Pajamas Media

250 Comments

1. URBuddy:

Correct, all Senator Obama has to do to quiet these lawsuits is to ask for his long form birth certificate to be released by Hawaii instead of contining to direct his legion of DNC attorneys to keep fighting lawsuits and piling up billable hours. One other thing, who is paying Senator Obama’s attorney fees?

Dec 11, 2008 - 11:08 pm 2. robotech master:

O like more retarded ppl jumping in and being retarded…

“Obama is ineligible to be president because he was born outside the United States. If he was born outside the United States or U.S. territories, this might indeed have been a legitimate Constitutional issue. The problem with this theory is that no one has been able to provide any credible evidence that Barack Obama was born anywhere other than Hawaii. Claims that he was born in Kenya have been based on fanciful claims woven out of thin air and a faulty translation of a conversation with his grandmother purposefully taken out of context. There is no documentation or testimony to support this claim. None.”

Hmmm got any proof that he was born in hawaii… none has been produced…I do find it amusing that a newspaper ad is proof beyond any shadow of doubt for obama knob slobbers…but obama grandmothers words… and a Kenya official’s words were “taken out of context” as well as the monument their being at obama birth location…in Kenya(and its clear the burden of proof is on him).

I also notice how you said nothing about his selective service….

While I agree the 3 other listed things are mostly legal matters of point of view… once again another libtard just trying to say they are above the law and shouldn’t have to do anything….

Why does PJM let these idiots copy/paste this propaganda crap… its nice to see the huge sources of proof, facts and citations that another obama knob slobber has posted along with his argument….This twit properly hasn’t even reviewed any of the laws he issues he talking about and just copied his piece from obama web site…

Dec 11, 2008 - 11:24 pm 3. Rob M.:

Well, of course it’s all a big conspiracy. Remember Hillary Clinton’s ongoing phrase, “Republican Conspiracy”? Obviously, it was a statement not without intentions, allowing further justification for those seeking to steer away from national interests toward a more inward focus; a vindicating sigh of relief for Americans who prefer a paranoid sense of dissent to patriotism.

Now the bloom is off the rose and the tables have turned. Now the frame of mind has been taken from those whose beliefs make them happy and been handed to those whose beliefs make them miserable. Now the conservatives are the ones who care enough to criticize, while the liberals have become the new “love it or leave it” crowd. The best way to get a liberal to have a complete emotional meltdown is to start questioning the validity of Obama, or practically any democrat. Meanwhile, the extent of their arguments continue to consist mainly of childish name-calling and finger pointing, (I might add, at Republicans who they couldn’t hold a candle to).

With the Christmas upon us, I would urge you all to get your liberal family members a copy of “How To Hypnotize Anyone Without Getting Caught” by Nathan Balszack. Learning the techniques also involves understanding when others use it on you. Needless to say, I read it a year ago and it’s exactly why I didn’t vote for Obama.

Dec 11, 2008 - 11:24 pm 4. MIke Malkovitch:

Surely this a simply way for Obama to obliterate the riff raff? Make his birth record public?

Dec 11, 2008 - 11:59 pm 5. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Bob Owen, et al.
RE: It’s In the Constitution

If he was born outside the United States or U.S. territories, this might indeed have been a legitimate Constitutional issue. The problem with this theory is that no one has been able to provide any credible evidence that Barack Obama was born anywhere other than Hawaii. — Bob Owen

Too funny.

Every other job in the government I’m familiar with one has to prove they are eligible to hold. With the exception of the highest one, President of the United States.

I asked my state’s Secretary of State whether or not they require proof of eligibility to run for that office. This is what they said in reply….

First, please understand that, pursuant to Colorado statute, the process
of nominating and certifying presidential candidates to the ballot is
party-oriented; candidates are certified to the state and, therefore,
the legal responsibility for confirming citizenship (or any other
qualification) lies with the certifying entity. Any questions regarding
the qualifications of a presidential candidate should be directed to the
parties, who are the certifying entities in this case.

Second, if you wish to challenge the qualifications of a Presidential
candidate, the proper forum is the district court, not the Secretary of
State’s office. Because the nomination and certification of candidates
is purely a party function, this office lacks the authority to
investigate complaints levied against a particular candidate’s
eligibility or qualifications for office. Please see section 1-4-909,
C.R.S., for more information regarding challenges to a candidate’s
qualifications.

In sum, please direct any inquiries regarding the qualifications of
candidates to the respective parties. If you wish to challenge these
qualifications, you must do so in district court. — Colorado Secretary of State, Elections Division dated 9 Dec 08

It’s pretty obvious that all the Colorado Secretary of State does is accept whomever the state party offers. No questions asked. They would have accepted Arnold the Governator or even Saddam Hussein or Vladimir Putin, if the party offered them.

In other words, the Colorado Secretary of State, a Republican by election, absolves itself of ANY responsibility in this sort of matter. And I find that an abdication of obvious responsibility in a matter as important as this. It’s a loop-hole one could drive a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, along with attending escort ships through, and the admiral wouldn’t lose a moments sleep.

And I’m pretty confident that most other states, if not all, have the same loop-hole.

RE: The Birth Certificate

The item offered by the Obama campaign at their Fight the Smears site is not a Birth Certificate. Furthermore, it is missing all of the following:

• No name of attending physician
• No name of hospital or location of birth
• No number of children born at the time
• No official seal
• No signatures

Furthermore, there are other anomalies associated with that document:

• The birth certificate looks rather ‘new’, i.e., no aging whatsoever…..
• The print on the image appears to be from a computer. I didn’t know they had computers like that in 1961
• In the lower left-hand corner, there appears to be the word “LASER”. Did they have lasers in 1961 doing printing?
• If this is a reprint, where is the signature of the official who endorses it as authentic?

RE: Hawaiian Officials Statements

We’ve heard that a number of state officials have said there is a ‘valid document’. Well, there are some things about state officials.

[1] They often lie. Especially when they are not under oath. I recall earlier this week an official in Ohio reported that she was “ordered to lie” to investigators about whether or not her office had illegally looked into ‘Joe the Plumbers’ martial/divorce records.

[2] Half-truths are another matter. Saying there is a ‘valid document’ and not specifying what document they are referring to could give them an out.

In addition to that, I went to the Hawaiian Revises Statutes web-site and found that ALL the items I searched for relating to Birth Certificates were not available for review. Got a 404 error on every item of the 41 found I clicked on. I find that rather ‘odd’. Especially in light of the report on Rick Moran’s thread from earlier this week that anyone who is a resident of Hawaii can get a Certificate of Live Birth.

And, as I said, the one offered by the Obama campaign has no signatures, so it has no value in a court of law.

Just some thoughts on the one item that I think is valid.

If Obama IS a natural-born citizen of the United States, this whole matter could be easily dealt with. BRING FORTH THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE.

The only reason I can think of that he has not done so is there is something VERY ‘embarrassing’ about the document. And I would suggest that it is one of these two possibilities:

[1] Maybe it doesn’t exist.

Or

[2] Maybe hs real mother’s name is “Barney Frank”, or something similar.

Until the matter is properly resolve, BEFORE he has control of the CIA and FBI—which are very good at faking documents—I consider him to be an ‘illegal alien’.

So, I call on you to ask that the Electoral College refrain from casting their ballots UNTIL AFTER they have been proven beyond any shadow of a doubt that Senator Barack Hussein Obama IS a natural-born citizen.

Anything less is a travesty.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[A popular government without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a prologue to a farce or a tragedy, or perhaps both. Knowledge will forever govern ignorance, and a people who mean to be their own governors must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives. -- President James Madison [Notes on Virginia]]

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:01 am 6. Alo Kievalar:

“U.S. law is very specific, stating that the only way a U.S. citizen can lose his citizenship is to renounce it following very specific steps:
”

As written, the above statement is incorrect.

A “naturalized” US citizen (someone who previously held another nationality but emigrated to the US, obtained a “Green Card” and eventually took the oath to become a US citizen) can have his US citizenship REVOKED by
court order.

This has happened on several occasions, most famously with regards former Nazi “guards” who were found out and had their US citizenship taken away from them (and who were subsequently deported to their country of origin), even though they had held US citizenship, for decades in some cases.

This cannot happen to citizens born on US soil, of course, because their citizenship was not “acquired” by means of any “naturalization” process, but through “birthright”.

Any US citizen can “renounce” his citizenship, of course, following the procedures outlined in the article. But, as I’ve stated above, in some cases, citizenship can be TAKEN AWAY.

The quoted statement should be modified as follows:

“U.S. law is very specific, stating that the only way a [natural-born] U.S. citizen can lose his citizenship is to renounce it following very specific steps:”

Dec 12, 2008 - 3:49 am 7. grandfather:

We adopted my granddaughter,
the second question on the list of things I had to do.

‘Please provide us with a notarized Birth Certificate.’

I guess Bambi’s grandmother never had to use one.

Dec 12, 2008 - 3:56 am 8. Alo Kievalar:

CAN I BECOME US PRESIDENT?

Further to my previous post:

The question has frequently been asked in my own family circle whether I myself can run for US President.

I was born in Lima (Peru) to a natural-born US citizen on official US government assignment to Peru. My mother was a Latin American citizen.

As far as I understand the law, you are either a “natural-born” US citizen or you are a “naturalized” US citizen. THERE ARE NO FURTHER CATEGORIES….It’s either one or the other.

You become a “naturalized” US citizen by acquireing citizenship through a process which involves: legal immigration to the US then obtaining a Green Card (resident status) and finally taking an oath of allegiance and legally “becoming” a US citizen (you can become a state governor (Schwarzeneger), get a US Passport etc). This process takes a minimum of 5 years….usually more like 10.

Note: The vast majority of legal residents (Green Card holders) in the US NEVER BOTHER to take the next step and become actual citizens. Unless you’re running for public office, there’s no need to.

Clearly, in my case, I am NOT a “naturalized” US citizen. I never “emigrated” to the US nor had a green card nor took an oath.

I acquired my US citizen AT BIRTH thru my father. The second I plopped out, I was a US citizen.

But am I a “natural-born” US citizen? And can I become the next US President?

These are issues that have raged for years with various interpretations.

In my opinion, UNLESS A SEPARATE CITIZENSHIP CATEGORY is established, I consider myself a “natural-born” citizen and fully eligible to be a US President.

For a detailed and generally easy to read explanation of this issue, go to (where else):

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural-born_citizen#.22Natural_born_citizen.22_as_presidential_qualification

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:27 am 9. Chris in Toronto:

Is this a click magnet?

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:47 am 10. Steve:

Uhhhh…… you said you were going to debunk ALL the theories. As for possibly having not been born in Hawaii, you say no proof has been provided that he was born elsewhere. This is true, but it is not debunked. There is certainly some evidence that he was not born in Hawaii. To debunk that evidence you would have to provide proof that the evidence is wrong. You have provided nothing. Obama could release his birth certificate. What is he hiding?

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:56 am 11. RE:

I believe that what has a lot of people upset is the cavalier attitude to the law. Illegal immigration and voter fraud has a lot have done much to undermine the rule of law in this country. The refusal of politicians to be forthcoming on compliance with established law just feeds into the cynicism.
A birth certificate is so basic, so simple. A refusal to produce one can only arouse suspicions, so I find it perfectly understandable why some people are passionately pursuing this issue.

The notion that laws are optional for some people should evoke much, much more outrage than it has. Obama is just a symptom of our much bigger problems.

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:34 am 12. misanthropicus:

Owens – if things are THAT neat and clear as you claim they are, why Obama doesn’t provide the evidence? It is so simple and cheap!
While he, so far has prevailed in court, this may not last forever – why does he prefere a significantly more expensive way to face this situation, financially and PR-wise, to making available for scrutiny the paper in cause at a negligible price, prove everyone who question him as a fool, score big, and be out of this for ever? Why?

Forget for a moment your demonstration and answer this very simple question – Why Obama prefers a lawyerly struggle to a very simple solution? Why?
His choice cannot but make the suspicions existing around him greater and greater, and justifiably so.

But since you will not answer this question, I have to remind the PJM readers that you went through the same type of contorsions and obfuscation a few months ago, when the photo of the Franziskus school enrollment page hit the fan – and you weren’t very convincing that time, either.

Answer this – why Obama preferes this long and damaging tergiversation to a quick end? Can you answer this question and this without arguing that only a loon can come with such a request?

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:37 am 13. cedarford:

Alo Kievalar – IMO, too. I think George Romney proved it out when he ran in 1968. “Truthers” miss that before the 14th Amendment, the “senior” and I believe in most people’s minds, the still ongoing higher claim to natural citizenship is born of the blood of one or more American citizen parents. Superior, IMO, to someone illegally in the country or abusing a tourist or work visa to plop an “instant natural citizen” anchor baby out on US soil.
People need to remember that Amendments to the Constitution do not extinguish pre-existing rights unless they clearly specify so.

******************
URBuddy:
Correct, all Senator Obama has to do to quiet these lawsuits is to ask for his long form birth certificate to be released by Hawaii instead of contining to direct his legion of DNC attorneys to keep fighting lawsuits and piling up billable hours. One other thing, who is paying Senator Obama’s attorney fees?

1. Just like all Gov Palin had to do to quiet her critics and lawsuits demanding she release her gynecological records and newborn’s “official original” birth certificate for the other side’s Truther conspiracists.

Or she could politely tell them to f*ck off. Which she did.

As for Obama’s Team, I imagine that they are following the maxim: “When you see your enemies
digging a hole and making assholes out of themselves, don’t stop them. Better yet, buy them more shovels.”
Fighting the Truthers, rather than kow-towing to their angry demands, is the purchase of shovels. The other side benefits are you deplete their funds, and fighting Right Wing nutballs on the trivial gives you huge cover in appeasing Lefties angry with your Centrist appointments.

*******************

Chuck Pelto – I asked my state’s Secretary of State…

And got the pro forma dismissal your fellow hundred or so other nutball conspiracists got when they wrote “demanding!!” something be done about the Secret Kenyan Birth Conspiracy

As for your question on funds, it is a legitimate Campaign expense and Obama not only has 47 million leftover, he could raise another 5-10 million with one mass emailing.

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:44 am 14. Ms Attitude:

I honestly think this issue should be dropped. His mother was an American citizen at the time of his birth. Even if he was born in Kenya and his mother hadn’t been an American citizen for 5 years after the age of 16 at the time of his birth, why should a child of an American citizen be penalized for it?

Let’s flip the coin here for a second. The 9/11 theorists used proof that the Bush’s had contacts with the Bin Ladin’s prior to 9/11. That movie made by the liberal Mike whatever, had video and documents. But the Bush’s are innocent of that.

We are wasting time on this. We need to focus on the important issues. Was he in on selling his Senate seat, is he following the teachings of Saul Alinsky, is he going to royally screw the USA? How crooked is he? I think he’s allowing this birth certificate issue as a shield, he’s up to no good and while we are focused on this he can do whatever he wants.

What if he is proven to be ineligble for president? Say, two years down the road. I think that civil war would break out, his followers vs. the rest of us. He will have his army of citizens by then and would become a dictator! Lets let him have his 4 years and make sure he doesn’t ruin us.

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:50 am 15. Chuck Pelto:

TO: cedarford
RE: Hi There…

Haven’t heard from you for some time.

By the way, you never answered my question regarding where and in what capacity you ’served’ as an officer in the US Armed Forces.

Still waiting on that.

Is your reason for not answering akin to Obama’s not showing his birth certificate?

Which by the way….

…dismissal your fellow hundred or so other nutball conspiracists got when they wrote “demanding!!” — cedarford

Asking for proof of employment eligibility is an indication ‘nutball conspiracy’?

How VERY odd. Every employer that I’ve encountered has required that of ME. So they must be nutballs too.

And, if you’re still employed by anyone, your boss must be a nutball too.

I’ll be sure to tell them you think so highly of them.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. Projection looks bad on you…..

Dec 12, 2008 - 6:04 am 16. bill:

Ms. Attitude,

You make some great points. I personally think it would be easier to disqualify him on constitutional grounds than to allow him to get in and “royally screw the USA”. Nip it in the bud

Dec 12, 2008 - 6:18 am 17. epb:

No doubt he’s ought to receive the full allowance of any U.S. citizen, including to right to run for the presidency, because his mother is an American. Ipso facto, he too is an American citizen in its fullest sense. I however would find it enlightening to see if he actually self-identified himself as anything other than a U.S. citizens as an adult, and as an adult also self-identified himself as Muslim, e.g., on university documents. If he did, it would not negate the election but it would help me and many know more about this man of mystery.

I do find it curious, even disconcerting that many are so uninterested in these questions.

Dec 12, 2008 - 6:34 am 18. Ms Attitude:

bill: I think there are more damning things that he has done that we don’t know about. He has so many secrets. I wouldn’t even what this guy as my neighbor. (besides, I couldn’t afford a house in his neighborhood) I had mentioned before his mother’s medical records at the hospital. I don’t know Hawaii’s laws regarding a deceased person’s medical records. That would show he was born in Hawaii.

I’m usually a good judge of character by listening and watching a person. Obama is up to something and it’s bigger than the birth certificate issue.

Dec 12, 2008 - 6:38 am 19. G Alston:

#12 misanthropicus — “Owens – if things are THAT neat and clear as you claim they are, why Obama doesn’t provide the evidence?”

It sets a precedence that wingnuts accuse Obama of X and he must now — apparently by their mere diktat — dance to whatever tune they deem. What’s X going to be next week? Does it involve aliens, perhaps? Will the wingnuts demand the dance be started every time they feel the urge to accuse Obama of something?

I say good for Obama’s team on this one.

At best, this is unseemly.

Dec 12, 2008 - 6:47 am 20. TexEd:

Well, maybe. But why all the coyness about his records? He has to be hiding something! We don’t have his birth certificate, we don’t have his medical records, we don’t have his thesis or transcripts, we don’t have his work product as a state (ILLINOIS) legislator. Imagine a Republican or even a white demo who tried to get away with that.
We know from his “no contact with Blago” lie that he can easily be trapped. By hiding his past, he avoids having to reconcile issues. That’s not right!
Citizen or not, there is a reason Hussein is hiding his birth certificate. That’s how Clinton acted. Obama said he was for change. He lied!

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:03 am 21. AnninCA:

Nicely written summary of the facts, but I doubt any of the nuts invested in this ridiculous story will be able to swallow the truth of the matter.

Basically, they will never accept that they are wrong. After all, the governor of Hawaii is in on this deal. Right?

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:14 am 22. always right:

This is not ‘debunking the arguments’ of the Proofers.

This is ‘punting’.

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:16 am 23. Thinking Person:

I am enjoying watching the MSM now questioning Obama’s previous claims of transparency in office. Anyone else notice the subtle prodding by the “journalists” about what contact Obama’s staff had with the Illinois Gov.? Maybe if they gain enough confidence to start asking some real questions about that, they’ll find enough kehones to start requesting some of the documents in question too! I know….I didn’t really think so either.

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:17 am 24. always right:

BTW, before you call the proofers ‘nutroots’ or worse, think of the consequences.

This is to prevent media (in league of one party) shove another unvetted, unqualified candidate down the American public’s throat in future elections.

What would be the next “FIRSTest, Most Novel” candidate they can think of, to show the world that we are so broad-minded, we can ignore The Constitution to select a world president?

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:20 am 25. Chuck Pelto:

TO: epb
RE: Good Advice

…his mother is an American. Ipso facto, he too is an American citizen in its fullest sense. — epb

If you ever find yourself going to court find a good lawyer to represent your case, do not, repeat NOT, try to represent yourself.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Ignorance of the law is no excuse.]

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:21 am 26. Thinking Person:

G Alston….I’m going to remember your poetic retort to the asking for official documents of a President (to be in this case). Whenever the liberal “wingnuts” start asking for ANY documents from the Bush administration after he leaves office and he denies turning them over I’m going to use your words……”"I say good for Bush’s team on this one. At best, this is unseemly.”"

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:26 am 27. ChuckTX:

“Some will argue — as I did earlier in the week — that Obama should, of his own volition, ask the state of Hawaii to release his long-form vault copy birth certificate to settle this matter once and for all. ”

So, why hasn’t he??

Just like the Illinois Senate seat possible corruption case – it is not the crime itself, it is the coverup going on…

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:52 am 28. Gilligan:

Bob Owens

Thank you for posting this story. You provide the valuable function of keeping all the Kenya Konspiracy Troothers posting on one thread instead of polluting the other discussions with their idiocy.

My guess is that you will have more than 400 posts before the end of the weekend.

Once again, thank you. It’s a dirty job but somebody has to do it.

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:53 am 29. Kevin McKague:

Wow.

I must be sick. I’ve spent time actually trying to talk to conspiracy theorists, naively believing that if I just present facts, I can rationally talk the tin-foil wearing myth believer down from his perch.

It doesn’t work.

Let’s consider a short list of people and institutions that don’t believe the myth.

1) Sen. John McCain
2) The RNC
3) The media, who believe it or not, would actually relish a chance to jump on a legitimate story destroying Barack Obama (or anyone else for that matter).
4) Hawaii’s Secretary of State.
5) THE FRIGGIN SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

If the hand of God came out of the clouds, and a voice beamed below:
“My children, get a life. Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, I saw it, it happened. Get help”.

The conspiracy theorists would mentally put God under the heading of “part of the conspiracy”.

Either that or blame Hollywood for trying to trick them, just like they did when they helped fake the moon landing.

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:55 am 30. Peg:

“1. Just like all Gov Palin had to do to quiet her critics and lawsuits demanding she release her gynecological records and newborn’s “official original” birth certificate for the other side’s Truther conspiracists.”

Palin’s citizenship status was never questioned. Surely you can appreciate the logical incongruity of comparing an explicitly required Presidential requirement to maliciously salacious gossip that is entirely unrelated to Palin’s citizenship status? To further extend that irrelevant comparison as justifcation for Obama’s serial stonewalling simply defies belief.

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:57 am 31. tim maguire:

This keeps going round and round in circles. The central problem is that no matter how thoroughly you, I or some other blogger soundly examines the evidence and concludes that Obama was born in Hawaii, neither you, I nor any other blogger has the authority to make such a determination.

Turns out, much to my surprise this election cycle, that nobody does. There is no mechanism for establishing eligibility to hold the office.

Reasonable arguments can be made that it should be the Supreme Court (my preference), the House of Representatives, or even the electoral college, but the bottom line is that your mere attempt to resolve the question yourself is based on the conclusion that the requirement does not really exist and/or can be ignored.

It is Obama’s job to prove he is eligible, not his detractors’ job to prove he isn’t. The fact that Obama has not and will not be asked to offer such proof is a problem completely separate from his ability to produce proof. And this problem is now going to resurface every four years until it is fixed.

Instead of white washing the issue, we should be lobbying the goverment to establish a mechanism for satisfying the requirement.

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:10 am 32. Amy:

Owens says:

“Barack Obama never renounced his U.S. citizenship. Also, as he was a minor when he moved to Indonesia, neither he nor his parents could have renounced it. Period. As far as U.S. law is concerned, Barack Obama never lost his U.S. citizenship even as he gained Indonesian citizenship. Indonesia’s laws on the matter simply don’t apply in this country.”
Although this is the law NOW, I am not at all sure that this was the law at the time that Obama moved to Indonesia.

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:10 am 33. Chip:

The funny thing about every mention of “black helicopters” is that they sightings started after Clinton allowed National Guard helicopters (dark green, look black at night) to begin low-level drug recon. Similarly, the ‘nutjobs’ who saw black triangular UFOs in the 1980s were doing a pretty good job of describing the F-117s they actually saw.

By the way, ex post facto laws are usually unconstitutional.

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:12 am 34. Chuck Pelto:

TO: All
RE: AnninCA & Typical Progressive Reasoning

….I doubt any of the nuts invested in this ridiculous story will be able to swallow the truth of the matter. — AnninCA

The only evidence offered that the question is invalid has been nothing that would stand up in any rational court of law.

So, everyone who asks for evidence is a ‘nut’.

Oddly enough most of US who abide by the law and wish to see it fulfilled have not dropped to the level of dehumanizing the opposition. But we do call them ‘ignorant’ or ’stupid’, as they seem to be just that.

I think the difference in approach is an interesting indicator of the mentality of these ‘progressives’.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Stupid, adj., Ignorant and proud of it.]

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:16 am 35. cfbleachers:

I happen to like Rick Moran and I think Bob Owens is a national treasure. I love the Volokh Conspiracy and David Horowitz is one of the most courageous men of our times. I love Roger Simon and David Mamet and VDH.

So, it would not be unusual for me to be on the same side of an issue as they are, in fact, it would be highly unlikely to find me anywhere but…however, while I have a nearly automatic instinct to join them in the chorus of “this is beneath us, stop it, it makes us look ridiculous”….alas, I cannot.

Look, I don’t think this is much more than a parlor game for those hell bent on denying President-elect Obama’s win of this election. Coming up with cockamamie theories about being adopted or being a Kenyan national by the mere fact of his father’s nationality.

However, two major elements have given birth (no pun intended) to this parlor game. And it upon those two elements which I concentrate and give my fullest efforts in exploring. First, the entrenched media surrended their last shred of credibility in this most recent election (and some, having not humiliated themselves enough and having none left…borrowed on EZ credit the last vestiges of their sanity by asking for an accelerated “takeover” prior to Jan 20)

Because the entrenched media sacrificed their honor, their dignity, their credibility, their duty, and betrayed a public trust in this past election…they gave wings to theories that the citizens of this land of ours must cobble together themselves in order to fill the vacuum left behind. This ugly beast of a parlor game was sired by the entrenched media’s rape of our information stream.

For those looking to perform an early term abortion on it, to send it away to a monastery so as not to feel the shame of association with it…I say, let us all feel the shame, let it sear the conscience, let it burrow its way into our souls so that we never, ever forget the lasting damage wrought from the intentional concealment and coverup of a “favored” candidate or party’s flaws, frailties and blemishes. The entrenched media did more than “side” with one candidate or party…they bastardized the truth in order to secure a win for them.

Let me be clear here. I do NOT wish President-elect Obama any ill will. He is to become my President and I will support him fully in that office. I do NOT wish for him to be denied his rightful place in the Oval Office based upon a technicality of birth. My fervent desire is that he become all that his potential portends…and more.

But he was the beneficiary of a swindle, and while not his fault, when people are swindled of facts, truth, vetting, they WILL replace the void with their own conclusions.

The second element here has to do with some of the rather “unique” ways in which the Obama campaign treated what Al Gore has coined as “inconvenient truths”. I haven’t the faintest clue or notion what is contained within the transcripts of the higher education institutions that might cause some discomfort. Nor do I have the faintest clue what would or could be contained within the medical records. I don’t know what we might find in the full and unfettered review of the documents that Stanley Kurtz went looking for and was blocked, impeded, stalled, hindered and delayed.

However, I do know this…if I had a witness on the stand who began to suddenly become evasive, clearly wanted me to move on to another subject…I knew I was on to something that needed further exploration.

We need to have a much firmer grasp on the rules of submission of mandatory information for our highest elective offices. We certainly can no longer trust the entrenched media, as outlined above, to do the vetting job for us. You can’t reasonably ask a shill to place your bets.

The Obama campaign (witness my distinction between the candidate himself)did not distinguish itself as one of open air governance. If you disagreed or critiqued you were kicked off the plane. The saga of the disabling of the credit card verification system should have caused much greater disgust than it did. The fertile ground for mischief in the manner in which information was blocked, inquiry was shut down and financing regulation was imperially ignored is a major issue that has been virtually swept under the rug.

If we have no enforcement of rules of engagement for a nominee of our highest office, we have no rules at all. Since the entrenched media has forsaken its quasi-public trust to the citizens of this land of ours in order to advance its adopted leftist message over truth, we are left to create the imposition of mandatory rules for candidates.

And asking a candidate to give us a full resume’, complete with ALL the pertinent facts for qualification is not asking too much.

The combination of these two elements leads me to this conclusion. If the only way to get this subject back on the table is to have it come in the form of the discussion of parlor game intrigue…then that is what has been wrought by the wrongdoing that preceded it. In the absence of truth and facts…we get games. Let no man be heard to complain about the latter, if he remains silent on the former.

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:22 am 36. Thinking Person:

Re #29 Kevin McKague: [...]3) The media, who believe it or not, would actually relish a chance to jump on a legitimate story destroying Barack Obama (or anyone else for that matter).[...]

Seriously? The media who elected Obama you feel would actually “relish” destroying him? I can’t even form words right now at the absurdity of that statement. Please refer to http://www.newsbusters.org before commenting on what the media is willing to do in reference to Obama.

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:25 am 37. bjr118:

The point still remains. Why is obama hiding his papers and BC? If he is legal then allow his original bc to be examined in a public forum. Otherwise, this will never go away.

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:29 am 38. Jaci:

Always good to see those who ask questions caricatured as nutjobs.

I believe that when Osama claimed responsibility for 9/11, he was telling the truth. I think Pearl Harbor was genuinely a sneak attack of which American had no prior knowledge. And, if Obama is a natural-born citizen, hooray. Let’s move on. But, until he produces an actual birth certificate – you know, the one he’s refusing to release – then the jury’s still out, as it should be.

You say you think he should release his birth certificate. So do we. That’s all we’re asking. On this you and I agree. However, even though Obama hasn’t done this, you don’t want to ask why. That’s where our differences are. We just want to know why. You, apparently, don’t really care enough to ask.

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:29 am 39. TriciaNC:

Why isn’t the fact that he has spent almost 1 MILLION dollars to hide this? Imagine what good that money could do instead.

He needs to show his birth certificate, his Indonesian records and his passports.

Let’s not forget, even if he was born in Hawaii, was he ever a citizen of another country? If so, he’s not eligible either.

Where’s that new politics of transparency and honesty he promised?

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:42 am 40. The Raving Atheist:

Just like all Gov Palin had to do to quiet her critics and lawsuits demanding she release her gynecological records and newborn’s “official original” birth certificate for the other side’s Truther conspiracists

Palin’s medical records didn’t bear on her Constitutional qualifications for office. Obama’s original 1961 long-form birth certificate does. And the problem isn’t that Obama is resistant to the idea of providing proof of his origin. The problem is that he acknowledged that proof is necessary and then pretended that some meaningless 2007 computer print-out was conclusive on the issue. That response raises enormous red flags, as does his continued refusal to produce the 1961 original.

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:46 am 41. J.Parker:

As usual, Mr. Owens can’t see the forest for the trees…

He has a hypothesis that Obama was born in Hawaii. Those that claim he was born in Kenya have a hypothesis as well. Each of these positions are supported by some rudimentary evidence.

Then there are the rest of us who have no hypothesis at all, we simply don’t know. What we do know is that the answer matters.

It is Obama’s response to those questions that should lead a clear minded person to form an actual working theory.

Imagine if you will a room with a box in the middle. On one side of the room you have the Obamas and the Ad Honinems. On the other we have the Foreign Borners and the Don’t Know What We Don’t Knowers.

Within this nondescript box lies the answer to the question. A question not posed by those in the room, but by the ghost of great men who understood the value of a republic over a democracy. The same question has been asked 43 times previously in the history of America.

Obamas and Ad Hominems claim you don’t have the right to see what is in the box or you are a complete idiot for even wanting to look. They offer no substantive evidence nor logical argument, merely uttering things like “distraction”, “everybody knows”, and “it doesn’t matter anyways.”

Foreign Borners and Don’t Know What We Don’t Knowers oddly enough want to look in the box because it will answer the question. Once that question is answered then things proceed to the next logical step, whatever that may be depending on the answer in question.

It is really that simple. Anybody telling you otherwise is either hiding something, or the complete idiot which they claim you to be.

J. Parker

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:50 am 42. Kevin McKague:

Re: #36 “Thinking Person” said: Seriously? The media who elected Obama you feel would actually “relish” destroying him? I can’t even form words right now at the absurdity of that statement. Please refer to http://www.newsbusters.org before commenting on what the media is willing to do in reference to Obama.

Oh, goody, a source for more unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.

Here’s another link. Consider it the antedote to yours.

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:57 am 43. Marauder:

Saying again what I’ve said before – I have no idea if he’s eligible to be president or not, and if he is, okay, he is. But it’s kind of weird that he could end this whole issue by doing very little very quickly and he hasn’t done it.

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:00 am 44. Music Producer:

A Video Message to Our Electors.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sX7uuhHXs-0

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:05 am 45. Harry:

Unfortunately, the courts are never going to rule here. One, if Obama were “disqualified”, the country would experience riots like we have never seen before. Two, there seems to be no “enforcement” provisions anywhere, in the consitution, nor any statute. The idea that someone not born here would flamboozle the people was never contemplated.

I think it is clear and evident that either, A) the story of the airline prohibiting his mother from flying, Obama being born and going to Hawaii the next day, or B), there is some scandalous information on the certificate, which Obama does not want released. There is no alternate explanation for spending hundreds of thousands of dollars (legal fees alone) on a $1.50 problem.

Lets also remember, we have never seen:
His passport on his trip to Pakistan
His college transcripts/application files
His medical records

But we have seen records indicating citizenship in Indonesia and Kenya.

This can be called an “obsession”, but it is not based on hysteria, like the 9-11 “truther” fanatics, who need to spin the facts to support an off the wall conclusion. Here, there are no facts to spin, they are ALL missing, and the one fact which could end the speculation is being withheld.

One day, someone is going to get that certificate, illegally, and fireworks may go off at that point.

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:09 am 46. Robert Hurley:

I was having a busy day at work and needed a laugh. I knew I could depend on you wingnuts to bighten up my day. I wonder what the common thread is between the rightwing nuts and the muslim nuts who think that 9/11 is a Jewish conspiracy. These treads would provide great fodder for some PhD thesis.

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:12 am 47. goy:

cfbleachers:

*standing*
*applause*

Well said!!!

Mr. Owens – and Moran, and all the other so-called “debunkers” who are simply making a high ground pretense to demonstrate their intellectual superiority over those of us conservatives they deem embarrassing – as soon as you use the terms ‘conspiracy’, ‘proofers’, ‘truthers’ or any other ad hominem to cast doubt on the position you feel it’s necessary to discredit, you’ve embarked on an appeal to ridicule fallacy and lost your credibility. So you may as well have stopped typing after you chose the title for this article.

You generally apply the standard of “innocent until proven guilty” here, as if BHO should be considered innocent of fraud unless someone has proven he’s guilty of same. As such, your fundamental premise is flawed.

The problem is this: the controlling standard in this case is “ineligible until proven eligible”. Given the extremely complex controlling legal factors and the unusually opaque nature of BHO’s origins and past, his Article II eligibility has never been demonstrated. So in effect, there’s nothing tangible on which to cast doubt or on which to base any accusation.

If and when BHO ever actually does demonstrate his eligibility providing the best evidence he has at his disposal, those who seriously question this issue will be happy to move on. Others who want to see the election thrown over at any cost, because they don’t like or trust him, may or may not feel the same, but your and others’ sloppy attempts to lump us all together indicates that you haven’t given much real thought to this issue. Rather, you pursue the ego glorification found in “proving” someone else “wrong”.

The only clear, untainted, tangible evidence available to ascertain BHO’s eligibility is currently held under legal lock and key – at his behest. Aside from this, even with that evidence in hand, there are mitigating factors that put this issue squarely among those which must be determined by our highest court of law, not the court of public opinion (or worse: simply ignored for the sake of expedience). Anything less will leave a permanent question regarding the validity of this government and anything it does during BHO’s administration.

An election may be a popularity contest. Determining the meaning of the laws that govern our elections can NOT be.

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:13 am 48. JP:

Bob Owens wrote the following false claim:

‘The problem with this theory is that no one has been able to provide any credible evidence that Barack Obama was born anywhere other than Hawaii. Claims that he was born in Kenya have been based on fanciful claims woven out of thin air and a faulty translation of a conversation with his grandmother purposefully taken out of context. There is no documentation or testimony to support this claim. None.’

Gee, that’s funny- a certified fraud examiner begs to differ:

“The bottom line is that if the document was simply scanned into a computer and was not created on, or substantially modified by, a computer there would not be as many variations in the compression and error rates as can be seen in the [Daily]KOS [Obama] certificate. Taking the error level analysis into account along with my other findings (such as the obvious cut and paste marks, the glaring errors in the size and count of the security diamonds, and the lack of consistent header and footer start and end point) is how I arrived at my conclusion. None of this can simply be explained away or ignored by people claiming that this is a different un-recorded revision since no one has been able to produce another real certificate that matches the security engravings of the KOS version but there have been numerous reports and sightings of real certificates matching Decosta’s [image].”

MUCH much more can be found here:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/07/atlas-tech-expe.html

Looks like non-fraud-examiner Bob got caught with his pants down.

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:17 am 49. cedarford:

tim mcguire – It is Obama’s job to prove he is eligible, not his detractors’ job to prove he isn’t. The fact that Obama has not and will not be asked to offer such proof is a problem completely separate from his ability to produce proof. And this problem is now going to resurface every four years until it is fixed.

1. You seem to be very unfamiliar with the concept of burden of proof. Which falls on the accuser, not the accused.
Nor are you familiar with the concept that people have a right to decline demands…something about right to individual autonomy, free will, all that good natural law stuff. (Unless someone under the color of law compels them against their will to comply with law or warrant, or they are voluntarily subordinate to an employer who may make demands as a condition of employment.)

2. Obama got his White House job the old fashioned way. He was elected. And not just the Supreme Court, Hillary, McCain, and the Federal Election Commission were satisfied with his credentials – so too were the voters.

3. Actually, this “problem Truthers have” is something Obama’s Team doesn’t hope only comes
4 years from now. They would love to see it kept going strong as long as Right-Wingers have money to waste – because they hope the Secret Kenyan Konspiracy folks not only discredit themselves, but also as many Republicans and conservatives as possible nutballs themselves through guilt by association.

(Hint: Team Obama is happily buying the shovels Truthers can dig themselves deeper with. If the Right Wing nuts would only ask, Obama’s people would happily provide free transporation to the Inauguration and set up little Truther kiosks right next to the Media Tents. A kiosk for “Obama is a space alien!” Truthers. One for Secret Kenyan Birthers. More kiosks for the Indonesian Konspiracy Crowd, the British Citizenship overrides US citizenship Krowd headed by Donofrio. One for the Hawaiian Konspiracy of Dems and Republicans keeping the Super-Special birth certificate from Troothers.

Believe me, Obama’s people want the spittle-flecked screams of sore losers reverberating all over DC and to media on Jan 20th.
*************************
bjr118:

The point still remains. Why is obama hiding his papers and BC? If he is legal then allow his original bc to be examined in a public forum. Otherwise, this will never go away.

That is sort of what Obama hopes for. The Clintons fed off donors for years off video of “Hillary Killed Vince Foster!” Conspiracists
blowing up pumpkins.

******************
Chuck Pelto:
TO: cedarford
RE: Hi There…

Haven’t heard from you for some time.

By the way, you never answered my question regarding where and in what capacity you ’served’ as an officer in the US Armed Forces.

Still waiting on that.

Is your reason for not answering akin to Obama’s not showing his birth certificate?

Yah, pretty much. You think people have to hop to when demands! pour out of Chucky Pelto’s yap.

They don’t.

PS – When you post obsessively as you have on Obama Conspiracies, with 100+ posts on Rick Moran’s thread, you “miss” a lot of people because no one really wants to engage a mildly deranged fanatic.

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:28 am 50. Tinfoil Hatter:

Mr. Owens-

This article simply doesn’t stand scruntiny. By blithy accepting the “fact” of the President-Elect’s place of birth, you then argue from it.

This is known as “begging the question.”

The President-Elect needs to produce his BC, as a function of confirming his fitness for office. Not doing so for political reasons (because it allows his detractors to be derided as ‘truthers’) demeans the Office of the President.

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:39 am 51. robotech master:

“42. Kevin McKague:

Re: #36 “Thinking Person” said: Seriously? The media who elected Obama you feel would actually “relish” destroying him? I can’t even form words right now at the absurdity of that statement. Please refer to http://www.newsbusters.org before commenting on what the media is willing to do in reference to Obama.

Oh, goody, a source for more unsubstantiated conspiracy theories.

Here’s another link. Consider it the antedote to yours.”

Lol you post snoopes.com as a counter… do you even read above a 5th grade level… that site heavily uses other sites with no references or research to back up their claims. They post a bunch of links to other ppl who believe the same thing who also did no research on the topic and write a op-ed about it…Its basically equal to a mob hanging a black guy and because everyone in the mob believed it was right it was right….

Plus almost all the topics on that page are pro-obama… Why is it ppl can’t even read above the 5th grade level nor can they tell the difference between a op-ed piece like factcheck.org, snoopes.com or a host of other op-ed news sites that do no real research and rarely understand the law.

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:39 am 52. Chuck Pelto:

TO: All
RE: cedarford and AnninCA, et al.

….you “miss” a lot of people because no one really wants to engage a mildly deranged fanatic. — cedarford

As I’ve stated earlier, these people do a LOT of projection over things that they can’t defend. So they only offer ad hom propaganda.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Propaganda must not serve the truth, especially insofar as it might bring out something favorable for the opponent. -- Adolf Hitler]

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:50 am 53. Thinking Person:

#42 Kevin McKague….No, if you dare look at the website friend, there are no unsubstantiated theories. All it consists of are actual video clips of the MSM themselves at work. No lengthy essays. No opinion based on someone else’s viewing. No hearsay. Just actual video clips. Please, humor me. Step outside your liberal box for a bit and just take a peek. http://www.newsbusters.org Why do I think you don’t have the nerve to even look?

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:06 am 54. Kevin McKague:

If the tin-foil hat club did get their Supreme Court hearing, what would be their best case scenario?

Exhibit A: A sworn affidavit from Hawaii’s Secretary of State vouching for the validity of Barack Obama’s birth certificate.

Case closed.

For all of the pomposity of “Robotech Master”, you all still base your arguments on a lot of unsubstantiated rumors.

For example:

1) “Barack Obama spent $1 million covering this up” I would love to see your sources.

2) “The ’short-form’ BC is not legal proof of citizenship.”

Like hell it ain’t!

3) “The mainstream media doesn’t want to cover this”

That’s quite a conspiracy theory all by itself. How is discipline maintained keeping thousands of journalists and hundreds of media organizations from exposing “the truth”?

The simple truth is that you guys get a great deal of pleasure thinking that you have “special information” which reveals “the truth”, and that you’re just so gosh darn more intelligent than those of us who can’t see what you do.

This is quite a criminal act you are suggesting is occurring before us today, with an astounding amount of accomplices.

Now that the Supreme Court has quite smartly decided not to consider this, answer me this:

If your case is so simple, what is the Supreme Court’s motive in ignoring it?

Also; Since you seem to believe that it is the burden of the accused to prove his innocence in this matter, do you also believe that this President, (or any other) should spend his entire term of office answering to unsubstantiated accusations?

Get used to be calling “nutjobs”, guys. Please dispel any delusions you have of being David in some sort of David and Goliath moral tale. Sometimes the underdog is just a paranoid tool.

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:07 am 55. John M:

While the state doesn’t presently have a procedural mechanism in place to make the long-form copy available, it is merely a procedure, not a law, and the proper officials could waive procedural norms for this specific issue of national importance.

You have been reading too many liberal blogs.

From the State of Hawaii

There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record.

This clearly means that Obama can request the original at any time.

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:08 am 56. Thinking Person:

#42 Kevin McKague…PS…I am open-minded enough to actually look at your link! I have seen snopes before and for the uninitiated….if you think there are only a few rumors about Obama…you are in for a treat! Thanks though. I’ll just add them to my “Reasons Why Obama Should Have Had An FBI Backgroud Check Before The Election.” Now, argue against actual clips of MSM at work. Hard to deny video.

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:11 am 57. Pat J:

As I’ve stated earlier, these people do a LOT of projection over things that they can’t defend. So they only offer ad hom propaganda.
——————–
black kettle alert

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:11 am 58. MB:

Look I am a Naturalized Citizen, and I believe that the Constitution’s provision should be adhered to, especially after the bang-up job Schwarzenegger has presided over in California, God forbid my fellow citizens want him for President if this provision is overturned.

I am past the results of the the election so be it he won by a majority of the votes. However, what annoys me to no end is that all of this could have been put to rest if all of his records were released. When has any other candidate been given such a pass over these records. NO ONE.

Put the matter to rest if he fulfills the eligibility for the office of President swear him in, if not then don’t but get it over with. I am starting to feel like a GOD DAMN 9/11 TRUTHER!!

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:20 am 59. IOpian:

The cost of putting this to rest: $12
The amount Obama has spent to prevent putting it to rest: about $880,000

So people can do the ‘truther’ comparisons all they want. Their position is no more on solid ground as anyone else. Nobody has seen the document yet accept those that cannot reveal its contents.

To me this ought to raise suspicion in any reasonable person’s mind.

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:26 am 60. Rachel Peepers:

Mr. Ownens,

A pitifully thought out piece. What you did is simply raise red herrings that can logically be refuted, which you of course did.

Then you talked about the people who raise these kinds of arguments. You said they probably wouldn’t even accept, as proof of citizenship, if it were presented, a long form original birth certificate.

There, you miss the point completely. Any middle of the road, reasonable person would accept a valid birth certificate as proof. Obviously, there’s something on that valid birth certificate Obama is trying to hide.

Poof, your lack of logic is revealed. For the reasonable people out there, a birth certificate puts everything to rest.

You, though, appear to come at this issue from the loony left where north is south and right is wrong. You should be banished to the literary time out room before allowed to create any more cockamamie missives that are so flawed in their thinking any editor in their right mind should send you back to square one, and work out a reasoned, well thought out piece.

The only issue is why Obama hasn’t produced proof of citizenship; an original birth certificate. Anyone who sits in church for twenty years and listens to Jeremy Wright spew out anti-white anti-American hatred, should be able to find a little time to assign someone to obtain Obama’s birth certificate. What could be simpler than that?

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:30 am 61. Gayle In Oregon:

Why do you think Obama will NOT release his birth certificate or certificate of live birth? So, far we have seen only a certificate that was not issued by the hospital but the kind that any one can get by going to the registrars office and just saying “I have a new baby” and telling the clerk where it was born meaning no credible witness to the birthplace he says is Honolulu. Those who want to dismiss us as wing nuts like this author have not delved into the facts. AND if Obama has a convincing vault birth certificate, why does he keep it in hiding as it would make 90% of the problem go away? Ask that question of him or any of the nay sayers and you cannot get a reasonable answer.

Obama’s grandmother states he was born in Kenya and she attended his birh there.

This will dog him until he cleans it up regardless of the courts who have dismissed these cases not on the merits but on standing. In other words, the petitioner cannot prove irreparable harm to himself ergo no standing. I for one think if he has a good birth certificate he would have shown it by now.

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:30 am 62. Wahine:

RE and cfbleachers have it exactly right. But I might be harder on our President-elect.

With what’s going on this very moment in the swamp from which he emerged, he needs to show us he’s a man who respects the law and all the citizens he’s sworn to serve. That he’s different from those he’s surrounded himself with for decades. In short: that he can be trusted.

There are too many similarities, to my liking, between the corrupt Illinois governor and Obama. From getting big money for the wife to attempting to shut down media opposition, to name just a few. It stinks. All of it. It looks to me like the governor has witnessed how well the “deals” have worked for Obama (and others) over the years, and he expected the same.

If he thought Obama were cut from a different cloth, he’d have known asking for – and expecting – something would prove fruitless. But the level of his outrage shows he realized Obama dumped him just as he dumped Wright. He was now a liability to Obama and of no further use.

Obama needs to show the good, law abiding American people that his historic election isn’t just a more “nuanced” version of Chicago politics. And he needs to do it today.

This is his hour to show us that he got into politics for service, not self-aggrandizement. Or were those things he said yesterday “just words?”

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:32 am 63. blank:

With all due respect for Mr. Owens he starts with a fundamental logic error. There is a very big difference between someone not presenting credible evidence that Obama was born outside the US and presenting evidence that Obama was born in the US.

To date, neither side seems to have presented any evidence supporting their assertions. All that Obama’s people have presented is a “Certificate of Live Birth” which, under Hawaiian law can be given to someone that was born outside the state (admittedly state officials have confirmed that they’ve seen Obama’s original birth certificate but they did not confirm that it agreed with the COLB that Obama has provided).

The “Obama is a Kenyan wetback” crew have provided a telephone conversation with his grandmother that says she was present at his birth in Kenya together with a couple of affidavits confirming that her testimony is correct.

One difficulty both sides have is that the definition of “natural born” as contained in the Constitution has never been tested in the courts so what effect, if anything, dual citizenship has on his eligibility is unknown.

Of course there are other theories. Obama doesn’t want to release the original birth certificate because it will show that his father was someone other than Obama Sr. (which is also the reason that he has steadfastly refused to release his medical records). He won’t release his college records because he applied for aid as a foreign student, etc.

The thing that bothers me about this is the man has spent mega-bucks [best estimates are something like three quarters of a million dollars to date] blocking the release of his birth certificate. When a $50 notary fee would solve the whole thing this does not compute.

Besides, unless he releases the birth certificate there will alway be a sizeable group that doesn’t believe he’s eligible. And a much larger group that simply wonder what the guy is hiding [we know so little about him - virtually everything is sealed at his request - that I really have to ask who we've elected].

Having said all that, there is no way the Supreme Court will touch this one. Constitution be damned, there is no way they’ll do anything that will potentially result in riots of the order of magnitude that would result.

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:35 am 64. Saul W.:

The next time anyone else is asked to demonstrate any kind of status (marital, being of age to consume alcohol, residency in an electoral jurisdiction etc.) to the government, they should just claim that a restaurant receipt is proof enough and that it is up to them to prove you don’t have the status. Then claim that they are a conspiracy nut to be questioning you. There is now a legal precedent behind you.

I am pretty sure B.O. is a natural born citizen but if no one can be asked to prove it then just repeal it so that both parties can nominate whomever they please.

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:35 am 65. veracious:

Such a soft shoe regarding requirement for the U.S. President, from the supreme law of the U.S. Constitution.

What glib diregard of our sincere desire that our presidents be eligible. What foolishness to pretend, in this day that the alphabit news, political parties or portions of the government
can just be trusted to uphold the law. This very foundational principles of the law are disregarded daily or are delegated to the sidelines in favor of political views, ie., the policies which evolves daily based on the mood and current popular interpretation of it.

The United States Constitution ? 1791. All Rights Reserved.
— unknown

“Lay down true principles and adhere to them inflexibly.”
— Thomas Jefferson to S. Kercheval, 1816.

“[T]he present Constitution is the standard to which we are to cling. Under its banners, bona fide must we combat our political foes – rejecting all changes but through the channel itself provides for amendments.”
— Alexander Hamilton (letter to James Bayard, April 1802)

“Patriotism means to stand by the country. It does not mean to stand by the president or any other public official, save exactly to the degree in which he himself stands by the country. It is patriotic to support him insofar as he efficiently serves the country. It is unpatriotic not to oppose him to the exact extent that by inefficiency or otherwise he fails in his duty to stand by the country. In either event, it is unpatriotic not to tell the
truth, whether about the president or anyone else.”
— Theodore Roosevelt

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:36 am 66. Boris:

lol at the conspiracy theorists.

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:40 am 67. Steve P.:

The reason Obama is not producing his birth certificate or making any official statements about this issue is because he understands that dignifying these accusations with a response only gives unwarranted attention and legitimacy to the conspiracy-theory obsessed nutcases who populate this board. He and every other sane and rational person who has ever worked in politics or PR understand that the best way to deal with nutcases promoting smears is to simply ignore them. This accomplishes the following:

1.It keeps the nut job conspiracy stories off the front page. If Obama were to release statements about this “issue”, even to correct the record, it continues to remain a story, and thereby continues to distract from the tone/messages that Obama wants to promote.

2.It demonstrates that the president-elect will not cave in to the demands of, or be baited by, fringe whackos. If every time a whacko made an accusation against the president he or she was given a podium and media coverage to promote that accusation, could you imagine who many other fame-seeking nutcases would crawl out of the woodwork to get their 15 minutes of fame? And if the president-elect had to respond to each and every accusation, how would he be able to do his job effectively?

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:49 am 68. hp:

whatever else the heck is going on over in illinois, the citizens of the united states stand to become employers of obama soon by virtue of that our tax dollars would fund his paycheck.

the elections, such as they were, were the easiest way we combined potential employers could come to a timely consensus on whether or not to accept his application to become our employee for the position of president of the united states. as it stands, a purported majority chose “aye”.

as his still potential future employers, we have the absolute right to demand that which is legal for all employers in these united states to demand under the law to make the final decision as to whether or not we wish to put the final stamp of approval or not on obama as our employee in the position of president.

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:52 am 69. tim maguire:

cedarford wrote, among other silly things, “You seem to be very unfamiliar with the concept of burden of proof.”

You are completely wrong. This isn’t a courtroom where the truthers are the prosecution. There is a constitutional requirement that must be complied with. Period. Same for your “got his job the old fashioned way.” The turthers did not invent this requirement, the framers of the constitution did.

An extra point for the ad hominem people (love that formulation; BTW, I don’t consider cerdarford to be one of them, he is simply a dishonest player here), as I noted earlier, the crux of this is not even about Obama. If the “don’t look inside the box” people win the argument (as I have little doubt they will), this issue wil rear its ugly head again and again to muddy up transitions in the future. It’s time to do the right thing and develop a mechanism to guarantee the constitution is followed, or else amend it to remove the requirement.

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:56 am 70. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Kevin McKague
RE: The Proof

A sworn affidavit from Hawaii’s Secretary of State vouching for the validity of Barack Obama’s birth certificate. — Kevin McKague

Well….

….after Mr. Bill Clinton perjured HIMSELF I tend to not take people, especially ‘government officials’ at their word anymore; when a signed and sealed document is available….according to said ‘government official’.

So. I’d rather have Hawaii’s Secretary of State present the document as an exhibit in a court of law. Not take his/her word on it….if you please. Or even if you don’t please.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. Did you vote for Mr. Bill ‘Perjurer’ Clinton?

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:58 am 71. tim maguire:

Chuck, I would accept that. While I believe the Supreme Court should make the final decision, I also believe that position of the State in which the president-elect was born should be considered at least persuasive, and possibly even conclusive, evidence. Who better to decide who was born in Hawaii than the government of Hawaii? If anyone wants to challenge the position of the state, they should go and do it there.

So far as I know, Hawaii has not taken the position that Obama was born there. Rather, they have taken a more Clintonesque position that the document is valid.

Dec 12, 2008 - 11:05 am 72. SeniorD:

I don’t give a flippin’ rip if Barack Obama is a Natural Born Citizen, thus eligible to run for the Office of the President of the United States. What matters to me is how Obama thinks of this country – are we a failure needing massive Socialist ‘fixing’ or a champion of individual achievement?

When he swears the Oath of Office, he swears to uphold the Constitution and protect this country from all enemies foreign and domestic. Will he hold to that oath? Will he throw it under the bus as he has everything other ‘inconvenient truth’?

Dec 12, 2008 - 11:05 am 73. Thinking Person:

Boris….pick your knuckles up off the floor and crawl back into your cave. We’ll be on Constitution watch for you while you evolve into a human.

Dec 12, 2008 - 11:06 am 74. Robert Hurley:

“In History and Hatred, a review of Political Paranoia: The Psychopolitics of Hatred, Richard Webster observes that

Feelings of rage and hostility in particular are subject to denial and projected on to othersand that the paranoid’s impulse to persecute and tyrannize others is denied and projected on to phantom enemies who then become imaginary persecutors who must be hunted down and either subjugated or destroyed.

The reality of the 2008 Presidental Election in the United States seems to have been condusive to bringing the ideology of political extremeism into a mode of open expressinon of views that were far beyond the historical norm of political discourse established in the mid to late 20th Century. Here is an example:

The ignorant and gullible voted for Obama. He will fail. Mark my words everyone who voted for this man will regret it. Go out and rent Omen III. He is opening the way for the Antichrist. I will never call him President. This is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. (Emphasis added).

In what follows, I intend to explore here is that belief in such a convoluted interpretation of reality in spite of a multitude of factual contradictions frequently supplement and accompany long running episodes of obsessive paranoid delusions and that such constructs are motivated and maintained by fear, hate and overriding assumptions of self inadequacy.

I. The First Series of Tests.

People with a condition this severe seldom know the difference between what they see in dreams and other periods of low-threshold consciousness and what they experience while dealing with real people. The relationships they have with real people are generally highly degraded so it is seldom that the person really knows where they are in space and time or consciousness and diminished consciousness.

They are miserable on this stage, all the relationships they have ever had have been miserable relationships, and until they develop comprehension of the entire world and not just the stage they think is a world, all the relationships they will ever have will be miserable ones, alienated ones. The happiness they think they enjoy is false happiness and their existence is false existence. The problem they have is that they do not comprehend what happiness is or what a human being is. They are only consumers and the definition of happiness they have is given to them by those who supply the consumable goods that perpetuate the existing social order. In other words, consuming what they are given is by definition happiness. This is a societal phenomena and a point that I will return to later.

Such an existence must be highly frustrating.

As C. Wright Mills observed in The Sociological Imagination:

(people) often feel that their private lives are a series of traps. They sense that within their everyday worlds, they cannot overcome their troubles, and in this feeling, they are often quite correct: What ordinary (people) are directly aware of and what they try to do are bounded by the private orbits in which they live; their visions and their powers are limited to the close-up scenes of job, family, neighborhood; in other milieux, they move vicariously and remain spectators. And the more aware they become, however vaguely, of ambitions and of threats which transcend their immediate locales, the more trapped they seem to feel.

In Social Theory and Social Structure, Robert Merton discusses distinctions between manifest and latent functions. It follows that the merging of differences between the real and engendered consciousness in delusional paranoia and political extremism have common characteristics which are most obvious as the observable distinctions between manifest and latent functions:

It is precisely the latent functions of a practice or belief which are not common knowledge, for these are unintended and generally unrecognized social and psychological consequences. As a result, findings concerning latent functions represent a greater increment in knowledge than findings concerning manifest functions. They represent, also, greater departures from “common-sense” knowledge about social life. Inasmuch as the latent functions depart, more or less, from the avowed manifest functions, the research which uncovers latent functions very often produces “paradoxical” results. “

Dec 12, 2008 - 11:07 am 75. Thinking Person:

According to Kevin McKague….Obama is withholding his birth certificate so it will keep him from having to cave into every demand in the future. That’s hilarious! Kind of like his side-kick Rahm not speaking out on the Gov. of Illinois matter so as to no worry the public. hahahahahaha! No one could write this stuff! Don’t worry Kevin, we forgive you for voting in Laurel and Hardy. You can quit the tap dancing now.

Dec 12, 2008 - 11:10 am 76. Ratatosk:

You know, a little objective thought on the matter would be helpful.

The Democrats KNEW that they were likely to win this time around (Doesn’t matter who won the GOP nomination, they were likely screwed). They had, at least, three candidates that COULD have carried the election. Generally speaking, Sen. Clinton would have easily carried the nomination and probably the White House (What a hellish thought!). Does ANY rational human being think that the CLINTONS would have missed something as obvious as Obama being ineligible? Does any rational person think that the Democrats would have risked the election if there was some serious questions about his birth location or status as a citizen?

It seems far more likely that Obama is a citizen and is more than happy to let his enemies run around chasing red herrings. How many bolgs have been spinning their wheels with this story? How many people have been writing their *insert political rep here* about this stuff (which as far as I can tell, no one in Washington is taking seriously at all)? How much time and effort have gone into this, rather than into building a consensus among the GOP, rather than figuring out how the GOP will stand against the new ALL LIBERAL government?

It’s straight out of traditional political playbooks and you all are getting played.

Focus on real issues and you might get somewhere… focus on this stuff and you’ll be lumped in with the tinfoil hat people by the general public. Once you’re in that group, its easy to dismiss everything you say. Think about it. Let’s say that Obama releases absolute confirmation that he IS a natural-born citizen, let’s further say that he does so in a mocking and derisive fashion, playing the “I want to represent you all… including those who don’t think I am eligible to vote” game.

Then, a year down the road, some other question comes up, perhaps one that has some serious merit, rather than providing the documentation… what happens when Obama says “Well, that must be hidden away in the same place as my Birth Certificate!” (insert laugh line). Diffused, disabled and anyone screaming about that… will get lumped in easily with those screeching now…

Don’t believe me? Look at the past 8 years. Those that screamed about complete bullshit were more easily sidelines by people here and elsewhere because they’d already shown that they had no rational capability when it came to discussing their political enemies.

Dec 12, 2008 - 11:28 am 77. robotech master:

Dear 54. Kevin McKague Your ignorance is impressive but thats about it…

“Exhibit A: A sworn affidavit from Hawaii’s Secretary of State vouching for the validity of Barack Obama’s birth certificate.Case closed.” O ignorance, a sworn statement in this matter is useless… plus even if they did it doesn’t mean anything for obama… no one has disputed that obama has a birth cert on record with hawaii…. if you weren’t so stupid maybe you’d read many of the lawsuits. They demand that that very birth cert be released… Once again you project your foolish and poor education on others and redirect away from the topic…

“1) “Barack Obama spent $1 million covering this up” I would love to see your sources.” Maybe you can ask obama for source info… o wait he wouldn’t tell you and you wouldn’t ask…or maybe try google.. or try one of the 3 law firms he hired… how about instead of being spoon feed propaganda you go out and find it yourself for once…

“2) “The ’short-form’ BC is not legal proof of citizenship.”

Like hell it ain’t!” Citizenship is not in question… once again a clever deflection… but once again I can read above a 5th grade level so not going to work vs me… Once again it has been stated many times and been proven that obama could have been born in kenya(or the freaking moon) and have a valid birth cert from hawaii… however as an obama truther no matter how much proof is given to you, you never believe anything expect the spoon feed propaganda.

3) “The mainstream media doesn’t want to cover this”

“That’s quite a conspiracy theory all by itself. How is discipline maintained keeping thousands of journalists and hundreds of media organizations from exposing “the truth”?”

Really hard is it…? What about hitler and the jews…? What about the new york times winning a Pulitzer prize for writing propaganda for russia about the Ukraine famine…(which they still do this day refuse to give back) or even recently john edwards love child… in which Wikipedia actively censored it until your MSM “approved” of the story since they were outed…

“Also; Since you seem to believe that it is the burden of the accused to prove his innocence in this matter, do you also believe that this President, (or any other) should spend his entire term of office answering to unsubstantiated accusations?”

Heh again you lack a complete understanding of the law or the matter at hand… obama must prove his status before he can become president… those who say he can’t become president have met the burden of proof under the Constitution… the fact that someone says he doesn’t meet the requires is all the burden of proof needed… on the other hand obama must prove beyond doubt that he does meet the requirements…

This is not a court case where its innocence until proven guilty… its a requirement set forth by the Constitution… A REQUIREMENT… your argument is so ignorant its amazing. Are you going to argue next that obama could be 12 years old and its ok for him to be president…? Or how about if he lost the electoral college… would you argue that its ok because the Constitutional REQUIREMENT of winning the electoral is BS anyway Sieg Heil obama Sieg Heil obama….

I find it funny that obama truthers presented with facts ontop of facts will never even question their lord obama… obama truthers like rick moron and bob owens are the very definition of what the truther movement is… Facts don’t matter to them only propaganda and misdirection.

Dec 12, 2008 - 11:37 am 78. Suzi:

A man with nothing to hide hides nothing.

Dec 12, 2008 - 11:52 am 79. Paul_Unalaska:

I looove Robert Hurley’s comments. The comments are either dully insulting or a copy & paste feature. Wow, perhaps I should go through my ‘Scientific American Mind’ magazines and type verbatum on points I disagree with the masses to attempt intellectual equality and orsuperiority. Robert, to have your own, well thought-out response of your own is really, too much to ask apparently.

Back to the topic at hand. A person possessing the most powerful job in the Free World, their life’s contents should be an open book. Isn’t this the ‘Hope’ n ‘Change’ people wanted when voting for this guy? To be forthcoming, honest and true?

Dec 12, 2008 - 11:55 am 80. asdf:

I had to show my original Birth Certificate for every job i have had yet the PEOTUS does not… nice. Why not just produce the document and be done with it Barak? I am supposed to believe him when he is part of the biggest lie of our time, Human caused global warming?

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:02 pm 81. Orion:

The question comes up because various members of Obama’s extended family in Kenya – not just his grandmother – have said he was born there and his mother took him back to the US immediately after the birth to register him as a US citizen. The whole matter could be resolved by Obama releasing his 1962 birth certificate long-form and it’s really only his continued, stubborn refusal that keeps the story alive.

The reason for the Framers limiting candidacy to the Presidency to “natural-born” citizens is obvious. They didn’t want someone with ties of blood or birth to another nation to be in charge of this one. Had they ever thought their intentions wouldn’t be self-apparent they would have nailed the definition of “natural born” down a little better. Personally I don’t think even if Obama were born in Kenya or that he attended school in Indonesia matters enough to make a fuss about it – he’s hardly going to govern based on close, personal ties (of which he has none) to either Kenya or Indonesia. It’s his close, personal ties to the corrupt Chicago political machine that are of greater concern, really.

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:04 pm 82. Terry Gain:

I have not seen Obama’s long form birth certicate and therefore I do not not know whether Obama was born in Kenya or Hawaii. In this respect I am the same as eveyone else including cedarford, hurley etc. Unlike them I don’t call people names like Truther because they ask reasonable questions.

The name callers should read Steve’s comment, at #10, and try applying logic rather than emotion to the question of Obama’s birthplace.

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:09 pm 83. Terry Gain:

SeniorD:

I don’t give a flippin’ rip if Barack Obama is a Natural Born Citizen, thus eligible to run for the Office of the President of the United States. What matters to me is how Obama thinks of this country – are we a failure needing massive Socialist ‘fixing’ or a champion of individual achievement?

When he swears the Oath of Office, he swears to uphold the Constitution and protect this country from all enemies foreign and domestic. Will he hold to that oath? Will he throw it under the bus as he has everything other ‘inconvenient truth’?

—

If he knows he was born in Kenya his swearing in will be fraud on the country. IOW worse than worthless.

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:14 pm 84. Thinking Person:

Note to all….I still chuckle when I read a posting by Obamazombies calling everyone crazy while still not providing ANY documentation of Obama’s citizenship. Should be easy enough to provide right? Of course any proof provided would include an addendum like “according to reliable sources” or “his attorneys say this is irrefutable” or “this person saw it and says by golly it’s gen-u-ine!”. Please. We’ll excuse your smugness as coming from a position of ignorance.

Steve? Pat J.? Robert Hurley? ….Cough up your proof you’re so proud of! You’ve gotten a chance to look ours over, let’s see yours! Turnabout is fair play right? (No proof needed is NOT a valid answer. The Constitution demands it.)

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:16 pm 85. Thinking Person:

Anyone else looking forward to proof that should be forthcoming from Steve, Pat J. and Robert Hurley?

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:18 pm 86. Boris:

“We’ll be on Constitution watch for you..”

I feel so safe and warm now with the Obama troofers on the watch. Do you play heroic music on your itunes as you patrol the internet for Constitution destroyers?

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:30 pm 87. Paul_Unalaska:

‘applying logic rather than emotion’ has been the rise/downfall of our society. Today, it’s the ‘I do this because it just felt right’ mantra. Logic be d*mned.

Orion, Obama’s visit to Kenya in ‘06 (on the taxpayers dime to boot) and campaigning there for a cousin, for whom Obama’s father was of the same tribe, running for office displayed his personal ties (suffice to say, the cousin lost and many lives were lost in the process due to opposing tribes differnces). Robert Fredosso’s book, ‘The Case Against Barack Obama and the Cult of Personality..’ details his motives for his visit well.

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:34 pm 88. Boris:

“What about hitler and the jews…?”

Yeah, if someone had just checked Hitler’s birth certificate the holocaust would never have happened! DONT YOU LIBERALS UNDERSTAND THAT IF OBAMA DOESNT RELEASE HIS BC HE WILL KILL THE JEWS? CANT YOU READ AT A FIFTH GRADE LEVEL??!?!?

This is fun. Keep ‘em coming, guys!

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:35 pm 89. AnninCA:

Obama hasn’t hidden anything, which is why these people are relegated to the basement of tinfoil hat types.

What is truly sad is those types have driven off posters from sites that actually have some interesting stuff.

But they dominate.

Alas…..just the way it goes in blogworld.

Nuts rule in small segments.

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:35 pm 90. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Paul_Unalaska
RE: Not Really

Isn’t this the ‘Hope’ n ‘Change’ people wanted when voting for this guy? To be forthcoming, honest and true? — Paul_Unalaska

All they were ‘hoping’ for was ‘change’. It didn’t matter whether or not it was ‘forthcoming’ nor ‘honest’ let alone ‘true’. All they wanted was a change that they could not effectively articulate.

And, based on what we’ve witnessed SINCE the election is that they’re going to get all they were ‘hoping’ for….

….’change’. But obviously, by the recent portents, nothing for the better. But for the much, much worse. That change being more (1) less ‘forthcoming’, (2) less ‘honest’ and (3) less ‘true’.

The sorry part is that the rest of US have to live with it as well.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. That is unless and until someone comes forward with a stronger desire to uphold the Constitution of the United States.

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:36 pm 91. robotech master:

Yes boris because you know hitler legally was elected and didn’t do anything illegal or underhanded to be the “leader” of germany…. nope not a single thing… The MSM media after said so…I see that you approve of hitlers raise to power as completely legal along with the way russia ran things and the media covering for edwards…

Once again please write your propaganda/deflections/lies/and misstatements in a manner that a 5th grader couldn’t easily disprove…

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:42 pm 92. zanne:

I just don’t get it. $12.00 would of ended this.This issue is not going away. Sooner or later the truth will come out. HOPE it is soon. Because this isn’t going to CHANGE.

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:43 pm 93. goy:

Paul – the motives were pretty clear: Odinga was family and a communist.

Interestingly, Odinga billed himself as the “Agent of Change”.

“Change”. I guess that’s left’s equivalent of the neocons’ secret decoder ring password (New World Order).

Must be something started by Che, so now it’s fashionable.

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:51 pm 94. Thinking Person:

Boris…Please read my comment #84. We’ll be awaiting your proof also. Same rules apply.

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:53 pm 95. tim maguire:

WHat are you talking about Boris? Are you trying to cut this off with a Godwin violation?

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:54 pm 96. Ms Attitude:

74. Robert Hurley:

As you stated:

“In History and Hatred, a review of Political Paranoia: The Psychopolitics of Hatred, Richard Webster observes that feelings of rage and hostility in particular are subject to denial and projected on to othersand that the paranoid’s impulse to persecute and tyrannize others is denied and projected on to phantom enemies who then become imaginary persecutors who must be hunted down and either subjugated or destroyed.”

Perfect description of the liberals claiming Bush “stole” the 2004 election.

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:58 pm 97. smrstrauss:

Re: Correct, all Senator Obama has to do to quiet these lawsuits is to ask for his long form birth certificate to be released by Hawaii instead of contining to direct his legion of DNC attorneys to keep fighting lawsuits and piling up billable hours. One other thing, who is paying Senator Obama’s attorney fees?”

You assume that you can get a long form birth certificate from Hawaii these days. This is not true. You can only get the certification of live birth that Obama has already posted and which was authenticated by the officials in Hawaii.

As for paying lawyer’s fees, this has been greatly exaggerated by the right. In fact, all the cases are being fought by state election commissions, the federal election commission and Obama and the DNC. These cases would be fought by the states and the federal elecition commission even if Obama sat on the sidelines.

It is natural for Obama to send a lawyer to some of these cases since the issues involved include other things besides showing the birth certificate. Many have fall back positions claiming that Obama is not a citizen due to dual nationality or loss of citizenship.

This does not cost very much money. (Where did you get your estimate that it did?) Especially since there haven’t been many court hearings lately.

In any case, he has lots of money left over from the campaign, and it cannot be used for anything else except these law cases until the next election. (Except maybe he can use it as contributions to other candidates.)

Re: “still not providing ANY documentation of Obama’s citizenship.”

The certification of live birth is valid documentation, accepted by the US State Department for issuing passports, and it is the only birth document that Hawaii issues these days. It does not issue certified copies of the original birth certificate. How do I know? I asked the Hawaii Department of Health.

Dec 12, 2008 - 12:59 pm 98. Ms Attitude:

88. Boris: You’re about as useful as teats on a bull.

Dec 12, 2008 - 1:03 pm 99. Holly B.:

In 1962, I married an Iranian. From him, I gained Iranian citizenship. My American citizenship was NEVER at risk. Except if I went to Iran, of course, where only the Iranian citizenship conferred by my husband mattered at all – to THEM, I was not an American. I held a very different view on the matter.

I was told that if I went there, the U.S. Embassy in Teheran could NOT help me, because Iran didn’t recognize me as American, even though THEY did. If I wanted to leave my husband, I’d have to escape from Iran to another nation with a U.S. Embassy. THEN they could help me. The Embassy in Iran had to respect the laws of Iran, like it or not. And even though they had nothing but disdain for OUR laws and customs about my citizenship. Ours didn’t count. Only theirs did. America’s citizenship laws are embracing; theirs are intolerant and grasping. It made me realize JUST how important my citizenship really WAS.

I was young and immature, but realized how important this was. I would NOT go somewhere where the authorities could tell me I was NOT an American. If I had, that movie “Not Without My Daughter” might have been the story of MY life, too. I’m glad that, even at 19, I had that much wisdom. I was appalled that Iran could even THINK of stripping my U.S. citizenship from me, without my knowledge or permission.

I took great umbrage, so I never went, and the marriage ended. Our daughter had dual citizenship, too, and I have no reason to think it “expired” when she gained maturity. It may have, but I think not. The U.S. doesn’t generally decide to terminate a person’s citizenship in another country. If she ever went to Iran, chances are good that they’d claim she was Iranian, not American. Islamic states have that tendency, to glom things for themselves, to their liking, showing no respect for the laws or values of other cultures.

Under U.S. law, an American is an American. Even convicted traitors retain their citizenship. There are two kinds, nationalized and born. No born citizen can lose his citizenship except by officially RENOUNCING it. I doubt it’s any different than that for nationalized ones, although it may be that committing certain kinds of crimes could result in revocation. I doubt it, but it may be true. I haven’t researched it.

It wouldn’t matter, either, WHERE Obama was born. If one of his natural parents was an American citizen, that child is an American. The Constitution would not allow an American born abroad to be president, but that’s the only difference. He was BORN as an American, even if it happened abroad, but he was not born IN America. Which amounts to no difference other than not being able to run for president.

The Constitution says, “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…” It does not specify that a “natural born citizen” means born on American soil – a solid argument could be made that “natural born citizen” applies to any American born of an American, regardless of where he was born. I think it is very likely that the Supreme Court would uphold a challenge against a foreign-born American whose parents were American. What about Americans whose parents are tourists abroad, and the baby is born early? Should that child be precluded from running for president? I think that would be very unfair. American law tends to be more inclusive on such matters than exclusive. So even if he were born abroad, his mother was an AMERICAN, which made him a “natural born American.” And it would be so, even if he acquired dual citizenship in the other country because he was born there. I met a young Canadian who had been born in the house I rented in Mexico. He had both nationalities, and for as long as he wanted to keep them. All three countries, U.S., Mexico and Canada have innclusive citizenship laws – because they are valid democracies.

I’ve been living in Mexico for 15 years, early retired with a severe disability. I can’t live independently back home on my SS Disability. In addition, I have full medical coverage here, under their national health care plan – and it’s very good. (I wish there was one like it in the States.) Back home, I’m uninsurable. Totally SOL.

Despite not having set foot in the States in 15 years, my citizenship remains intact. I may never get back, weak as I am. I may die here. But I will die an AMERICAN. I can even say that I love Mexico – that isn’t any indication that I don’t want to be an American. I simply love two countries. I’m an American, until such day as I would choose to say I’m not. And that’ll never happen.

Like it or not, right-wingers, Obama IS an American citizen, and always has been, no matter how many other countries offered him their own citizenship. Unless he renounced it as an adult, he couldn’t have lost it.

Fortunately for many of us, America is VERY serious about citizenship – insuring that it cannot be stripped from ANYONE arbitrarily, or without his knowledge, or for failing to do something to keep it “renewed.” You have it, you keep it, until YOU officially cast it off. It’s one of the things we can all be proud of.

It’s pathetic that some people are so hateful of this man that they’d sink into the sewers to try to push a fake agenda on the country – and if they succeeded, it would weaken citizenship rights for ALL of us, but they care nothing about that; all that matters is that they can’t abide the thought of a “N” in the White House.

These people claim to be REAL Americans, yet have no respect for the very citizenship laws that contribute to our great democracy being what it IS.

To which I say, “grow up and live with it.” I could add suggestions about where certain things might be shoved… Nah.

Dec 12, 2008 - 1:08 pm 100. Chuck Pelto:

TO: AnneinCA
RE: Yeah?

Obama hasn’t hidden anything, which is why these people are relegated to the basement of tinfoil hat types. — AnneinCA

Puhlease….

…show us the long-form Birth Certificate from Hawaii.

You’ll be a FIRST in the world.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. Either that or stop lying to US.

Dec 12, 2008 - 1:09 pm 101. Damien:

Obama is a US natural born citizen. The State Gov’t of Hawaii has certified his birth certificate as genuine. But lets explore some possibilities shall we? The following people and organizations would have to be either morons (to be fooled by one Kenyan) or conspiring with said Kenyan, if any of this BS should be true

The US Senate
The US House of Reps
President GW Bush
President Bill CLinton
President GHW Bush
President James Earl Carter
Vice Pres Dick Cheney
Vice Pres Al Gore
The RNC
The DNC
Senator John McCain
the McCain Campaign
Senator Hillary Clinton
the Clinton Campaign
Governor Sarah Palin
The State Gov’t of Hawaii

All the above have acknowledged Obama as a citizen legally entitled to be President,

Now the douchebags bringing this BS have a choice… they can call the above listed ppl and org’s morons or they can call them traitors…

Or maybe… just maybe Obama IS in fact exactly what he says he is… a citizen of the USA born in Hawaii and our next President. Then said douchebags can call him ‘Mr President’

Dec 12, 2008 - 1:19 pm 102. Thinking Person:

Damien…Refer back to comment #84. This would either fall under the “reliable sources” or “gen-u-ine” category. Therefore flawed. Try again. Proof? Documentation?

Dec 12, 2008 - 1:27 pm 103. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Damien
RE: The Hawaiian Governor?

Obama is a US natural born citizen. The State Gov’t of Hawaii has certified his birth certificate as genuine. — Damien

Really? Please show me the URL that substantiates your report. And, does it include a statement sworn to under penalty of perjury? [Note: Not that that means squat since President Clinton perjured HIMSELF and got away with it.]

See how things go downhill once senior government officials can’t be trusted to tell the truth? Well….in your case….I guess not.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[It is lies alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself. -- Thomas Jefferson]

P.S. Hence the hiding of the document and government officials possibly lying about it?

Dec 12, 2008 - 1:30 pm 104. robotech master:

To 101. Damien think you could lay off the truther drugs… Other then the State of hawaii none of those other groups really matter… and neither house of congress nor the state of hawaii have this statement… [i]have acknowledged Obama as a citizen legally entitled to be President,[/i]

Dec 12, 2008 - 1:38 pm 105. JP:

OK, let’s try this again: see my original post on the first page here.

The ONLY birth cert provided by Team Obama (the Daily KOS) one has BEEN PROVEN to be FRAUDULENT by someone who makes his living detecting fraudulent documents, and he’s been doing so for 20 years or so. There is a similar problem with his Selective Service registration as well.

At what point after a presidential candidate -
provides fake documents, refuses to provide original documents, ‘accidentally’ serves as lawyer to a known vote fraud instigator under investigation in multiple states, hobnobs with bomb-throwing anarchists and corrupt politicians trying to ’sell’ his Senate position, visits Kenya to help Sharia thug Raila Odinga campaign in 2006 in direct violation of the Logan Act (including a group called Friends of Barack Obama contributing more than $900,000 to Odinga) -

do we say “Enough!” ??

The guy is dirty. Get it?

Dec 12, 2008 - 1:38 pm 106. Войска ПВО:

Holly B. bloviates:

“Like it or not, right-wingers, Obama IS an American citizen, and always has been, no matter how many other countries offered him their own citizenship. Unless he renounced it as an adult, he couldn’t have lost it.”

Your rambling discourse and description of your marital adventures and odessey, notwithstanding, you cannot state for certain tha Obama’s an American citizen because you have NOT seen his original birth certificate.

Dec 12, 2008 - 2:05 pm 107. Boulderffellow:

Goodness – what is so hard about BO producing his birth certificate? Why is anyone who would like to see proof of his elegibility labeled a tinfoil hat wearing whacko? Why is it easier to discredit anyone who dares to ask for proof than it is to produce the proof?

Something is broken in this country and this issue is a good example of the problem. Somehow, intelligent journalists and bloggers have been replaced with mindless syncophants whose only purpose seems to be to protect BO from criticism or exposure.

Why doesn’t the author of this blog ask Obama the saimple question: Why won’t you produce your birth certificate? Instead you are spending all of your time castigating those who arae asking legitimate questions. You, blog author, are very much a part of the problem. Why? What’s in it for you to maintain the Obama halo?

Dec 12, 2008 - 2:13 pm 108. Boris:

“We’ll be awaiting your proof also.”

No one cares what you wingnuts are waiting for. Sorry to break that to you.

Dec 12, 2008 - 2:14 pm 109. Roger King:

If Obama released his original birth certificate I think it would satisfy most skeptics, myself included. The fact he refuses to release the document will always make people wonder why. I would really love to know whey he has chosen to not release this information immediately, like McCain did when questioned.

Dec 12, 2008 - 2:18 pm 110. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Boris
RE: Well…Actually…

No one cares what you wingnuts are waiting for. — Boris

…you’re obviously lying about that. Either that or a total moron.

Why?

Because there are a LOT of posts here looking for what you say no one cares about.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[There is no defense against dumb.]

Dec 12, 2008 - 2:28 pm 111. Brian H:

robotechmaster;
One small correction to your info about Kenya: it is “well known” where BO Jr. was born, not that there is a memorial there. You have to properly reference the pronouns in the ambassador’s sentence. He’s saying that putting one up is up to the government, but it’s not necessary (for Kenyans) since the site is already well known and doesn’t need one.

Dec 12, 2008 - 2:38 pm 112. Boris:

“what is so hard about BO producing his birth certificate?”

He did. The tinfoil hats say it’s a fake. Hence they are conspiracy theorists.

Dec 12, 2008 - 2:42 pm 113. Brian H:

The location of Obama’s birth is an issue because the burden of proof is on him, not those questioning him. The Certification is inadequate even to get a driver’s licence. Only one document can prove his birth location.

But there are many that could disprove it, and he’s done his best to block those. E.g., his educational records and transcripts would indicate nationality and birthplace, from a time before his coverup began. So he’s sealed them.

The Indonesian citizenship is an issue because he was there long enough, in school as a Muslim, to have acquired loyalties to foreign states and powers.

Dec 12, 2008 - 2:45 pm 114. rwg:

It is a matter of character more than a technicality. Can we trust this man when the time comes for us to act on trust alone? History will show all the facts in the years following the Obama presidency. Will history show a truthful or a dishonest president. Just wait a decade or two and find out.

Dec 12, 2008 - 3:01 pm 115. Thinking Person:

Re: Boris….”"No one cares what you wingnuts are waiting for. Sorry to break that to you.”"

Hard to face up to the facts eh Boris? We accept your subtle surrender. You can slink back into your cave now. We “wingnuts” will wait and see if any other Obamanauts can come up with documentation.

Dec 12, 2008 - 3:11 pm 116. Andy:

Hmm.. Show my birth certificate for 20 bucks, or hire multiple law firms and spend many thousands of dollars fighting to keep it secret?

Dec 12, 2008 - 3:19 pm 117. U S Patriot:

pajama has a cool, hip name but this article proves that you are just a bunch of squares. As usual, the “establishment” wants the “conspiracy” nuts to prove our case, but you have it all wrong, Obama needs to PROVE that he IS natural born citizen ,and he has refused to do so. So let me see, “do I have it right”, Obama is willing to spend millions to three law firms to help him avoid showing his long-form birth certificate – wa document which costs about $20… and we lected this guy to manage the economy. It doesn’t add up, but PM is just another right-wing group defending Obama from transparecny just like the left-wing MSMS nuts who got him elected.

Dec 12, 2008 - 3:24 pm 118. Mr. Facetious:

Seriously, get over it. Obama released his short form Birth Certificate. The State of Hawaii confirmed it was legit. 3rd party groups examined the certificate and vouched for it’s authenticity. The McCain Campaign, the RNC, Hillary (who you can’t tell me wouldn’t have clawed through reinforced concrete in order to win,) The Supreme Court and on and on and on have all found no evidence that there is anything whatsoever to the idea that Obama is ineligible. Obama released a valid legal document. . .and it wasn’t good enough. Why would he keep going along with this idiocy? Get over it, get a life and move on.

Dec 12, 2008 - 3:34 pm 119. zanne:

Secrets don’t come cheap. Trust is priceless.

Dec 12, 2008 - 3:41 pm 120. Chuck Pelto:

TO: All
RE: Mr Facetious

Obama released his short form Birth Certificate. The State of Hawaii confirmed it was legit. — Mr Facetious

The ignorant and/or liars just keep crawling out of the woodwork here. Like so many cockroaches.

I’d like to see Mr Facetious provide us with a place where we can see for our selves this ’short form Birth Certificate’. And where the State of Hawaii has gone on record, i.e., under penalty of perjury, as ‘confirming’ it as legit.

I’ve not seen anything of either items he/she would like US to believe.

Until he/she provides that information, he/she is either ignorant, stupid, and/or a liar.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[No man has a good enough memory to be a successful liar. -- Abraham Lincoln]

Dec 12, 2008 - 3:49 pm 121. Paul_Unalaska:

Chuck(le)’s, – Always a pleasure to read your posts.

Goy – Thanks for refreshing my memory. I’d read Fredosso’s book some 6+ months ago.

Birth certificate aside, it worry ANYONE this will be 47 year old Barack Obama’s first time to have held the same job for at least 4 years? 47! Amazing how standards have fallen in our country’s time..

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:04 pm 122. Rotwang:

105. JP: What’s hysterical about that statement is that you know less about the “expert” who has “proven” Obama’s COLB to be fraudulent than you do about Obama.

You question Obama’s identity on the word of a faceless man with a fake name. Now THAT’s irony.

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:08 pm 123. griff1123:

This is a well reasoned outline of the situation.
My question is if the original Birth Certificate or a certified duplicate (which I and my wife have one of each)were produced all this contraversory would go away. While he’s at it how about releasing his Columbia,Harvard and Occidental records as well. I would gladly release my college and law school transcripts. Just thinking out loud.
Griff

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:12 pm 124. Boris:

“We accept your subtle surrender.”

Not surprised that a conspiracy theorist will claim an imaginary victory.

“Because there are a LOT of posts here looking for what you say no one cares about.”

Yep. Those would be the wingnuts. No one else cares about the wingnuts–except as entertainment.

Can you guys tell me a bedtime story? Please tell the one about how the birth certificate Obama released is fake again. Hold on, let me grab my pillow…..got it. Now, shoot!

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:12 pm 125. Kevin:

“Thinking Person” and “Robotech”, you seem unable to accurately quote the other posters’ arguments.

Elvis was spotted at the Burger King in Battle Creek, MI the other day. Why don’t you go bug Precilla for a copy of Elvis’ death certificate?

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:29 pm 126. Ozwitch:

There is no one in this country who has shown proof that Obama is eligible for the office of POTUS. Nobody. Including Obama himself.

There may be people who are able to prove it, but they have not yet done so.

There is also nobody has shown proof that Obama is ineliglible. They may be able to prove it, but they have not yet done so.

Hence: the most fundamental and legitimate of questions is asked of he who seek the highest office in the land:
Are you eligible? If so, then please provide tangible proof. Not hearsay, not circumstance, not logical argument. Tangible proof.

Simple. And yet it drags on to the tune of millions . . . .

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:39 pm 127. Ozwitch:

I should have said, nobody who has publicly shown proof of eligibility/ineligibility. Obama may have shown his proof to someone, but he’s not telling.

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:42 pm 128. robotech master:

“118. Mr. Facetious:

Seriously, get over it. Obama released his short form Birth Certificate. The State of Hawaii confirmed it was legit. 3rd party groups examined the certificate and vouched for it’s authenticity. The McCain Campaign, the RNC, Hillary (who you can’t tell me wouldn’t have clawed through reinforced concrete in order to win,) The Supreme Court and on and on and on have all found no evidence that there is anything whatsoever to the idea that Obama is ineligible. Obama released a valid legal document. . .and it wasn’t good enough. Why would he keep going along with this idiocy? Get over it, get a life and move on.”

And yet more poorly educated fools who know nothing….and since were name dropping, bill richerson says obama is an immigrant…

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/12/huh_what_does_bill_richardson.html

I suppose he just lying huh….heh its so much fun to taunt the truthers with their own propaganda….

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:43 pm 129. robotech master:

Dear kevin you seem to not even be able to read… try reading before posting….

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:44 pm 130. Phil Byler:

The Owens article does NOT debunk theories that Obama is not a natural born citizen. What Owens really argues is that none of these theories have been proven. The problem with that argument is that Obama has refused to release the long form original birth certificate that would either dispose of the question or show he is not qualified to be POTUS under the express language of the U.S. Constitution.

When the issue came up as to John McCain, he did a full public disclosure of all possible relevant documents and hired Larry Tribe and Ted Olsen to address the legal analysis to establish that McCain was and is qualified to be POTUS. Senate Resolution 511 (2008) reflects that conclusion. John McCain is a patriot who loves America and reveres America’s Constitution and who acts and has acted accordingly.

What, in contrast, is Obama hiding? Sorry, Ownes, that is the real question.

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:44 pm 131. levotb:

Obama’s an illegal alien, a fraudster and should be arrested and indicted for impersonating a U.S. citizen and Senator. If he becomes President, he’ll be hounded by millions of Americans who know he’s as phony as a $3 bill. All the bills and executive orders and Acts he signs will be deemed “fraudulent”. A Constitutional Crisis is about to develop, but he’s too dishonest and power hungry to do the right thing and step down. God bless Phil Berg, Leon Donofrio, Cort Wrotnowski and so many others who are suing Obama!!!

Dec 12, 2008 - 4:57 pm 132. Deaf Smith:

Hey Bob, if Hussein was born in Hawaii then why has he spent upwards of 1 million dollars on lawyers to not show his BC?

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:03 pm 133. Paul_Unalaska:

Ahh, ‘Bill Richardson’s’..

Has anyone been to New Mexico? For the most part, trailer park heaven. Double wides and cantinas in every town. Quite an image, huh?

Gov. Richardson’s New Mexico, though ranking 36th in population is 5th in the country for felony-type crimes. Quite a feat. Hey, great job Bill! Look forward to you bringing about that kind of ‘Change’ to the nation! Gulp..

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:04 pm 134. concerned:

Hey, Buck Owens:

0bama did not produce a COLB or anything close to it. It was a photoshopped forgery as anyone can tell in a second by looking at a real Hawaii COLB from that era.

Indonesian parents can renounce foreign citizenship for their children, which 0bama’s parents did.

Go peddle your idiot lies to your idiot Left Wing friends.

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:13 pm 135. concerned:

“The ignorant and/or liars just keep crawling out of the woodwork here. Like so many cockroaches.

I’d like to see Mr Facetious provide us with a place where we can see for our selves this ’short form Birth Certificate’. And where the State of Hawaii has gone on record, i.e., under penalty of perjury, as ‘confirming’ it as legit.”

Mr. Facetious was just being, well…, facetious. Big Hitler sized lies by his ilk have been proven to work on his mentally challenged Left Wing friends.

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:19 pm 136. misanthropicus:

TO all Soeterobots:
As of Friday, 5 pm PST I don’t know what was the Supreme Court’s decision regarding the other Soetero case.

However, I know that Monday Rezko will have his day in Court – it’s going to be quite exciting, some say.

Hurley and Cie., – relax, kids, life is beautiful!

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:21 pm 137. concerned:

““what is so hard about BO producing his birth certificate?”

He did.”

Stop parading your ignorance, Boris. I’ve seen an actual Hawaiian birth certificate from about the time 0bama was born and it looks nothing like the forgery he’s peddling.

Save your foolish lies for your moron Left Wing friends.

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:21 pm 138. stacey:

For all of you who thing that a photo copy of a document is valid proof that the document is credible, try this experiment.

Try to apply for a social security number for your newborn, with a photo copy birth certificate. Or how about pay your mortgage with a photo copied check? Hand over a photo copy of a 100 dollar bill to pay for your buckets koolaid, who will accept it? How about who won’t accept a photo copy document, by all accounts only far right wing fringe conspirators ask for such things!

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:27 pm 139. AnninCA:

Ah well, Kevin. It’s a relief to read someone who isn’t nutty. Thanks.

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:36 pm 140. robotech master:

I see bob owens isn’t even man enough to post in his own story… I guess he did read rick morons story and saw the giant *****slap he got when he tried to get stupid and defend blatant propaganda piece he wrote…

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:37 pm 141. Войска ПВО:

If this and other controversies rage over the next four years, you gotta believe that the public is going to tire of this POTUS and his DOA administration; real high-mainenance, like a girl friend I once had.

It never felt so good as when I bolted.

Dec 12, 2008 - 5:40 pm 142. Kevin:

I’m still waiting for proof that the President-elect spent a million dollars in this alleged “cover-up”.

I’m also wondering why Robotech thinks calling somebody illiterate is akin to disproving another’s argument.

Dec 12, 2008 - 6:03 pm 143. Donna V.:

#76 Ratatosk, you’ve written the most sensible post on this thread. Too bad people are intent on ignoring it.

Focus on real issues and you might get somewhere… focus on this stuff and you’ll be lumped in with the tinfoil hat people by the general public. Once you’re in that group, its easy to dismiss everything you say. Think about it. Let’s say that Obama releases absolute confirmation that he IS a natural-born citizen, let’s further say that he does so in a mocking and derisive fashion, playing the “I want to represent you all… including those who don’t think I am eligible to vote” game.

Then, a year down the road, some other question comes up, perhaps one that has some serious merit, rather than providing the documentation… what happens when Obama says “Well, that must be hidden away in the same place as my Birth Certificate!” (insert laugh line). Diffused, disabled and anyone screaming about that… will get lumped in easily with those screeching now…

Bingo.

Dec 12, 2008 - 6:15 pm 144. jeanniejo:

http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/12/11/obama-indictment-blagojevich-arrest-patrick-fitzgerald-December-11-2008-rezko-trialobama-rezko-levine-blagojevich-health-planning-board-pay-for-play-il-senate-obama-arrest-and-indictment/

Obama indictment, Blagojevich arrest, Patrick Fitzgerald, December 11, 2008, Rezko trial,Obama, Rezko, Levine, Blagojevich, Health Planning Board, Pay for Play, IL Senate, Obama arrest and indictment by USDOJ, US Department of Justice

Dec 12, 2008 - 6:38 pm 145. AnninCA:

Yes, it’s a false issue.

People are really scared over the economy.

This gives them a topic to blast on, without harm.

Dec 12, 2008 - 6:40 pm 146. barry:

“Unless a Hawaiian hospital birth is somehow confirmed the State of Hawaii is only certifying whatever information baracks mother or grandmother told them about where he was born”.

If the original certificate listed an at home birth and not a hospital birth then that information would be considered private and the state would not release that information So unless the the original is made public by Mr obama or by court order we will never know for sure.

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:05 pm 147. Scott:

Hey, I have his birth cert right here:

http://scottthong.wordpress.com/2008/11/05/obamas-american-birth-certificate-found1one/

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:48 pm 148. DemocracyRules:

I read your posting with sadness.

Although opinions matter, facts also matter. As a scientist I find your arguments distressingly incomplete. Citations are not given, and you do not expose your reasoning well enough for the rest of us to understand it.

Certainly your discussion of the term “natural born citizen” is in egregious error. I recommend Blackstone’s book on English Common Law (1759) as an excellent place to start. Blackstone is important because the Framers referred to it when they wrote the US Constitution.

Blackstone makes it clear that to be a “natural born subject”, one must be (1) born to the soil, and (2) have an undivided allegiance to the Crown. Thus, Obama is inherently ineligible because he was born a dual citizen of the US and Great Britain.

I hope you will consider revising your posting. If you wish to post your opinions, I have no objections. But I am deeply concerned to see facts and opinions seamlessly commingled. This posting does not clarify the issues, it muddies them.

Dec 12, 2008 - 7:49 pm 149. Herb:

robotech master, You’re still on the birth certificate thing? And bragging about slapping around Rick Moran?

Dude…YOU’re the one getting slapped around.

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:16 pm 150. Dave:

“There is no documentation or testimony to support this claim. None.”

And where, may I ask, is the evidence to refute this claim? Why won’t Obama give up his real birth certificate? And why did his campaign offer up a forgery?

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:26 pm 151. zanne:

Is this the Big Foot gone political? Give the long form b.c. for forensic evaluation. Conspiracy forums love defeat. Give it over.

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:32 pm 152. cedarford:

28. Gilligan:

Bob Owens

Thank you for posting this story. You provide the valuable function of keeping all the Kenya Konspiracy Troothers posting on one thread instead of polluting the other discussions with their idiocy.

My guess is that you will have more than 400 posts before the end of the weekend.

Once again, thank you. It’s a dirty job but somebody has to do it.

Hilarious! Sort of like the Phys Ed Dept teacher assigned the special ed kids so the normal kids are free to play sports at their limits, rather than be held back and only playing at the lowest common denominator’s level. “Don’t hit the ball too hard or go too fast…remember that Joey, Yalowinda, and Percival are members of your team and Yalowinda sometimes stops in the middle of play to adjust her hockey helmet. Be patient!”

***************************
Chuck Pelto – Only 11 posts so far on this thread! Either your aged parents forced you out of the basement for half a day or you are trying to exert some control over your deranged Truther fanaticism after your 100+ post meltdown on Moran’s Obama Citizenship thread!

Either way, keep it up. It’s good that you wind down your Truther Konspiracy Korps work and get on with getting a life.

Then again, this thread has only been up a day..

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:42 pm 153. Boris:

“Stop parading your ignorance, Boris. I’ve seen an actual Hawaiian birth certificate from about the time 0bama was born and it looks nothing like the forgery he’s peddling.

Save your foolish lies for your moron Left Wing friends.”

Oh, my goodness. I didn’t know I my post was going to be read by an HONEST TO GOD HAWAIIAN BIRTH CERTIFICATE EXPERT. I know you’re an expert because you claim to have seen one once, and that is solid proof that Obama’s is a forgery. Thank you for stepping forward and solving this matter.

Dec 12, 2008 - 8:44 pm 154. John Q. Public:

I do not think that Obama will produce any birth certificate, nor do I think this will prevent him from taking office on January 20th. I agree that something is amiss, however, it will not prevent him from taking office. It is a lost cause.

I wonder why these strident, arrogant people (Boris, G.Alston, AnninCA, Gilligan, Kevin Mckague) et al, are on this site. Their views are out of sync with the rest of us, and yet, they seem to feel that their “superior, intellecutally informed opinions” will/should diminish ours!

I would venture to guess, that they are so ego-centric, and self-involved, they actually believe their comments will leave this audience “stunned” or perhaps “awakened to the TRUTH of their left-leaning, intellectually superior” thoughts/opinions!!

Sorry, I, and it seems, the majority of the people on this site, just do not ‘buy’ into your ‘arguments.’ Do us all a favor…opine on Daily Kos, or some other site that may appreciate your insight(s). I find it intellectual drivel, at best.

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:07 pm 155. jason:

The weakest argument Bob Owens makes is right off the bat, where he was born. If he wasn’t born in Hawaii, he is not eligible. Period. It’s not a constitutional crisis, he simply does not meet the criteria. So Bob thinks there is no evidence he was not born in Hawaii. Fine, but what’s the harm in ascertaining that fact in definitive fashion.

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:09 pm 156. Boris:

And to think, while all this discussion going on, there are robotechs somewhere not being mastered. Whatever that means.

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:15 pm 157. Confused:

Background – believed to be accurate:

1. Obama was not born in Indonesia, but he lived in Indonesia as a child and went by the surname Soetoro, the name of his mother’s second husband, Lolo Soetoro, a citizen of Indonesia.
2. Obama traveled from the U.S. to Indonesia, Pakistan, India and Kenya in 1981.
3. Obama obviously needed a passport of some country to make the trip.

Some questions:

1. Did Obama become an Indonesian citizen?
2. If the answer to Question 1 is Yes, what was the basis for his becoming a citizen?
3. If the answer to Question 1 is Yes, did Obama renounce his Indonesian citizenship?
4. If the answer to Question 3 is Yes, when and by virtue of what circumstances did Obama renounce his Indonesian citizenship?
5. Assuming that Obama had U.S. citizenship, did Obama have the capacity to renounce his U.S. citizenship before his 21st birthday?
6. Assuming that Obama had U.S. citizenship, did Obama renounce his U.S. citizenship?
7. If the answer to Question 6 is Yes, when and by virtue of what circustances did Obama renounce his U.S. citizenship?
8. Did Obama have an Indonesian passport?
9. If the answer to Question 8 is Yes, when was his Indonesian passport issued?
10. If the answer to Question 8 is Yes, when did his Indonesian passport expire?
11. If the answer to Question 8 is Yes, did he renew his Indonesian passport?
12. If the answer to Question 8 is Yes, when did his final Indonesian passport expire?
13. Would State Department records reflect details of the passport on which Obama traveled in 1981?
14. Did Obama renounce his U.S. citizenship by obtaining, renewing or holding an Indonesian passport?
15. When did Obama first receive a U.S. Passport?
16. Did Obama register with the U.S. Selective Service System?
17. Is Obama legally present in the U.S.?

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:17 pm 158. Lifeofthemind:

Proposed Constitutional Amendment.

sec. 1 Persons may become natural borne citizens of the United States by means of birth within the United States or its territories, provided that their birth mother was legally present within the jurisdiction thereof. Persons borne outside of the United States to a citizen or a spouse accompanying a citizen either of whom are assigned to be so stationed in the service of the United States shall be deemed natural borne citizens.

sec, 2 Persons may be naturalized at birth regardless of place of birth in accordance with the principle os lex solis and lex sanguinis. Other persons of good character may be naturalized following examination by oath or affirmation of loyalty.

sec. 3 Citizenship may be revoked or renounced; including by declaration, or by taking an oath to a foreign prince or power or by flight to evade public obligations or by treason.

sec 4. All persons seeking to be considered for election to the offices of President or Vice President of the United States shall submit a declaration to that effect to the legislatures of the state of which they are a citizen. Each state shall review them and shall forward no more than 10 candidates per state to the President of the Senate accompanied by proofs of the eligibility of their state’s candidates no later than the 20th of January of the year before the term of the new President shall start. The President of the Senate shall forward all applications to the Supreme Court within 10 days who shall review them and who may call candidates to submit further proofs. The Chief Justice shall within 30 days of the Courts commencing to review them send to the legislatures of the several states his certification of such persons as are eligible for selection by the Electors as provided for elsewhere in this Constitution.

sec. 5 The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

sec. 6 This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission to the States by the Congress.

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:28 pm 159. misanthropicus:

RE #145/AnninCA: [...] Yes, it’s a false issue. [...]

No, AnninCA, it’s mighty valid issue, which is getting day by day more incendiary.
The fact that the Supreme Court has dissmissed two cases agains Soetero (and probably the third one as well), will not calm the spirits – neither your, Soeterotrolls’, clumsy attempts at obfuscation and sowing confusion will change much the trajectory of this affair.
Time and again, why Soetro, the one who’s getting glowing paeans for his astuteness and sense of proper tone for the public sensibilities, has chosen such a costly manner (PR, financially and politically) to answer a two dimes question?
This is a matter which could have been for long and quickly dispatched if… IF there isn’t anything to hide – do you think that Soetero’s squads of lawyers in the Court (anyway payed by poor, gullible Dems), look that good in the eyes of the larger public?
No matter how much media will cover for him, there will be a point where folks will say – enough is enough, I had it with lawyers, why he doesn’t produce that paper?

Remember:Jericho’s walls didn’t fall at the first blare of the horns – and we are still one month BEFORE Soetero’s inauguration!
Planty of time for blowing the horns – see you later, AnninCA aligator!

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:35 pm 160. plutosdad:

Correct, all Senator Obama has to do to quiet these lawsuits is to ask for his long form birth certificate to be released by Hawaii
No it won’t, it won’t satisfy any of these nuts. In fact, doing something like that only lends their arguments a legitimacy they don’t deserve. It is paying attention to the kooks who want attention more than anything, it’s not fighting them, it’s rewarding them.

Hey I voted for McCain, I didn’t believe Obama on anything (I live in Chicago) but some common sense has to rule.

Dec 12, 2008 - 9:57 pm 161. Concerned Citizen:

This one is too far gone and the only place that can stop this is the Electoral College, those people we elect to vote on our behalf for president. They are not going to do anything.

However, Obama will need to run again in four years.

Pass state laws in the next year that require anyone running for public office to file a copy of their full, original birth certificate with the secretary of state and make this publicly accessible.

You’ll know in a maximum of three years where Obama was really born.

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:01 pm 162. Dave:

#143 Donna V: #76 Ratatosk;

If there is any kind of genuine conspiracy here
it is one to cripple our side by making as many people as possible believe that ALL IS LOST FOREVER because AN ILLEGAL ALIEN is in the White House.

My personal tinfoil radar in no way confirms this
but does detect some unidentified blips at the edge of the screen.

Dec 12, 2008 - 10:32 pm 163. Sara123:

Monitored by law enforcement? Americans who do not agree with you on a constituional issue should be monitored by law enforcement for that disagreement? I don’t care who they are or what they beleive! What is wrong with you to even suggest such oppression on any of your fellow citizens for daring to think and/or speak incorrectly in your, no doubt, superior opinion.

Maybe law enforcement should be monitoring you and maybe Obama will and give you a taste of the medicine you are begging for. You are the one who is the dangerous extremist here! I am shocked to read such hatred and intolerance for even the mere debate of constitutional issues from an author on this web-site! You live in a constitutional republic (what is left of it)! You don’t even accurately protray the arguments being made in the law suits before the court. Maybe it is all above your head and you should leave the room and permit the adults to talk amongst themselves.

I don’t necessarily agree with the argument being made, but I sure have enjoyed the opportunity to learn about the constitution and what goes into determining the orginal intent of the constitution. Arrest me for that!

Dec 12, 2008 - 11:53 pm 164. Cybergeezer:

Futatsu yen:
Perhaps Obama doesn’t want it to come out that he is less than 50% black! Maybe he’s pulled off a Michael Jackson in reverse
And after all; You know how Islam treats deserters to the faith.

Dec 13, 2008 - 5:02 am 165. misanthropicus:

RE #160/plutosdad: [...] all Senator Obama has to do to quiet these lawsuits is to ask for his long form birth certificate to be released [...] by Hawaii. No it won’t, it won’t satisfy any of these nuts. [...]”

Plutosdad: you’re darn right, albeit unintentionally – remember, we are discussing here an application for the commander-in-chief position, not for a part time/ temporary loading dock guy:

So, mister Soetero owes much more information to this nation (including to the gullible folk who voted him in), to quelch the suspicions around his unexplainable career – and not requesting it for justified scrutiny would be not only a negligence but a deeply irresponsible act. Bellow you can find a few of the relevant Soetero biographical elements which were always made public by presidential candidates to the public, but which in his case are completely shut off, and which the nation needs to examine in order to allow him at the helm:

- his medical records which are completely sealed;
- college transcripts/ GSLs forms and status;
- college work (Columbia graduate thesis);
- Harvard scholarly work;
- application for Illinois state bar certification;
- Selective service registration;
- travel documents, i.e. passports, records thereof;
- there are more,…

All these should be made available for examination, in order to clear the, so many! mysterious spots in Soetero’s career – a mighty legitimate request, whose denial has placed this country in a buffoonish operetta situation. And this is the most clement description of the situation – the objective description of the situation would be much, much worse.

Dec 13, 2008 - 5:45 am 166. Obieone:

Mr. Owens, Answer one question. What hospital was Obama born in? Until this question gets answered by someone, anyone, then I will doubt his eligibility to be our president. I have been asking this question for some time now, and no one can answer it. Don’t you find that strange? The truth will come out…..some day.

Dec 13, 2008 - 5:52 am 167. Thinking Person:

Boris et al….Still no documentation this morning I see? More name calling, lots of smoke and mirrors, claims that everyone but the Radio City Rockettes have seen the birth certificate and have vouched for it. But again…..NO DOCUMENTATION. You see, you have no argument Boris. Go back and look at your posts friend. All name calling, no facts whatsoever. Obama is going to be the next President of that we can all be sure. Just know that he’s going in with a HUGE cloud over his head. You can name call all you want but that just highlights the fact that you have no documentation of ANY KIND showing Obama’s citizenship. Odd for an incoming President that was nicely spit out of that questionable Democratic Chicago Political machine now isn’t it? Now dip back into your thesaurus for some more adjectives. The style of writing you’ve used so far demonstrates to me that “crazy” and “idiot” have just about used up your word bank.

Dec 13, 2008 - 5:56 am 168. Steve in TN:

I have no problem with BO being a “natural born citizen.” I just wonder: 1) Why he won’t ask for and produce his Hawaiian birth certificate, 2) and what happens when someone who ISN’T a “natural born citizen” is challenged. According to Bob Owens’ argument, the candidate doesn’t have to prove citizenship if challenged. Rather, the challengers must prove the candidate ISN’T a “natural born citizen; something that is very hard to prove.

Dec 13, 2008 - 6:03 am 169. hp:

cedarford Hilarious! Sort of like the Phys Ed Dept teacher assigned the special ed kids so the normal kids are free to play sports at their limits, rather than be held back and only playing at the lowest common denominator’s level.

typical democrat response of late. stereotypical “humor” at the expense of those they deem subservient.

2012 – the truth (of how much obama willingly shafted them the previous four thus showing they were nothing but throwaway TOOLS to his end means) shall set them free! can’t wait to be there to shake their hands and welcome them aboard. hahaaa hahaaa

Dec 13, 2008 - 6:09 am 170. Kevin McKague:

I’ve already spent too much time on this otiose project, but it has been fun. The mind of a conpiracy theorist has always provoked my curiosity.

Here is a list a found a while back that I think some of you might find helpful. Some of it refers to British theories, but it still applies to the American tin-foilers.

Pay particular attention to point #5.
here.

10 characteristics of conspiracy theorists
A useful guide by Donna Ferentes

1. Arrogance. They are always fact-seekers, questioners, people who are trying to discover the truth: sceptics are always “sheep”, patsies for Messrs Bush and Blair etc.

2. Relentlessness. They will always go on and on about a conspiracy no matter how little evidence they have to go on or how much of what they have is simply discredited. (Moreover, as per 1. above, even if you listen to them ninety-eight times, the ninety-ninth time, when you say “no thanks”, you’ll be called a “sheep” again.) Additionally, they have no capacity for precis whatsoever. They go on and on at enormous length.

3. Inability to answer questions. For people who loudly advertise their determination to the principle of questioning everything, they’re pretty poor at answering direct questions from sceptics about the claims that they make.

4. Fondness for certain stock phrases. These include Cicero’s “cui bono?” (of which it can be said that Cicero understood the importance of having evidence to back it up) and Conan Doyle’s “once we have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however unlikely, must be the truth”. What these phrases have in common is that they are attempts to absolve themselves from any responsibility to produce positive, hard evidence themselves: you simply “eliminate the impossible” (i.e. say the official account can’t stand scrutiny) which means that the wild allegation of your choice, based on “cui bono?” (which is always the government) is therefore the truth.

5. Inability to employ or understand Occam’s Razor. Aided by the principle in 4. above, conspiracy theorists never notice that the small inconsistencies in the accounts which they reject are dwarfed by the enormous, gaping holes in logic, likelihood and evidence in any alternative account.

6. Inability to tell good evidence from bad. Conspiracy theorists have no place for peer-review, for scientific knowledge, for the respectability of sources. The fact that a claim has been made by anybody, anywhere, is enough for them to reproduce it and demand that the questions it raises be answered, as if intellectual enquiry were a matter of responding to every rumour. While they do this, of course, they will claim to have “open minds” and abuse the sceptics for apparently lacking same.

7. Inability to withdraw. It’s a rare day indeed when a conspiracy theorist admits that a claim they have made has turned out to be without foundation, whether it be the overall claim itself or any of the evidence produced to support it. Moreover they have a liking (see 3. above) for the technique of avoiding discussion of their claims by “swamping” – piling on a whole lot more material rather than respond to the objections sceptics make to the previous lot.

8. Leaping to conclusions. Conspiracy theorists are very keen indeed to declare the “official” account totally discredited without having remotely enough cause so to do. Of course this enables them to wheel on the Conan Doyle quote as in 4. above. Small inconsistencies in the account of an event, small unanswered questions, small problems in timing of differences in procedure from previous events of the same kind are all more than adequate to declare the “official” account clearly and definitively discredited. It goes without saying that it is not necessary to prove that these inconsistencies are either relevant, or that they even definitely exist.

9. Using previous conspiracies as evidence to support their claims. This argument invokes scandals like the Birmingham Six, the Bologna station bombings, the Zinoviev letter and so on in order to try and demonstrate that their conspiracy theory should be accorded some weight (because it’s “happened before”.) They do not pause to reflect that the conspiracies they are touting are almost always far more unlikely and complicated than the real-life conspiracies with which they make comparison, or that the fact that something might potentially happen does not, in and of itself, make it anything other than extremely unlikely.

10. It’s always a conspiracy. And it is, isn’t it? No sooner has the body been discovered, the bomb gone off, than the same people are producing the same old stuff, demanding that there are questions which need to be answered, at the same unbearable length. Because the most important thing about these people is that they are people entirely lacking in discrimination. They cannot tell a good theory from a bad one, they cannot tell good evidence from bad evidence and they cannot tell a good source from a bad one. And for that reason, they always come up with the same answer when they ask the same question.

A person who always says the same thing, and says it over and over again is, of course, commonly considered to be, if not a monomaniac, then at very least, a bore.

Dec 13, 2008 - 6:09 am 171. Fred:

What is absolutely amazing to me in this issue is that Obama has numerous documents that constitute legal *proof* of citizenship – copy of birth cirtificate, passport, etc. – but in the absence of any credible evidence that these documents are false, some people refuse to accept them. While rules do vary depending on what one is doing (getting a passport, getting a social security card), a notarized copy of a birth certificate is legal proof of citizenship for just about anz purpose, and so is a passport (which also shows place of birth). Baring some strong evidence that Obama’s documents are incorrect, he has met the standard of legal proof. How can you expect the courts to rule otherwise?

Just out of curiosity, what the h____ is a *long form* birth certificate? Are you refering to the actual record copy that stays in the state or county files in Hawaii (something that Hawaii has already said exists)? That copy never leaves the records, and the only people who handle it are the records clerks, who pull it out copy it, and get the copy notarized before it is sent wherever its needed. And the odds are, these days the official record copy is a scanned pdf file. Seeing as how the notary has to verify that the copy sent out is a *true copy* of the original, exactly what are you expecting to see in this *long form* thats different from what has already been released? How many differnt notaries do we need to have sign this thing before everyone is willing to accept it?

Look, I didn’t vote for the guy either, but this argument is just rediculous.

Dec 13, 2008 - 6:40 am 172. Curbster:

Is it possible the document presented by Obama as proof of Hawaiian birth was intentionally made to look like it was printed yesterday and some low level staffer spent 2 minutes preparing it, knowing that this would totally unleash the dogs?

Eventually, the proof will probably come out, but the fact that the refusal to submit the original is intentional and meant to cause controversy.

Smokescreen

Dec 13, 2008 - 6:53 am 173. Lifeofthemind:

cedarford is a roving bigot who got run out of the Belmont Club for his anti-Semitism. He is unreliable even as a negative example. The best policy is to simply not feed the troll and Ignore him.

Dec 13, 2008 - 7:33 am 174. Thinking Person:

To Kevin McKague….Just in case you thought you’d cornered the market on cutting and pasting…..

Liberals clinically mad, concludes top shrink
Eminent psychiatrist makes case that leftist thinking is a mental disorder
Posted: November 12, 2008
6:33 pm Eastern

© 2008 WorldNetDaily

WASHINGTON – Just when liberals thought it was safe to start identifying themselves as such, an acclaimed, veteran psychiatrist is making the case that the ideology motivating them is actually a mental disorder.

“Based on strikingly irrational beliefs and emotions, modern liberals relentlessly undermine the most important principles on which our freedoms were founded,” says Dr. Lyle Rossiter, author of the new book, “The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness.” “Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave.”

While political activists on the other side of the spectrum have made similar observations, Rossiter boasts professional credentials and a life virtually free of activism and links to “the vast right-wing conspiracy.”

For more than 35 years he has diagnosed and treated more than 1,500 patients as a board-certified clinical psychiatrist and examined more than 2,700 civil and criminal cases as a board-certified forensic psychiatrist. He received his medical and psychiatric training at the University of Chicago.

Rossiter says the kind of liberalism being displayed by both Barack Obama and his Democratic primary opponent Hillary Clinton can only be understood as a psychological disorder.

Dec 13, 2008 - 7:53 am 175. Cort Wrotnowski:

Bob, you have the whole dual citizenship thing screwed up. You are just making things up as you go along. Show me the laws, or any official government source that regards dual citizenship as being “in addition” to natural born. It’s dead wrong. Lots of debates have been made over the last two hundred years. Congress revisited the subject a few years ago, and what you are suggested was never asserted, never agreed to by anyone. It’s just your fiction.

My email address is right there. I’ll be waiting for you.

Dec 13, 2008 - 8:27 am 176. GMW:

Hey Thinking Person, World Net Daily is your source?

LOL!

Did you notice that even Michelle Malkin thinks you birthers are nuts?

Dec 13, 2008 - 8:45 am 177. Tom the Redhunter:

Kevin McKague – those top ten characteristics are brilliant! And you’re right, #5 is the best. You can find “small inconsistencies” in just about everything.

Thinking Person – “eminent psychiatrists” have said that about conservatives for decades, most notably Barry Goldwater. It’s a terrible tactic to use against one’s opponent, and ridiculously untrue. I’m pretty far right, but don’t consider WorldNetDaily reliable or informative.

Dec 13, 2008 - 9:39 am 178. quasar:

could someone please start a fund raising sight for bo to help him raise the $12.00 fee required to ger his bc!

Dec 13, 2008 - 9:45 am 179. cedarford:

Kevin McKague – Thanks for the Ferentes letter profiling what a Truther is.

LifelessMind – Lifeofthemind:
cedarford is a roving bigot who got run out of the Belmont Club for his anti-Semitism.

No, apparantly Wretchard was trying to mellow his Blog out, likely because he was threatened by some his more hysterical anti-Muslim posters (like lifeofthemind) that they would try and tarnish his Blog as a hate site unless he banned certain posters. Wretchard has not explained his action, expressly.
I regret he caved to the “Nuke Mecca!” crowd, which are amongst the biggest haters and warmongers on the Internet, but that is his choice, and it is a big sea out there for me to swim in. His own posts are still good…Wretchard is now a little damaged because much of what he wrote early on about Iraq, purple-fingered democracy triumphing, and the WOT was discredited.
Wretchard swung too far over to the Neocons and Bush-Wilsonians. He is now making a difficult personal transition (given his own freedom fighter days) back to Realism.
************************
Deaf Smith:
Hey Bob, if Hussein was born in Hawaii then why has he spent upwards of 1 million dollars on lawyers to not show his BC?

Oh, he did show enough documentation to satisfy the FEC, Hillary, McCain, and Hawaii’s Republican Governor and officials under her that his birth cert was good, he was born in Honolulu. Oh, and the voters…

As to why he is spending money? (not the million the Truthers claim, far less) – The reason is the reluctance to kow tow to nutballs serves him well, politically.

1. It is the equivalent of spending a little money on shovels to hand to foes now digging a deep hole for themselves. He has 10s of millions, can raise 50 million with an email message if he wants…and the little he has spent to keep the Truthers going has been worth 10s of millions in bad PR about his foes.

2. It helps him with the Left. He can go Centrist, but immunize himself with the Left via riling them up good by pointing out crazy Right Wing Truthers are attacking him and trying to steal their victory.

3. With any luck, Axelrod and Plouffe believe, the Truthers will become equivalent in the eyes of the public with “Conservative Republicans”. If the two could get away with it, they would invite the Truthers to be in Inauguration Day tents labeled “Conservative Republicans for the Truth about the Secret Kenyan Birth, Elvis Lives, Obama Lied!. Pay for the tents themselves out of Obama’s vast money surplus and fly as many Truthers as they could in to pack the tents…especially the Peltos and the more spittle-flecked ones. And put them right next to the TV broadcast center and media spin rooms – with phone calls suggesting that they all interview the “Republican protestors seeking to overturn the election”.

4. Standing up to fanatics? Well, that is one concern voters had about Obama..and it boosts public confidence in the guy to see him standing up to mildly deranged Right Wingers. (Just as it did Palin when she didn’t crawl to like the boots and plead for the forgiveness and the endorsement of Leftie Truthers demanding the immediate release of her medical records and Trig,s birth certificate to them.) Even Obama seen to behave in a contemptuous and dismissive way about Secret Alien believers “non-negotiable demands” serves him well with people expecting a President who stands up to Pelosi, Putin, China, Corporatists, Chavez, Israel’s Lobby, and the radical Islamists.

******************

I am a Republican. Very conservative on finance, illegal immigration, green power Algore crap, liberal courts.
But I saw in the last few months of the race a McCain that could never be anything but slogan-spouting mediocre, erratic, frequently incoherent, wedded to failed ideas of his past. And lacking the brains and commitment to values to do anything other than veer tactically in leadership reponding to external pressures or personal whims he felt at the moment. Someone who wanted more wars and who wanted to resurrect the all but dead Neocons for another go at running our foreign policy. In short, a potentially horrible executive leader.
I saw in Obama someone who at least had the potential to be a very good leader and President, especially if he governed from the Center and unified us..and was not beholden to both the Left and the Republican’s wealthy Corporatists, Theocrats, Neocons.
I voted straight Republican, except at the top. And I only decided that after the 2nd debate, where what I saw of McCain greatly disturbed me. If Fred Thompson or Mitt Romney had been the nominee, I would have voted for either over Obama.
But so far, I have not regretted my vote for Obama in the least.

Dec 13, 2008 - 9:47 am 180. Brian Conner:

The language of the 20th Amendment, Section 3, makes it clear that the burden of proof of eligibility for the office of President of the United States is on the President elect.

” . . . if the President elect shall have failed to qualify”

Constitutionally, it’s not up to any of us to prove Obama is not a natural born citizen. It’s up to Obama to prove he is.

The time for him to be required to prove it is after he becomes President elect, which will happen on Monday, December 15, 2008. According to the 20th Amendment, he can not be required to provide proof before then.

Dec 13, 2008 - 10:04 am 181. Adam:

Owens
Your columm is the finest job of blithering I have ever seen. Apparently your research did not extend any further then the mindless drivel posted by stop the smears. Congratulations! You have just become the Barach-opod of the month.

Dec 13, 2008 - 10:06 am 182. Joe Six Pack:

There are a lot of theories. At this point the SCOTUS seems to be the best place to determine the fascts of the matter. it is clear that all the SOSs did not certify the candidates properly (some may have, the socialist candidate, a non-citizen got on the ballot in a number of states).

I think the dual citizenship issue and the passport issue, expecially need to be adderssed. Just because SCOTUS dismissed Donofrio case, does not mean they ruled against it. It just means they chose not to hear it. Since the Wrotnowski case is basically the same theory, they may have chosen to hear it instead of Donofrio. Donofrio himself says the Wrotnoski case has fewer lower court problems, and is better written. Don’t jump to the conclusion that because the case was not heard, the subject matter is not valid.

Dec 13, 2008 - 10:12 am 183. Pete:

Regardless of ones political leanings, there are very interesting legal and logical arguments involved. That alone makes it hard to toss these questions aside without some Court at least standing up and ruling on the merits.

BTW, I believe a Presidential candidate should clearly prove eligibility, otherwise candidates for President are on an honor system. That is hard to fathom as being right.

Even if it is supposed to be an honor system, it seems to me that candidates would still want to jump through hoops to prove they are eligible to the People since the candidates will be swearing to uphold the Constitution.

Dec 13, 2008 - 10:56 am 184. Wahine:

I wonder how many others have noticed the Dems are repeating the line that Blago is “nuts.” They and their media pals can’t say it often enough. But this is what they do. They’re in self-protection mode. Ever aided by those in the media.

The Dems need to discredit him so we fellow citizens won’t give any credence to his testimony that might implicate them, or the incoming administration, in the corruption.

Remember Blago wanted to “clean up” the Chicago Tribune editorial staff. Think of the many attempts Obama and team tried to silence others during the campaign or did “clean up” websites that carried inconvenient information on him. We can expect more of the same. Probably much more.

For a guy who campaigned on “transparency” I don’t think anyone could successfully argue he’s been in any way close to transparent. And should you point it out – expect to be diminished. Get used to being called a nut.

Dec 13, 2008 - 11:07 am 185. Kirk:

Bob
I would love to see your disproof of the information shown in this clip.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6771521759788800576&ei=VsxBSZ72CJycrALi1InTDA&q=bob+schultz+pres

Dec 13, 2008 - 11:10 am 186. Tom the Redhunter:

cedarford wrote “Very conservative on finance, illegal immigration, green power Algore crap, liberal courts….I voted straight Republican, except at the top”

What a perfect example of erratic and incoherent thinking.

Dec 13, 2008 - 11:51 am 187. Liz:

Buy a copy of the Globe they are picking up where the Globalist propaganda-media has left off.
I suspect that “Hussein” Obama is paying his lawyers off the same way he paid for his campaign and college education (also under lock and key) via the Islamic $$$ pipeline.He is truly as characterized by Reverend Manning”..the most prolific con man to have ever walked the planet”

Let’s see where this writer full of contempt for “conspiracists” says about the conspiracies to defraud the American people of their Constitution and the Il. senate seat.Journalists today are so completely traitorous..Its time to read Cicero folks!

Dec 13, 2008 - 12:34 pm 188. liberty4usa:

It is clear to me that our very wise founders reserved the highest form of a natural born citizen as the only viable candidate for this particular position.

Everyone that is calling people conspiracy theorists are ignoring the fact that ‘all by his lonesome’ Obama chose to hide his records.

That is not a conspiracy.

Everything as a result of his action since has been people taking political sides.

Everyone that is contributing to hiding the truth are the conspirators, and not those seeking to uncover the truth.

Horiwitz, Malkin and others including this author Mr. Owen, should have left this alone rather than calling people nuts for their interest.

Like it or not this issue could turn our entire political system on it’s head.

The rush to debunk this and the virtual silencing by censorship leaves people wondering; Who knows what, that they are not saying?

http://thenma.org/blogs//index.php/libertyforusa/2008/12/11/title-2

Dec 13, 2008 - 1:33 pm 189. Boris:

“Obama is paying his lawyers off the same way he paid for his campaign and college education (also under lock and key) via the Islamic $$$ pipeline.”

Haha–no conspiracy is too stupid for pajamas media commenters.

Dec 13, 2008 - 1:34 pm 190. Guy the NJ Voter:

The “Certificate freaks” claiming that Obama was born in Kenya originate on the Democratic side of the aisle (Berg & Martin) and make this whole thing a Wingnut Expedition Par Excellence. I think the Certification has a real certificATE to back it up, and it’s going to show that Obama was born in Hawaii. PERIOD.

What gets drowned out in the three-ring circus that focuses on the BIGGEST circle of Berg and his Illuminati Productions videos on YouTube and his own prior history of getting the CRAM-DOWN from a Judge in 2005 for how he mishandled a client’s case, is the SERIOUS and SMALLER circle that says “Hey, folks, wake up! The admission that Obama isn’t a Natural Born Citizen is right on the guy’s FightTheSmears website!”

And it’s true. Check the Elg case in 1939. Check the 1758 “Law of Nations” treatise used by the framers in writing the Constitution and how it defines “natural born citizen”. People who argue that the Constitution imported Common Law and Blackstone’s writings about “natural born subjects” only confuse the issue. The REVOLUTION in 1776 was about getting away from monarchies and kings that demanded that you be “subjects” without your consent. It was feudalistic.

I used to be GOP but quit that gig because Bush is an affront to I.Q. (at a minimum) and because both parties screw us over these days. Bailouts? Who wants to pay for Wall St. crooks who got rich scamming everybody?

The whole thing was too cozy between the parties. McCain was ineligible too. And that’s a FACT. New York Times blew the whistle on him in February ‘08. Earlier, his friend Orrin Hatch introduced a proposal in 2003 to amend the Constitution to remove the natural born citizen requirement. It went nowhere. By 2008, Obama has a problem; McCain has a problem. Obama and Clinton co-sponsor Resolution S. 511 which is NON-BINDING and expresses the “sense of the Senate” that McCain is a natural born citizen. They all know he’s not. In return for giving McCain legally contrived paperwork to flash at reporters (idiots, gullible, not lawyers) the Democratic side gets a promise from McCain that he and the GOP, in turn, won’t go after Obama for also being ineligible.

If GOP candidates promise to swear off on raising ineligibility questions about Obama, why should the MSM bring it up? The issue is made into the Great Untouchable Tin Foil Hatwearing Joke of the 2008 election, even though it had a serious legal basis for justifying a challenge on just the known facts. No need to claim Obama was born in a Kenyan manger.

End of story. What do you expect from a group of entrenched politicians that have spent the country into bankruptcy, ignored Bush’s arrogant abuses of power and unConstitutional actions on a dozen fronts (Patriot Act, FISA, torture, Gitmo, Halliburton/Blackwater, corrupt Dept of Justice with lawyers from Moo-U evangelical law schools doing politicized screenings of attorney hiring etc etc etc.)and wheel and deal in pork.

Until people amass and realize that BOTH PARTIES are cynical charades that have failed to checkmate each other on far too many issues and that that shortcoming has operated to hurt the COMMON GUY paying taxes and STRUGGLING, then Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dum are all that we’re putting into office. It’s time that WE THE PEOPLE run an election geared to DEFEAT THE INCUMBENTS (all of them), or you aren’t going to see any change. Term Limits would be a big help. No more career politicians. They create their own cesspools.

Dec 13, 2008 - 1:42 pm 191. Chuck Pelto:

TO: All
RE: Cedarford Talking About ‘Deranged’

Only 11 posts so far on this thread! Either your aged parents forced you out of the basement for half a day or you are trying to exert some control over your deranged Truther fanaticism…. — cedarford

How very illuminating. Cedarford talks about people being ‘deranged’. Trying to drag my deceased parents into this because he/she can’t offer anything logical or rational to the discussion. Having all his/her arguments shot to pieces, all he/she is left with is vitriollic ad homs.

Or maybe he’s thinking of my mother-in-law, whom we’re caring for for terminal squamous carcinoma of the neck and mouth.

We’re talking SERIOUS ‘derangement’ here, alright. As well as clinical-level projection.

Regards,

Chuck
[The Truth will out. And cedarford isn't going to enjoy it at all....]

Dec 13, 2008 - 3:09 pm 192. Bdaman:

Guys, Guys, get off the birth certificate, don’t you all realize he has a bigger scandal thats unfolding in front of him right now.
I can give you at least 4 or 5 different scenarios where it might generate from, As a student of history and having served with seven presidents i promise you it’s occuring.

Dec 13, 2008 - 4:43 pm 193. Benson:

Sheesh! These “BO is not a natural-born US citizen” arguments are tiresome, absurd, and irrelevant drivel. It’s a simple situation rendered bafflingly complex by endless verbiage. It’s loons deliberately confusing the issue as much as possible, swamping simple facts with a tsunami of empty words, frantically trying to sow doubt where rational people can find none. These morons remind me of the 9/11 Truthers and the defenders of The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion.

The real question is…why did I even LOOK at this in the first place?? My bad, as the kids say.

Dec 13, 2008 - 4:44 pm 194. stand up and fight:

To get a drivers license or social security number you must provide a certified copy of your original birth certificate.Nothing else will do.If you want to be president of the U.S.A. that piece of paper Obama has on his web site “Fight The Smears” is not good enough.How can any sane person not understand that.

Dec 13, 2008 - 5:02 pm 195. Beeblebrox:

Who cares what his Hawaii BC says? That’s a side-show issue. Obama’s own website fightthesmears.org says his father was not an American citizen. Therefore, Obama is not “natural born”. Case closed.

The problem here is that you can be disqualified from being president over the citizenship issue, even if you are and American citizen, if:

a. you were not born here
b. you were born here but your parents were not citizens when you were born
c. you were not born on US soil even though your parents may have been in service to the country at the time of your birth

There are four types of American citizens, only one of which can legally become president:

Native Born (born on US soil to parents, one or neither of whom are U.S. citizens). This is likely the case with Obama
Naturalized (one, born an alien, has lawfully become a citizen of the U.S. under the constitution and laws.)
Citizen by statute (made a citizen via legislation). This is the case with McCain.
Natural Born (born on US soil to an American citizen couple). This is the constitutional requirement and the only front runner in this last election that qualifies would be Hillary.

People confuse “native” with “natural born”. This is a common misconception but there is a nuanced difference between the two. Note that the Framers did not say “native”. In fact, this was debated and it was determined by the Framers that the president should have no allegiances to any country except that of his parents. Thus, native born was not enough. Clearly, “natural born” refers to the status of the parents as well as that of the location of the actual birth.

Interestingly enough, it is more likely that a child born to two American citizens in say, France, and then returned to the U.S. would have greater allegiance to the U.S. than a child born to an American mother and a French father here in the U.S. Yet, no one thinks that the kid born in France to the American couple would be constitutionally eligible for the office of President.

Obama had (we assume) a Kenyan father and has continuously shown a loyalty to Kenya. This is exactly the kind of thing the Framers sought to prevent when they required the POTUS to be natural born (i.e to American citizens). NO DIVIDED LOYALTIES.

For a greater explanation, read the blog http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com

Dec 13, 2008 - 5:50 pm 196. Ben Florsheim:

MISCONCEPTIONS

(1) “Obama released his short form Birth Certificate.”

Interestingly, the disputed (and probably fake) “Certification of Live Birth” was NOT released on Obama’s official website, but on the semi-official fightthesmears.org as well as the Annenberg-financed fake-neutral factcheck.org.

Obama’s official site clearly did not want to be associated with this obvious forgery.

One can learn a lot by watching for what people do NOT say even though it would superficially help.

(2) “The State of Hawaii confirmed it was legit.”

Another LIE. The “health director” of Hawaii’s Department of Health, a lady with the politically helpful name of Chiyome Leinaala Fukino claimed that the department has *A* birth certificate on file, and that the birth certificate meets the departments regulations (duh!). Here is what she did NOT say:

(a) that the published “certification of live birth” is authentic and was issued by the department.

(b) that the filed birth certificate shows Obama’s birth in Hawaii.

Fukino also offered her opinions on energy policy and the economy, and adamantly REFUSED further comment.

Careful observers will have noticed that Fukino offered these comments AFTER Republican governor Linda Lingle had sealed Obama’s (filed) birth certificate.

Whatever the truth of the matter, look for juicy political pay-offs for two political team players. (No real election challenges, etc.)

Dec 13, 2008 - 6:02 pm 197. Potemkin:

Not a very good job of “debunking”. This is not a court of law where there is a presumption of innocence, so why not produce the ding-dang birth certificate? Heck, let’s send some Ohio state employees to Hawaii to “verify” the birth certificate. uh … er… wait … sorry, wrong party. Never mind.

Dec 13, 2008 - 7:03 pm 198. cedarford:

Beeblebrox:
Who cares what his Hawaii BC says? That’s a side-show issue. Obama’s own website fightthesmears.org says his father was not an American citizen. Therefore, Obama is not “natural born”. Case closed.

Horsecrap.
Several Presidents, VPs, major candidates on the Presidential ticket have had non-US citizen parents or one non-citizen parent.

There are four types of American citizens, only one of which can legally become president:

Native Born (born on US soil to parents, one or neither of whom are U.S. citizens). This is likely the case with Obama..

More horsecrap.

Citizen by statute (made a citizen via legislation). This is the case with McCain.

More crap. McCain was a US citizen at birth through right of jus sanguinis, which wasn’t extinguished when the 14th Amendment was passed saying an additional path was to be plopped out on US soil to one or more non-citizens subject to the jurisdiction of the USA.

In fact, this was debated and it was determined by the Framers that the president should have no allegiances to any country except that of his parents. Thus, native born was not enough. Clearly, “natural born” refers to the status of the parents as well as that of the location of the actual birth.

Yet more horsesh*t.

You do not understand the Constitution nor immigration statutes.

The problem here is that you can be disqualified from being president over the citizenship issue, even if you are and American citizen, if:

a. you were not born here
b. you were born here but your parents were not citizens when you were born
c. you were not born on US soil even though your parents may have been in service to the country at the time of your birth

More Truther horsesh*t. And ignorance. The alternate path – born on US soil and subject to US jurisdiction – only came long after both the Constitution and jus sanguinis were the law of the USA.

PS – The Right Wing varient of Truthers likes to add that they think government employees abroad “serving government needs” have a higher claim to citizenship than ordinary US citizens abroad giving birth to a child. Pure, latent fascism.

Dec 13, 2008 - 7:36 pm 199. zanne:

Pay us now or pay us later..uh…er…wait..sorry,same party. Right?

Dec 13, 2008 - 8:18 pm 200. Rashputin:

cedarford – “More Truther horsesh*t.”

That’s pretty emotional for something you say is just a lot of noise and not worth mentioning. In fact, you do a lot of mentioning on this topic. Do you have deep seated emotional problems surrounding your birth, something like the absent father syndrome?

I’m sorry you have a hard time ignoring “Truthers” you deem as stupid and so forth. Have you tried not reading what they say so that your emotional problem won’t surge up and force your fingers onto the keyboard?

have a more crap day

Dec 13, 2008 - 9:05 pm 201. robotech master:

198. cedarford:
Horsecrap.
Several Presidents, VPs, major candidates on the Presidential ticket have had non-US citizen parents or one non-citizen parent.

And non-ran for presidential in a general election and none became POTUS or VPOTUS… stop with the strawman cedarford…

Dec 13, 2008 - 9:28 pm 202. Frank Lake:

[i]cedarford:

Horsecrap.
Several Presidents, VPs, major candidates on the Presidential ticket have had non-US citizen parents or one non-citizen parent.[/i]

Correct, but only second part. Chester Arthur deliberately hide that he was only born on US soil, but both of his parents were immigrants. And even then it was ‘understood’ that a NBC had to come from 2 citizens, why else would he be one of the few who burned all of his documents. Of course it doesn’t help his case that one of the Supreme Court Justices that he last appointed helped to re-define the 14th’s stand on NBC’s.

[i]There are four types of American citizens, only one of which can legally become president:

Native Born (born on US soil to parents, one or neither of whom are U.S. citizens). This is likely the case with Obama..[/i]

[b]More horsecrap.[/b]

Actually true if the SCOTUS finds that way, but it would still only be two types of citizenship Naturalized and NBC because the Con describes it only for 2.

[i]More crap. McCain was a US citizen at birth through right of jus sanguinis, which wasn’t extinguished when the 14th Amendment was passed saying an additional path was to be plopped out on US soil to one or more non-citizens subject to the jurisdiction of the USA.[/i]

Incorrect. McCain was made a citizen in Congress by statue and anyone who is made that way cannot be an NBC. Period. Also since Panama was NEVER made US soil it permanently voids the point.

[i]In fact, this was debated and it was determined by the Framers that the president should have no allegiances to any country except that of his parents. Thus, native born was not enough. Clearly, “natural born” refers to the status of the parents as well as that of the location of the actual birth.

Yet more horsesh*t.

You do not understand the Constitution nor immigration statutes.[/i]

Truefully it was debated and it was decided upon. The term NBC was chosen. Actually the NBC didn’t always gets his/her citizenship from the mother, as is with modern day. It had originally came from both of the child’s citizen parents. Which was described in the book The Laws of Nations. A book that was referenced by the framers themselves.

Now if the SCOTUS hears and finds for Wrot on this case then changes would be required for every other case involving NBC as it perfectly defines NBC, as it was once ‘understood’ nearly 240 years ago.

If not then same corruption as always, but made even chancer by the fact that foreign powers would have a ‘back-door’, via blood, into influencing the POTUS more than any lobbyist ever would.

Dec 13, 2008 - 10:40 pm 203. Frank Lake:

[i]Having said all that, there is no way the Supreme Court will touch this one. Constitution be damned, there is no way they’ll do anything that will potentially result in riots of the order of magnitude that would result.[/i]

If the SCOTUS bowed to external pressure then they would be as usefully as dirt in ‘clean room’.

Dec 13, 2008 - 10:48 pm 204. js12:

somehow this writer forgets to actually look at hawaii state law–which is the the only reason this is still in play–children born outside of the country –can register and recieve a certification of live birth from hawaii–aka the document obama has posted on his website. obama’s half sister who was born in indonesia also has the same document –and she is admits she is born in indonesia.

Dec 13, 2008 - 10:52 pm 205. jasper james:

This issue of the BC or COLB or where Obama was born is a misleading and false distraction from the fact the Obama was Natural Born Citizen or Britain because of his father. The Framers of our constitution understood the difference between citizen by law and citizen by natural law. They were not idiots and to them the term “natural born citizen” was not an obscure term. If laws are passed to define citizenship of a person – then those laws only define man-made laws. At that time the Child would inherit the Fathers name and his citizen ship first – Naturally. The 14th amendment and subsequent rulings and statutes define man-made definitions of citizenship. Obama has received citizenship in the U.S. by such laws, but his Natural Born Citizenship (The same as his fathers) can not be defined by such laws. This might seems sexist in today’s times, but that fact is irrelevant. It was the understanding at the time the Framers of the constitution wrote the words: “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.”

Dec 14, 2008 - 2:27 am 206. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Rashputin, et al.
RE: [OT] Cedarford’s Apparent Problem

That’s pretty emotional for something you say is just a lot of noise and not worth mentioning. In fact, you do a lot of mentioning on this topic — Rashputin

That’s all he/she has left to argue with against simple requests for a simple document.

It’s the application of Option #3 of the Lawyers’ Rule:

[1] If the Law is against you, argue the facts.
[2] If the facts are against you, argue the Law.
[3] If the Law and the facts are against you, call the other side names. — The Official Rules: A Compendium of Truths and Laws for Living

But cedarford is getting overly vexed by the fact that we’re more interested in facts than the paltry excuse for arguments being offered by those who don’t care for facts.

And I suspect cedarford feels intimidated by these continuing questions and calls for the document. Hence the ever increasing level of emotion and subsequent application of stronger forms of vitriol.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Hatred is the cowards revenge for being intimidated.]

Dec 14, 2008 - 3:50 am 207. Chuck Pelto:

TO: jasper james
RE: Well….

This issue of the BC or COLB or where Obama was born is a misleading and false distraction from the fact the Obama was Natural Born Citizen or Britain because of his father. — jasper james

….why can’t we have both?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Is it better to be feared? Or respected? And I ask, "Can't we have both?" -- Tony Stark, Iron Man]

Dec 14, 2008 - 3:53 am 208. Chuck Pelto:

TO: js12, et al.
RE: This…

children born outside of the country –can register and recieve a certification of live birth from hawaii–aka the document obama has posted on his website. — js12

….could be the greatest fraud pulled on US since the Gulf of Tonkin Incident under another Democrat, LBJ.

One question that comes to mind….

….how many will die as a result of THIS one?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[The truth is that all men having power ought to be mistrusted. -- James Madison]

Dec 14, 2008 - 4:08 am 209. misanthropicus:

RE #174/Thinking Person:
[...] Liberals clinically mad, concludes top shrink/ Eminent psychiatrist makes case that leftist thinking is a mental disorder [...]
WASHINGTON – Just when liberals thought it was safe to start identifying themselves as such, an acclaimed, veteran psychiatrist is making the case that the ideology motivating them is actually a mental disorder. [...]”

The truthfulness of this has the gravitation’s verity.

However, in the context of the present debate I’ll add also the fact that besides the liberal loons who, perhaps sincerely see the horizon as vertical (Cedarford, Hurley, you name them), also we have to deal with fraudulent trolls who are assigned to monitor sites and contain/deflect/neutralize any revelations concerning Soetero/Obama – and since it is difficult to separate the loons of hired hands, the solution is to deal with them all as roaming mental cases.

Dec 14, 2008 - 4:14 am 210. misanthropicus:

RE #206/[...] fraudulent trolls who are assigned to monitor sites and contain/deflect/neutralize [...]”

Complementing this, bellow, freshly harvested from Drudge Report:

* Google cranks up the Consensus Engine/By Andrew Orlowski – The Register/Posted in Music and Media, 12th December 2008 19:38 GMT *

“Google this week admitted that its staff will pick and choose what appears in its search results. It’s a historic statement – and nobody has yet grasped its significance.
Not so very long ago, Google disclaimed responsibility for its search results by explaining that these were chosen by a computer algorithm. The disclaimer lives on at Google News, where we are assured that:
The selection and placement of stories on this page were determined automatically by a computer program.
A few years ago, Google’s apparently unimpeachable objectivity got some people very excited, and technology utopians began to herald Google as the conduit for a new form of democracy. Google was only too pleased to encourage this view. It explained that its algorithm “relies on the uniquely democratic nature of the web by using its vast link structure as an indicator of an individual page’s value. ”
That Google was impartial was one of the articles of faith. For if Google was ever to be found to be applying subjective human judgment directly on the process, it would be akin to the voting machines being rigged.
For these soothsayers of the Hive Mind, the years ahead looked prosperous. As blog-aware marketing and media consultants, they saw a lucrative future in explaining the New Emergent World Order to the uninitiated. (That part has come true – Web 2.0 “gurus” now advise large media companies).
It wasn’t surprising, then, that when five years ago I described how a small, self-selected number of people could rig Google’s search results, the reaction from the people doing the rigging was violently antagonistic. Who lifted that rock? they cried.
But what was once Googlewashing by a select few now has Google’s active participation.
This week Marissa Meyer explained that editorial judgments will play a key role in Google searches. It was reported by Tech Crunch proprietor Michael Arrington – who Nick Carr called the “Madam of the Web 2.0 Brothel” – but its significance wasn’t noted. The irony flew safely over his head at 30,000 feet. Arrington observed:
“Mayer also talked about Google’s use of user data created by actions on Wiki search to improve search results on Google in general. For now that data is not being used to change overall search results, she said. But in the future it’s likely Google will use the data to at least make obvious changes. An example is if “thousands of people” were to knock a search result off a search page, they’d be likely to make a change.
Now what, you may be thinking, is an “obvious change”? Is it one that is frivolous? (Thereby introducing a Google Frivolitimeter™ [Beta]). Or is it one that goes against the grain of the consensus? If so, then who decides what the consensus must be? Make no mistake, Google is moving into new territory: not only making arbitrary, editorial choices – really no different to Fox News, say, or any other media organization. It’s now in the business of validating and manufacturing consent: not only reporting what people say, but how you should think.
Who’s hand is upon the wheel, here?
None of this would matter, if it wasn’t for one other trend: a paralysing loss of confidence in media companies.”

———————–*—————

[...] None of this would matter, if it wasn’t for one other trend: a paralysing loss of confidence in media companies. [...]
Comment: A) the IG Brother is watching you;
B) Schimdt is a an acknowledged Obamabot;
C)

Dec 14, 2008 - 4:24 am 211. Chuck Pelto:

TO: misanthropicus
RE: This….

Liberals clinically mad, concludes top shrink/ Eminent psychiatrist makes case that leftist thinking is a mental disorder — misanthropicus citing Thinking Person @ #174

…might go far in explaining cedarford’s recent descent into what appears to be a personal form of Hell.

The question becomes what can we do to help the poor, demented bugger?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. I mean…SERIOUSLY….dragging my deceased parents and terminally ill mother-in-law into this discussion seems quite a bit ‘over the top’ to me. But I’m involved in that matter personally. I’ll allow each of you to decide for yourselves whether or not cedarford is as ‘clinical’ as I thought…based on what caught my eye vis-a-vis misanthropicus’ comments.

Dec 14, 2008 - 5:35 am 212. Fred2:

In order to suppress the controversy, some court has to subpoena Hawaii to produce the long form birth certificate. Until then, the issue will bubble.

This will come up again during impeachment follies.

The policy of the State of Hawaii of not releasing birth certificates or certificates of live birth (they are different) is not justifiable. There might be some other scandal involved.

Spies could surf into Hawaii from a boat or a Russian submarine.

Consider that people do not actually remember their births. Their parents tell them. Your parents could have lied to you; You might have been born in, uh, Borneo. You unwittingly could be part of some vast conspiracy.

Also, how can you be sure those old people who raised you are really your parents? They could have been substituted by the conspiracy, or the pod people, or the CIA…

Dec 14, 2008 - 7:00 am 213. GMW:

Yes, I know this a fruitless attempt, but I don’t want to do my laundry….

The theorists here are forgetting The theory of O’ccom’s Razor, that is, the simplest answer is most likely to be the correct one.

Remember Damien’s (comment 101)long list of those who would have to be complicit in such a scam if this were to work?

How likely is that?

Did any of you notice that the author of this article is a conservative?

Don’t go asking Precilla Presley to unbury her dead husband just because you read in some tabloid that he was spotted in Burger King.

Dec 14, 2008 - 7:15 am 214. zanne:

GMW wrote:”Don’t go asking Precilla Presley to unbury her dead husband just because you read in some tabloid that he was spotted in Burger” King. Does John Edwards ring any bells? MSM admitted to sitting on this story for over a year. Enquirer broke the true story.

Dec 14, 2008 - 8:39 am 215. Chuck Pelto:

TO: GMW
RE: How Likely?

Remember Damien’s (comment 101)long list of those who would have to be complicit in such a scam if this were to work?

How likely is that? — GMW

The following people and organizations would have to be either morons (to be fooled by one Kenyan) or conspiring with said Kenyan, if any of this BS should be true

The US Senate
The US House of Reps
President GW Bush
President Bill CLinton
President GHW Bush
President James Earl Carter
Vice Pres Dick Cheney
Vice Pres Al Gore
The RNC
The DNC
Senator John McCain
the McCain Campaign
Senator Hillary Clinton
the Clinton Campaign
Governor Sarah Palin
The State Gov’t of Hawaii — Damien’s List @ #101

Well, GMW….

….how old are you?

Do YOU remember Viet Nam? Something like 58,000 Americans dead. Millions of others from Southeast Asia dead?

How likely is it that the Gulf of Tonkin Incident that got us eye-ball deep in that war was a fraud?

Try 100%

And it wasn’t EXPOSED as a fraud until MacNamara admitted to it in the mid-1990s, like 25 years later. And that’s with HUNDREDS of people in the government aware that it was a fraud at the time it happened.

So. How likely is it that a handful Obama being a natural-born citizen is a fraud as well?

I give it a higher probability than YOU obvious do. And I suspect I have considerably more experience with ‘fraud’ at this level, having been a soldier during Nam.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. In order to hide the truth about Obama’s status as a natural-born citizen, all you need is a handful of people to refuse to divulge the truth of it.

It’s not like having hundreds of military personnel, i.e., the sailors on the ship allegedly attacked, the general staff at CINCPAC that knew there was no such attack as reported having occured, the joint chiefs of staff operations people in the Pentagon knowing the same, the president and the cabinet all keeping their mouth shut.

SO I give the possibility that Obama was actually born in Kenya and people keeping it quiet a considerably higher probability than people like you and Damien.

Dec 14, 2008 - 9:36 am 216. robotech master:

Dear GMW do you understand what O’ccom’s Razor says…

O’comm’s Razor says that if for 12 dollars one could post ones birth cert for the world to see… or send millions of dollars preventing it from being seen… Clearly the simplest reason to prevent ppl from seeing is because theirs something bad on it. Thats O’ccom’s Razor….

Their is no “long list” of scammers theirs really only obama and that it…. So once again clearly you haven’t a clue what O’ccom’s Razor is.

Dec 14, 2008 - 11:20 am 217. Chuck Pelto:

TO: GMW
RE: Almost Forgot

About that Gulf of Tonkin fraud thing.

I personally know a retired US Navy officer who was working at CINCPAC at the time of the ‘incident’.

He confessed to his knowledge that it was a fraud in front of about seven other members of the Denver Chapter of Mensa at a restaurant to which we had retired after a monthly general meeting. This was shortly after MacNamara confessed to his complicity in the fraud.

The confession was almost tearful.

Most of the others at the table wore expressions of shock and horror. A couple of us were glaring daggers at him.

So, back on topic, I have personal experience that a goodly number of people can keep a major fraud to themselves. And that people like Rick Moran and Bob Owens can behave like bozos, blowing off something like a fraud being perpetrated against US vis-a-vis Obama’s eligibility to be President of the United States.

And you and others like Damien, cedarford and others here can behave like bozos too.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[If we are to take for the criterion of truth the majority of suffrages, they ought to be gotten from those philosophic and patriotic citizens who cultivate their reason. -- James Madison]

P.S. Based on that statement, I get the distinct impression that the names of the people I cited in this comment have problems with their gardening of ‘reason’.

After all, they don’t ask for evidence. They just accept a politician at their word…..go fig…..

Dec 14, 2008 - 1:50 pm 218. zeezil:

Why should we believe anything Obama says? Obama has never come clean on much of anything. He denies, obfuscates and distorts the truth constantly. Even with the recent Blago scandal. Obama has never come clean on the many questions related to his past relationships:
Ayers
Rezko
Wright
Kalidi
Pfleger
to name just a few. By not releasing his original long form birth certificate, it is apparent that he is hiding something. Otherwise, what’s the big deal? Just release the certificate and provide definitive answers.

Dec 14, 2008 - 2:37 pm 219. Boris:

As Chuck pints out, if one conspiracy is true, then ALL conspiracies are true. QED.

Dec 14, 2008 - 2:46 pm 220. Beeblebrox:

Setting aside that this cedarford person actually offered ZERO refutation to the reality that the Framers clearly intended and wrote same, that “natural born” means born in the US to two American citizens, what is it with the invective?

Obama ADMITS that he not born of two US citizens. Like I said, case closed. If the SCOTUS wants to redefine what natural born means then they have a problem given that the implicit meaning of “natural” is that no court or legislative body needs to intervene to define the term. “Natural” means that it is by obvious right that a person is a citizen because there is no other place the person born here to TWO American citizens could possibly be from.

Chester Arthur is the only known president to NOT be natural born and this was not known to the country at the time. He lied about his lineage to specifically gain eligibility to be president. Why lie, why cover up, why destroy records of his father’s citizenship if it was okay to have a non citizen as a parent? Answer: He would never have been allowed to become president if it had been learned his father was a citizen of Ireland at the time of Arthur’s birth.

Bottom line, the “proofers” as Bob the Elitist calls them, may have a point about the Hawaii BC, no one knows, certainly no Bob. I, personally, don’t care about that issue because it has no bearing on whether Obama’s father is a citizen. He wasn’t, so Obama clearly isn’t natural born. End of story.

Dec 14, 2008 - 2:51 pm 221. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Boris
RE: Cute

As Chuck pints out, if one conspiracy is true, then ALL conspiracies are true. QED. — Boris

But hardly accurate.

Or are you saying the Gulf of Tonkin Incident occurred as reported by D-TX LBJ, President of the United States?

And all those hundreds of military and naval officers didn’t keep it to themselves until AFTER MacNamara ‘confessed’?

Are you REALLY that STUPID?

Well….maybe that’s a rhetorical questions after all…..

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. It’s truly amazing how P.T. Barnum was so accurate. And YOU, Boris, are a prime example of that.

Dec 14, 2008 - 3:41 pm 222. Someone75:

Boris:

Don’t mind Chuck Pelto’s brainless fluff. He hangs around in all sorts of Internet forums and posts idiotic contrarian views arguing with anyone that pays attention to him. And it’s not just politics – it’s literally anything. He’s a sad old man desperate for human contact, and the very definition of a troll.

Besides – the conspiracy nuts will never listen to reason. That’s why they’re conspiracy nuts.

Keep up the good work.

Dec 14, 2008 - 6:59 pm 223. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Someone75
RE: Heh

He’s….the very definition of a troll. — Someone75

Talk about ‘projection’.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Hatred is the cowards revenge for being intimidated.]

P.S. By the way, the epitome of a ‘troll’ is someone who contributes nothing but ad homs to the discussion….and guess what you’ve done here….{nudge-nudge, wink=wink}….

Dec 14, 2008 - 8:41 pm 224. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Beeblebrox
RE: Chester Arthur

Chester Arthur is the only known president to NOT be natural born…. — Beeblebrox

Was he delivered by C-section? I see he was born in Fairfield, Vermont, on 5 October 1829.

How is it that he is not ‘natural born’?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[The study of history is the best medicine for a sick mind. -- Livy]

P.S. Too bad people like Boris and Someone75 don’t take a good dose of that medicine….

Dec 15, 2008 - 12:01 am 225. Robert Hurley:

Chcuk Pelto and Mensa – Tha is a combination that makes me chuckle

Dec 15, 2008 - 8:28 am 226. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Robert Hurley
RE: [OT]You’re Welcome

Chcuk Pelto and Mensa – Tha is a combination that makes me chuckle — Robert Hurley

Glad to have brightened your otherwise shabby day.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[If laughter is the best medicine, why isn't it regulated?]

Dec 15, 2008 - 8:36 am 227. Vanessa3436:

Citizens of this country should care that Obama is not providing is birth certificate for inspection.

Every single one of us have to show birth certificates when required and thats the gall of it by him.

Why does Obama think he is above the law?
Dictators do this.

You lose your freedoms one at a time.

Literally Obama is telling every US citizen that he is above the law.

There is something seriously wrong with my-our country. This saddens me to no end.

Dec 15, 2008 - 8:54 am 228. liberty4usa:

On one side we have people defending fraud.
On another side we have people caring about the truth.
The side defending fraud is now considered mainstream normal thinking.
The side wanting the truth is considered the kooks!

The long term effects of illicits indoctrination are now becoming apparent!
http://thenma.org/blogs//index.php/libertyforusa/2008/12/14/the-death-of-respect

Dec 15, 2008 - 10:30 am 229. Kelly:

Obama could present a copy of his passport. I have read US citizens were not eligible to travel to Indonesia or Pakistan during the period Obama went there. I believe this was in his twenties. How was he able to get a visa if he was US citizen?

Dec 15, 2008 - 11:51 am 230. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Kelly
RE: Heh

Obama could present a copy of his passport. — Kelly

One can get a US Passport without showing a US Birth Certificate.

The Certificate of Live Birth, as offered by the Obama Campaign, could supply the necessary document to get a passport, based on looking at requirements at the State Department’s web-site for apply for a passport.

Heck. The way government works in Illinois, see various recent reports about their governor on PJM, one might not even need to do THAT to get a passport.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Our country is now taking so steady a course as to show by what road it will pass to destruction, to wit: by consolidation of power first, and then corruption, its necessary consequence. -- Thomas Jefferson]

Dec 15, 2008 - 12:17 pm 231. Kelly:

But if he had a US passport, he wouldn’t have been able to get a visa to visit those countries so he would have needed a foreign, perhaps Indonesian, passport to visit.

Dec 15, 2008 - 12:41 pm 232. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Kelly
RE: Ach Tso!

But if he had a US passport, he wouldn’t have been able to get a visa to visit those countries so he would have needed a foreign, perhaps Indonesian, passport to visit. — Kelly

I see your point.

Thanks,

Chuck(le)
[We accept Visa, MasterCard, AmEx, and Jeri Ryan JPGs.]

Dec 15, 2008 - 12:55 pm 233. Beeblebrox:

Was he delivered by C-section? I see he was born in Fairfield, Vermont, on 5 October 1829.

This was answered in my post. Arthur hid the fact that his father was an Irish citizen at the time of his birth because he knew that if it had become known that one of his parents was not a citizen, that he would have been disqualified to be president.

Natural born implicitly means that one does not have to fall back on statute to gain citizenship. Having two parents who are citizens at the time of your birth on this country’s soil requires no statute to affirm citizenship. The second that you have to rely on a ruling by a court or on some legislative action (such as McCain did to get himself his bogus “natural born” status) then by the very act of doing so, one proves that one is not natural born. In the case of Arthur, native yes, natural born, no.

Dec 15, 2008 - 7:11 pm 234. quasar:

Hey Barack, I hear that you are going back to Hawaii next week. Please take Sandy Berger with you this time. Don’t forget to tell him to wear loose fitting clothes. We need to kill this stupid controversy about your NBC status. If you want to really cover your tracks, send Axelrod or Emanuel under cover over to the National Archives with a bottle of White-Out. The Constitution is way out of date.

Dec 16, 2008 - 7:22 am 235. Paul - Indiana:

Aside from the claims that Obambi is eligible for the presidency it’s clear that he is totally unqualified for the presidency.

Dec 16, 2008 - 8:34 am 236. Robert Hurley:

I think Obama is just withholding the bc just to torture the wingnuts. Like moths to a flame you guys are just sucked into nutty issues.

Dec 16, 2008 - 10:53 am 237. Robert Hurley:

Paul – Indiana – I guess that 70 million voters in the US disagree with you

Dec 16, 2008 - 12:50 pm 238. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Beeblebrox
RE: Chester’s Father was Irish

This was answered in my post. Arthur hid the fact that his father was an Irish citizen at the time of his birth because he knew that if it had become known that one of his parents was not a citizen, that he would have been disqualified to be president. — Beeblebrox

Well….

….neither I nor the INS hold to that interpretation of ‘natural-born citizne’.

Thanks,

Chuck(le)

Dec 16, 2008 - 3:52 pm 239. CHKlaver:

I am always wary when there are more questions than answers about a policy or a person. Obama’s own personal history is fraught with unanswered questions. And, his political one has huge gaps in it as we are just recently witnessing in relation to the Blagojevitch situation.

Obama by his own admission admits that he has dual citizenship. The Kenyan ambassador said on live radio that everyone in Kenya knows Obama was born there and have made a shrine of his birthplace. The grandson of the Imam who witnessed and recorded Obama’s birth is reportedly seeking political asylum in Britain through Amnesty International. Even Gov Richardson said in a foreign interview that “Obama es un imigrante.” He didn’t add a qualifier that he was referring to Obama’s descendency or his parents’ status at the time of his birth.

Suspicious things I see:
1. Obama’s own website says he is a native born citizen and uses only Amendment 14 to justify his eligibility, not the “natural born citizen” clause in Article II.

2. The Democratic Party will NOT take responsibility themselves for verifying his eligibility and instead have deferred the verifiers of authentication to Hawaiian officials who have been vague at best, and the Annenberg Public Policy Center. Why won’t the Democratic Party just tell its members that THEY have verified Obama’s birth certificate and hence eligibility? Why pass the buck?

3. Why have the Democrats since 2006 been pursuing the elimination of the “natural born citizen” requirement? Chicago Atty Herlihy called it in effect “racist” and outdated in our increasingly global society. The timing of this is what appears suspicious to me since 2006 was Obama’s first national exposure at the Democratic Party convention.

4. Why did Sens McCaskill and Obama jointly work on legislation to change the constitutional requirement during the McCain resolution last spring?

What is missing is the understanding that these are valid constitutional questions to present to the SCOTUS. Atty Berg is a DEMOCRAT and has been questioning this since during the primaries.

We just need to look at the words of some of the electors to tell us why the SCOTUS should look at these various cases and settle specifically the issue of dual citizenship (as well as the other questions) once and for all. One elector, Wayne Abraham said that since the SCOTUS hasn’t defined “natural born citizen” he would use his own definition for the term.

You can call it conspiracy theory all you want, but this Liberal Democrat wants some questions answered about Obama’s eligibility just like those questions regarding the Blago situation.

You other Liberals have bought the “Republicans are using whatever they can to get Obama just like they did with Clinton” garbage and refuse to look at the facts that Obama is hiding something. The question is WHAT?

I personally believe that we Americans have been set up by the Democrats with this selected candidate, and a deal was made with the Republicans to not contest his eligibility in exchange for not impeaching Bush and Cheney, or prosecuting after they leave office for war crimes. Hillary’s involvement was clear at the Democratic convention in August, and many in the party have speculated all along that she would be offered SOS as a result.

The other rank and file Republicans simply want the economic fall out to occur while Democrats are in control. How else do you explain that 10 million of them didn’t even show up to vote for this election? Even if you assume that some of this number is due to states like mine where we don’t have to register a party to vote, that doesn’t shave off the number too much.

It’s time for Americans to WAKE UP.

Dec 16, 2008 - 5:00 pm 240. BLiP:

Its fun watching those unable to accept Obama as president clutching at straws and using feeble logic to deny reality.

Its true – there are none so blind as those who will not see.

Dec 16, 2008 - 7:31 pm 241. robotech master:

240. BLiP: Its true – there are none so blind as those who will not see lord obama as the greatest messiah to walk the earth, who can do no wrong and he shall save us from everything including ourselves.

Fixed that for you BLiP….

Dec 16, 2008 - 9:25 pm 242. another view:

just saying. we know and we don’t care…we will still vote him in tomorrow. get over it.. he has the countrys best interest in mind… that is good enough for us…the best man has the job.

Dec 17, 2008 - 9:12 am 243. Chuck Pelto:

TO: All
RE: BLIP vs. ‘Reality’

Its fun watching those unable to accept Obama as president clutching at straws and using feeble logic to deny reality. — BLIP

Show US the ‘reality’ of Obama’s Hawaiian Birth Certificate, and all of this will go away.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. We’re talking SERIOUS ‘projection’ with BLIP.

Dec 19, 2008 - 8:09 am 244. Chuck Pelto:

TO: All
RE: Obviously….

just saying. we know and we don’t care…we will still vote him in tomorrow. — another view

…is the sort of person who had a “Anyone but Bush” mentality in 2004. And, based on that sort of expression he/she has made here, they would have voted for Saddam Hussein if the Democrats had put his dead carcass on the ballot. [Note: Not that any state Secretary of State would have objected, based on what I encountered from my own, see item #5 (above).]

So, another view despises the Constitution of the United States. Just as long as he/she gets what they want, the rest of US could go to Hell. And, ultimately, take them along with US.

We’re talking REAL ’stupid’ here.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[You can't fix dumb.]

Dec 19, 2008 - 8:14 am 245. Chuck Pelto:

TO: All
RE: Another Key Indicator

It seems that the Kenyan government, for some reason or other, has decided that Obama’s family there must NOT speak to the media.

See THIS Item…..

This looks like prima facia evidence that Obama is NOT a ‘natural-born citizen’ of the United States.

I recommend someone take depositions of these people and present them to the United States federal courts.

We’ll probably have to give them potlicial asylum. But WHERE? HERE? If their honest reports are that they swear to having seen Obama born in Kenya, they’re lives would probably be at risk at the hands of the Democrats.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[The Truth will out.....]

Dec 21, 2008 - 8:29 am 246. Robert Hurley:

Chuck – This must be a new definition of prima facie evidence. Tell me again just for the record, where did you study constitutional law. I want to get a good laugh today

Dec 22, 2008 - 10:19 am 247. Chuck Pelto:

TO: Robert Hurley
RE: Get Thee…

This must be a new definition of prima facie evidence. — Robert Hurley

….a good dictionary.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Did you know that the word "gullible" is not in the dictionary?]

Dec 24, 2008 - 12:27 pm 248. No Free Lunch:

Below are two official emails that dispute the public version of Obama’s Birth and his mother’s marriage to BHO Sr.

From: pubrec@u.washington.edu [mailto:pubrec@u.washington.edu]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008
Subject: Re: Stanley “Ann” Dunham 1960 to 1970 class registration

Ms. Stanley Ann Dunham (BHO II’s mom) was enrolled at the University of Washington for:

Autumn 1961
Winter 1962
Spring 1962

The records responsive to your request from the University of Washington are above as provided by the Public Disclosure Laws of Washington State. This concludes the University’s response to your Public Records request. Please feel free to contact our office if you have any questions or concerns.

Madolyne Lawson
Office of Public Records
206-543-9180

From: Stuart Lau [mailto:stuartl@hawaii.edu]
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008
Subject: Re: Inquiry

The University of Hawaii at Manoa is only able to provide the following information for Stanley Ann Dunham:
Dates of attendance:
Fall 1960 (First day of instruction 9/26/1960)
Spring 1963 – Summer 1966
Fall 1972 – Fall 1974
Summer 1976
Spring 1978
Fall 1984 – Summer 1992

Degrees awarded:
BA – Mathematics, Summer 1967 (August 6, 1967)
MA – Anthropology, Fall 1983 (December 18, 1983)
PhD – Anthropology, Summer 1992 (August 9, 1992)

Sincerely, Stuart Lau
****************************************
Stuart Lau
University Registrar
Office of Admissions and Records
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Ph: (808) 956-8010
****************************************

Commentary on University Emails…or Stop, Drop and Enroll:

For the BHO II Hawaiian Aug 4 1961 COLB to be accurate the following improbable events needed to occur:

1 month after starting classes, Stanley Ann Dunham, Barack’s mom, at age 17, got pregnant by the only black African man on the entire chain of Hawaiian islands.
2 months after getting pregnant, she drops out of college.
3 months after getting pregnant, she marries BHO Sr.
10 months after her first day at the U of HI, she delivers BHO II and immediately leaves her parents, her new husband, and her home, to fly alone with a newborn 2800 miles to Seattle to start college at the U of W.
Stanley Ann Dunham does not return to Hawaii until AFTER BHO Sr left the islands for Harvard.

This is an implausible series of events made even more nefarious because Obama II in his 2 bio books never mentions his mom left Hawaii when she was supposedly married to BHO Sr, nor does he mention she was in Washington State during this time.

Dec 29, 2008 - 10:02 pm 249. Brian Smith:

Still going after this story? What? …are you children?

Brian…

Jan 12, 2009 - 2:33 pm 250. Texasgal:

No Brian, the children are the ones drinking the OKool-Aid.

John D. Hemenway, Esq. – a World War II veteran, Naval Academy graduate and a Rhodes scholar who is friends with Rupert Murdoch recently wrote him to inquire officially why the media has not covered this story. He is one of the people who facilitated a lawsuit (Hollister vs. Soetoro et al.) in the United States District Court (D.C. Circuit) requesting that Obama be required to produce his original birth certificate or satisfactory substitute evidence.

There has yet to be produced an “original” birth certificate. The non-original “Certificate of Birth” is not notarized, sealed, does not provide the detail necessary to prove his birth in Hawaii and the original supposedly remains in Hawaii – where just $20 and the approval from Barack Obama to release it would clear up this story.

Why instead has he spent reportedly $1 million in legal fees to NOT show the original birth certificate?

May 27, 2009 - 2:30 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed)
Comments: