tests? How good are you at armchair urinalysis?
Besides, think about this for one second. If he really didn’t have a birth certificate, how hard would it be to forge? Who else would have to be in on it? His family of course, but also the FBI, the CIA, the Pentagon, George Bush and Dick Cheney. Give me a break.
Loyal Achates, you paint with too broad a brush. neo is not a nirther, nor is it clear to me that anything like a majority of the commenters here believe that this is a big story. The opposite, if anything.
To put it in terms that you can understand, it’s as if you discover that among FDR’s New Dealers there were a number of Communists mixed with the liberals, and on that basis you proclaim that they were all Communists. People would rightly challenge your intellectual honesty.
You can rest assured that there are plenty of arguments against the current Administration’s policy direction that don’t rely on “conspiracy” theories. But I think you knew that already.
harry McHitlerburtonstein,
To quote your “estimable” self:
“Scottie, detracting from the issue is not all you’re doing and I agree with what had also been said here that you not only look like you’re wearing a tin-foil hat, it makes it look to non political observers, that we all wear tin foil hats.”
That’s quite a leap. I don’t recall being nasty to anyone who disagreed with me, but if that’s the way you want to play….
If I remember correctly, I was the first that cracked a light hearted joke with br549 about the tin-foil hat being associated with…ahem…my “estimable” self.
To jump to the conclusion that others have already made that assertion towards me prior to that – and more, that this meant anyone else on this thread was likewise considered a tin-foil hat theorist by the casual observer, is quite a leap and completely false.
But hey, perhaps you need the exercise?
I’ve actually been very careful to base my observations on known facts and logic, ignoring anything that is questionable – or if it is any part of the information I have brought into the discussion that COULD be questionable I’ve acknowledged it upfront and not attempted to defend it.
But to get back to your post:
“We need to win with convictions and conservative values (and no, not by shoving your religion down somebody’s throat, and no, not by forcing fake Republicans down our own throats), As someone earlier has said, trying a legal gimmick no matter how relevant is going to make it look like mere maneuvering rather than strength through reasoned argument.”
I have to admit, I’m a bit perplexed on this one. I don’t recall even bringing up the topic of religion, nor “fake Republicans”. Anyone who knows me would find that statement quite laughable. Perhaps you are projecting something here….
“legal gimmick”??? “conservative values”????
As I pointed out earlier, the US Constitution DOES mandate that the president be a natural born citizen. How is this a “legal gimmick”? I have always held the view that “conservative values” was fundamentally based on adherence to the Constitution.
Perhaps you have a different definition of “conservative” than I do….
There have been substantial questions raised regarding this issue dating all the way back to the primaries, and I think Obama releasing the documentation would lead to greater sense of ease over the man. The fact he doesn’t is only exacerbating that sense of unease.
Then there is this:
“Show people how superior to the mob rule and a demagoguery spouting sophist leader a republic is.”
I agree – so I’m happy to see you also want to see the US Constitution, upon which our republic was founded, enforced.
Welcome aboard.
Assistant Village Idiot,
“Scottie, if you couldn’t see it with one reminder, you’re unlikely to see it with two, but you might consider reviewing the comments of Vieux Charles, strcpy, Daniel in Brookline, expat, gcotharn, Tim P, oblio, and my estimable self.”
Oh, I have. It’s always funny to watch when people assume others are completely supportive and that you can speak for them…
It’s also funny you don’t really quote me, preferring to rely instead upon vague generalities.
“Your contentions that this should all be a simple Constitutional requirement – let’s just get the truth – is appealing but misguided, refuted above.”
You say “should be” and call it a “simple Constitutional requirement” as if it doesn’t exist??? You call it “misguided”?
Please note:
“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
(Constitution of the United States of America, Article II, Section 1., paragraph 5)
See AVI, it’s not something I think “should be” a “constitutional requirement” – it IS a constitutional requirement.
Exactly how have you refuted it?
The “natural born citizen” issue has broken through to the MSM, and like soldier ants rushing to the defense of their anthill, all sorts of defenders on the Left have sprung into action, in the MSM, on the Web and in Congress; this is but the latest of several steps Obama and his supporters have taken to defuse this issue, which could well wreck his Presidency. All this frenzied activity tells me that this is not just a trivial issue or unimportant, but is rather a major, even game changing, show stopping issue for Obama & Co..
In my view Obama knew, all too well and from the very beginning of planning his political career, that he might have a major problem with the “natural born citizen” requirement, and to deal with this problem he has taken steps, some of which have come to light.
First, was Obama’s laying down the main “narrative” of his life in his two autobiographies, “Dreams from My Father,” and “The Audacity of Hope” which, more and more, are being discovered to be a tissue of lies, half-truths, and omissions.
Next, was the sealing of all his records–original birth certificate, school records, scholarship records, medical records, passport records–to eliminate his back trail; the U.S. MSM cooperated to great effect here by not being in the least inquisitive, portraying anyone inquiring into this area as a nut, “conspiracy theorist,” “Birther,” “Zombie,” a “Hater,” or a “Suspicious Mind,” and repeating the mantra “there is nothing here to see folks, just move along.”
Next, there is the rather odd research done in 2006 by the Chicago law firm of Kirk and Ellis–that has ties to Obama–on this Constitutional requirement and how to get around it, and the law review article based on this legal research by Kirk and Ellis lawyer Sarah P. Herlihy titled, “Amending the Natural Born Citizen Requirement: Globalization as the Impetus and Obstacle,” in which she argued that this requirement, called by some the “stupidest provision” in the Constitution, “undecidedly un American,” “blatantly discriminatory,” and the “Constitution’s worst provision,” was discriminatory and aught to be scrapped (http://tinyurl.com/56fvex) .
Then, there was Obama unusual interest in and cosponsoring of Sen. Res. 511 in the 110th Congress, a non-binding Sense of the Senate Resolution declaring that Senator McCain was a “natural born citizen,” that, not coincidentally, got some discussion and legal opinions about this issue that might be useful to Obama into the Congressional Record, which could later be called upon as legislative history and as evidence of how Senators viewed the natural born citizen issue.
More recently, below is a link to the second article within the last week in a MSM outlet–today its the Chicago Tribune.com–arguing that the “natural born citizen” requirement is, in this instance, “a bit of vestigial nativism,” “An infamous slap at naturalized citizens,” “That’s not patriotism, it’s bigotry,” and “the most un-American Section of the Constitution” http://tinyurl.com/ko933z ), last week it was an article calling this requirement “archaic.”
And here is Senate majority leader Harry Read’s statement a day or so ago: “Let’s be clear. It’s a phony issue and does not deserve even a minute of our attention on the floor of the United States Senate,” Reid announced today, giving the issue just that minute. “It’s absurd, irresponsible, baseless and the false claims of long ago have been refuted” (http://tinyurl.com/m3ve52) .
This is not at all, “much ado about nothing,” on the contrary, this is called a preemptive strike, shoring up the dikes, and building a line of defense, and the great vulnerability of Obama.
Scottie, Wolla Dalbo. If you get into a discussion with a lawyer from the other side, you are going to have your balls handed to you. You don’t believe that, but it’s true. I answered in “vague generalities,” not quoting you, because the arguments above are lengthy, and I would really rather you do the work of reading and thinking. There are over a dozen reasons listed there why this should be dropped. Here are a few:
1. “Natural born citizen” looks simple but in practice it’s not.
2. There is no mechanism that will result in Obama’s removal, as no court is going to overturn an election, and no one is going to impeach him over it.
3. Obama has released documents that some find insufficient, but a court will likely find sufficient.
4. Obama could have other reasons besides place of birth for keeping records out of the public eye. Lots of presidents and candidates have successfully done that. Sometimes they do it just because they can, and don’t like to be ordered around. I will remind you of Bill Clinton’s medical records and John Kerry’s service records, for example.
Start with those.
Assistant Village Idiot–As a practical matter, it well may be impossible to remove Obama, but, if not, at least his legitimacy can be called into question, and the legitimacy of all of his actions and appointments as well.
This is about “reasonable doubt,” and people who have reasonable doubts will be more critical and less likely to just accept things at face value, and uncritically go along with them. Each one of those “doubters” is one less easily manageable silent spectator and potential slave in Obama’s Socialist/Fascist/Marxist “Utopia.”
Assistant Village Idiot,
I take it then you are versed in the law, and practice it daily?
Once again, opinions are not facts. This is a discussion regarding Obama not releasing birth documents and the ramifications of that decision – not a court of law.
The level of “proof” in a blog is far lower than that of a court of law.
Then again, the level of “proof” in politics is far lower than that of a court of law as well, so I guess that’s appropriate.
In your previous statement – which was extremely vague – I guess I was supposed to read your mind as to exactly what issues you were referring to. That does not fall into the catagory of “thinking”.
I put mind readers into the same catagory as witch doctors and crystal ball readers…
BUT, since you’ve finally elected to offer some specifics, I’ll be happy to discuss those.
*1. “Natural born citizen” looks simple but in practice it’s not.*
For most Americans, it actually IS pretty simple. However, in Obama’s case it IS complicated.
It’s this very complication that is generating the unease in a substantial portion of the population and leading to these very rumors.
As the nation’s leader Obama should be willing to set aside his personal preferences regarding privacy, release the necessary documentation, set the public mind at ease, and settle the matter once and for all so we can all move on.
Extraordinary public positions sometimes require extraordinary explanations.
*2. There is no mechanism that will result in Obama’s removal, as no court is going to overturn an election, and no one is going to impeach him over it.*
Impeachment, summary ruling by the USSC, resignation.
There are plenty of ways to handle it should there actually be something of substance under all of this smoke, those are only three of the options.
Other options are far more unpleasant to contemplate due to the general civil upheaval that would occur – which is why I would prefer Obama take the necessary steps to put this matter to rest once and for all.
It is, after all, well within his power to do so.
*3. Obama has released documents that some find insufficient, but a court will likely find sufficient.*
Obama supporters have actually only released an alleged copy of his “Certification of Live Birth” for online publication.
As pointed out earlier, this is not the same thing as a “Birth Certificate”. To my knowledge Obama has personally released nothing of this nature, and as far as I know, no actual forensics expert has examined the original documentation.
Since he has personally released nothing for real review by knowledgeable people in a public forum, how could any court rule that it is “sufficient”?
As others have pointed out, various government agencies – including Hawaiian agencies – don’t consider this document being referenced (actually, online copy of the alleged document) to be valid as stand alone proof and require additional proof of citizenship for various reasons.
If even Hawaii won’t accept it as stand alone proof, why should the American be required to accept a far lesser standard for someone who deigns lead them?
Who knows what a judge would accept under these circumstances?
To my knowledge the cases filed have all been stymied or dismissed for various reasons.
I don’t believe any judge has actually ruled that the evidence provided to KOS and published online is sufficient, nor has any judge used this information to dismiss a case, thereby leaving the subject very much an open issue.
*4. Obama could have other reasons besides place of birth for keeping records out of the public eye. Lots of presidents and candidates have successfully done that. Sometimes they do it just because they can, and don’t like to be ordered around. I will remind you of Bill Clinton’s medical records and John Kerry’s service records, for example.*
Had you bothered to read what I wrote earlier, you would have noticed I said pretty much the same thing already, noting that Obama very well could be a legitimate Natural Born Citizen – yet have other reasons for not releasing the documentation.
I believe that would fall under the heading of “reading and thinking” for yourself.
“There are over a dozen reasons listed there why this should be dropped.”
Read the topic our host wrote once again.
She gave an excellent overview of the matter, but offered no questions for discussion. As such, this has been a very free wheeling conversation.
If you want to get pi$$y over discussing this issue at all and believe it should NOT be discussed or even brought up for fear of being labeled a tin-foil-hatter, perhaps you should contact our hostess and demand she not bring the subject up in the future?
Let me know how that conversation goes….
On the political question, will the nirther foolishness redound to the detriment of the conservatives and the Republicans?
There is reason to believe not. The left and Dems got great benefit from the Bush/Hitler and Halliburton madness and from BDS in general. The campaigns against President Clinton re Whitewater and Monica did the President great harm without hurting the Republicans.
Ever since Nixon’s resignation, the Politics of Personal Destruction have been an integral part of US domestic politics. Deplorable, but true.
Fred2,
Just an observation:
Should Obama approve the release of the information and is subsequently confirmed in his citizenship status, then there is no “personal destruction” but rather validation.
That actually is how I would like to see this issue resolve itself….the alternative is something that I don’t want to see the nation go through.
Regardless whether or not Obama can be forced to produce his original birth certificate for inspection, there is another even more important aspect to this controversy and that is adherence to the Constitution. The question is, do we ignore a fundamental part of our Constitution, do we remove it or treat it as null and void as some have suggested we do, because, they argue, it seems “archaic” or “discriminatory” to them? And, if we ignore this part of the Constitution, what part do we ignore next? Then, which parts of our Bill of Rights, that some could argue, too, is archaic or old fashioned, do we declare null and void?
The Founding Fathers very carefully constructed our Constitution, and the natural born citizen requirement was put there for a very specific reason; to insure that any President was American in mindset, heart and allegiance, that he was familiar with and loved America and Americans, our particular history, traditions, customs and democracy. By his actions just these last six months, Obama has shown the wisdom of this provision, which he was unfortunately able to evade.
Regardless whether or not Obama can be forced to produce his original birth certificate for inspection, there is another even more important aspect to this controversy and that is adherence to the Constitution.
If I am reading the writer correctly he is claiming that Obama is violating some part of the Constitution. I’ve seen this claim before and find it puzzling. I am going to have to ask the writer to explain to me what part of the Constitution Obama is violating.
– There are over a dozen reasons listed there why this should be dropped. Here are a few … Start with those.
Okay, I’ll happily butt in on that.
– 1. “Natural born citizen” looks simple but in practice it’s not.
You assert that this issue should be dropped because it’s complex. Sorry. First, that’s a straw man. No one’s pursuing this mystery because it’s “simple”. Second, complexity of the issue is not sufficient justification to drop it. Fail for you.
– 2. There is no mechanism that will result in Obama’s removal, as no court is going to overturn an election, and no one is going to impeach him over it.
Really? Is this what your crystal ball tells you? Because nowhere in the Constitution or in any of the U.S. Code is this guaranteed. Your assertion is actually just speculation. If BHO has actually committed perjury by affirming he is a natural born citizen when he isn’t, that alone would be grounds for impeachment. And once he trashes the economy sufficiently, you can be sure that an electorate made sufficiently aware of his conspiratorial behavior will be clamoring for exactly that. Or perhaps you’d prefer to deflect back to Clinton? He was impeached on precisely this charge, and ‘acquitted’ on a purely partisan basis despite having been sanctioned for that very same crime.
– 3. Obama has released documents that some find insufficient, but a court will likely find sufficient.
Let’s not exaggerate. BHO has released only a single document. No court has deemed BHO’s Certification document “sufficient”, since the question has never been considered by any court. What you believe a court will “likely” find is hardly of any interest at all in that context. This is especially true given the fact that even the State of Hawaii doesn’t consider a Certification document probative for the purposes of affirming native Hawaiian status.
– 4. Obama could have other reasons besides place of birth for keeping records out of the public eye.
He may well have such reasons. The fact that he and his handlers have gone to such herculean effort to hide his past is ample evidence that such is the case. Unfortunately, those reasons are irrelevant unless and until he’s actually demonstrated his Article II eligibility to be elected POTUS, with probative documentation affirming that eligibility. A facsimile of a Certification doesn’t qualify in this regard, since it doesn’t reflect any amendments that may have been made to the original Certificate.
As to what other Presidents or candidates have or have not released or promised (and later chosen not) to release – none of those records had any bearing on their Article II eligibility to be elected. So that line of ‘defense’ is just irrelevant thesis fallacy.
John McCain’s similar case is the only case with any relevance here. He complied in every way with requests for original, probative documentation affirming his eligibility even though there was far less question regarding his status. Based on that precedent, BHO has failed to comply with Article II requirements.
Oh yeah, what about the announcements in two Hawaiian newspapers of his birth at the time?
And we do have his doctor’s name – it’s Dr. Rodney T. West. The birth of a baby to married black and white couple was not exactly a common occurrence in 1961, and so people remembered it:
http://snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp
Upon reflection – and I can’t speak to Obama’s motives – it might be a strategic decision not to release his long-form birth certificate to the public. First of all it would prove nothing, the same self-declared experts who decided that his Certificate of Live Birth was a forgery would suddenly become very knowledgeable about Hawaiian birth certificates form the 1960s and declare that a fake too. You an’t argue with the birthers – it’s giving someone an orange and trying to prove to them it’s not an onion.
The only people whoi take this birther stuff seriously are people who hate Obama anyway. by not giving in to them he gains cred with his base and make the Right look like desperate hooligans with no ideas.
What’s your game, Loyal Achates? Stirring the pot for the Alinsky faction?
I’ve never read Alinsky so I couldn’t really say if I belong to his ;faction’ or not. if you want to criticize Obama there’s plenty of opportunities, because conservatism is still a valid worldview. But intellectually the American conservative movement is absolutely dead as a doornail, and this Birther stuff clinches it.
You are overgeneralizing again, Loyal Achates. If the nirthers are clinching evidence that the “Right” is intellectually dead, then you must admit that the MoveOn General “Betray-us” ad was compelling proof that the Left and even mainstream Democrats like Hillary Clinton are also intellectually dead.
If everyone is intellectually dead, your point loses its meaning. But perhaps you could name some movement that is not, by your standards, and explain what your standards are along the way.
I suppose your point could be that we are people on a darkling plain, where ignorant armies clash by night.
“Ah, love, let us be true
To one another! for the world, which seems
To lie before us like a land of dreams,
So various, so beautiful, so new,
Hath really neither joy, nor love, nor light,
Nor certitude, nor peace, nor help for pain;
And we are here as on a darkling plain
Swept with confused alarms of struggle and flight,
Where ignorant armies clash by night.”
Thank you, Matthew Arnold! (Dover Beach)
Scottie and goy. Thank you for your answers, but they are partial. I think you really don’t hear the main part of the complaint somehow. It’s an anterior cingulate gyrus phenomenon that we all experience in certain circumstances. As an alternative, I suggest you consult a person whose reasoning you usually trust who does not have a position on this issue, and see if you can convince him.
I really don’t believe for a moment that Obama is not a natural-born citizen. The newspaper articles would require a rather absurd presumption of prescience on the part of his mother/father, since about the only possible position for which it makes any real difference is that of PotUS. Anything else and his citizenship — US, Kenyan, whatever — is his choice at the age of majority.
But I do have to wonder quite a bit — WTF possible reason could Obama have for refusing to release the long-form BC? It now becomes something I want to know just because he clearly is going to insane lengths to hide it from us, just like he did with his school papers, records and other things which due diligence from the US press should long since have turned up.
More critically, why is this item — a full and legally binding copy of a birth certificate (which the short form isn’t) — why is publicly available presentation of this NOT an absolute requirement to file for candidacy in a US Presidential election in the very first place?
– …I suggest you consult a person whose reasoning you usually trust who does not have a position on this issue, and see if you can convince him.
Huh?
A Certification of Live Birth is the ONLY documenation BHO has released in response to those seeking proof that he is eligible to be elected POTUS under the rules set forth in the Constitution he’s sworn to uphold and defend.
A Certification of Live Birth is not probative for the purposes of affirming natural born citizenship, since it contains data that may differ from the original Certificate of Live Birth in substantive ways – per Hawaii State Law.
Therefore, BHO has never publicly released probative documentation affirming his Article II eligibility to be elected President. So the question of his eligibility is still open.
That’s about as simple as I can make it for you, and it’s not necessary to “convince” anyone I know that this is true. It’s already documented fact.
The precedent for this question was set when McCain’s eligibility was challenged and the courts enthusiastically obliged that challenge. The circumstances of McCain’s birth were ALSO ostensibly well-known, yet he immediately released the probative documentation necessary for a legal review. That documentation was affirmatively assessed, and the Senate passed a Resolution affirming McCain’s eligibility.
The double standards observed by the courts in BHO’s case – purely out of fear of appearing “racist” – are nothing short of breathtaking, and demonstrate exactly how far from a Republic this nation has wandered in the absence of reasonable leadership.
I’ve quoted you and linked to you here: http://consul-at-arms2.blogspot.com/2009/08/re-on-nirthers-and-press.html
A couple of commenters make some incorrect assertions.
Vieux Charles: “The fact that his mother is a US citizen is proof that he is indeed a natural born citizen – something even his Indonesia step-father can’t renounce on his behalf.”
&
ohbloodyhell: “The newspaper articles would require a rather absurd presumption of prescience on the part of his mother/father, since about the only possible position for which it makes any real difference is that of PotUS. Anything else and his citizenship – US, Kenyan, whatever – is his choice at the age of majority.”
First VC: The mere fact that one parent is a U.S. citizen is insufficient, if born abroad, to transmit American citizenship. This is covered by federal statute, 8 U.S.C., The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, as amended. Usually refered to as the INA. Precise requirements vary depending upon when a child is born. Due to the requirements then legally in force when Pres. Obama was born, if he had not been born in Hawaii (or elsewhere in the U.S.) he would not have been a U.S. citizen at birth. He could have subsequently naturalized (but no one is claiming that).
Lastly, obh: Huh? Since when do you get to “choose” whether or not you’re a U.S. citizen when you reach the age of majority? I’ve heard this rumor before, particularly when dealing with German-Americans (there used to be some basis of this in German nationality law but no longer), but it’s not a part of U.S. nationality law.