Ed Brayton is a journalist, commentator and speaker. He is the co-founder and president of 
Cynthia Dunbar, the nutball on the Texas State Board of Education who wrote an idiotic screed about Barack Obama at the Christian Worldview Network last week, is now scrambling to backpeddle from the things she said. The Ft. Worth Star-Telegram reports:
Cynthia Dunbar's phone hasn't stopped ringing since the presidential election, but the questions being asked of the State Board of Education representative have nothing to do with textbooks or curriculum.Dunbar, of Richmond in Fort Bend County, posted a column titled "Freedoms Will Be At Risk Under President Obama," on the Christian Worldview Network Web site two days before the election.
The column questioned whether Obama is a U.S. citizen as well as whether his presidency might bring on a terrorist attack "by those with whom Obama truly sympathizes" and suspension of rights under martial law. It has since been pulled from the site.
"When I wrote this article, I wrote it as a private citizen," Dunbar said Wednesday. "I did not use it as a bully pulpit."
So what? No one thinks she didn't have the right to say what she said; the issue is how utterly moronic it was. And here comes the "my words have been distorted" tap dance:
On Wednesday, Dunbar told the Star-Telegram that her comments about Obama and a possible terrorist attack had been "misconstrued through repetition."She said she didn't intend to imply that Obama was actually plotting with terrorists, as the headline said."My concern is that there are associations that would feel more comfortable and more safe to attack with Obama as president," she said.
She said her comments were based on Vice President-elect Joe Biden's statement that Obama would be tested by terrorists within the first six months of his administration.
"My point was, I'm not saying that Obama would not respond to an attack, I just think the apprehension of not doing an attack would have been greater with McCain as president," Dunbar said.
Bullshit. She claimed in the article that Obama actually sympathizes with those who would attack us and that Obama would use this to declare martial law:
So we can imagine the blatant disregard for our Constitution, but what other threats does an Obama administration pose? We have been clearly warned by his running mate, Joe Biden, that America will suffer some form of attack within the first 6 months of Obama's administration. However, unlike Joe, I do not believe this "attack" will be a test of Obama's mettle. Rather, I perceive it will be a planned effort by those with whom Obama truly sympathizes to take down the America that is threat to tyranny. What nobody seems to be discussing is the fact that if such an attack takes place, what about Martial Law? What happens to expand executive power when a state of civil disorder is declared?
You're lying, Cynthia. We know exactly what you said. She also repeated the equally idiotic "Obama isn't a real citizen" nonsense, but she still thinks that was valid:
She remains unconvinced that Obama is a legal U.S. citizen, she said Thursday. The president-elect was born in Hawaii but lived in Indonesia as a young child. His mother is U.S.-born; his father was Kenyan. His campaign posted an image of Obama's birth certificate online and state officials attested to its authenticity, but theories that he is not a citizen persist."Yes, I've seen the birth certificate posted online. I've read all the articles," Dunbar said. "What concerns me is the time he spent in Indonesia. His time in Indonesia would be a substantive issue, and I really don't know why it hasn't been examined more closely."
A suit questioning Obama's citizenship was thrown out of court early in the presidential campaign.
"The birth certificate does not address all the citizenship concerns raised in this suit," Dunbar said in a follow up e-mail.
She really is an idiot. Living in another country does not mean your citizenship is revoked, for crying out loud. Seriously, how does anyone with an IQ above that of a pot roast believe this crap? Even Matthew Franck at the National Review calls it exactly what it is and tells people to just stop:
It's a week after the election, and I'm still getting e-mails that holler about how Barack Obama is ineligible to be president because he's not a "natural born citizen" under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution. Enough already!Last winter, even the New York Times was suckered into taking seriously the loopy theory that John McCain is not a natural born citizen because he was born in the Panama Canal Zone. As I explained then, his parentage sufficed no matter where he was born, since his parents were U.S. citizens.
So too with Obama. All indications are that he was born in Hawaii in 1961. The state authorities say they have his birth certificate (though the fact that a modern printout of an electronic record has been made available rather than a photocopy of the 1961 original has sent some people round the bend).
And what if Obama was not born in the U.S. but instead, as some claim, in Kenya? Well, his mother was an American citizen, and as UCLA law prof and blogger Eugene Volokh explained to the Chicago Tribune, the applicable statutes about foreign birth with one U.S. citizen parent are on Obama's side here.
At this point the spluttering begins, from loons like Pennsylvania lawyer Philip Berg, who try to bootstrap an argument that young Barack lost his U.S. citizenship while living in Indonesia. This isn't a reach. It's preposterous.
Berg's frivolous lawsuit (and "frivolous" is putting it nicely) was tossed out for lack of standing shortly before the election by a federal district court. The howls only increased in volume, from people who have no understanding of the limits of judicial power. This question--if it were even a question--is to be settled not by judges but by the electors in their state capitals next month, and by the Congress that finalizes the election in January when the electors' ballots are counted.
Give it up and get on with life. Barack Obama is going to become president on January 20, 2009. He won, fair and square, an office he is eligible to occupy. So stop with the fetid, fervid, fevered e-mails, okay?
There simply is no limit to how ridiculous some people can be.
Politics
Comments
Shouldn't that be "backpedal", not backpeddle? :)
Of course, you haven't really been able to pedal backwards on a bike in ages, so the metaphor's kinda sketchy anyway.
Posted by: countlurkula, the spelling Nazi | November 18, 2008 9:41 AM
"When I wrote this article, I wrote it as a private citizen," Dunbar said Wednesday. "I did not use it as a bully pulpit."
But it is legitimate to use what one says in public to determine whether one is really too nutty or ignorant to continue in the post that you have.
I mean, education is supposed to be about teaching people to think critically. Do we really want someone who is prone to falling for absurd conspiracy theories to have such an important role in education?
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 10:00 AM
I continue to be frustrated that the mainstream media allows people to mischaracterize their past statements without immediate refutation by the interviewer. I attribute this to sheer laziness by the journalist and low standards by their producer/editors who let them get away with it.
I also believe these same journalists should anticipate the interviewees talking points, which is easy enough to do, and challenge those that are based on false premises. Wolf Blitzer's interview with Palin on 11/12 was another example of a politiician getting a bully pulpit to repeat false assertions even after we know they are untrue.
The media should be cleaning up the public square, not contributing to its pollution. I think Rachel Maddow is a candidate for meeting my standards, she appears willing to do the hard work of preparation and has the balls to speak out.
I don't think this is media bias so much as laziness and its resulting effect - ignorance.
We need a lot more Ed and Rachels in the media.
Posted by: Michael Heath | November 18, 2008 10:07 AM
Holy crap! This means that by her reckoning that I am not a US citizen, having lived for 15 years abroad. Oh... wait. Citizenship is conferred at birth or at the moment of nationalization. Since Obama was born in the United States he is an American citizen from birth. Since he was born to one parent who was born in the United States, he is an American citizen from birth.
McCain is on slightly more shaky ground than Obama, having been born (possibly) on a military base in the Panama Canal Zone (after it had stopped being run entirely by the US military). Therefore, McCain was NOT born on US soil (unlike Obama), but born on a territory no longer belonging to the United States! However, with parents both born in the United States, McCain is an American citizen from birth.
A similar argument could have been made against George Romney (Mitt's father), who was born in Mexico, but ran for president against Goldwater. Bah, stupid argument. These points were covered it before in this blog (back in February, I believe).
So when celebrities are accused of using their status to make private endorsements of candidates in public, that wrong, but when a government official makes a statement in public against a candidate as a private citizen, that's okay? Hmm...
Posted by: Umlud | November 18, 2008 10:16 AM
Out of curiosity, whether it be weeks, months, or years from now, if Cynthia Dunbar's statements prove to be true will you be trying to "backpeddle" yourself? You used words like "moronic", "bullshit", "idiot", and more to describe her. If any of her statements prove to be true in the future, will you post an apology to her and use your own words to describe your own ramblings, or will you completely forget or deny what you've said? Using statements such as "I find it hard to believe" or "the truth of her statements seem incomprehensible" can demonstrate your objections and bias while leaving you the opportunity to claim you too were misled like the majority of the population in case she proves correct.
Instead your ravings reflect those of someone who has had a few too many drinks at the local pub, and instead of strengthening your argument against Dunbar and your support of Obama, you weaken them.
Posted by: Troy | November 18, 2008 10:16 AM
Re Troy
For the information of Mr. Troy, Mr. Brayton has, on several occasions, been shown to have posted erroneous claims and has cheerfully posted retractions and apologies when they were shown to be erroneous.
Re Ed Brayton
Mr. Brayton may be interested in the information that his favorite whackjob, Alan Keyes, has filed suit in California to prevent the electors there from being certified on the basis that Senator Obama is not a natural born citizen!
http://israelinsider.ning.com/profiles/blogs/keyes-adds-his-standing-to
A 'Constitutional crisis' is looming over Barack Hussein Obama's unwillingness to prove his birth location and thus his US "natural born" citizenship.
That is the warning of Alan Keyes, a political activist and media commentator widely regarded as a beacon of moral clarity, whose lawsuit in California warns that America may have a 'usurper' in Oval Office unless something is done to stop him.
A California court petition filed on behalf of former presidential candidate Alan Keyes and others, including California electors, calls on the California secretary of state to prevent the state's 55 Electoral College votes from being cast in the 2008 presidential election until President-elect Barack Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office
Posted by: SLC | November 18, 2008 10:30 AM
No, that describes Dunbar far better than Ed.
Using what's known at the time, "bullshit" is an appropriate term.
What's idiotic is your attempt to attack Ed's rhetoric. You have no substance here and you are attacking the man and not the arguments.
It's.....bullshit.
Posted by: gwangung | November 18, 2008 10:31 AM
Troy: Out of curiosity, whether it be weeks, months, or years from now, if Cynthia Dunbar's statements prove to be true will you be trying to "backpeddle" yourself?
Just out of curiosity, which of Dunbar's moronic, idiot, and bullshit statements do you think stand even a remote chance of being proven true in the future?
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 10:35 AM
The wing-nit claim regarding Obama's time in Indonesia - and Dunbar can't even get get this right - is that he took on Indonesian citizenship and effectively repudiated his American citizenship.
If it were true - and there's no evidence it is - it might call his qualification to run into question assuming he made no subsequent attempt to reclaim his US citizenship.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 18, 2008 10:42 AM
Troy - Ed laid a line in the sand and squarely stands on one side of it. It's not like Dunbar's statements have not been swirling around the Internet, we've had plenty of time to investigate and ultimately fisk these claims months prior to Dunbar idiotically repeating them.
Where do you stand beyond rhetorical questions Troy? If you're going to call out Ed, shouldn't you stake a position as well? I would argue, a response by you in the realm of, "I dunno know", would be weak since none of Dunbar's claims are original or new and we have ample evidence to stake a position. So what's yours Troy?
Posted by: Michael Heath | November 18, 2008 10:42 AM
Another wing-nut meme was that Obama took on Indonesian citizenship and thereby lost his American citizenship (I understand my statement differs from yours Ian). However, even if Obama did become an Indonesian citizen, that does not cause one to lose their American citizenship, that is a wholly separate exercise that would need to be taken up with the American government and that simply did not happen.
I have no idea whether his mother got him an Indonesian citizenship, he was a little kid the whole time he lived there and it's irrelevant for the criteria I use to judge a candidate's qualifications.
Posted by: Michael Heath | November 18, 2008 10:48 AM
Whether she will be proven right or wrong on any of her allegations, I do not know. She has fears as do many Americans. If McCain had won, it would have been the same for those who supported Obama. I was merely pointing out the fact that name calling is often derided by those who they themselves use it. It is very easy to disagree with someone by calling them names. It takes much more sophisticated etiquette to disagree with them without doing so.
As to which allegation I might agree with her. I want to know why he will not kill the conspiracy regarding his birth by releasing his original birth certificate. When I first heard the allegations, I thought hogwash, but I've noticed more than a half dozen lawsuits were fought to prevent its release, and now I want to know why too. NBC Augusta has just released a story on this. I believe it will only grow in magnitude if he continues to fight its release.
Posted by: Troy | November 18, 2008 10:55 AM
Obama was a minor when he lived in Indonesia. Even if his parents had taken out Indonesian citizenship for him, he would not thereby have lost his US citizenship. Depending on when he turned 18, he might have been required to choose which citizenship to keep, as my father was during WWII. Without a formal repudiation of US citizenship as an adult, of which there is not the slightest evidence, Obama could not have lost his US citizenship due to having or acquiring Indonesian citizenship.
Posted by: Bill Poser | November 18, 2008 10:55 AM
Ian Gould: ...he took on Indonesian citizenship and effectively repudiated his American citizenship.
It is my understanding (and I can be wrong) that one doesn't "effectively" repudiate one's American citizenship.
One must explicitly renounce one's citizenship in front of a US government official, like an ambassador, or the US government can revoke one's citizenship for something like serving in a hostile country's armed forces or in its government. In either case, I would expect that there would be official documents attesting to someone's loss of citizenship.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 10:57 AM
"If McCain had won, it would have been the same for those who supported Obama."
Can you give us an any actual examples of US leftists accusing McCain of being a traitor or plotting to establish a dictatorship?
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 18, 2008 11:02 AM
Citizenship? Can't lose something you never had.
Posted by: Mobius | November 18, 2008 11:04 AM
Troy: It takes much more sophisticated etiquette to disagree with them without doing so.
Personally, I don't think it does anyone a service to pretend that lunacy and stupidity is the same thing as a rational difference of opinion.
-
I want to know why he will not kill the conspiracy regarding his birth by releasing his original birth certificate.
Because it wouldn't kill the allegations. This isn't how lunatics work. Lunatics will not be swayed by any evidence or any kind of reasoning. If these allegations could be killed, they would have been killed when Obama actually did release his birth certificate, and when the proper authorities verified its authenticity.
Frankly, if you remain unconvinced, then you are a nut too. This is not name calling. It simply doesn't do either of us any good to pretend that you are presenting legitimate and reasonable grounds for doubting Obama's citizenship.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 11:08 AM
Dunbar and Troy are both morons. She for spouting lies in public and trying to retract them and he for supporting her. Loons are everywhere.
Posted by: Mike | November 18, 2008 11:10 AM
Troy wrote:
And this has what to do with me, exactly? I've never derided name calling, nor do I plan to. I have absolutely no problem calling an idiot an idiot. And if you don't think Cynthia Dunbar is an idiot, I'd call that evidence that you're also an idiot.
Posted by: Ed Brayton | November 18, 2008 11:14 AM
Of course Obama is not a "Naturally-born Citizen." Befitting his status as AntiChrist, he was most definitely unnaturally born. You'd think Don Ho with all the demons of Hell playing ukeleles outside the hospital would have been a giveaway.
Anyway, as this is a Christian Nation, it is against the Constitution for the AntiChrist to serve as President. If that is not in itself sufficient, Hussein is also a Muslim and an atheist and therefore ineligible (and don't even try that "no religious test" bit: Folks around here regularly claim that Darwinism is not a religion; therefore, eliminating atheists from office is not a religious test).
I wonder if there is a living to be made from out-loonying Alan Keyes?
Posted by: kehrsam | November 18, 2008 11:14 AM
Come on EVERYBODY knows Obama's school record (CNN report) he is listed as "Indonesian" and his last was listed as Soetoro, his step-father an Indonesian.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.barnhartblog.com/photos/uncategorized/2008/07/18/obama_school_form.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.blogtalkradio.com/rss/tag/Barry.rss&usg=__H-6basnN7jHGHcbnzBYLUOxvX5o=&h=1004&w=800&sz=99&hl=en&start=9&um=1&tbnid=R3JjJxE3ydP9sM:&tbnh=149&tbnw=119&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dobama%2Bschool%2Brecord%2Bindonesia%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26rlz%3D1C1CHMB_en-USUS294%26sa%3DG
Give me a break. Let's ALL ask a few questions here and not make fun of anyone trying to get to the bottom of it.
Posting a "birth certificate" online is not sufficient. In this day and age of Photoshop - Obama needs to bring forward the 'goods' to a court for examination.
Right now there are TWO lawsuits in the Supreme Court, let's just see what happens in the next few days with those.
I, for one, wish to be very careful about who gets the highest office of the land. The media won't cover this story because they only report favorably on Obama. It is up to each of us to study the issue.
Posted by: Voice of Reason | November 18, 2008 11:17 AM
Hawaii officials validate Obama's original birth certificate: http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5iw1At-4G1xuE50oXVFRlBPfR3dqgD945OLU00
Posted by: Michael Heath | November 18, 2008 11:17 AM
Michael Heath:
And this isn't going to shut the kooks up, Troy. Kooks never shut up. Kooks will remain kooky no matter what. Troy, if you keep going on about Obama's birth certificate even though the very officials who are responsible for verifying it have verified it, then you are a kook as well.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 11:20 AM
The claims against Obama's citizenship are nothing more than another lame right wing attempt to discredit a well deserving president elect. They have nothing more to go on, and after countless attempts that hurt rather than helped their campaign they are still frothing at the mouth. After 8 years of an abominable and disastrous administration, you'd think that ANYONE rather than another Republican would be a welcome change. Only because Obama is black, open minded and has a Muslim sounding name has he struck fear in the right wingers.
Serves them right after being dealt nothing but fear for the last 8 years by one of their own.
Posted by: mark_s | November 18, 2008 11:21 AM
Voice of Reason [sic]: I, for one, wish to be very careful about who gets the highest office of the land.
We haven't been particular careful about who gets the highest office of the land since, oh, about 1980. Why should this election be any different?
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 11:25 AM
I suggest Troy and the inaptly name "Voice of Reason" check out the factcheck.org article.
And I'm sure he will, if a court ever sees fit to order it. Or do think he should just pick a court at random and march in with his birth certificate demanding they validate it? Personally, I don't think you wingnuts would be satisfied unless he came door-to-door and showed it to each one of you personally.Posted by: Taz | November 18, 2008 11:30 AM
Voice of "Reason" wrote:
Is it possible that you could really be this clueless? This is from an application to a Catholic school when he was 9 years old. He didn't fill it out, his stepfather did. And no one has a clue whether it is authentic or not. But even if it is, it doesn't support this idiocy at all. In fact, it specifically lists Honolulu as his place of birth, which is the only thing under dispute that matters for whether he is a natural-born citizen or not. Even if he was adopted by his stepfather and lived in Indonesia, that has absolutely nothing to do with whether he is a natural born citizen. You do not lose citizenship automatically by moving to another country or being adopted by someone from another country.
Actually, there are no lawsuits in the Supreme Court. There is one lawsuit that was dismissed at the lower court level that has a cert petition filed. That doesn't mean it's in the Supreme Court, that means the Supreme Court is deciding whether to hear the case or not. At this point, they are waiting for a response to that petition. But I can tell you what is going to happen here and I guarantee you I'm right: the case will be rejected. The Supreme Court will not hear the case, they will let the lower court ruling stand. And that will still not satisfy the lunatic conspiracy theorists. Nothing will satisfy them.
For crying out loud, the state of Hawaii has already verified the legitimacy of his birth certificate - a state led by a governor who endorsed John McCain, by the way. What possible reason could they have for lying about it? That would end the issue with any rational people. Alan Keyes and Phillip Berg are not, however, rational people.
Posted by: Ed Brayton | November 18, 2008 11:32 AM
Hi, Troy. Do you think that Obama's citizenship is simply a matter of opinion or up for vote? This is not a complicated legal issue. Dunbar readily admits that he was born in Hawaii, which was a US state in 1961. If he was born on US soil (and Dunbar says so), then he is a US citizen (this has been true since the Constitution was ratified.
I'm sure that *some of her statements are true - a stopped clock is right twice a day. But this rant from which she is trying to backpedal clearly establishes her as a paranoid conspiracy loon and an idiot. She completely fails to justify her accusation that he is sympathetic to terrorists. Sure, it's conceivable. It's conceivable that you are a thief and a rapist - but I have no reason to think so. Until I do, such accusations now would be completely unwarranted. And even if they turned out to be true later, any such accusations now would still establish me as an idiot (or delusional).
Posted by: Kermit | November 18, 2008 11:37 AM
Kermit: And even if they turned out to be true later, any such accusations now would still establish me as an idiot (or delusional).
Good point. I teach math. Anytime a student puts down an answer to a test question without showing their work or when the work is wrong, they get no credit, even if the final number turns out to be the correct number.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 11:41 AM
Then get off your butt and find out.
Or don't speak.
Posted by: gwangung | November 18, 2008 11:46 AM
Wow. A lot of morons came out to play for this one! Anyone who at this point still thinks Obama is not a citizen is a freakin' moron. Period.
Posted by: marilove | November 18, 2008 11:50 AM
Give me a break. This is well established law. It's like...a bunch of religious wackos trying to question well established biological theories and facts.
We are MORE than justified in making fun of ignorant, ill informed ideologues who try to make these "arguments."
Posted by: gwangung | November 18, 2008 11:51 AM
One of the worst parts of this lunacy is that Dunbar represents the State of Texas on the board of education. She's clearly unfit for the post and should be removed. I've spoken with middle schoolers (not from Texas of course) that can make a more logical argument than she's made.
Posted by: Mike | November 18, 2008 11:54 AM
I find it interesting that the majority of the posts in support of Obama being eligible/natural born include personal attacks, while almost all of the contrary posts do not. Based on the actual arguments presented, it seems like the "kooks," "morons," "idiots," etc... are better able to articulate facts and don't have to resort to pot-shots.
Someone please explain, without name-calling, why Obama does not have to proove he is a "Natural Born Citizen." And, no, his COLB does not proove he was born in HI.
Posted by: Unbiased? | November 18, 2008 12:10 PM
I read he spent $800,000 of taxpayer money defending a lawsuit rather than just show the long form birth certificate everyone wants to see...It's hard to tell what is true when you read anymore, so I say show it if you have nothing to hide.
Posted by: interestedcitizen | November 18, 2008 12:12 PM
Ed and readers,
It appears that the Christian Worldview Network has removed Ms. Dunbar's post. Ed's link now links to comments without an article. At least I couldn't find it, but I'm somewhat web-challenged, so if anyone can point me to it I'd appreciate it.
The Star Telegram link also gives a 404 error. Hmmm, maybe its me....
Posted by: eric | November 18, 2008 12:23 PM
Does anyone really believe that Obama's production of a birth certificate will satisfy the doubters? He's already produced the birth certificate and made it available on line--the only way to do that is to scan it. Copies have been made available to independent factcheckers who have verified their validity (see the links others have thoughtfully posted). If Obama is required to produce a copy in court, and the court rules it's valid, the doubters will still be able to claim that he gave them a faked copy.
In short, there is no way possible to disprove their theory--their clamoring for evidence is a red herring, as they will simply continue to denounce all evidence Obama does produce as more forgeries. "He faked the seal!" "The Hawaiian Health Department changed it in the computer before printing out a new copy!"
That's nutcase territory for sure, and Troy and the poorly named Voice of Reason are clearly charter members of the Tinfoil Hat Brigade.
Posted by: James Hanley | November 18, 2008 12:25 PM
"Someone please explain, without name-calling, why Obama does not have to proove he is a "Natural Born Citizen.""
Proove? Perhaps he doesn't have to do it because the people who believe (without reason) that he is (pick one) not American, a pal of terrorists, a socialist, the anti-christ, or who dislike him because he isn't white, aren't able to give any logical, legal, intellectual, support for their point of view.
Posted by: dean | November 18, 2008 12:27 PM
From a broader context and as a member of the Email Pushback Team the frustration by people who are not conservatives is obvious. I fisked about 500 viral emails this campaign season. Of those, about 480 were conservative viral emails, all of which contained assertions that were simply not true. The aprox. 20 liberal viral emails I fisked merely stretched their arguments beyond what their assertions could withstand.
So after 1+ years of non-conservatives being swamped with tinfoil hat conspiracies, the patience has worn thin. They deserve the derision because they make arguments with zero evidence repeatedly. Ad Nauseum. Never-ending. Get it?
I find your observation that those siding with Dunbar on this thread have better articulated facts absurd. I have yet to see one fact presented, one, that deserves our scrutiny and argues for legal action. What evidence exists that should require Obama go beyond what all other presidential candidates in our history have done when it comes to medical records?
The arguments against Obama were similar to far right loons during the primary season insisting that Sen. McCain could not be President due to the situation surrounding his birth - I fisked those wingnuts just has hard and disrespectfully as I fisked the anti-Obama loons.
Posted by: Michael Heath | November 18, 2008 12:37 PM
First, calling someone a kook for espousing a kooky idea is not a pot shot. If someone told you with a straight face that the Earth was flat and you could fall off so be careful, despite the overwhelming evidence to the contrary, you would be perfectly justified in calling them a kook. And if you did, this does not somehow automatically give them a modicum of credibility.
Second, please *please* point out what important facts were articulated that somehow everyone missed. You seemed to have, uh, left them out of your post.
Posted by: MyPetSlug | November 18, 2008 12:42 PM
The reaction of kooks is not a valid justification for why Obama is not required to proove his status as a NBC. Even if we thought the kooks would all crap their pants and then spontaneously combust, it doesn't matter.
Can someone, without name-calling, explain why Obama does not have to proove he is a NBC?
Posted by: Unbiased? | November 18, 2008 12:43 PM
Hey fat body,
Check your facts. Seriously, you're a few clicks away.
There are cases at the Supreme Court and even one recently filed in CA by Alan Keyes and several of California's Electors, against the SoS.
Posted by: H. Rand | November 18, 2008 12:46 PM
After a bit more investigating: Dunbar's comments WERE pulled from the Christian Worldview Network site.
Fortunately, however, the Star-Telegram is far more ethical than the Christian Network and kept a verbatim copy of her post. They have a link to it:
http://startelegram.typepad.com/extra_credit/files/dunbar_transcript.doc
Cheers,
eric
Posted by: eric | November 18, 2008 12:48 PM
Mom. Natural born citizen.
End of story.
Posted by: gwangung | November 18, 2008 12:54 PM
Can someone please explain why Obama has not been forced to validate he's not an alien from Mars? First you have to present a case that requires a response. You nor anyone else has presented such a case; therefore, your question is just as idiotic as my martian question.
And in case you don't read links well, myself and several others have validated that the State of Hawaii has validated his birth was there while you continue to provide zero evidence any rational person should consider otherwise.
Posted by: Michael Heath | November 18, 2008 12:57 PM
Name calling version:
There are two, separate tracks that make Obama a citizen. It takes a deluded moron to construct a rickety, Rube Goldberg-esque story that ignores all current law to arrive at a pre-determined conclusion.
It springs from both ignorance and an ideological prejudice not unsimilar to the same impulse that tries to cram creationism down the throat of innocent children. It's worthy of nothing more than contempt and mockery.
Posted by: gwangung | November 18, 2008 12:59 PM
Unbiased -
By COLB I assume you mean "Certificate of Live Birth"? Are you actually claiming that his Hawaiian birth certificate doesn't prove he was born in Hawaii?Posted by: Taz | November 18, 2008 1:05 PM
"Can someone, without name-calling, explain why Obama does not have to prove he is a NBC?"
He DOES have to prove it. EVERY presidential candidate has to prove it. But if you read carefully, you'll notice that no one here is actually saying that he doesn't have to prove it. What we are saying (and have said numerous times) is that he already HAS proved it, exactly as all other presidential candidates have proved it.
Obama was born on U.S. soil to a U.S. natural-born citizen. He has proved that (unless the theory is now that his MOTHER's birth certificate has been faked, too?). That makes him a natural-born citizen. That's it. End of story. He's a natural-born citizen, and therefore fully eligible to become the President of the United States.
(You'll note that there is no name-calling in the text above.)
Posted by: Dr. Kate | November 18, 2008 1:11 PM
@Unbiased?:
As I understand it, the kooks are not asking him to prove that he is a NBC. They are asking him to publish his long form birth certificate to the world.
Why is he required to do that? Firstly, none of the relevant authorities have taken any issue on his constitutional qualifications to serve as POTUS; secondly, he has already demonstrated that he was born in Hawaii to a US citizen, which makes him a NBC. At what point did the kooks get the rights either to have anything proven to them, or to decide what counts as proof in this context?
More generally, would you explain why Obama is being singled out for this? I don't recall a campaign for disclosure of GW Bush's birth certificate to prove he is a NBC; or Clinton's, or GHW Bush's etc etc.
Posted by: Robin Levett | November 18, 2008 1:13 PM
Folks, there is only one issue here. If Senator Obama was born in Hawaii, he is, without question a natural born American citizen, regardless of the citizenship of his parents. All this other stuff is a pile of crap. As a minor, his parents have no authority to sign away his citizenship so the issue of whether they assigned him Indonesian or Kenyan or Lower Slobovian citizenship is irrelevant and immaterial.
Now, for the mentally retarded, a Honolulu newspaper printed a birth announcement of this birth a day or two after it occurred. Period, end of discussion.
Posted by: SLC | November 18, 2008 1:18 PM
interestedcitizen: I read he spent $800,000 of taxpayer money defending a lawsuit rather than just show the long form birth certificate everyone wants to see...
And if he did show it, so what? Are you an expert that can judge whether it is authentic? Can even experts be fooled by clever forgeries?
The only way that a birth certificate can be judged as authentic is for the state officials to go into the original state records and determine that the original is on file. And they did that. The only real method for checking authenticity has actually been carried out.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 1:26 PM
Unbiased? (question mark is apt): Someone please explain, without name-calling, why Obama does not have to proove he is a "Natural Born Citizen."
Since Obama has "prooven" that he is a natural born citizen, why is your question relevant?
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 1:31 PM
In any case, the "lawsuits" can't survive Summary Judgment for the simple reasons that they don't have the proper parties and the Plaintiffs have no standing in any case. Elections are held by states (including elections for Federal offices).
Take a look at the rules in my state (NCGS § 163-127.1. et sec): The only challenge allowed is by another candidate for the same election. Before the Board of Elections. not a Court. Other states are similar, since there is a model statute thet many states have copied.
So the lawsuits are only further evidence of hallucination on the part of the Obama-haters.
Posted by: kehrsam | November 18, 2008 1:34 PM
H Rand: There are cases at the Supreme Court and even one recently filed in CA by Alan Keyes and several of California's Electors, against the SoS.
Do you have any references for this? All I can find are articles saying that cases have been file with the Supreme Court, which Ed Brayton did say, but nothing that the Supreme Court has actually decided to hear any of them, which is what Mr. Brayton has also said.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 1:36 PM
I like "backpeddle". Dunbar is trying to sell horse^h^h^h^h^hsomething retroactively.
Posted by: Ferrous Patella | November 18, 2008 1:42 PM
Her attempts at rewriting the history of her own statements seem to be hindered by technology as well.
Posted by: Azkyroth | November 18, 2008 1:47 PM
Obama has knowingly created this crisis. This has been going on since before February of this year. The press is to blame for much of this for their black-out on this issue. The Constitution requires the President to be a "natural born citizen". That is a standard that every President since George Washington has met.
Obama has been asked to step forward and produce his records to prove he meets the test. Instead all he has done is produce the short form version of his birth certificate. The problem with that is that under Hawaiian law at the time of his birth his parents could have brought back a birth certificate from Kenya and used that to register Obama. The short form version produced would not reflect that.
There are also questions about Obama's school records.
Obama and his legal team have sealed all of these records. All requests for these records under the Freedom of Information Act have been refused.
Instead of showing up in Court in the Berg matter Obama and the DNC filed a motion and had the lawsuit dismissed on the technicality that a citizen does not have standing to bring the suit in Federal Court as they have not been damaged. The 11 to 15 State lawsuits were dismissed on the same grounds. Obama to this date has not opened his records and put them on the table to prove he meets the standard. Instead he seems perfectly willing to risk riots and a national Constitutional and national crisis we have ever had.
Alan Keyes and several California electors have now filed suit in Sacramento Superior Court against Obama, Biden, Deborah Brown the California Secretary of State, and the 55 California electors asking the Court to either qualify Obama or order that the 55 California electors cannot cast their votes for Obama.
Mr. Keyes was on the ballot in California and he does not suffer the lack of standing issue and Obama is going to have to finally stand and deliver his records. Obama and the Democratic party should be ashamed of themselves for forcing this to Court after the election. I salute all of those citizens that filed suit and tried to have this issue answered fully and transparently before the election to avoid what will clearly be a very painful experience if Obama is determined not to meet the natural born citizen standard. If the Court rules Obama does not meet the standard expect the Democrats to try to pass some kind of Obama Horse Shoe Act, that he is "close enough". There will be serious problems should that tack be taken.
If Obama is shown not to be a natural born citizen he is likely to be disbarred, face jail time and public humiliation. It appears he was willing to risk all of that to try and gain the office of the President without proving he meets the basic Constitutional standard.
There is a hearing in Hawaii today in the Martin case who is suing the State of Hawaii and the Health Department to produce the long form version of Obama's birth certificate. I hope Mr. Martin is successful as that will be much more information than has been produced to date.
What is clear is that an answer to the question of whether Mr. Obama is a natural born citizen will be made in the near future.
Posted by: John Adams | November 18, 2008 1:50 PM
(I've only skimmed the (rather tedious) thread so I may have overlooked a previous response. If so, apologies)
I believe Ed may have mixed up "backpedal", which you can do on a bike (I've actually ridden a bike with some sort of weird automatic mechanism that cut from braking to backpedaling when the bike was stationary), and "backpaddle", which you do in a canoe or kayak. If I were to decide, I'd say "backpaddle" is more appropriate, since that's what you do when you've overpaddled and are on a collision course with another vessel or the shore.
Posted by: konrad_arflane | November 18, 2008 1:51 PM
Since none of the wingnut trolls here seem inclined to read the FactCheck site I linked, here's an exerpt:
Posted by: Taz | November 18, 2008 1:58 PM
There may be dismissals of cases that have been appealed to the Supreme Court. But that doesn't mean the cases are themselves at the Supreme Court. First, nearly any outcome can be appealed, but the Supreme Court accepts only about 1% of appeals for hearings. That means the filing of an appeal says nothing about the validity of a case, as most appeals are so spurious they're dismissed without any comment. Second, what is being appealed is the dismissal of the case, not the issue itself. That is, the plaintiffs are trying to have the Supreme Court rule that they do have standing, so that their case can go forward in the trial court. They are not, at this stage, asking the Supreme Court to rule on Obama's citizenship. It's merely a procedural stage, not a substantive one.
No kidding! Wow! A lawsuit has been filed! You do realize, I hope, that the filing of a lawsuit is not proof of anything? That to win the lawsuit you have to prove your claim in court? Did you know any fool can file a lawsuit about anything at all? I could file a lawsuit claiming your posts made me physically ill from naseau and I was unable to sleep at night because of the trauma your phenomenal stupidity caused me? But that case would almost certainly be thrown out. And that's the point--the fact that I could in fact file such a case says nothing about its merits. And so for you to suggest that the fact that Alan Keys has filed a case says anything about the merits suggest how gut-wrenchingly moronic you are.Posted by: James Hanley | November 18, 2008 2:02 PM
John "Troll" Adams,
Here are the facts, once again, since you forgot to mention them.
1. The State of Hawaii Department of Health issued a Certificate of Live Birth. That is considered by the federal government to be proof of natural born citizenship, as it is accepted for purposes of getting a passport.
2. The Honolulu Advertiser Nespaper ran a birth announcement for a boy born to "Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama" in August of 1961.
3. Obama's mother is and was a U.S. citizen, meaning he automatically was born with U.S. citizenship.
4. Even if Obama's stepfather got him Indonesian citizenship--a non-proven claim--Obama could not, as a minor, lose his U.S. citizenship. The U.S. does not take away citizenship from natural born children who's parents
5. No allegation has been made, or evidence supplied, that Obama has ever renounced his U.S. citizenship.
Now, against this, the "evidence" is what? That he hasn't produced a different, and not legally required, document? I do hope you're not considering joining the legal profession. You just ain't got the skills for it.
Posted by: James Hanley | November 18, 2008 2:13 PM
"Riots" Mr. Adams? "Constitutional and National crisis we have ever had"?
Even worse than that Civil War thingy?
While we're at it, why should Obama's educational records be subject to FOIA?
Posted by: kehrsam | November 18, 2008 2:17 PM
Wow, the loonies are out in full force today...
I find it interesting that the majority of the posts in support of Obama being eligible/natural born include personal attacks, while almost all of the contrary posts do not.
"The majority of the posts in support of Obama being eligible/natural born" also include FACTS, which the loony denialists ignore. This is, of course, yet another standard reflex of denialists: pretend their opponents have offered nothing but name-calling, even when it's perfectly obvious they have not. Short version: "LALALALALALALA-I-CAN'T-HEAR-YOU-OVER-ALL-THE-NAME-CALLING-LALALALALA..."
These people are even crazier than the ones with all those theories about black helicopters, jackbooted thugs, the New World Order, the "Clinton Mafia," and the Vince Foster "murder." Either that, or the same people just got crazier after sixteen years of trying to avoid reality.
All we need now to complete the picture is that fruit-bat raving about "PIAPS!" who showed up on the "Obama is the Antichrist" boards.
I have two things to say to those idiots who are still trying to pretend Obama is not a citizen. First, you are accusing Obama of a crime, and therefore the burden of proof is on you to prove him guilty; he is not required to prove his innocence. (And no, the mere fact that a bunch of right-wing wackaloons are clogging up the courts with lawsuits is not proof of anything. This is just another version of "Gosh, there's so many people who believe it, there HAS to be something to it.")
And second, Obama has been considered possible Presidential material since 2004. For those of you whose math is as lame as your grasp of reality, that's FOUR YEARS in which both Karl Rove and Hillary Clinton could have dug up all the evidence they would have needed to rule Obama ineligible. If Obama's NBC status was really in doubt, do you really think Karl Rove and a Shrub-politicized DoJ would have missed the proof? You losers are just as delusional as every other conspiracy-buff who thinks he's found some huge secret that the rest of Mankind have been missing for a zillion years.
Posted by: Raging Bee | November 18, 2008 2:20 PM
Oh, yeah, and this:
What's a national national crisis?People who write like that undermine their own credibility. Why should we take you seriously when you have such a tenuous grasp of our language?
Posted by: James Hanley | November 18, 2008 2:20 PM
God, I love this stuff. It's "9/11 was an inside job!"... for Freepers!
Posted by: Der Bruno Stroszek | November 18, 2008 2:36 PM
John Adams: Obama has knowingly created this crisis.
What crisis? A few wackaloons who can't accept that a black man who doesn't pander to the religious right is now President and are now hitting the blogs do not make a crisis.
There is no crisis. Obama's citizenship has been proven as thoroughly as anyone's can. No one except the kooks has any serious doubts about this.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 2:44 PM
And please, in the extremely unlikely event that it turns out Obama is not a NBC, he'll face jail time because his *parents* faked his birth certificate?
Posted by: MyPetSlug | November 18, 2008 2:54 PM
I'm seeing some conflicting points about whether or not Obama has released his "original" or "long-form" birth certificate, as opposed to the official copy certified by Hawaii. I don't know (and don't care) if he has made the original available, but if he hasn't, I'd like to know why anyone assumes he still has it. I don't have mine - my family moved around a lot when I was young, and lost it somewhere along the way. Quite possibly, the same has happened to Obama, and the printed copy of the electronic record is the only version he has. After all, he's older than me (thus has had more time to lose it) and moved around quite a bit as a youngster himself.
It turns out that my own printed copy of the electronic record from the state of Indiana is more than adequate to prove my citizenship. Heck, it isn't even my first COPY - I've had to replace it at least once, and it's STILL valid proof of citizenship. Joined the military with it, got a passport with it, got a driver's license with it. If I were ever to run for President, I would expect it to be sufficient for that, too.
Anyone who questions that, please provide YOUR OWN "long-form, original" birth certificate to authenticate your argument. You'll also need to PROVE that it isn't a forgery, since that'll be the next silly conspiracy claim - and having your home state certify it won't be sufficient. (Good luck trying to prove that negative.) No copies, please - if that piece of paper is more than a few days younger than you, or you can't prove that it was in your possession for your entire life, then sit down and shut up.
Posted by: BobApril | November 18, 2008 2:55 PM
Those who point out that nothing will satisfy the lunatic demands for proof are absolutely right.
Posted by: Dr X | November 18, 2008 2:56 PM
Posted by: Taz | November 18, 2008 3:04 PM
MyPetSlug And please, in the extremely unlikely event that it turns out Obama is not a NBC, he'll face jail time because his *parents* faked his birth certificate?
It's part of the World Wide Muslim Conspiracy to Nuke Israel and Impose Sharia Law on the US, of which Obama is the leader: They clearly sent a cyborg back in time to fake the birth certificate.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 3:14 PM
I'm a big believer in putting one's money where one's mouth is. I challenge anyone who questions Obama's citizenship to the following wager:
If, at any point during the next four years, the Supreme Court rules that Obama is not a natural born citizen, I will donate $100 to the organization of your choice. If they do not, you will donate $10 to the organization of my choice.
That's 10-1 odds. Any takers? (And, yes, I'm serious.)
Posted by: James Hanley | November 18, 2008 3:18 PM
At what point do these wack-a-loons cross the line into Secret Service interest and the asylum decides to deny them their computer privileges?
Seriously, all this talk about illegitimacy, riots, violence, Antichrist... some dangerously imbalanced individual(s) is (are) deriving intellectual aid and comfort from all this...
When it came to Bush, the Left bellyached about it, and spoke of impeachment - a legal remedy.
I don't hear the right-wing wackjobs talking about legal action.
Posted by: SharonB | November 18, 2008 3:23 PM
Keyes has a case filed in California, but Berg has one before the Supreme Court. They dismissed his request to stop the election, but they have requested that Obama respond to Berg's Petition for a writ of certiorari by December 1st. Here's a link to the Supreme Court's web site on the matter:
http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08-570.htm
I am not some nut that has no idea what he is talking about. I was only pointing out the fact that this matter is escalating when it could have so easily been stopped by Obama releasing his long form BC rather than the short one. As for Dunbar's other allegations against Obama, I never attested to. Yet, by stating that I had questions regarding as to why he might want to fight his long form's release, I am barraged with attacks that I am some form of kook. Never did I call him a terrorist supporter, Muslim, or any other name.
The only one I questioned was the legitimate (Supreme Court link above) allegation that Obama has been legally fighting the release of his long form birth certificate. I questioned why would he do that? For your information, before the election I was posting in regards to Palin needing to release her medical records as she had promised in order to end that conspiracy theory. I wasn't attacking her nor am I attacking Obama now. I am merely seeking the resolution of this matter by the release of information.
What harm would the release of his long form birth certificate bring? Hawaiian officials said his short version BC was legit and that he was born in Hawaii, I acknowledge that. So why not show the long form, and end this thing before the Supreme Court thus ending the multiple court cases? The long form would justify the short form, right?
Anyway, the ball is in the Supreme Court right now. They want his response to the petition by December 1st. So in less than two weeks we might have more information by which judge this allegation one way or another.
Posted by: Troy | November 18, 2008 3:24 PM
Why, if it is sufficient for all candidates to show the short form or whatever he did produce to certify citizenship, should Obama be forced to do more? That smacks of discrimination, no?
Posted by: Mike | November 18, 2008 3:33 PM
If you say you have a 7, 2 off suit and won with a straight draw on the river great now show me your cards. It would only be a problem if your bluffing or else you would gladly turn them over. Do I think a majority of the accusations are embellished? Yes. Started from the work of nut jobs? Probably. But why keep people wondering then and not just debunk it with showing an original long form document. People have a right to know at least and all the secrecy just adds to the problem. If you are telling the truth Mr. Obama then why hide it behind such a cloud of secrecy? It kinda makes me wonder on his character in general.
Posted by: AmericanPatriot | November 18, 2008 3:39 PM
Troy and his fellow nutters,
A black guy is going to be president. Deal with it.
Posted by: Savagemutt | November 18, 2008 3:41 PM
By buckling to this need to meet a higher standard, he allows the discrimination to flourish and continue. He meets the minimum requirements. Done deal. If loons or conspiracy theorists or sore losers need to grasp at this to feed their paranoia, it makes no difference since once satisfied on this point, they will only raise more.
Posted by: Mike | November 18, 2008 3:44 PM
Troy: What harm would the release of his long form birth certificate bring?
What good would it do? It certainly wouldn't end the "crisis". The wackaloons will find more excuses to continue believing that there is some conspiracy to hide the fact that Obama is not a natural born citizen.
Let me turn around the question: seeing how Obama's birth has been confirmed by the relevant officials in a manner that would be acceptable for any other person for any other purpose, what would be the harm in just accepting this and moving on?
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 3:44 PM
AmericanPatriot: People have a right to know at least and all the secrecy just adds to the problem.
What secrecy? The very state officials who have the responsibility to check these things out have check this out and verified that Obama was born in Hawaii. People have the right to know, and this right has been satisfied: the people now know that Obama was born in the state of Hawaii.
What further right does anyone have to add more requirements that aren't even relevant to the question?
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 3:49 PM
But a respondent has 30 days to file a response. Since Obama has until Dec. 1 (that fact seems to be correct), that suggests Berg filed his appeal on Nov. 1, in an attempt to stop the election. And that is apparently the case. Obviously that failed (as anyone with an IQ above arctic winter temperatures could have told him would happen).
So the question is what happens now? The appeal was made to a single justice as an emergency appeal. That particular emergency is now moot, the election having passed. The Court could still decide to hear the case on a rush basis before the Electoral Collegians cast their votes early next month, or perhaps before the inauguration. But so far, as far as we can tell, only Justice Souter is involved, not the Supreme Court as a whole. Souter could issue an injunction against counting Obama's ballots, which would likely lead to an emergency hearing before the whole Court. But it seems unlikely he would take such a dramatic step single-handedly, so Berg would still need 4 justices willing to hear the case.
So far he has, perhaps, 1. Perhaps 1 is a long way from 4.
So, Troy, you may not be a nutter, but you do indeed have no idea what you're talking about.
Posted by: James Hanley | November 18, 2008 3:50 PM
Why doesn't the Air Force answer (non-FOIA) requests for information about UFOs? Same reason. Its a waste of resources better spent elsewhere, and it encourages more spurious requests for information.
Because it wouldn't end it. You, Troy, are a great example of why not: you acknowledge the legitimacy of the short form but want to see the long form. Don't you think there are other people who have your same attitude about the long form? "I acknowledge the long form, but why doesn't Obama give this other piece of information too?" It would go on and on, without end.
Posted by: eric | November 18, 2008 3:51 PM
There is no "crisis" here. There are a bunch of tinfoil hat types with lunatic conspiracy theories making mountains out of molehills. And when the Supreme Court rejects the cases and dismisses them, which is exactly what is going to happen, those wingnuts will continue to believe that Obama is really secretly a furriner sent here by Osama Bin Laden to destroy the world. If seeing the short-form birth certificate and having the government of Hawaii, run by a governor who endorsed McCain, validate the long form birth certificate is not enough to convince them then absolutely nothing will convince them. They're out of their fucking minds. They're as bad as the 9/11 truthers.
Posted by: Ed Brayton | November 18, 2008 3:54 PM
American Patriot,
See my offer of a wager above. Do you believe strongly enough in what you're saying to accept it? If not, shut the fuck up.
Sincerely,
A Natural Born American Patriot
Posted by: James Hanley | November 18, 2008 3:57 PM
If Obama's birth is NOT a consideration as mamdated by the Constitution, then why doesn't he provide what is requested? - A vault certified birth certificate which names Doctor and hospital. According to Phillip Berg's lawsuit, Obama's paternal grandmother states that she was in the room when he was born and that was in Kenya! Also, if Obama is so legitimate as this article tries so hard to claim, then why doesn't he release all his records, school, college and university? If you have nothing to hide, why hide it? People, citizens like me, have a right to know who my president is - and that includes everything about him!
www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualification/1244/stop-obama/constitutional-crisis
Don't you want to know?
Posted by: Jacy | November 18, 2008 4:00 PM
I smell sock puppets.
Posted by: Adrian W. | November 18, 2008 4:13 PM
Jacy: People, citizens like me, have a right to know who my president is - and that includes everything about him!
No you don't. You have the right to be assured that he meets the Constitutional requirements for being President, and you have been assured of that. At least you have now been assured by officials of the State of Hawaii that he was born in that State and that there has never been a legal proceeding that stripped him of his citizenship. You certainly have the right to not accept these assurances, but that is not the same thing as you are claiming.
As far as "knowing everything about him", you have the right to decide to vote for or against the candidate based on what you know and what you don't know about him -- and in fact, it is entirely legitimate to base your decision on questions like this. Presumably you made use of this right a couple of weeks ago.
You don't have any further rights in this manner. Obama has been determined to be eligible for the office of President according to reasonable standards that would apply to anyone else for any other purpose, and the citizens of the US subsequently chose him as their next President.
Everyones rights have been satisfied. Including the right to continue to be a wackaloon.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 4:13 PM
A question to those insisting that they "just want to know:"
If Obama's name were, say, Frederick Eckhard Heinz, and his father was a German citizen and his mother American, and he had spent part of his childhood at a boarding school in, say, France...would you still be clamoring for him to prove his citizenship?
Of course, I'm sure you will all claim that you would be. But considering that (to my knowledge) there has never been this much uproar and craziness to see every single document related to a President's life, somehow I doubt it. No one asked to see Bush's elementary school records, or his long-form birth certificate. Why should Obama have to? As has been pointed out (ad nauseum), Obama has fulfilled every legal requirement for proving eligibility to hold the Presidency. For him to kowtow to the conspiracy theorists and provide every document they ever request would bog down his administration in a futile quest to satisfy people who refuse to be satisfied. He has REAL problems to deal with, folks. Trying to prove an undisputed legal fact is not a priority. Or would you rather he spend the next 18 months producing document after document proving that he did actually attend preschool instead of figuring out how to keep you from losing your jobs??
Posted by: maddox22 | November 18, 2008 4:15 PM
Jacy just proved Ed's point. He also failed to answer either of my points, thus proving he and his fellow wackaloons have absolutely no case at all.
Also, if Obama is so legitimate as this article tries so hard to claim, then why doesn't he release all his records, school, college and university? If you have nothing to hide, why hide it?
Jacy, if you're as sane and rational as you try so hard to claim, then why don't you release all your records, school, medical, college and university? If you have nothing to hide, why hide it?
Posted by: Raging Bee | November 18, 2008 4:16 PM
Some here have noted that the long form BC would also not be enough for these people. Guess what, the site Jacy links to is a petition that states:
These people are fucking nutjobs.Posted by: Taz | November 18, 2008 4:29 PM
I'm not a praying man, but if I were, I would have only one prayer-
"Lord, may I NEVER be as terrified of reality as creationists, and the 'Obama isn't an NBC!!' conspiracy theorists."
Ramen.
Posted by: Rick R | November 18, 2008 4:30 PM
So nutjobs like Jacy want him to produce BOTH an original birth certificate proving he was born in the US AND a "certified copy Oath of Allegiance" taken upon age of maturity. Damn, I hope no one asks me for a copy of my oath of allegiance. I don't even remember taking it. Of course, I was doing a lot of partying back then.
Posted by: Taz | November 18, 2008 4:34 PM
Troy, I think part of the reason people here call this out as kookery is that it displays all the hallmarks of kookishness.
First, the proponents ignore the evidence (the birth certificate has been validated, Obama's mother is a NBC, the newspaper announcement).
Second, they ignore the evidence counter to their claims (Parents can't renounce the citizenship of their children, adoption by a foreign national has no bearing on US citizenship).
Third, instead they focus on the "unknown". "Oh, why won't Obama release this other piece of information, what is he hding?", "Why would Obama fight these court cases instead of just releasing whatever information I want?", and "I just what to know the TRUTH."
Fourth, even though the vast majority of people in the country obviously don't believe their claims have any merit, the majority did elect Obama after all, they think, if they just repeat "Controversy!" or "Constitutional crisis!" enough times that it will somehow magically become one.
Posted by: MyPetSlug | November 18, 2008 4:39 PM
You guys crack me up. You know nothing of Obama. There is barely any background info on this man. The facts we know about him:
He barely voted on anything in the senate. Policies?
He evasive.
He's marxist. He has no regard for our constitution and his only allegiance is to the International bankers, multi- national corporations and there socialist global takeover that is happening right under our noses.
He can't prove he is a natural born citizen.
Without teleprompters he doesn't speak much better than Bush: " um.....uh......oh..oh......wait....yeah....um .....der"
Although once the teleprompters are on, he really charms the pants off the "hope and change" Obamanoids which is the only reason he got elected. Never in my life have I seen such a large segment of the population so dumbed down looking like glassy eyed zombie's chanting "hope and change". With no intellectual explanation whatsoever as to why they voted for him. One giant cult of personality. Cynthia Dunbar made some good, valid points. Thanks to Bush and Clinton, the president has dangerous powers: instant dictator just add national emergency. But like the Germans said when intellectuals tried to warn them of hitler just before the holocaust: "That can't happen here. Your a nut". I'm shocked GW didn't capatilize on the power grab. Surely with his marxist/machiavellian policies, Obama likely will. Taake a look beyond the talking heads and you will see this is an economic depression in the making and the gov is setting the stage right now for marshall law!
Hopefully the law prevails and justice is served and the commie bastard will not be inaugurated. Then he can go back to Kenya and try for the presidency there!
Posted by: Jimmy | November 18, 2008 4:39 PM
Jimmy: But like the Germans said when intellectuals tried to warn them of hitler just before the holocaust....
Yeah, you're an intellectual, Jimmy. Thanks.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 4:43 PM
It's hard to tell what is true when you read anymore, so I say show it if you have nothing to hide.
It is especially difficult to tell what is true when one starts out with a conclusion and one looks for "facts" to prove it. Try reading WITHOUT an agenda - you might be a touch more successful.
Posted by: WBPNYC | November 18, 2008 4:43 PM
Posted by: James Hanley | November 18, 2008 4:43 PM
Now Janet Folger-Porter has signed up (once again) for the tinfoil hat brigade's latest cause: http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81307 . Awesome! Telling people they would go to hell if they voted Obama just wasn't enough, so it's time to join in the conspiracy theories.
Posted by: Adrienne | November 18, 2008 4:45 PM
He evasive.
And you makin' shit up. Oh, and you misspelled "martial law." "Marshall" is a person's surname.
Jimmy is both a fruit-bat and a complete idiot. There's really no more need for even private bloggers to waste any more time with this lot, let alone US courts.
Posted by: Raging Bee | November 18, 2008 4:45 PM
What's "marshall law"? Does that force the entire US population to donate some money to Europe?
Posted by: Adrienne | November 18, 2008 4:49 PM
I had some fun with the website Jacey linked to,
When you sign their petition, you can put in comments. So I put in comments mocking them.
Then you can send an automated letter to your Congressmen and Senators, which they allow you to edit. So I edited it to read:
Heh heh, there's no fun like undermining people's own propaganda efforts via their own tools.
Posted by: James Hanley | November 18, 2008 4:50 PM
Jimmy wrote:
Even if spelled correctly, that would still be the funniest line I've heard all day. What the hell is the word "socialist" doing in there? If you want to hear ranting about the influence of multinational corporations, ask a socialist.
Posted by: Ed Brayton | November 18, 2008 4:55 PM
Ed: Can't you spray for whackaloons? I know they're sort of fun at first, but they're getting kind of repetitive now. Well, not Jimmy, but he's trying to hijack an entirely different thread.
Posted by: kehrsam | November 18, 2008 4:57 PM
Jimmy farted: "Although once the teleprompters are on, he really charms the pants off the "hope and change" Obamanoids which is the only reason he got elected."
You have revealed yourself as the fucking moron you are. How FUCKING dare you attempt to divine my motivations. How FUCKING DARE you second guess the decision I took TWO FUCKING YEARS to make. By reading and researching and listening and listening and listening. And reading more. And researching more. And discussing for hours and hours and hours with the TRUE thinking intellectuals with which I surround myself?!?
Bloody fucking TWIT.
Oh that felt good.
Posted by: WBPNYC | November 18, 2008 4:58 PM
One thing to note (and probably already noted): These people are bringing this up after Obama got elected. In other words, far later than such concerns should be brought up. This isn't mere conspiracy theory, this is raw desperation.
Posted by: Gray Falcon | November 18, 2008 5:01 PM
Yea, I snuckered you good. I hope you have plenty of canned food and water stored up comrades. It's going to be a long, hard winter for you white Christians. Bwa ha ha ha!
Posted by: Barak Obama | November 18, 2008 5:03 PM
Yeah, I love Jimmy's line about teleprompters. Obama fumbled an answer one time, and Jimmy saw it on YouTube! Therefore, Jimmy knows that Obama can never speak well without teleprompters, despite the fact that he's done so time after time. You see, Jimmy's an intellectual!
Posted by: Taz | November 18, 2008 5:05 PM
kehrsam: Can't you spray for whackaloons? I know they're sort of fun at first, but they're getting kind of repetitive now.
A thread like this serves no other purpose but to put the wackaloons on display.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 5:07 PM
The Oath of Allegiance is taken upon Naturalization. Born citizens won't have this document.
Its a "when did you stop beating your wife" request. It assumes Obama is not an NB citizen and is meant to impugn him to that effect.
(f) suffers from the same flaw; it assumes he has legally changed his name when there is no evidence he has.
So much for an unbiased quest for the truth. You have to assume Obama is not a NB citizen who changed his name to even think these documents exist!
Posted by: eric | November 18, 2008 5:08 PM
Right, "his parents", which includes his US citizen mother, whose status as a citizen automatically gives Obama citizenship regardless of where he was born. Or do you think that she also is not a "natural born citizen"?
Posted by: Tulse | November 18, 2008 5:11 PM
Adrienne's link is a gold mine of wingnuttery. Highly recommended.
Posted by: kehrsam | November 18, 2008 5:12 PM
It's better than that, eric. They don't ask for a birth certificate OR an Oath. According to the petition, he must produce BOTH. They are truly mental giants.
Posted by: Taz | November 18, 2008 5:13 PM
Forget Obama: that Jesus guy claims to be king of the world, says that God is his father, and his mother is a virgin. The fundies all say he's alive, so why can't he just come up with a birth cert to prove it all, huh?
Posted by: Amadán | November 18, 2008 5:13 PM
Ok, the real crisis is the one I'm going through at the realization that the president-elect is TWO YEARS YOUNGER than I am! WTF?
(Must go listen to more Neil Young who at 63 is still a rock god.)
Posted by: ildi | November 18, 2008 5:18 PM
Damn this thread has some stupid people on it.
People. Take OFF the tin foil hats and listen for a second, 'kay?
Sen. McCain was digging up every little piece of crap he could find just to throw it at Obama. But we never ONCE saw McCain dispute Obama's citizenship status.
McCain didn't bother to mention this "scandal" AT ALL during any of the debates. And he didn't mention it on one of his many negative political TV and radio ads either. Why do you think he failed to do this?
... Oh... I know... he was in on the conspiracy I guess...
Okay, you can put back on your tin foil hats again!
Posted by: doctorgoo | November 18, 2008 5:22 PM
Ed, I'm afraid you just don't get it, my friend. See, none of us was actually there in the delivery room when Obama was born. So we can't say for sure that Obama was born anywhere, much less in the good 'ol US of A. Hence, the claims that he exists, that he is a natural born citizen, and that he was elected President are all just a theory. Until you can produce someone who was in the delivery room with a video camera and who has videotaped every second of Obama's supposed "existence," we must allow the arguments for and against his "existence." And his natural born citizenship. And his election as President.
Get it? This is all of a piece with that evil, atheistic, Marxist, communist, socialist, anti-free market evolution crap. Those Hawaii officials who have authenticated Obama's birth certificate undoubtedly believe in Darwinism, too.
Posted by: Dan | November 18, 2008 5:22 PM
Amadan: Luke gives the equivalent, of course. Unfortunately, the original was filed with the Dept of Motor Vehicles and this one guy has been waiting 20 centuries now to get a copy. Some call him the Wandering Jew, but he's really just Chair 13.
Posted by: kehrsam | November 18, 2008 5:24 PM
But is there more documentation to prove that Obama exists than there is for Jesus? Were the Gadarene swine wearing lipstick? Id Jesus THE One or THAT One?
Dr Fessburger says I'm getting better. . .
Posted by: Amadán | November 18, 2008 5:30 PM
Why do we not have the original, vaulted, typed birth certificate of Obama's birth, instead of a digital document on line?
Why have no nurses, doctors, neighbors stepped forward to say they were there at the birth or saw the mom leave pregnant in Hawaii and return from a hospital with a baby?
Why, while we are at it, have Obama's college and law school transcripts not been released?
The record of who paid for his education?
His client lists as a lawyer?
His schedules while a state senator?
If he were not surrounding himself with every inside-the-Beltway liar and whore he could find, perhaps we would not care that he has no documentation.
It will be amusing if Bill Clinton's opaque financial records keep Hillary out of the State Dept. but Obama himself is not vetted.
Posted by: Bruce Majors | November 18, 2008 5:37 PM
Jimmy: GOP stages of grief - stuck on the nutbaggery phase.
"Never in my life have I seen such a [small] segment of the population so dumbed down looking like glassy eyed zombie's chanting "[conspiracy!]".
There, Better.
He's going to be sworn in.
Deal.
Posted by: SharonB | November 18, 2008 5:38 PM
It should be noted that the whackjobs who have nattered on and on about Senator Obamas' birth certificate have yet to explain how come, if he wasn't born in Hawaii, the Honololu newspaper carried an anouncement of his birth and the hospital in which he was born. How about it, Jimmy, Troy, Jacy, interestedcitizen, American Patriot? It's very simple, if he was born in Hawaii in 1961, he's a natural born American citizen. It doesn't make a dimes worth of difference what the nationality of his parents (and in case somebody is claiming that his father was an illegal alien, he was here legally on a student visa). Just answer the question or STFU.
Re Jimmy
Hopefully the law prevails and justice is served and the commie bastard will not be inaugurated. Then he can go back to Kenya and try for the presidency there!
Hopefully, the Secret Service is investigating fucktard Jimmy as his comment certainly sounds like a veiled threat to the safety of the President Elect.
Posted by: SLC | November 18, 2008 5:41 PM
My dearest Troy, Jimmy, Voice of Reason, Unbiased?, interestedcitizen and any of the Reichwing's 101st KKKristian Whackaloon Brigade that I might have missed.
I spent the last several days receiving instruction from my spiritual advisor in the matter of accepting that which I am powerless to change. On arriving at this blog I was somewhat consternatitated to read about this NBC brouhahahahahahaha. But, I kept my composure and called my spiritual advisor who requested that I give him a link to the blog. He looked at it and said, "Fuck those morons!". I think he's drinking again.
Posted by: democommie | November 18, 2008 5:42 PM
Why do we not have the original, vaulted, typed birth certificate of Obama's birth, instead of a digital document on line?
Birth certificates sometimes contain fictions, even when a person is born in the time and place listed and the birth certificate is an original. My own list the person named by my mother as my biological father, and gave me his last name, even though he did not know she was pregnant and there was no proof he was the father.
Why have no nurses, doctors, neighbors stepped forward to say they were there at the birth or saw the mom leave pregnant in Hawaii and return from a hospital with a baby?
Why, while we are at it, have Obama's college and law school transcripts not been released?
The record of who paid for his education?
His client lists as a lawyer?
His schedules while a state senator?
If he were not surrounding himself with every inside-the-Beltway liar and whore he could find, perhaps we would not care that he has no documentation.
It will be amusing if Bill Clinton's opaque financial records keep Hillary out of the State Dept. but Obama himself is not vetted.
Posted by: Bruce Majors | November 18, 2008 5:42 PM
Why do we not have the original, vaulted, typed birth certificate of Obama's birth, instead of a digital document on line?
Birth certificates sometimes contain fictions, even when a person is born in the time and place listed and the birth certificate is an original. My own list the person named by my mother as my biological father, and gave me his last name, even though he did not know she was pregnant and there was no proof he was the father.
Why have no nurses, doctors, neighbors stepped forward to say they were there at the birth or saw the mom leave pregnant in Hawaii and return from a hospital with a baby?
Why, while we are at it, have Obama's college and law school transcripts not been released?
The record of who paid for his education?
His client lists as a lawyer?
His schedules while a state senator?
If he were not surrounding himself with every inside-the-Beltway liar and whore he could find, perhaps we would not care that he has no documentation.
It will be amusing if Bill Clinton's opaque financial records keep Hillary out of the State Dept. but Obama himself is not vetted.
Posted by: Bruce Majors | November 18, 2008 5:47 PM
Jimmy said: [Obama] barely voted on anything in the senate.
The best indication that a speaker is ignorant on this subject is the "Obama hasn't done anything" line. It only takes a few seconds with Google to find documentation like this showing Obama spondering legislation involving a lot of serious issues like nuclear proliferation, avian flu, and government transparency.
You conspiracy nuts feign interest in a subject and then reveal an abject willful ignorance of it. You live on the same hall as the creationists and the global warming denialists, cherry-picking whatever suits your goofy whimsy, ignoring the rest, and wasting a lot of valuable time yammering on about it.
Fuck off, the lot of you. We've got a lot of problems in this country, and we don't have time to waste it on exploring the limits of your sanity and imagination. The adults have work to do.
Posted by: Science Avenger | November 18, 2008 5:59 PM
Bruce Majors
Hitting the 'Post' button lots of times does NOT make your post any less noxious.
Why would anyone care about that crap now or ever? He is a citizen. The rest is drool. If you don't like him, vote for the other candidate. Oh, wait, you did and lost and can't accept it. Sorry. Carry on your ranting.
Posted by: Mike | November 18, 2008 6:11 PM
Wow some really intelligent comments here. People need to understand, Obama may be a "citizen", but not a "natural born citizen" as required under the Constitution to hold the office of the President. The COLB produced to factcheck does not meet the test. It does not confirm that Obama was born in Hawaii. Once the long form version is produced and if it confirms that Obama was born in Hawaii in a hospital then many of the people will move on for this point.
Let's be clear. The original long form version of Obama's birth certificate has been announced long ago to be in the possession of the State of Hawaii. Mr. Obama could have released the long form version months and months ago by signing a release and paying $12.00. Instead of doing that he has sent in his team of attorneys to fight production of any information and has sealed all of his records.
As far as I can tell factcheck and the other websites that have looked at the short form version and verified that it is "authentic" is not the issue. They have never held the original long form version, never produced a copy of the long form version, never shown it and contrary to what people say, the only statements on the issue from Hawaii is that they are holding the original. The State of Hawaii has never confirmed that Obama was born there, read the articles and statements carefully.
The lawsuit filed by Alan Keyes in Sacramento Superior Court can be viewed here: https://services.saccourt.com/indexsearchnew/CVFLPRDetail.aspx?Details=CV|2008-80000096|keyes|01/01/2008|12/31/2008|Name|Asc|
Unlike the other cases that were dimissed due to no standing, Alan Keyes was on the ballot in California and has standing. The other point is that Mr. Keyes case is being handled by Gary Kreep who is a very fine attorney that has the capability of having this issue and Mr. Obama's credentials fully vetted/qualified. The Keyes suit is also being backed by the Independent Party and so will have the bank roll to serve all of the parties and issue the necessary discovery to thouroughly qualify Mr. Obama.
I agree with those that say the Supreme Court will likely not take either of the two cases up. But the Keyes case is going to make up for any technical short coming in those other two matters.
Again, Obama and the Democratic Parties are responsible for this internet frenzy. They should have produced all of Mr. Obama's records and answered this well before the election. Factcheck and the other internet sites are not official government agents, and nor were they given the long form birth certificate, again which the State of Hawaii is holding. So their verification based on the short form version is simply a waste of time.
To force this issue to be resolved after the election was clearly the plan for Obama. Again, if it is found out that Obama is not qualified to hold the office may cause serious social disruption. For those of you who may be interested in how the government may respond do a Google search under the news category for "posse comitatus".
It is surprising to me the vile things people are saying to each other on these boards. All candidates need to be open and transparent. The erosion of the Constitution under Bush and now any future Presidents needs to be stopped. I voted against Bush. I am a citizen that wants our public officials to start acting in the public interest.
For Obama to think he could ignore this issue or answer it with a copy of a short form birth certificate to several websites is not acceptable. Obama is a very smart attorney and does things for a reason. I hope that in this case the reason was not to hide the facts that would show that he does not meet the "natural born" requirement of the Constitution. Mr. Obama is the only one that knows the answer to that question at this point and he seems to not be telling.
Posted by: John Adams | November 18, 2008 6:16 PM
Posted by: Taz | November 18, 2008 6:20 PM
Uh, morons...
HIS MOTHER WAS A CITIZEN. END OF STORY
Y'all still didn't deal with this, have you?
mutter...mutter....same mindset as creationists. Don't give 'em the facts...their mind is made up....
Posted by: gwangung | November 18, 2008 6:28 PM
No, sir. You need to understand. You're dead wrong.
Mom. Citizen. END OF STORY.
Mr. Troll, you keep ignoring that.
Posted by: gwangung | November 18, 2008 6:31 PM
Re John Adams
Mr. Adams joins the kookoo bird list of clowns who refuse to tell us how come the announcement of Senator Obamas' birth is in a Honolulu newspaper if he wasn't born in Hawaii, which was a state at that time. Come on folks, provide a reasonable explanation.
Posted by: SLC | November 18, 2008 6:32 PM
"Old man, look at my life, I'm a lot like you were...."
Posted by: ildi | November 18, 2008 6:33 PM
I'm suspecting one or more of these yo-yos are just trolling.
Of course, the baseline has been set so low, you can't tell the trolls from the truly dedicated loons....
Posted by: gwangung | November 18, 2008 6:37 PM
Once the long form version is produced and if it confirms that Obama was born in Hawaii in a hospital then many of the people will move on for this point.
No they won't. The wackaloons will never move on. They will continue to make up new absurd claims about how any evidence that has been provided can't be trusted. Anybody who is reasonable enough to accept the "long form" birth certificate has already accepted the evidence that has been provided.
Despite your bluster, it has been determined according to reasonable criteria that would suffice for any other person for any other purpose that Obama is a citizen, and people have already moved on. You see, it is only a few nutters like yourself you won't move on. You are a small minority (although it may seem like a large number if you spend most of your time in your right-wing echo chamber), and so it is up to you to provide some good evidence to believe that there is some doubt as to Obama's citizenship.
We don't have to show anything to you or prove anything to you. The matter has been resolved to the satisfaction of any reasonable person, and, thankfully, that includes a clear majority of US citizens.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 6:41 PM
John Adams
Obama's a citizen, having produced sufficient documentation as required by law to hold any office he cares to run for. Nothing more is required. The only social unrest is in your sad, bigoted dreams. If you continue to require more of him than any other candidate, your discrimination will keep showing.
He is the president-elect. He beat McCain. I'm sure you read about that. Jan 20 will mark the end of a disastrous 8 years and the beginning of a very difficult struggle for a man I believe is up to the task. Lets get on with that and leave this ALREADY SETTLED MATTER alone.
Posted by: Mike | November 18, 2008 6:45 PM
You gotta hear this 90 minute blogradio on why the media has a blackout of the looming Obama Birth Certificate Constitutional Crisis:
http://politicalpistachio.blogspot.com/2008/11/why-is-obamas-birth-certificate-still.html
Posted by: Ted | November 18, 2008 6:47 PM
Is he a Marxist, or is his only allegiance to capitalism (bankers, corporations)? Inquiring minds want to know! :-D
------------------------
To recapitulate: President-Elect Obama is a natural born citizen for two reasons, each of which would completely suffice alone:
1) he was born in the state of Hawai'i (birth certificate, announcement in newspaper) -- whoever is born on US soil is a US citizen;
2) his mother is a US citizen (natural born, so she was a citizen before, during and after Obama's birth) -- whoever is born to a parent who is a US citizen is a US citizen.
For comparison, Senator McCain was not born on US soil, but he is nonetheless a natural born citizen for two reasons, each of which would completely suffice alone:
1) his mother was a US citizen (natural born, so she was a citizen before, during and after McCain's birth);
2) his father was a US citizen (natural born, so he was a citizen before, during and after McCain's birth).
Posted by: David Marjanović | November 18, 2008 6:49 PM
I suppose that's because nobody has invented a way of transferring a physical birth certificate over the Internet into the waiting hands of crazy people. And of course, if they had, there'd be no guarantee that the crazy people would give it back undamaged.
So... did they also list you as being born in the wrong hospital? The wrong state? The wrong country?
If true, my guess would be the fact that not a lot of doctors or nurses are likely to remember the names of the babies they deliver after 40 years or so, if they're even still alive. A 45 year old medical staffer would be 92 by now. But go ahead and ask around. I'm sure you'll find people who remember it like yesterday.
Why would they be? Seriously? Oh, I get it. You're just getting ready to move the goalposts once your original pointless demands are met.
Either that or you're suggesting that the Harvard Law Review accidentally made a non-student its Presdient. Or something like that. We should all thank you for exploring the nefarious possibilities.
Indeed. It's quite possible that Barack Obama is a machine. Or one of the pod people. Or maybe, just maybe, he doesn't exist at all. Doesn't that, like, blow your mind?
Posted by: Troublesome Frog | November 18, 2008 6:50 PM
What mind?
Posted by: David Marjanović | November 18, 2008 6:59 PM
a Honolulu newspaper printed a birth announcement of this birth a day or two after it occurred.
There! See how thorough those Muslim extremist terrorists are? They even thought of a fake birth announcement back when that Catholic extremist feller was President! Illuminati, all of 'em, I say!
I wish that this whole thread was an illustration of some corollary of Poe's Law. But it isn't, is it?
Posted by: Coragyps | November 18, 2008 7:08 PM
Alan Keyes' attorney is.... Mr. Kreep?
[sproooiiinnng!]
Anyone know where to get a new irony meter?
Posted by: SharonB | November 18, 2008 7:46 PM
About Obama being a citizen because he was born in the USA: this is not proven yet. There are numerous elements to Philip Berg's complaint which can be answered by a valid birth certificate, which Obama seems determined to keep on a fish-hook, dangling it like bait for all to snap. It's weird the way he plays with everybody's mind.
About Obama being a citizen because his mother is a citizen: the complaint and assertion is that she gave birth to Barack while in Kenya, thus making Barack NOT a citizen. WRIF radio station in Michigan called Kenya on Nov. 6, 2008, after the election, and talked to the Kenyan ambassador, as sort of a goof. The ambassador told them quite by happenstance that Barack was born in Kenya and that they were making it a shrine of sorts!
Now it has come to my attention that David Souter WILL allow Berg's complaint to be heard by the Supreme Court. So, what if the Supreme Court finds Obama not a citizen? Civil war? The media has really whipped this one into a frenzy.
About the birth certificate: paper tests, seal tests, ink tests, the works.
Posted by: TommyG | November 18, 2008 8:05 PM
Looking over at Wing Nut Daily, I see Janet Porter's column is graced with a commercial just above: "Click here to see how you can flush 5-15 pounds of undigested waste from your colon." Not only eerily appropriate there, but here as well. Bye-bye Jimmy!
Bob
Posted by: Bob Carroll | November 18, 2008 8:11 PM
TommyG: About Obama being a citizen because he was born in the USA: this is not proven yet.
Actually, it has been proven, at least to a degree that most reasonable people find sufficient.
-
About Obama being a citizen because his mother is a citizen: the complaint and assertion is that she gave birth to Barack while in Kenya, thus making Barack NOT a citizen.
If his mother was a US citizen, then it doesn't matter where he was born. Any person is a US citizen if at least one of his parents was a US citizen at the time of his birth, regardless of the location of his birth.
This is a pretty basic fact. How could you not know it?
-
So, what if the Supreme Court finds Obama not a citizen?
I expect that the earth will stop spinning and will fall into the sun. You?
-
About the birth certificate: paper tests, seal tests, ink tests, the works.
See? This is what I've been saying. Producing a document will not shut the wackaloons up. They will demand paper tests, polygraph tests, more documents, and so on.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 8:26 PM
WOW!!!! I am so shocked at the responses I provoked. makes me feel great. In the midst of typing.....i did in fact........spell "martial" wrong. There you go. You got me. I am so discredited. Only a bunch of foaming at the mouth, blood thirsty lefties respond with insults and "fuck off". You people still believe this shit! I don't like McCain! I am not a republican! I am a liberty loving, constitutional conservative. I listen to you guys argue over politicians and I think to myself: these guys still think it's real. The president is nothing but a facade. He is no longer anything but a personality put forth for public consumption. The president does not run things. The global elite do. The banks, the corporations, the UN. The last three presidents were the most corrupt we have ever seen. Obama will be no different. The votes are rigged. How do you not believe that no matter who gets elected, nothing changes. Taxes grow, liberty decreases, morals decline and intellect is mocked. When I hear people talking about the elections all I hear is "John Cena will beat The Undertaker in the steel cage man! You'll see! And then we'll get healthcare and equality YEAHHHHH!" If only people would have a little love for the Constitution and The Bill of Rights, we just may be able to unite. But everyone wants to complicate things with big government, social programs and militant secularism. Look where its brought us. Government can not be your daddy! Government can not have absolute power without absolute corruption. There can be no socialist government run by We The People. While everyone is so busy arguing this gimme gimme BS, our country was purposely destroyed by foriegn subversion and domestic treason among our leaders. By next year America will be in a full blown state of emergency. The government will be bankrupt and people will begin starving. It is going to be worse than 1929. Police state issued by domestic and foreign troops and guess what? just like the ones you elect and glorify in these blogs.....THEY DON'T CARE ABOUT YOU!. Ron Paul was our only hope this time. Laugh, call me a conspiracy nut, I don't care I'm used to it. Unfortunately everything this "nut" predicted in the last ten years has come true! Why? Cause I seek truth. I pay attention. I think freely. Just like I face the ridicule on blogs like this, one day soon I will face the enemy as a dissident cause I chose to speak out in favor of YOUR freedom! This is history in the making. Things are fucked people! Wake up!
Posted by: Jimmy | November 18, 2008 8:36 PM
Why have no nurses, doctors, neighbors stepped forward to say they were there at the birth or saw the mom leave pregnant in Hawaii and return from a hospital with a baby?
Um...because they were there to witness the birth of THOUSANDS of babies every year, and there's no way they'd remember one more than any of the others? Just a guess here, based on nothing more than basic common sense about what goes in hospitals every day...
And besides, if such testimony were privided, would the tinfoil-hat crowd believe it? Of course not -- they'd point out what I just said and question the reliability of memories more than forty years old.
Oh, and none of you loons answered my question about why Obama's opponents (you know, McCain, Rove, Hillary Clinton) never made use of evidence that Obama was ineligible to be President. I take that as an explicit admission that they have no clue, no case, and no grasp of reality. Argument over. Buh-bye.
Posted by: Raging Bee | November 18, 2008 8:42 PM
Jimmy
Take a pill or something. I'm sure the doctor will be back soon to adjust the meds.
Posted by: Mike | November 18, 2008 8:48 PM
Here's the scoop in a nutshell: America runs on two principles, democracy and the rule of law. You asshats already lost on the democratic front, and now you're going to lose on the legal front. What shit do you have planned after that? Because you'll lose there, too.
Posted by: James Hanley | November 18, 2008 8:49 PM
But.... but.... why are there still monkeys?!?!?!
This thread is as loony as a PT troll-fest.
Posted by: Rick R | November 18, 2008 8:55 PM
Posted by: James Hanley | November 18, 2008 8:55 PM
And Mr. Jimmy, Mr. John Adams, and Mr. Bruce Majors continue to fail to tell us how Senator Obamas' birth came to be announced in a Honolulu newspaper, including the hospital in which he was born, if he wasn't born in Hawaii. Come on now, if you can't refute this fact, you are dead in the water.
Posted by: SLC | November 18, 2008 8:57 PM
Re Jimmy
Mr. Jimmy has failed to understand that the real villains who are leading this great nation to ruin are the the International Zionist Conspiracy, lead by Pope Benedict XVI, along with the Masons, the Bilderbergers, and the Illuminati.
(end snark).
Posted by: SLC | November 18, 2008 9:10 PM
Posted by: Taz | November 18, 2008 9:20 PM
This has been said before, but it needs to be rammed home.
IF Obama was born in Kenya, then he'd be a natural born US citizen automatically because one of his parents was a US citizen (similar to McCain's birthday situation in Panama, only McCain had two US citizen parents).
So if being born in a foreign country would be a non-issue as far as Obama's status as a natural born citizen, then there'd be NO NEED to fake a birth certificate showing him being born in Hawaii.
End of story.
Posted by: Michael Hoaglin | November 18, 2008 9:26 PM
Why have no nurses, doctors, neighbors stepped forward to say they were there at the birth or saw the mom leave pregnant in Hawaii and return from a hospital with a baby?
Come to think of it, I don't think anybody anywhere has stepped forward to say that. I don't think the man was ever even born. HE'S FROM ANOTHER UNIVERSE!
MILITANT NURSES!!
Posted by: 386sx | November 18, 2008 9:33 PM
Jimmy:
Your resemblance to an intellectual warning Germany about Hitler and the Holocaust is uncanny.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 9:47 PM
Well the short form version of the birth certificate does not prove that Obama was born in Hawaii. There could be a Kenyan birth certificate that his parents used to register his birth. Once registered it would be announced with the other infants in the local papers, who knows as Obama has refused to produce the vault or long form birth certificate.
The point is that since at least last February of this year people have been asking Obama to produce the long version of his birth certificate. Obama could sign a release and pay $12.00 and produce it. Simple as that but he has refused to do so.
Why should it fall on a citizen to have to prove that a candidate for public office is not qualified? You are somehow trying to bring criminal and civil standards into this discussion. What do you mean innocent until proven guilty? Obama is the one seeking the office. The presumption is on the candidate to show that they are qualified for the office they seek. Instead of being open and transparent on this issue Obama has sealed all of his college and bar records, and has hidden behind a law in Hawaii that prevents his original birth certificate from being produced without his authorization.
So, if all of the requests for information about Obama are denied under the Freedom of Information Act, and the law in Hawaii says the original version of the birth certificate can only be produced under narrow circumstances, how exactly is one supposed to gain such evidence? Particularly when cases brought by citizens are thrown out of court because they do not have "standing".
Again, the short form version of the birth certificate would be good for almost 99% of the things that you would need it for in your day to day life. One of the things it is not dispositive of is whether one meets the "natural born" standard in the Constitution needed to be President. The highest standard in this country is to prove that you are a "natural born citizen" as set forth under the Constitution, and hence eligible to hold that office.
We seem to disagree on this point. Rather than call all of you names it seems that a rational discussion is not within your grasp, which is unfortunate.
Fortunately for this country there are citizens that insist that the Constitutional standards be observed. The hearing today in Hawaii in the Martin matter was taken under submission by the Court. Mr. Martin is asking the Court for the Hawaiian Department of Health to release the original vault version of Obama's birth certificate. That would be the one that lists the hospital's name, his parents, place of birth, etc. The long form version looks much different than the short form version.
Obama has been bobbing and weaving on this for over a year now. With the Martin suit in Hawaii, the two lawsuits in front of the Supreme Court with one now being heard by Justice Thomas, and more importantly the Keyes case filed in Sacramento Superior Court, Obama is not going to be able to dodge this anymore. In one of these cases Obama is going to be forced to show the paperwork and a legitimate governmental entity will finally be able to opine on whether Obama meets the "natural born citizen" standard. Once again, he may be a "citizen" but not a "natural born citizen" eligible for the office under the laws in place at the time.
They have a saying in England that you cannot educate pork. As this matter will now be handled in one of the over 15 lawsuits filed in all parts of this country we fortunately to not need to try and debate this issue further, nor do I need to try and educate you on the issue. A decision will be made, as it should, after a legitimate government authority reviews Obama's records and rules on whether he is a "natural born citizen". If Obama passes the test he can enter the office, if not he will not be President. End of debate.
Have a nice day and a pleasant tomorrow.
Posted by: John Adams | November 18, 2008 9:47 PM
"It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of a thing he was never reasoned into." -- Jonathan Swift
Posted by: WScott | November 18, 2008 9:57 PM
John Adams: "Well the short form version of the birth certificate does not prove that Obama was born in Hawaii."
This reminds me of the Taxi episode where Jim is getting help passing the written part of the driving test. He asks them what does the solid yellow line mean, and they say "slow down". So, he repeats it slower, and they say "slow down", and back and forth, until finally he's saying very long and drawn out:
WHAT DOES THE SO LID YEL LOW LINE MEAN?
Actually, never mind, Taxi was funny, and the nutjobs on this thread are just depressing.
"Look out mama, there's a white boat coming down the river, with a big red beacon, and a flag and a man on the rail..."
Posted by: ildi | November 18, 2008 9:57 PM
You're all missing the point!
B is the 2nd letter of the alphabet
H is the 8th
O is the 15
Hawaii is the 50th state
Obama's birthday is the 4th day of the 8th months
*******NONE OF THESE IS A PRIME NUMBER!!!*****
He is therefore UNQUALIFIED to be the PRIME CITIZEN of the USA!
If you multinationalist corporatist socialist pasta-worshipping LIBERALS would only open your eyes and see how this OBVIOUSLY makes him an AMBIDEXTROUS NEPTUNIAN ILLUMINATUS you would join the REVOLT against the Disney-inspired plot to subvert the integrity of this nation that you hate, starting with the banning of Betty Crocker cake mixes, compulsory Pirate Studies in public schools, and the creation of a FEDERAL REGISTER of harmonicas.
Won't somebody PLEASE think of the CHILDREN???
Posted by: Amadán | November 18, 2008 9:59 PM
Note: Some elitist mathematicians try to call 2 a prime number, but the OVERWHELMING majority of prime numbers are odd. In a democracy, 2 is not prime.
Posted by: Amadán | November 18, 2008 10:04 PM
Democracy has nothing to do with it, Amadan. It's the Theory of Intelligent Priming that tells us 2 isn't prime. Because, you know, it doesn't LOOK prime.
Posted by: Taz | November 18, 2008 10:12 PM
I've always felt in my gut that 2 was not a prime number. I have great faith in that belief. Now, if you had a VAULTED CERTIFICATE that 2 is a prime number, maybe I'd change my mind. Why is 2 toying with us like this? What else is 2 hiding? Is 2 even qualified to be a number?
Inquiring minds want to know.
"Oh, this old world keeps spinning round, it's a wonder tall trees ain't layin' down, there comes a time..."
Posted by: ildi | November 18, 2008 10:13 PM
That still doesn't explain why there are still PYGMIES and DWARVES.
Posted by: Amadán | November 18, 2008 10:14 PM
Unqualified to be the Prime Citizen? Well then, could he be Preem Palver?
Posted by: Bob Carroll | November 18, 2008 10:24 PM
Re Amadan
I still think that Pope Benedict and his Zionist underlings are the prime movers in this plot to put Senator Obama in the White house.
Posted by: SLC | November 18, 2008 10:33 PM
Of course Mr. Brayton is not concerned about the constitution. He is supportive of the liberal agenda that provided his public education that is so poor he cannot even spell a metaphor correctly.
But I have to say that Ms. Dunbar's actions are also disturbing. There are just some conservatives out there that make the rest of us look bad.
Posted by: Bill | November 18, 2008 10:36 PM
386sx raises an interesting question in his last comment: If Obama was born in a different America, in a different universe, would he be a "natural-born US citizen" in this universe? Enquiring minds want to know.
Why should it fall on a citizen to have to prove that a candidate for public office is not qualified?
Because the aforementined citizen is accusing Obama -- and Gods-know-who-else -- of a crime, specifically conspiracy to fake a birth certificate. Therefore, the citizen is required to provide proof of the defendants' guilt to the competent authorities; the defendants are not required to prove their innocence.
You are somehow trying to bring criminal and civil standards into this discussion.
Because you asshats are alleging criminal misconduct, without even providing credible evidence, let alone proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Posted by: Raging Bee | November 18, 2008 10:37 PM
"My little friend Grildrig; you have made a most admirable panegyric upon your country. You have clearly proved that ignorance, idleness, and vice are the proper ingredients for qualifying a legislator. That laws are best explained, interpreted, and applied by those whose interest and abilities lie in perverting, confounding, and eluding them. I observe among you some lines of an institution, which in it original might have been tolerable, but these half erased, and the rest wholly blurred and blotted by corruptions."
- Jonathan Swift, Gulliver's Travels, Part 2, Ch. 6
Posted by: John Adams | November 18, 2008 10:38 PM
John Adams wrote:
A whole bunch of crap
Why won't you answer the point about Obamas's mother being a citizen? Even you should be able to figure out that makes the birth certificate irrelevant. I'd really like to hear how you can twist the facts around to explain that one away.
Posted by: tomh | November 18, 2008 10:49 PM
"John Adams:" first you say you don't need to argue wtih us because the question of Obama's citizenship status will soon be decided by competent legal authorities. Then you paste a quote that strongly implies you don't trust those aforementioned authorities to interpret the law correctly. Your apparent two-facedness here strongly implies you've already given yourself an excuse to reject any decision you don't like.
Posted by: Raging Bee | November 18, 2008 10:52 PM
While I hate to give the wingnuts any more fuel for their nattering, they are technically correct on one point: Obama's mother's citizen status would not neccessarily confer citizenship on her son if in fact he had been born in Kenya. The applicable US law can be found on the State Department website, http://travel.state.gov/law/info/info_609.html:
"Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock: A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child."
Given his mother's age (18) at his birth, had he been born in Kenya he might have run afoul of this provision. However, since Obama was in fact born in Hawaii, none of this is really relevant. The whole Indonesian angle is also worthless, as 1) The claim of his stepfather on a school enrollment form is, in and of itself, worthless as proof, and 2) Indonesian law has no impact on US citizenship status.
Posted by: General Zia | November 18, 2008 11:06 PM
If you look at the lawsuits there are no criminal allegations made. The lawsuits are in the form of declaratory relief asking the Court to review the records and declare whether Obama is a "natural born citizen", and hence eligible to hold the office of the President.
Now, if it turns out that Obama has been purposely hiding information that he knows would disqualify him until after the election, I think heads are going to knowingly nod. Yes, as Obama is an attorney and if he is shown to have knowingly hidden such information while making false statements about his qualifications than he does stand to face some serious consequences including disbarrment, jail time and he will have to make a lot of license plates to cover the $500,000,000.00 or so he collected from his friends in Gaza, oops my mistake, Georgia.
In Hawaii in the 1960's a child could be born, say in Kenya. The parents of said child could come back to Hawaii with the Kenyan birth certificate and take that to the Hawaiian Hospital and register the birth. Later, say 45 years or so later, that individual could get a short form version of his birth certificate which would look like what Mr. Obama has produced. Depending on several key issues Obama may be a "citizen" but not a "natural born citizen".
Again, I am not saying there is anything wrong with Mr. Obama's credentials. Only that due to the fact that Obama has chosen to seal all of his records from the public, that his background be propertly reviewed and a legitimate government agency step forward and say the relevant records of Mr. Obama have been reviewed and he qualifies as a "natural born citizen".
Other than factcheck and other worthless websites as they are not governmental agencies, can anyone post a cite to the Democratic National Committee, the Electoral College, the Federal Election Commission or anything that certifies such a review has occurred? Please do not give me the argument that he has been a State Senator, and a US Senator and surely the government must have done this. This is the same government that runs the post office.
Here is what the Electoral College has to say, which in part states that the Secretary of each State is responsible for vetting or qualifying candidates. If that is the case why were the 11 to 15 lawsuits filed in State Court all dismissed on the grounds that citizens do not have standing to challenge this? If Obama had sent an attorney with his papers to the Berg matter and asked the Judge to review the records and issue a ruling that would have ended this. Instead he sends a hoard of attorneys to fight on legal technical grounds never producing any evidence. It is really frightening that citizens would so blindly be willing to accept on face value such a crucial and simple review of a candidates qualifications for the office they seek. It is also equally deplorable of the Democratic Party to not have resolved this in an open and transparent fashion before the election. To leave it to the Courts to resolve after the election is a slippery slope.
Here is the Electoral cite, clear as mud.
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/electoral-college/questions.html
Posted by: John Adams | November 18, 2008 11:11 PM
"{I read he spent $800,000 of taxpayer money defending a lawsuit rather than just show the long form birth certificate everyone wants to see...It's hard to tell what is true when you read anymore, so I say show it if you have nothing to hide."
i read John McCain was actually murdered by the Vietnamese while a POW and replaced by a double.
Why won't he agree to my simple request for a DNA test?
Then too I've heard he's actually the product of an extra-marital relationship between his mother and a Panamanian national. Why won;t he agree to digging up his putative father's corpse for a DNA test?
for that matter, why won't Dubya agree to my demand that he undergo daily drug testing?
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 18, 2008 11:16 PM
Bill wrote:
Fuck you. Seriously, fuck you, you fucking moron.
Posted by: Ed Brayton | November 18, 2008 11:16 PM
John Adams: In Hawaii in the 1960's a child could be born, say in Kenya. The parents of said child could come back to Hawaii with the Kenyan birth certificate and take that to the Hawaiian Hospital and register the birth. Later, say 45 years or so later, that individual could get a short form version of his birth certificate which would look like what Mr. Obama has produced.
Two questions:
(1) Is this true? I haven't seen it written down anywhere except in wackaloon screeds. Does the State of Hawaii have a website up that explains this?
(2) What relevance is it? Obama's mother was a US citizen. That makes Obama a natural born US citizen regardless of where he was born, even if he was born in Kenya.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 18, 2008 11:21 PM
Er Raging Bee, the cite to Swift refers to the Democratic Party and their handling of the vetting of Mr. Obama. Swift is one of my favorite authors. I recommend him to you.
Posted by: John Adams | November 18, 2008 11:22 PM
Anyone for pie (or PI for that matter)? - DJ
"If you ignore them, they'll go away" - Wayne's Corollary.
Posted by: DingoJack | November 18, 2008 11:28 PM
Well Ed, for once the whackaloons are actually correct. Barack himself admitted it!!!
He admitted he wasn't born in the United States when he openly admitted at that New York charity banquet that . . .
. . . he was born on Krypton!!! That his father was really Jor-El!!! That he was sent here to Earth as a baby!!! He made it sound like a joke, but we know the REYULL AKSHUAL GENUWYNE truth!!!
You're right, do you hear? You're right!!!
You want more proof?? One word. KANSAS.
Now be nice whackadoodle nutter-bars and put on your Kryptonite-and-lead-lined jammies, so that baaad illegal alien, Kal-El Barack Hussein Obama, doesn't use his X-ray vision and catch a peek at your naughty bits before he melts them into protoplasmic goo with his heat vision, or freeze-dry them with his Kryptonian breath! By the way, he can also listen in on you with his super-hearing! He can even fly backwards in time and prevent you from being born!!! You're all dooooooooooooooooooooooomed!!!!!
By the way, did I tell you that Kryptonite causes testicular cancer in humans?
Posted by: Farb | November 18, 2008 11:28 PM
Here you can see the difference in the birth certificates:
http://www.peoplespassions.org/peoplesvoice/Birth_Certificate.htm
I do not endorse this site, there are others that lay out the legal arguments. There are issues about where he was born, his moves, dual citizenship and such that can only be reviewed by an expert in that area of the law. General Zia above gives part of the answer.
This issue needs to be resolved by Obama producing his records and answering this to someone that is qualified to make the determination. I am not, but I will accept a statement from a governement agency that says all of the pertinent records have been reviewed and Mr. Obama is a "natural born citizen" and eligible for the office. I sincerely hope that is what happens as our Country cannot stand any more turmoil.
Posted by: John Adams | November 18, 2008 11:33 PM
Here you can see the difference in the birth certificates:
http://www.peoplespassions.org/peoplesvoice/Birth_Certificate.htm
It shows what the two different types of birth certificates look like. I do not endorse this site, there are others that lay out the legal arguments. There are issues about where he was born, his moves, dual citizenship and such that can only be reviewed by an expert in that area of the law. General Zia above gives part of the answer.
This issue needs to be resolved by Obama producing his records and answering this to someone that is qualified to make the determination. I am not, but I will accept a statement from a governement agency that says all of the pertinent records have been reviewed and Mr. Obama is a "natural born citizen" and eligible for the office. I sincerely hope that is what happens as our Country cannot stand any more turmoil.
Posted by: John Adams | November 18, 2008 11:35 PM
Jimmy asserted: Unfortunately everything this "nut" predicted in the last ten years has come true! Why? Cause I seek truth. I pay attention. I think freely.
Baloney. All you conspiracy nuts think you predict everything, because you reinterpret everything to fit your misconceptions. Conspiracy theories are always nonfalsifiable, as you guys keep demonstrating.
Show some documentation that you've predicted anything over the last 10 years and then we'll talk. Or better yet, how about enlightening us on what's going to happen in the next ten years? Claiming you made a prediction after the fact sort of leaves off the "pre" part.
Posted by: Science Avenger | November 18, 2008 11:46 PM
dear all, what's your favorite kind of pie? Why? - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | November 18, 2008 11:51 PM
Is there any reason to believe that Jimmy, John Adams, Bruce Majors and the others who do not accept that Obama is a US citizen are citizens themselves? Who knows what they are? They imply that they are but they could be some weird kind of alien. Come on guys, the least you can do is to post your birth certificates (long form, of course) to show that you are not agents for a foreign power attempting to foment trouble.
(Full disclosure: I am not a USAian myself.)
Posted by: Richard Simons | November 18, 2008 11:53 PM
as the righties said repeatedly, after the issue of bush-cheney being ineligible to run and after the election fiasco of 2000... "move on." "get over it." "suck it up, you lost."
pity they won't take their own advice.
Posted by: lefty | November 18, 2008 11:55 PM
WARNING:
This thread may contain evidence, argument, intelligence, comprehension and logic-free Trolls. DO NOT FEED. Thank you, DINGO
Everyone else, free pie on me!
Posted by: DIngoJack | November 19, 2008 12:09 AM
Jimmy:
Okay. If the President is "nothing but a façade", then why does it matter? Assuming that the President doesn't matter, then who cares if we have a native-born citizen or some foreigner there?
Posted by: Paper Hand | November 19, 2008 12:16 AM
John Adams wrote:
Here's what the form says, and you can check me by accessing it here.City, Town or Location of Birth: Honolulu.
Island of Birth: Oahu.
County of Birth: Honolulu.
And now you want me to believe that 46 years ago a person could have their child in Kenya, fly to Hawaii, and have the Hawaiian authorities accept the Kenyan birth certificate, but change all the information to claim the child was born in Hawaii? Because you said, "The parents of said child could come back to Hawaii with the Kenyan birth certificate and take that to the Hawaiian Hospital and register the birth.:
As to why Obama should not release his records, but should in fact fight these lawsuits tooth and nail: Because he has already demonstrated his citizenship with this birth certificate, to the satisfaction of the U.S. State Department, and nothing more is needed. These lawsuits are just nuisance suits, and the only proper response to nuisance suits is to fight them ferociously. If you give anything up, your opponents can claim victory. Just look at how Philip Berg falsely claimed he'd forced Obama to "admit" all the allegations against him--just days before Berg's suit was dismissed. You don't win against lying scum like that by giving them an inch. You have to go for total victory, in which you smash them with no mercy and grant them no wins at any moment of any kind.
And that's because they're not just good citizens asking for evidence. They're scum who blatantly ignore evidence and facts and who will never, never, be satisfied with anything they receive, even if Obama were to give them everything--because their goal isn't the truth. Their goal is to overturn the election.
They are attacking American democracy, and they are attacking the rule of law. They, and you, are enemies of America. Fuck you. Go die. I'm an American, and you are my enemy because you want to destroy democracy and the rule of law just to get at Obama.
Posted by: James Hanley | November 19, 2008 12:24 AM
Oops - my mistake. Or, shall I say, the State Department's mistake. Congress did change the citizenship laws to decrease the time period that a US citizen married to a noncitizen would be required to reside in the US in order to confer citizenship to a child born in another country. This law is to apply retroactively to 1952, and as such would cover Obama. The relevant sections are found on page 16 of the following document (sorry - it's giving me a hard time trying to copy what I need)
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86757.pdf
Posted by: General Zia | November 19, 2008 12:40 AM
John Adams:
You just linked to a picture of a birth certificate that specifically said that Obama was born in Hawaii. Where is the problem, again?
Posted by: Troublesome Frog | November 19, 2008 12:52 AM
On a practical note, does anyone really think that it is remotely possible that a woman with limited financial resources, in her ninth month of pregnancy, is going to say to herself, "Yes, I think it would be a fabulous idea to fly to a third world country where I don't know a soul and give birth!"??? And then, having had the child, would arrange for the newspaper in her hometown to announce the birth, but lie and pretend it happened in Hawaii? Then fly home, without anyone noticing that she had been gone, with a newborn in tow? Does this make any sense at all to anyone?
Posted by: General Zia | November 19, 2008 1:00 AM
Sure doctors and nurses might not remember a NORMAL birth 40+ years later but this is the anitchrist we're talking about.
I mean surely they'd remember the rain of blood; the demonic apparitions, the swarms of locusts, the fact he was born to a Hyena nto a human woman/
Come on, haven't any of you lefties seen "The Omen"?
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 1:15 AM
General Zia wrote: Does this make any sense at all to anyone?
Of course, it makes sense to John Adams and other desperate, reality-denying Obama haters.
Posted by: tomh | November 19, 2008 1:19 AM
DingoJack...
I have always loved mincemeat. Humble pie is not bad, either.
That Frampton dude wasn't bad at all.
Posted by: BobbyEarle | November 19, 2008 1:38 AM
Mr. Obama - "there's some stuff that's been left undone."
On November 4, 2008 those voting for Barack Obama may in fact have voted for a non-candidate in the presidential election.
Obama refuses to answer mounting lawsuits in various states regarding whether or not he was born as an American. All it would take to clear up this question would be for him to produce a legal copy of his actual birth certificate, which to-date he has refused to do. The pressure is growing daily and now there is speculation that in fact he does not have a legal American birth certificate.
If you believe that Obama went to Hawaii to only see his Grandmother then; where was Michelle and why were the girls not allowed to see their Great-Grandma "Toot" for the last time??
Folks get a grip. This Obama trip to see Grandma 'Toot" was put together with ABC and Good Morning America as a two-fold attempt to, 1) legitimize a Publicity stunt to gain sympathetic favor for Obama and, 2) provide a cover for Obama to solicit a legal story and affidavit from Grandma 'Toot" as to his claim of having been born in Hawaii.
"One of the things I want to make sure of is that I had a chance to sit down with her and talk to her," Obama told Roberts on GMA. "She's still alert and she's still got all her faculties. And I want to make sure that I don't miss that opportunity right now." "And then we're going to find out what chores I can do, because I'm sure there's been some stuff that's been left undone," he said.
Yes, there was good reason that Obama needed to "talk with her and find some chores that need to be done!" And it's very important that you the voter decipher his words "she's still alert and she's got all her faculties." He keeps repeating this mantra because that's an absolute requirement for a valid affidavit. And Grandma "toot" was the only American relative left that could cover-up his birthplace.
Obama's other grandmother on his father's side, half brother and half sister claim Mr. Barack H. Obama was born in Kenya. Reports further reflect that Mr. Obama's mother went to Kenya during her pregnancy. Wayne Madsen, Journalist with Online Journal as a contributing writer published an article on June 9, 2008 stating that a research team went to Mombassa, Kenya, and located a Certificate Registering the birth of Barack Obama, Jr. at a Kenya Maternity Hospital, to his father, a Kenyan citizen and his mother, a U.S. citizen. There are claims of records of a "registry of birth" for Obama, on or about August 8, 1961 in the public records office in Hawaii, but these have not been released for scrutiny. It is alleged in the various lawsuits and is a matter of much general speculation that Mr. Obama's mother was prevented from boarding a flight from Kenya to Hawaii at her late stage of pregnancy, which apparently was a normal restriction to avoid births during a flight. It is likely that Stanley Ann Dunham (Obama) gave birth to Barack Obama in Kenya, after which she flew to Hawaii and registered Obama's birth.
Yes, Mr. Obama, "... there's some stuff that's been left undone!" NOW SHOW THE WORLD YOUR ACTUAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE and all the stuff will be done!
Posted by: B. Wilby | November 19, 2008 2:41 AM
The man visits his grandmother as she lay dying, and you call it a publicity stunt? You are a disgusting human being. Seriously, go find yourself a shred of human decency before you try to claim the moral high ground.
Posted by: Davis | November 19, 2008 2:59 AM
To Davis - Here is what Mr. Obama said: "One of the things I want to make sure of is that I had a chance to sit down with her and talk to her," Obama told Roberts on GMA. "She's still alert and she's still got all her faculties. And I want to make sure that I don't miss that opportunity right now." "And then we're going to find out what chores I can do, because I'm sure there's been some stuff that's been left undone," he said.
Who said that his Grand Mother was dying?? Please share your source of information. Thanks.
Posted by: B. Wilby | November 19, 2008 3:10 AM
"Folks get a grip. This Obama trip to see Grandma 'Toot" was put together with ABC and Good Morning America as a two-fold attempt to, 1) legitimize a Publicity stunt to gain sympathetic favor for Obama and, 2) provide a cover for Obama to solicit a legal story and affidavit from Grandma 'Toot" as to his claim of having been born in Hawaii."
So where is this alleged affidavit?
Why hasn't he produced it?
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 3:11 AM
To Ian Gould - You tell me.
Posted by: B. Wilby | November 19, 2008 3:14 AM
"Wayne Madsen, Journalist with Online Journal as a contributing writer published an article on June 9, 2008 stating that a research team went to Mombassa, Kenya, and located a Certificate Registering the birth of Barack Obama, Jr. at a Kenya Maternity Hospital, to his father, a Kenyan citizen and his mother, a U.S. citizen. There are claims of records of a "registry of birth" for Obama, on or about August 8, 1961 in the public records office in Hawaii, but these have not been released for scrutiny."
Nice to see you're requiring the same level of proof for Obama and for the loons claiming to have sighted a Kenyan birth certificate.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 3:19 AM
"To Ian Gould - You tell me."
You're the one who claims it exists in the first place.
My explanation as to why he hasn't produced it is simple - it only exists in your sad delusions.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 3:32 AM
I still maintain that John McCain is actually the child of two Panamanian citizens illegally adopted by the McCains.
If this isn't true, why hasn't he produced the full vault copy of his birth certificate?
Why haven't doctors and nurses come forward to testify that they witnessed his delivery?
when McCain suspended his campaign and flew back to Washington how do we know this wasn't a cover for him to arrange to have damaging documents regarding his real birth removed from government archives>
what?
everything I've just said has as much basis in fact as all the allegations about Obama.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 3:37 AM
Hmmm. I delivered my first bundle of joy in Japan. We had a little sign above her crib that said "Native Texan." When we returned to Texas, we of course told folks she'd been born in Japan, but they too agreed she is a native Texan. She never had a bit of problem signing up to vote, getting in-state tuition, or any other document of citizenship.
WHY WAS THAT, DO YOU SUPPOSE? DO YOU THINK MAYBE IT WAS BECAUSE I MYSELF AM AN AMERICAN CITIZEN, AND MY CITIZENSHIP WAS THE BASIS FOR HERS? And no, she doesn't even have a State of Texas birth certificate; hers is a funky Japanese-looking thing. Obama, on the other hand, has an Hawaiian birth certificate stating he was born in Honolulu. After it was produced, "the director of Hawaii's Department of Health confirmed Oct. 31 that Obama was born in Honolulu." The Associated Press quoted Chiyome Fukino as saying that both she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate.
So he's not just got citizenship through his mother, but also citizenship by virtue of being born on American soil, as verified by the two Hawaii state officials who are in a position to accomplish such a verification -- either of which alone is enough to make him an NBC.
"Native-born" simply means "not naturalized," you loons. Unless you're trying to claim that Obama is a naturalized citizen, you've lost the game already.
Posted by: Leigh Williams | November 19, 2008 4:36 AM
"Christian Worldview"
Does anyone really read beyond this amusing contradiction in terms with the expectation of finding anything besides utter shit?
Posted by: Ira Fews | November 19, 2008 5:28 AM
Well, it seems perfectly obvious to me...
In some sort of Manchurian Candidate sort of way, Barack's parents KNEW that he was destined to become President. So they had to overcome the mistake of allowing him to be born in Kenya by forcing the Hawaiian authorities to create a new American birth certificate for him.
In my humble opinion, they should have also had enough forsight to change his middle name too.
/tin foil hat mode
Posted by: doctorgoo | November 19, 2008 6:23 AM
How do you librul Barack HUSSEIN Obama worshippers know he was born in Hawaii?? WERE YOU THERE????
Posted by: PYGMIES + DWARFS | November 19, 2008 7:03 AM
TommyG: Now it has come to my attention that David Souter WILL allow Berg's complaint to be heard by the Supreme Court.
By the way, do you have a reference for this? My Google skills are pretty weak, and I can't find any news outlets that are reporting this.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 19, 2008 7:24 AM
@ Adrienne:
Ah, Janet Folger, maybe the dumbest proto-hominid on the entire fucking Web.
There's a replica of William Wallace's sword hanging on my wall...And I think the real thing is lodged in her skull.
Call me evil, but I take a perhaps twisted comfort in how agitated these aggrieved lunatics are. Their pain and paranoia is my mental jag-off fodder.
Ed wrote (to some shit-wit):
Oh, I got that you were serious the first time!!
Posted by: Ira Fews | November 19, 2008 8:04 AM
B. Wilby,
You're the only person in America who doesn't know that Barack Obama's grandmother was seriously ill, and died just days before the election, and you want us to believe you might actually be in the know about his citizenship status?
Don't just go fuck yourself. Go stab yourself in the eyes with bacteria-laden dinner forks.
Posted by: James Hanley | November 19, 2008 8:16 AM
Posted by: Taz | November 19, 2008 8:49 AM
On a related note, Neurologica recently ran an article on paranoia:
http://www.theness.com/neurologicablog/?p=417
Posted by: Adrian W. | November 19, 2008 8:51 AM
Well, as B. Wilby indicated, it now seems the loonies are down to merely repeating the same old allegations that have already been debunked and discredited, and completely ignoring our responses. They've lost the argument, and they know it. And like all other unhinged conspiracy-buffs, they'll just keep on repeating their nonsense until they die, regardless of what facts or evidence may turn up.
Posted by: Raging Bee | November 19, 2008 9:06 AM
@ James Hanley
You're the only person in America who doesn't know that Barack Obama's grandmother was seriously ill
He didn't say "grandmother," he said Grand Mother! Big diff!
Posted by: Ira Fews | November 19, 2008 9:12 AM
The best part was the claim that in Hawaii someone can bring a child born in Kenya and the state will issue a birth certificate stating the child was born in Honolulu.
I still want to see John Adams provide some sort of official verification for this.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 19, 2008 9:20 AM
Well, you know, the 9/11 troofer thing has lost its luster with time - can't you just feel the excitement in the air? New conspiracy! Woo hoo!
Posted by: ildi | November 19, 2008 9:22 AM
I for one, am waiting with baited breath for the idiot trolls here to produce proof from their doctors, that they are legally sane and entitled to walk around free and unmedicated.
Posted by: DuWayne | November 19, 2008 9:46 AM
Kermit:
Being born in the United States didn't qualify anyone as an American Citizen under the constitution. The 14th. amendment (considered by many to have been "misinterpreted"), has been used to justify so-called "anchor baby" tests for automatic citizenship. Arguably, the 14th. amendment, passed following the Civil war, was intended to address issues likely to arise in the sundry states specifically with regard to the status of former slaves. The founding fathers are on record in numerous archives regarding their views of what constituted citizenship, and I am not aware of any article of the original constitution (pre-amendment) that specifically addresses the issue of conferring citizenship. Your assertion that birthright citizenship is contemplated by the constitution can be asserted to be true (accepting that this caveat of the 14th. amendment hasn't truly been tested by the courts), but not as you suggest, from the very beginning. It may also be argued, in the absence of any original conferring sensitivity or intent by the legislature circa 1865, that the much abused "birthright" citizenship conferred by the 14th. amendment, really doesn't apply. I doubt any of the present scholarship on the 14th. amendment would apply to the Obama case, but it is one of the more interesteing aspects of precedent and legislative intent that will doubtless be explored. perhaps sooner than anyone expects.
Posted by: Ed Weirdness | November 19, 2008 10:18 AM
Ed Weirdness:
Are these philosophical/theoretical musings, or is there an actual case where someone was not recognized as a US citizen despite being acknowledged to have been born here?
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 19, 2008 10:35 AM
This thread has been a goldmine of lulz.
The nutters keep getting more and more shrill as the prospect of a *gasp* black man being bresident looms near.
I am going to second James Hanley's challenge. $10 gets you a $100.
I particularly like how the nutter above (was if 'kimmy?) claims how no one knows anything about him, he barely voted on anything, etc, then proceeds to tell us all about him.
Must be the kool aid gives them psychic powers, eh?
Posted by: FastLane | November 19, 2008 11:01 AM
If for some reason the courts do have to decide Obama's eligibility, at least we can rest assured that the wingnuts will be dead set against activist judges overturning the will of the people.
Posted by: Taz | November 19, 2008 11:21 AM
Ed Weirdness wrote: The 14th. amendment (considered by many to have been "misinterpreted"), has been used to justify so-called "anchor baby" tests for automatic citizenship.
Article V -- [Amendments] shall be valid to all Intents and Purposes, as part of this Constitution
Amendment 14 - Citizenship Rights.
1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States ...
Just what part of that is it possible to misinterpret? It hasn't been used to "justify" anything, since it could not be any more self explanatory.
Posted by: tomh | November 19, 2008 11:36 AM
tomh:
Especially since as far as I know, pace Ed Weirdness, the 14th Amendment has always been interpreted to give children born in the US citizenship. Until now I've never heard of any contrary opinions on this.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 19, 2008 11:57 AM
By the way, I wanted to correct a lot of people (who are on my side of this argument) who are saying that any person born in the US is ALWAYS a Natural Born Citizen (NBC). This simply is not true. Here's an example:
If a foreign diplomat working at an embassy in the US gives birth to a child in the US, this child is most definitely NOT an NBC.
Learn more here (I apologize for not knowing how to embed links):
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5af9bb95919f35e66f614176543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=85d3744a400ae010VgnVCM1000000ecd190aRCRD&vgnextchannel=96719c7755cb9010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD
This obviously doesn't change any of the arguments put forth on this thread since nobody (yet) has claimed that Obama's father was a diplomat.
...But since I brought it up, I fully expect the foil-hat brigade to somehow incorporate this info sometime soon, and in a spectacularly paranoid way!
Posted by: doctorgoo | November 19, 2008 12:21 PM
This comment is a bit off topic, but it's related to my previous comment.
Not many people know that the King of Thailand (who has reigned for more than 60 years) was actually born in the Boston area in 1927.
Many people assume that he has dual citizenship, or at least could claim to be a US citizen. But this is not correct, due to the reason I listed previously.
Posted by: doctorgoo | November 19, 2008 12:28 PM
I see that Taz and other cretins tried to respond to the questions I raised in their own lame airheaded way.
That Obama was editor of Harvard Law Review, or taught at the University of Chicago, makes it MORE remarkable, not less, that his transcripts are not public AND that he has NEVER published any scholarly articles. It makes it seem more like his resume is padded and he was promoted for something other than intelligence.
Posted by: Bruce Majors | November 19, 2008 12:30 PM
I see that Taz and other cretins tried to respond to the questions I raised in their own lame airheaded way.
That Obama was editor of Harvard Law Review, or taught at the University of Chicago, makes it MORE remarkable, not less, that his transcripts are not public AND that he has NEVER published any scholarly articles. It makes it seem more like his resume is padded and he was promoted for something other than intelligence.
Posted by: Bruce Majors | November 19, 2008 12:31 PM
Shorter Bruce Majors:
Therefore the Harvard Law Review and the University of Chicago must also be in on this conspiracy to elect a Muslim, socialist, Christian-terrorist, too!
lol
You really are pathetic Bruce.
Posted by: doctorgoo | November 19, 2008 12:35 PM
Bruce Majors:
And the reason you find any of this relevant is...?
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 19, 2008 12:55 PM
It makes it seem more like his resume is padded and he was promoted for something other than intelligence.
And this is supposed to disqualify people for president? You wish!
Posted by: 386sx | November 19, 2008 1:00 PM
On a slightly more peripheral note, I have an acquaintance who insists that Obama's case has been accepted by the Supreme Court and uses the docket number - Docket 08-570 - as evidence. He says that Obama is required to produce his birth certificate by Dec. 1.
I really don't understand this legal stuff very well. Can someone tell me what this docket really means?
Thanks,
Posted by: Mick | November 19, 2008 2:10 PM
The link I posted showed the difference between a long form birth certificate, that Obama has refused to produce, versus the short form version that was produced.
And yes, a child could be born in a different country and the short form version would show exactly what it says on Obama's.
But again, the Keyes lawsuit in California will bring an end to this speculation. Obama, the Democratic National Committee are going to have to come to Court and produce the records and prove to the satisfaction of the Court and to Deborah Brown and the State of California that Obama meets the standard of a "natural born citizen".
So to continue a back and forth is useless. The Keyes case, or the Supreme Court case that has now been referred to Justice Thomas will resolve this question.
Once again, Obama could have prevented this last February by signing a release and producing the long form of his birth certificate.
For all of you Obama supporters that want to blindly follow here are some steps you need to take immediately. Take your left hand and place it on your left ear, it may be difficult to find. Now repeat with your right hand. Pull as hard as you can and there will be a loud sucking sound but do not be alarmed, it is your head being removed from the warm, moist place it has apparently resided.
All of your arguments will be answered by a Court when Obama and the DNC appear and produce the records, just as it should have been done last February.
Have a nice day.
Posted by: John Adams | November 19, 2008 2:15 PM
Mick:
I have seen the Dec. 1 deadline, too, but only on right wing blogs. I haven't seen the news reported by, say, a source whose job is to actually present news.
I, too, would be grateful if anyone could provide further information on this.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 19, 2008 2:20 PM
John Adams: And yes, a child could be born in a different country and the short form version would show exactly what it says on Obama's.
Right. A child could be born in a different country, and Hawaii will issue a birth certificate reporting her city of birth as Honolulu.
I know I've asked for this before, but instead of simply repeating it as if it were true, could you actually provide a credible source?
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 19, 2008 2:23 PM
I told someone about this story, and she's wondering if there's even such a thing as a "long form" birth certificate.
Regardless, this isn't a case of someone refusing to show their cards. This is a case of the cards being on the table, shirt taken off to show a lack of holdouts, and someone being kicked out of the casino for demanding a body cavity search.
Posted by: Gray Falcon | November 19, 2008 2:38 PM
Um, what? Check out the faculty listing at any major university, and tell me how many of them have publicly available transcripts. I'll pay you $1 for each one you find.
Posted by: Davis | November 19, 2008 2:57 PM
08-570 is Berg's Petition for Writ of Certiorari. It has not yet been ruled on. Obama has until Dec 1, 2008 to file a brief in response. It does not mean that he is under Court order to produce any form of birth certificate, nor does the existence of a docket number mean the Court has even agreed to hear the case.
Posted by: DaveL | November 19, 2008 3:19 PM
I told someone about this story, and she's wondering if there's even such a thing as a "long form" birth certificate.
I, for one, have never heard of such a thing. How much information is there to record about a NEWBORN BABY that won't fit on one page? Mine has place, date and time of birth, birth weight and "length," parents' names, my footprints, my mum's right thumb-print, name of the person taking the prints, and signature of hospital superintendent. What more is there to record?
Posted by: Raging Bee | November 19, 2008 3:36 PM
John Adams wrote:
More crap
Let me explain this for you, since you seem to be in the slow reading group.
This is the relevant section of
U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 7 - Consular Affairs
ACQUISITION OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP BY
BIRTH ABROAD TO U.S. CITIZEN PARENT
Sec. 301. The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United
States at birth:
g. a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its
outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a
citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was
physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a
period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which
were after attaining the age of fourteen years.
There is indisputable proof that Obama's mother was born in Kansas, moved to Seattle, WA for high school and graduated from high school in Seattle. This means that she could have had a child on the moon and he would have been a natural born American citizen. Your failure to acknowledge this marks you as terminally stupid or in complete denial of reality. Or, most likely, both.
Posted by: tomh | November 19, 2008 3:52 PM
Raging Bee, the birth certificate you describe is what, at least in Hawaii, is known as the "long form." The "short form" omits things like your mum's fingerprints, your birthweight, and your footprints, and just states the facts: that you were born in such and such a place on such and such a date.
And that limited amount of information is sufficient to the State Department to prove your citizenship. The feds don't give a shit about your little feetieprints or how much you weighed when you were born, because those facts aren't relevant to your citizenship status. Sorry, not yelling at you, just using your question to yell at the pus-brained nutters.
Believe it or not, they are demanding that the irrelevant information such as birth weight be brought forth to prove/disprove citizenship. OK, that's not quite fair. They're saying the short form is a fake, so they want to see the original that is on file. That would be a reasonable request if there was actually any evidence of a forgery, but obviously there isn't except in the warped little walnut-sized brains of these jackasses.
Posted by: James Hanley | November 19, 2008 4:12 PM
What evidence do you have that this is the case? Why would a state issue a Certificate of Live Birth, stating that a child was born in Hawaii to a child that was not born in Hawaii?
We keep asking you this question, but you keep ducking it. Unless and until you can answer, I am publicly stating that you are a lying sack of horseshit. If you want to actually stand a chance of convincing anyone here that you are not a lying sack of horseshit, you have to give us some evidence to back up your claim that Hawaii would do such thing.
WHAT IS YOUR EVIDENCE THAT HAWAII WOULD OFFICIALLY LIST A CHILD AS BORN IN HAWAII, WHEN THAT CHILD WAS NOT IN FACT BORN THERE?
Posted by: James Hanley | November 19, 2008 4:18 PM
Here's a little, somewhat amusing update:
Response from Electoral Commission: "Meh!"
The respondents have elected not to respond, which is pretty much what I expected. So much for "Obama has until Dec 1st to produce an original/vault copy/long form/blood-on-human-skin-version of his birth certificate of he's in big trouble!!!!OMG!!ONE"
Posted by: DaveL | November 19, 2008 4:22 PM
Obama is on the record saying that he was born in a hospital in Hawaii. The long form version would list the hospital and the doctors names that were present during the delivery. If it turns out that Obama's long form birth certificate says he was popped out at home, or in a taxi that is going to raise questions that will need to be asked of Obama as to why he would lie about that. That will require further investigation. So it is not that people want to see his foot print, how much he weighed, etc. It is the details of his birth. It is also possible that attached to the long form version is a Kenyan birth certificate that shows Obama was born in Kenya. That is just the point, who knows at this point except Obama, the Governor of Hawaii and the Hawaiian Health Department. The long version needs to be produced so this issue can be put behind us.
By the way, some people are saying the short form is a fake, that is just a red herring. The point is that the short form does not answer the question if Obama is a "natural born citizen" as defined under the Constitution. Yes, he may be a citizen just not a "natural born citizen". This question can only be answered by experts in the area.
As to Tomh, once the long version is produced and if it is shown that Obama was born in Kenya the laws at the time would show that Obama's mother missed a deadline by 3 or 4 months that would qualify Obama as a "natural born citizen". That is why we are now seeing new arguments raised that laws were changed since then and Obama's mother would now qualify, etc. But again, this is mere speculation as no one has seen the long form version of the birth certificate.
The point is OBAMA NEEDS TO PRODUCE THE LONG VERSION OF HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE. The short form version is not sufficient. All of this angst and anger over OBAMA'S REFUSAL TO PAY $12.00 AND PRODUCE THE LONG FORM VERSION OF HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE.
I do not know how to be any more clear on that. All of you that want to simply look the other way on qualifying Obama can do so. The obligation to show that Obama is entitled to take the oath of the office of the President rests with Obama. Until he stands up and produces the records these issues will not go away.
Posted by: John Adams | November 19, 2008 4:29 PM
There are two case before the Supreme Court. The cite above does not include the fact that there is a hearing in the Berg matter on Dec. 01. This case has always had wrinkles but with all of the lawsuits around the country the SC may have to take this up. Perhaps not this case but there are 15 more and counting that could be on their way to the SC.
Below is the case that is now before Justice Thomas. So while the Keyes case in California will force a response from Obama and those other parties named (and if it is shown that Obama does not qualify in California he will not qualify in any State). The case below has more possibility as it was originally filed in State Court, rather than in Federal Court as the Berg case was. Again, Mr. Obama send in the long form birth certificate and have the Court rule on if you meet the requirements of a "natural born citizen".
No. 08A407
Title: Leo C. Donofrio, Applicant
v.
Nina Mitchell Wells, New Jersey Secretary of State
Docketed:
Lower Ct: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Case Nos.: (AM-0153-08T2 at the New Jersey Appellate Division without a docket number)
~~~Date~~~ ~~~~~~~Proceedings and Orders~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nov 3 2008 Application (08A407) for stay pending the filing and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, submitted to Justice Souter.
Nov 6 2008 Application (08A407) denied by Justice Souter.
Nov 14 2008 Application (08A407) refiled and submitted to Justice Thomas.
Nov 19 2008 DISTRIBUTED for Conference of December 5, 2008.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
~~Name~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~Address~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~Phone~~~
Attorneys for Petitioner:
Leo C. Donofrio P.O. Box 93
East Brunswick, NJ 08816
Party name: Leo C. Donofrio
Posted by: John Adams | November 19, 2008 4:41 PM
John Adams: It is also possible that attached to the long form version is a Kenyan birth certificate that shows Obama was born in Kenya.
Except that the "short form", which is also an official document, says very clearly that the long form has Honolulu as Obama's birthplace. There is no information relevant to this issue that is not already on the so-called "short form".
-
The point is that the short form does not answer the question if Obama is a "natural born citizen" as defined under the Constitution.
Yes it does. It clearly states that Obama's place of birth is Honolulu. That makes him a natural born citizen.
-
If it turns out that Obama's long form birth certificate says he was popped out at home, or in a taxi that is going to raise questions that will need to be asked of Obama as to why he would lie about that.
Except that this is completely irrelevant to his qualifications for President. You are really starting to sound desperate here. This is exactly what we have been saying. Nothing is going to shut you wackaloons up. You wackaloons never shut up. You are going to reach for any excuse whatsoever to continue hounding Obama, and if you can't find an excuse you'll just make one up. Pretty much like you made up this whole "is Obama a natural born citizen" nonsense.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 19, 2008 4:42 PM
In a taxi? En route from Nairobi, I suppose? You are aware, are you not, that Honolulu is on an island, are you not? And that Hawaii shares no land borders with any other country? Obviously neither of these scenarios leaves us with any evidence that Obama was not born in the U.S., even if one of them were true.
Are you instead suggesting that his official long-form birth certificate is a forgery? Because if you are, it pretty much gives the lie to your claim that it would put this whole thing to bed. If not, then it doesn't matter if he lied about being born in the hospital in Honolulu or at a home in Honolulu or in a taxi in Honolulu; he would still be an American citizen by birth and the lawsuit would be without merit.
What!?
Are you actually claiming that some official, when they typed up the birth certificate, typed in "Honolulu" for city of birth and then dutifully attached the original Kenyan birth certificate? Don't you think they might have noted a little discrepancy there? What a flat-out retarded scenario. Has this ever happened, to anyone, anywhere, at any time?
Posted by: DaveL | November 19, 2008 4:50 PM
John Adams wrote:
the laws at the time would show that Obama's mother missed a deadline by 3 or 4 months that would qualify Obama as a "natural born citizen"
You really are delusional. if you did any research yourself, instead of just repeating crackpot claims from loony tune, right wing web sites, you would know that "the laws at the time" mean nothing, since the relevant statute was made retroactive to 1952. But, as others have pointed out, facts will never convince you. You're happy to live in your delusions.
Posted by: tomh | November 19, 2008 4:51 PM
Some troll named bill- "Of course Mr. Brayton is not concerned about the constitution. He is supportive of the liberal agenda that provided his public education that is so poor he cannot even spell a metaphor correctly.
But I have to say that Ms. Dunbar's actions are also disturbing. There are just some conservatives out there that make the rest of us look bad."
Some? You mean, like, ALL of them?
Posted by: Rick R | November 19, 2008 4:51 PM
"Call me evil, but I take a perhaps twisted comfort in how agitated these aggrieved lunatics are. Their pain and paranoia is my mental jag-off fodder."
Prodding the wing-nuts is fun, it also serves a useful purpose in provoking them to ever-crazy assertions which should make it even harder for the Republican Party to hold together and come back in 2010 or 2012.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 4:56 PM
All of this lunacy, all of it, because some folks don't want to have to call the scary black man "Mr. President".
You trolls are funny, but you're mostly just disgusting.
Posted by: Rick R | November 19, 2008 4:57 PM
Conservatives are sore losers.
Posted by: jws | November 19, 2008 4:58 PM
T"he feds don't give a shit about your little feetieprints..."
Ah but what if instead of footprints, the long form for Obama has ....
HOOFPRINTS!
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 5:05 PM
Let me be clear here:
Neither of these cases is before the Supreme Court
Both of these are Petitions for Writ of Certiorari, which is a petition for the Court to review the case. A case isn't before the Court until such a writ is granted.
Posted by: DaveL | November 19, 2008 5:12 PM
"The point is OBAMA NEEDS TO PRODUCE THE LONG VERSION OF HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE. The short form version is not sufficient. All of this angst and anger over OBAMA'S REFUSAL TO PAY $12.00 AND PRODUCE THE LONG FORM VERSION OF HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE."
Since the statement by the Republican Governor of Hawaii that the long form exists and contains nothing that invalidates Obama's candidacy is insufficient to satisfy some people, I feel certain that if the long form certificate is produced it too will be dismissed as a forgery.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 5:17 PM
[wingnut]Obama's birth certificate can't be real, both them Hawaii state officials who say they seen it is just Japs and it's still part of the whole Pearl Harbor conspiracy, and the 14th amendment don't mean nothing cause it's right after that there 13th amendment that lets them uppity nigras vote, and I don't agree with that, so everything after it don't count, and it don't matter that Obama's mother was a US citizen cause she done give up her citizenship whin she done had sex with a black man in the first place.[/wingnut]
Posted by: Lurkbot | November 19, 2008 5:24 PM
"If it turns out that Obama's long form birth certificate says he was popped out at home, or in a taxi that is going to raise questions that will need to be asked of Obama as to why he would lie about that."
Right, because, assuming for the moment this nonsense is true, Obama would obviously remember the precise details of his own birth.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 5:26 PM
If it turns out that Obama's long form birth certificate says he was popped out at home, or in a taxi that is going to raise questions that will need to be asked of Obama as to why he would lie about that.
Note the word I've bolded and underlined. It's the most important part of the entire sentence. As in "If a starship enters Earth orbit from the Galactic Center and her commander produces a birth certificate saying Obama was born on a planet whose name can't be pronounced by humans, that is going to raise questions that will need to be asked of Obama as to why he would lie about that."
Until the "if" condition is proven true, the wackaloons have nothing to their name but a lot of empty "what if" speculation, with ZERO evidentiary backup, which no decent court has time to deal with.
Posted by: Raging Bee | November 19, 2008 5:34 PM
Let me put this in the venacular that you might understand. Dudes, Obama has refused to produce the birth certificate, ya know the real one. It is long and has a bunch of lines on it that says things, like the name of the hospital, the name of the doctor. When he coughs it up it may mean that he is a "natural born citizen" eligible to hold the office of the President, but it may ya know, say something that doesn't match with what he has been saying. Bummer, but Obama has not produced it so all we can do is hang around and fire up the bong and wonder. Gee, I wonder what it will say once we see it.
So you are right. This may all be a bunch of crap for nothing. But it is a Constitutional standard that has applied to every President since George Washington. So even if this is considered a mere formaly by some, I for one want to see that Obama has produced the records, they have been reviewed and he is deemed a "natural born citizen". This should have been done several years ago. But it was not and the issue is not going away.
Obama is now going to be forced to produce the records. If it says what Obama has said it does, then all will be well. And again, I hope that Obama is "natural born citizen". Our country has other more pressing issues to deal with. But if it turns out that Obama does not meet the standard there are going to be numerous problems.
I fully agree with you Raging Bee, this could all be a tempest over a teapot. But until Obama signs the release and pays the $12.00, or a court of law drags Obama and his legal team into court and forces them to produce the records all we can do is speculate. And that my friend is the issue.
I hope race does not enter into this. That is not the point. John McCain was asked the same question. In response he immediately produced all of his records, including the long form version of his birth certificate and it was determined that he was a natural born citizen. Obama should have responded in the same fashion. When he was asked this question back in February he or the DNC should have stepped forward and produced all of the records and ask that it be confirmed by a legitimate government agency that he meets the standard. Instead Obama produced a short form versio of his birth certificate which, as an attorney he would know, does not answer the very specific questions to determine if one meets the definition of whether you are a "natural born citizen". He is or he is not, it is the functional equivilent of being pregnant or not. The records will prove it one way or the other. Unfortunately we still do not have the records and this is now on its way to potentially becoming a crisis. The closer we get to the Electoral College meeting on Dec. 15, and then the Senate and the House meeting to confirm the electoral vote in January 2009 without this question being fully answered the closer we are to a crisis.
It will, in my opinion, be a crisis in any case if Obama is found not to be a "natural born citizen". I hope if that happens those of you that voted for him direct your inquiries to Mr. Obama and the Democratic National Committee that failed miserably in their handling of this issue. For some reason they have taken the position that producing a short form version of a birth certificate to several websites like factcheck, fightthesmears and others should meet the Constitutional standard of vetting a candidate. It does not and we are now in a situation that could turn very ugly.
Posted by: John Adams | November 19, 2008 7:36 PM
Re James Hanley
Mr. Hanley should note that John Adams and his fellow whackadoos have yet to supply a rational explanation for the birth announcement in a Honolulu newspaper. If he was born in Kenya (or Lower Slobovia for that matter), how come the newspaper announced him as having been born in a Honolulu hospital? Fucktard Adams and his fellow travelers just keep repeating the same horsepucky over and over. Attached is a link to an article in the very same Honolulu newspaper.
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20081119/COLUMNISTS20/811190394/1156/localnewsfront
Posted by: SLC | November 19, 2008 7:43 PM
Tomh, excellent point. I am not an expert in this area. I know that there were changes in the law, but as this will be a very fact specific inquiry one will have to wait until Obama produces the "facts" before the law can be applied. I suspect that when the issue is actually presented with the necessary documents from Mr. Obama that those arguments will be aired and dealt with by attorneys and experts in such matters.
That is the point of vetting or qualifying a candidate and why it should not be left to websites such as factcheck, fightthesmears and such to opine on the issue. As I have consistenly said that is citizens can ask is for Obama to produce the records and a legitimate government agency to issue a statement that the records have been reviewed and he does or does not meet the standard. I am astute enough to recognize that there will be issues about this that will require attorneys with expertise in this area to resolve.
It may also be that Mr. Obama did not want this information vetted before the election, which now that you mention it actually raises a question of voter fraud as Obama is an attorney and may have purposely hid this information until after the election. But we can save that for another day perhaps.
Posted by: John Adams | November 19, 2008 7:50 PM
SLC I want to complement you on your command of the English language. Thanks also for providing a cite to a prime example of why this situation exists. That article misstates facts. The State of Hawaii has confirmed that they are holding and will not produce the original vault version of Obama's birth certificate. This article is a prime example of the press wanting to give Obama a pass on everything. The DNC did more digging into Joe the Plumber's background then they have done with Obama.
The article states, for example, "Under Hawai'i's privacy laws, the state is not allowed to release birth information of this kind to just anyone. It does make copies available to people with a legitimate interest and has done so for Obama, who has made the document public." That is a gross misstatement as the State of Hawaii has announced that it has the original vault version but cannot issue it without Obama's permission. Obama has only produced the short form version and that is what this is all about. But from this article you would never be able to tell that. This article then goes on to wax eloquent on theories why Obama has to be a "natural born citizen". Again, sorry produce the records and let the experts decide.
As to the newspaper ads. I said previously that in 1961 a family could bring in a birth certificate from another country and register their child and get an Hawaiian birth certificate. The hospital would send the list of all birth certificates to the Health Department that would then publish the announcements. So again, the only mystery here is why hasn't Mr. Obama produced the original vault version of the birth certificate?
It should also be pointed out that Mr. Obama's sister had her birth recorded in just that fashion, so the family was familiar with the drill.
Anyway, as I have said before this issue is now going to be answered by one of the Court cases. And I agree it is not a done deal that the Supreme Court will take up the case. I think it should as there is an eminent Constitutional crisis, but that is my opinion.
The Keyes case is going to get the answers on this if the Supreme Court does not take it up. Keyes was on the ballot in California and does not suffer the lack of standing issue that all of the other cases were dismissed on. While you are at it Google Gary Kreep (yes a great name for an attorney) who is one of the attorneys representing Keyes. Mr. Kreep is a very capable attorney and he will get a resolution in this.
Posted by: John Adams | November 19, 2008 8:12 PM
"So you are right. This may all be a bunch of crap for nothing. But it is a Constitutional standard that has applied to every President since George Washington."
No, it is a requirement that when registering as a candidate, a candidate attest that they are natural born citizen and supply evidence acceptable to the several electoral authorities in the several states to support that claim.
Obama has done so.
Tell me, did George W Bush publish his long form birth certificate? Can you provide a link to an on-line copy of it?
How about the 42 previous Presidents?
This is not about Obama failing to comply with the standards required of previous Presidents this is about inventing a new and higher standard for him in order to attempt to disqualify him.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 8:23 PM
JA -
There is only a crisis in your paranoid little mind. You act as though this is a serious issue - rest assured that it isn't. Several paranoid loons, some of whom have filed in court, a case doth not make. I'm sorry, but a very, very few folks actually give a shit about this.
Show me the evidence that what you assert is true. Show me the evidence that the parties who actually certify anything, are being given a line of bullshit. Show me the evidence that Obama is hiding anything from the actual people who will certify this election. Until you can, until you can prove that something nefarious is going on, you don't have a leg to stand on.
If I were in Obama's shoes, I wouldn't bust out to meet the demands of a bunch of paranoid conspiracy theorists either. Ironically, I spent the evening last night, with a very dear friend who is just such a loon. He let me watch a video of an even worse loon, who was arguing that because Obama hadn't responded to the charges, he and the DNC were admitting guilt. I love John dearly, but he doesn't have any right to demand anything from the president elect, any more than I do. Besides which, I assume his major reasoning behind not producing what is being demanded, is that he is well aware that it will just move the goalposts.
Get a fucking life.
Posted by: DuWayne | November 19, 2008 8:25 PM
"John McCain was asked the same question. In response he immediately produced all of his records, including the long form version of his birth certificate and it was determined that he was a natural born citizen."
Proof please?
And for that matter, there is only a legal opinion stating that his Pananamian birth doesn't disqualify him as a NBC.
Presumably, given your concenr for constitutional niceties, if McCain had won you'd now be demanding that the Supreme court rule on that.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 8:41 PM
Actually, McLame provided a couple of different birth certificates. When it was pointed out that the first one said he was born in a hospital that wasn't built until 20 years later, he produced a new one that corrected that. In any case, the law that made the Canal Zone the same as the US wasn't passed until much later.
McCain was undoubtedly told the same thing I was in school, that to be president, it wasn't enough to be a natural-born citizen; you had to actually be born in the United States, which Mr. Obama demonstrably was and Mr. McCain demonstrably was not. (When did they change this requirement, by the way, or was it always baloney?)
Posted by: Lurkbot | November 19, 2008 8:46 PM
"As to the newspaper ads. I said previously that in 1961 a family could bring in a birth certificate from another country and register their child and get an Hawaiian birth certificate."
and of course they lied about his place of birth in the advertisement and on the short form birth certificate because their commie, race-mixing conspiracy to put a Muslim terrorist in the White House was already under way back in 1961.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 8:49 PM
John Adams: I said previously that in 1961 a family could bring in a birth certificate from another country and register their child and get an Hawaiian birth certificate.
Let me put this in the venacular that you might understand. Dude, the birth certificate that has been produced gives Obama's place of birth as Honolulu. Obama's particular birth certificate wasn't issued to him based on birth records from Kenya, otherwise it wouldn't have listed his place of birth as Honolulu.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 19, 2008 8:51 PM
P.S. I wonder how many of these wackaloons think that if Obama is disqualified, then McCain will become President by default?
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 19, 2008 8:53 PM
"Anyway, as I have said before this issue is now going to be answered by one of the Court cases."
No, the Supreme Court is highly likely to decline to hear the appeals, which is good news for you of course since it means yo ucan continue to slander Obama for the 4-8 years.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 8:54 PM
The "short form" birth certificate is a real birth certificate, and valid as legal proof of his place of birth.
The only ones who seem to have a problem with that are a handful of whackjobs who got their legal education at the Imperial Klan University of West Nutlick, GA.
Oh really? When exactly, did George W. Bush produce a "vault copy" of his "long form birth certificate", either for the public or for the Supreme Court?
You seem to have missed the part about Hawaiian officials having reviewed the records, and deeming him a "natural born citizen."
Actually, what's going to happen is the Supreme Court is going to deny cert. Obama is not even compelled to respond at all to Berg's or anyone else's Petition for Writ of Certoriari.
Liar.
Idiot. The specific question was "where was he born", and the answer, found on the "short form" certificate, is "Honolulu". Whether he was born in a hospital, home, or taxi, and whether he was delivered by Dr. Feelgood or Dr. Frankenstein, has absolutely no bearing on his citizenship.
Well, given that Mr. Obama was a professor of constitutional law, whereas you are some random internet nutbar with obviously no legal knowledge, I feel much more confident in their appraisal of that standard than I do of yours.
I'm shocked, let me tell you. Shocked.
That says their child was born in Honolulu? Rubbish.
Posted by: DaveL | November 19, 2008 9:20 PM
writ of certiorari
All this is is a request on the part of the superior court to receive the transcript of the lower court's proceedings. If the SCOTUS does not issue the writ before Dec. 1 the appeal is essentially dismissed. The fanatical partisans hoping for some judicial relief of their stunning defeat by the electorate seem to overlook this simple fact. This could be due to wishful thinking but I think it is due to utter blindness to reality.
What is truly impressive is the degree to which the faction that claims this so called issue has some traction has departed from reality. Well, actually, I suppose it is possible that they never had a casual acquaintence with it before now so maybe departed is inappropriate.
What is truly amazing to the rest of the world is that the the plurality for Obama was not 80%. The only possible conclusions that can be drawn from the statistics of this election are that some combination of sub-classes of the US population are either 1) racists or 2) morons. Together, they, along with the 24% or so utterly and hopelessly deluded religiots make up almost half of the voting public.
It is one thing to be poorly educated. Many countries in the world have a large percentage of illiterates with virtually no education. But almost all of those same uneducated people have enough native good sense to be able to discriminate between a huckster politician, and a statesman.
Such "debate" as has been offered up here is exemplary of the sad condition into which the US has fallen.
One last point, if the conspiracy freaks here had argued thusly against the Bush administration, the consequences of doing so would have been quite serious.
Contemplate that for a moment.
Zai jian,
Posted by: Krubozumo Nyankoye | November 19, 2008 9:56 PM
...But until Obama signs the release and pays the $12.00, or a court of law drags Obama and his legal team into court and forces them to produce the records all we can do is speculate.
Ever heard of these things called "subpoenas?" IF there's enough probable cause, one of those things can be issued to force the hospital to provide Obama's "long-form" birth certificate, without having to wait for Obama to cooperate. Of course, you'd need probable cause, or at least reasonable suspicion, to get a subpoena issued; which brings us to this question -- if no subpoena has been issued, doesn't that imply that no one could find enough probable cause to doubt the records that have already been provided?
I hope race does not enter into this.
It already has -- do you really think a white guy of European lineage would face these empty insinuations from people who think he's in bed with terrorists?
Posted by: Raging Bee | November 19, 2008 10:05 PM
Dead wrong.
You keep ignoring the bit of info that renders all your blathering moot. Mother. Citizen. That makes Barrack a citizen. END OF STORY.
Press won't dig into something that will make no difference how it turns out.
Son, you're just being an idiot.
Unfortunately for you, we ENJOY playing with idiots around here.
Posted by: gwangung | November 19, 2008 10:06 PM
Liar.
You are a racist because you have not demanded the same thing of John McCain.
Posted by: gwangung | November 19, 2008 10:08 PM
John Adams wrote: I am not an expert in this area.
Or any other area you ramble on about.
John McCain was asked the same question. In response he immediately produced all of his records, including the long form version of his birth certificate...
No, he didn't. He produced some spurious document which referenced, as someone pointed out, a hospital that didn't exist at the time, then replaced it with this, which, as you can see, shows he was born in Colon, Panama, not on a military base at all. But, guess what, it doesn't matter . Both his parents were American citizens, which makes him a natural born citizen. Or, do you think that the tens of thousands of children born to military people around the world can't run for president?
Posted by: tomh | November 19, 2008 10:11 PM
Raging Bee, the birth certificate you describe is what, at least in Hawaii, is known as the "long form." The "short form" omits things like your mum's fingerprints, your birthweight, and your footprints, and just states the facts: that you were born in such and such a place on such and such a date.
Okay -- but once the long form is made, why make a short form? So it can fit on a 3-by-5 card? Seems a pointless duplication of effort, if the long form is just one page.
Posted by: Raging Bee | November 19, 2008 10:15 PM
Bee -
Okay -- but once the long form is made, why make a short form?
Probably because it makes it easier to put it onto a computer - especially early computers. There is nothing to scan, if they omit the foot and fingerprints. Nowadays, they just put the prints on a separate card, that is filed with the official birth certificate. But several years ago (how long depends on location - I'm 33 and my prints aren't on my actual birth certificate) all of that went onto the actual birth certificate.
Posted by: DuWayne | November 19, 2008 10:28 PM
The long from contains the full medical details.
The short form is less complete and is designed to be copied and use to document one's identity - like for example if one were running for President.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 19, 2008 11:07 PM
Just to summarize for those who have difficulty reading,
a) Obama's mother is a US citizen thus her son is too (no matter where he was born)
b) Obama born on US soil (HI) thus he is a US citizen
c) Even if b) is false, a) is true, thus he is a US citizen
d) Short form of birth certificate has always been sufficent to prove citizenship*
e) Birth announcement is further evidence of HI birth
f) HI authorities have confirmed details of birth
g) Relavent Federal authorities have confirmed details of Obama's birth
h) the burden of proof IS ON YOU, unless you can PROVE IT no amount of speculation changes anything
i) YOUR CANDIDATE LOST, GET OVER IT
j) IF (and such a probability is SO LOW as to be non-existant) Obama IS NOT a US citizen - all hail President BIDEN (at least, in your eyes, he's WHITE). -DJ
*None of the other [white] candidates has been set this high a level of burden of proof,
wonder what would raise the bar now? Hmmm, let me think....
Posted by: DIngoJack | November 20, 2008 12:40 AM
So Alan Keyes is filing a suit in California. Some of you may not know that Keyes was Obama's opponent in the Senate election in 2004. Which, of course, Keyes lost. Perhaps Keyes is holding a grudge.
Posted by: Blue Nine | November 20, 2008 2:37 AM
John Adams
Yes, you said this previously. At least twice. And at least twice I have asked you to support that assertion with evidence.Please understand that with just your word to go on, we have no reason to believe you. None of us have heard this claim elsewhere, and certainly not from a reputable source. Prove your claim or quit making it.
Posted by: James Hanley | November 20, 2008 8:00 AM
Tommy G's assertion: "About Obama being a citizen because his mother is a citizen: the complaint and assertion is that she gave birth to Barack while in Kenya, thus making Barack NOT a citizen."
Sorry Tommy, but being born outside the US doesn't matter as long your mom or mom's husband is a US citizen. My niece's children, born to her in London, are "natural-born US citizens" (although they are at the moment citizens of the UK, France, and the USA because daddy is a French citizen) and were issued US passports when they were just weeks old.
They have three separate birth documents: the UK cert of live birth (the "real" birth certificate, and the USA and French consular "record of birth abroad" or whatever it is called that you get by showing up at the consulate with the CLB, the parents, and the parent's proof of citizenship.
Posted by: Tsu Dho Nimh | November 20, 2008 9:56 AM
Well I will give it to Obama he is a great poker player. Once he is deemed ineligible he may be able to join the poker circuit because other work is going to be hard to come by. For all of you here is the complaint that has been filed in Sacramento Superior Court. You can go to the court website and enter Alan Keyes and it will show you it has been filed. What this means in simple terms is that Alan Keyes has called Obama's bluff. Obama either produces the evidence to support that he is a "natural born citizen" as required under the Constitution or he does not get the 55 California Electoral votes. Under Federal law and the Sister State Judgement Act what that also means is that all of Obama's electoral votes will start falling like a line of dominoes.
Gary Kreep is a very fine and competent attorney. Google him. This lawsuit will not be dismissed on the technical lack of standing grounds Obama was able to dodge with in the other 17 cases so far. If he does not produce the evidence he is out in California, and then each other State will follow. So for those of you that have requested chapter and verse on the law Mr. Kreep has presented it for you in clear and consise terms.
It should also be noted that for those of you like Mr. Hanley above, this suit correctly places the burden squarely on Mr. Obama, if that is his name, to stand and deliver the documents. For example, produce the passport that he used to go to Pakistan in 1981 when US Citizens could not enter there. It will likely be an Indonesian passport, and the same is likely to show up as his citizenship on his college applications. Wonder why no mainstream media or news has asked about this in the past?
Well, here for your reading enjoyment is the lawsuit. God Bless America and one thing that I think we can all celebrate is that in this Great Country candidates to the highest office can be called to stand before the people and answer the hard questions, which to date Obama has refused to do:
http://missionviejo.files.wordpress.com/2008/11/keyes-v-obama.pdf
And for any of you that want to compare the McCain situation with this you need to go back to school or whatever country you came from. Do some research on the McCain family. Do you know who his father was? Do you know why they were out of the Country during the birth of John McCain? Do you know who his grandfather was? Do you know that the McCain family's service to this Country goes back to the Revolutionary War? So you want to compare the situation of John McCain to Obama. On the one hand you have the McCain family with an illustrious history of service to our Country, that is sent over seas in the Military to serve their Country and they have a child. On the other it appears you have someone that was trying to manipulate the laws and register their children under potentially false pretenses, but as we have not seen any documentation what really occurred has yet to be determined. So if you want to delude yourselves on that point proceed.
Bottom line is that Obama is not going to be able to avoid this anymore. The American press should be ashamed to have assisted in this cover-up. At what point are they going to start covering this fully. Maybe at the Electoral College they will say the California electoral delegation called in sick today.
The Keyes case is a Writ of Mandate and it will move very quickly through the Court. Keep some popcorn handy as this is going to be interesting.
Posted by: John Adams | November 20, 2008 10:08 AM
John Adams: This lawsuit will not be dismissed on the technical lack of standing grounds Obama was able to dodge with in the other 17 cases so far.
Probably not. It will be dismissed on the grounds that Obama has been determined to be eligible for President through reasonable criteria and there is no reason for the Court to waste its time on an obvious nuisance suit.
-
Keep some popcorn handy as this is going to be interesting.
By all means, keep us informed about how things are progressing during the next 8 years.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 20, 2008 10:16 AM
Hey John Adams, speaking of answering hard questions, why is it you haven't provided any evidence for your assertion that "...in 1961 a family could bring in a birth certificate from another country and register their child and get an Hawaiian birth certificate."? You've been asked repeatedly and are ignoring it.
But do keep us posted over the next 4-8 years. I'm sure your arguments will only get more entertaining and more convoluted over time.
Posted by: Dave S. | November 20, 2008 10:22 AM
John Adams' assertion: "produce the passport that he used to go to Pakistan in 1981 when US Citizens could not enter there."
UH ... they couldn't? First prove that assertion, then we can worry about the passport.
Posted by: Tsu Dho Nimh | November 20, 2008 10:23 AM
Mr "Adams" - read my earlier post (or get a friend to read it to you, if reading is difficult for you), it will help to explain (briefly) why these whole 'controversy' is bogus. An additional point that I neglected to add in the post @12:40 am 20 November was h) Just because some whack-job files a suit is NOT PROOF is has ANY merit, nor that it will succeed. Again I'll state, IF YOU HAVE PROOF, SHOW IT OR STFU - DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | November 20, 2008 10:27 AM
Are you really questioning his name? I mean, he has the most unfortunate middle name ever for a President, and his last name is the frequent butt of jokes for the Obama/Osama link ...but you somehow think that he chose his name intentionally?
Dude. Seriously. Shut up!
Mainstream Republicans like Bush, McCain, O'Reilly, Limbaugh and Palin all realize that the question of Obama's citizenship is not a legitimate issue. So when partisan hacks like Rush and Bill don't find the story credible enough to report, then you KNOW that you're fighting for a lost cause.
Only crackpots like Keyes (and you) seem to think that the sky is really pink, that up is down, and that there is even a 0.0001% chance that Obama isn't qualified based on citizenship to be President.
What an idiot you are. Thanks for the entertainment.
Posted by: doctorgoo | November 20, 2008 10:28 AM
IRAN, on the other hand, was barring US citizens, and we were in the "Iran hostage crisis" 79-81 because they had seized the US embassy.
Idiot troofers can't even keep their countries straight!
Posted by: Tsu Dho Nimh | November 20, 2008 10:30 AM
I literally LOLed at this. I mean wow, just wow. I think I know the wingnut's next line of criticism, "Ok fine, there *was* a Barak Obama born in Honolulu, but how do we know this man's name is really Barak Obama *and* that he's the same Barak Obama as in the certificate?"
Posted by: MyPetSlug | November 20, 2008 10:42 AM
So as I understand it, each US state sets its own laws relating to the running of the Presidential election - for example, the balloting systems; ballot access rules and rules for resolving ties all vary between states,
That being the case, I would assume that there is no single national standard for validating whether a candidate is eligible to run.
That being the case, how does the US Supreme Court even get a look-in? Presumably they're being asked to confirm that the applicable state Law as properly applied.
"John Admas" suggests Obamaa's name is fake.
Funny.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 20, 2008 11:07 AM
doctorgoo: Dude. Seriously. Shut up!
Don't listen to him, John Adams. I, for one, thoroughly enjoy your, um, uh, "thought-provoking" commentary.
I certainly look forward to you keeping us informed about the progress of these "lawsuits". I will definitely be checking in on 20 January, right after Obama is inaugurated, to see how the "lawsuits" are proceeding.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 20, 2008 11:12 AM
Once he is deemed ineligible? Just yesterday you were speculating desperately about taxicabs and secret Kenyan birth certificates, and now you're taking it as a given?
What this means, in simple terms, is that Alan Keyes has gone right off the deep end and will be lauged out of court. I've started reading the brief and it appears Keyes is trying to argue standing by claiming California's Electoral College members have a constitutional duty to examine each candidate's "Original vault copy long form" birth certificate. It's a tactic that's guaranteed to fail by virtue of the fact no such verification has ever been required before. Either every Elector in every election since the adoption of the constitution has been derelict in his duty or Keyes is full of shit. Guess which one the court will choose.
I don't think you understand how citizenship works on an international level. Every nation is entitled to its own laws regarding citizenship. Even if Indonesia considers Obama a citizen and agrees to issue him a passport, it does not obligate the United States Government to recognize that citizenship, and in fact it would not. Obama was born a U.S. citizen and cannot be stripped of such except under very specific conditions.
Let me give you different example: Under U.S. law, a Canadian who is naturalized to U.S. citizenship loses his Canadian citizenship. He or she is now a U.S. citizen and the U.S. government will not recognize the person's claim to any rights accorded to Canadian citizens, such as access to assistance from the Canadian consulate.
Canada, on the other hand, recognizes dual citizenship. In the eyes of the Canadian government, this same person now holds both U.S. and Canadian citizenship, may carry either passport and have it recognized, may have access to U.S. consular assistance, etc.
Obama's citizenship is not a hard question. He is an American citizen by birth. That wasn't so hard, now was it?
The hard part, it seems, lies in getting reactionary lunatics to accept an answer they don't like.
Is there even a fraction of a smidgen of evidence that this is the case?
Posted by: DaveL | November 20, 2008 11:13 AM
DaveL: Once he is deemed ineligible?
Good catch. Previously John Adams has been claiming that these are interesting questions and that we need to check them thoroughly, and that he will stand by the decision of the Court when it is made. Now it appears that he has given away his true stand: he has already decided that Obama simply is not a natural born US citizen, and that even if the case were heard by the Supreme Court and if they ruled in favor of Obama he would then refuse to accept the Court's decision.
As usual, this is part of the radical right's usual disinformation campaign: to disguise their predetermined conclusions as disinterested inquiry.
-
One question though:
Let me give you different example: Under U.S. law, a Canadian who is naturalized to U.S. citizenship loses his Canadian citizenship....Canada, on the other hand, recognizes dual citizenship. In the eyes of the Canadian government, this same person now holds both U.S. and Canadian citizenship....
Is this true? To become a naturalized US citizen, the applicant must formally renounce their previous citizenship, using whatever legal proceedings the other country has to do this if there is one. Does Canada not have a legal proceeding by which they will recognize when a Canadian citizen renounces their citizenship?
A colleague of mine recently became a US citizen. When she went to the consulate of her former nation to renounce her citizenship their, she was told that officially she was not longer a citizen of that country, but she was also assured that it was more a formality: any time she wanted to resume her citizenship they would grant it back to her. And I think that they still consider her enough of a citizen that she will have access to consulate services if she ever needs it, but I'm not sure about this last point.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 20, 2008 11:26 AM
By my informal understanding, those proceedings are of essentially no effect from the Canadian government's point of view. I think it works pretty much like in your friend's case- you can formally renounce it and the government will formally accept it, and then pretty much forget the whole thing ever happened.
Posted by: DaveL | November 20, 2008 11:39 AM
Re Dave L
It is my information that the US recognizes dual citizenship. A former colleague of mine had dual Syrian/US citizenship. It is my understanding that White House Chief of Staff designate, Rahm Emanuel has dual Israel/US citizenship.
Posted by: SLC | November 20, 2008 11:40 AM
In the eyes of the U.S. government of in the eyes of the Syrian/Israeli governments?
A person can be a citizen of two countries, neither of which recognizes dual citizenship, and really have de facto dual citizenship except insofar as consular privileges are concerned.
Posted by: DaveL | November 20, 2008 11:44 AM
As I type the Babylon 5 episode "The Deconstruction of Falling stars" is playing in the background.
Anyone familiar with the episode will understand why I fidn this apt.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 20, 2008 11:44 AM
I think people (and I use that term loosely) haven't mentioned blood, sperm, and other bodily fluids as well - I'm sure there is a way Rush Limbaugh can test these and make sure they are from an American.
The 'Tard is strong in this thread. I think some extra-thck tinfoil is needed, but not the kind that actually makes it easier to recieve radio signals.
re: the "shrine" in Kenya. You do know that there is a tomb of Jesus in Japan, don't you. Obviously, no one would make up a story about that, just like no one would make up a tale about Obama being born in Kenya (just think of the tourism possibilities). It must be true!
Besides, according to Caribou Barbie, it was her god's plan to elect Obama, and He must have known of the citizenship, and if it's not a problem for Yahweh (a foreign national, btw - uh oh!), why is it a matter for some of his deluded followers?
Posted by: Badger3k | November 20, 2008 11:50 AM
Indeed, I can't think of any current thread more ripe for a frank discussion on the purity of our precious bodily fluids.
Posted by: DaveL | November 20, 2008 12:14 PM
DaveL is totally right. Bring on Bat Guano as a character witness! -DJ
Posted by: DingoJack | November 20, 2008 12:19 PM
The US does indeed recognize dual citizenship - although the State Department did fight this for quite a while. The Supreme Court ruled in Afroyim v. Rusk (1968) that the citizenship clause in the 14th amendment guarantees that a US citizen may not have their citizenship stripped from them without their consent.
The wikipedia article on Afroyim v. Rusk has a pretty good background on this, or for more detail, there's a guy who maintains a really comprehensive FAQ on dual citizenship in the US here:
http://www.richw.org/dualcit/
Posted by: Alex | November 20, 2008 12:23 PM
I stand corrected. Excellent reference, Alex.
Posted by: DaveL | November 20, 2008 12:37 PM
Thank you, John Adams, for finally helping me understand why people are persisting in this folly. I had thought that it was desperate last-ditch legal maneuver from a beaten party, but now I see that it's pure xenophobia. After all these years of bleating about illegal aliens pouring into the country to pop out kids and fraudulently register them as citizens, the wingnuts think they've finally caught one! "See? See? We were right all along about the
GermansIrishItaliansJewsChineseKenyans!"It's such a rare thing to be present at the birth of a new conspiracy theory. I feel privileged.
Yours,
A grandchild of German and Irish immigrants
Posted by: Martian Buddy | November 20, 2008 12:45 PM
Yeah. Anyone who disagrees with the faulty logic of the people who consider Mr. Soetoro's COLB, with no vault birth certificate showing as validation, should be taken as gospel, followed by massive name-calling ("fucktards" .. your mommy should have taught you better manners..) are idiots and other less savory names, need to take a course in logic and go back to second grade to learn manners.
I don't care whether or not Barry Soetoro is eligible to be President. I don't like him, and his citizenship is definitely up for the question. McCain's was proven without incident. Why will President-elect Soetoro not do likewise? Similarly, I don't care that he hasn't released anything about his school activities. No biggie.
What he has told us very clearly, is that he is in favor of infanticide, which is definitely egregious. How anyone can elect a person who espouses the murder of babies, is beyond me.
But to the point of this author's errors in logic: Soetoro/Obama's own grandmother has testified quite publicly, that she was present at his birth in Mombasa, Kenya. Not Hawaii. Even though his mother was a US Citizen, there are rules of law that state that at her age when he was born, she cannot pass that citizenship on to her offspring of her own right.
So, Mr. Brayton, before you bray further, I suggest that you collect all the relevant facts. Your article is simply wrong. Familiarize yourself with the United States Constitution, and with the content of the lawsuits you so foolishly babble about, clearly without understanding.
Oh. And it is "backpedal".
Go to Google and set up an alert for yourself based on the search "obama citizenship lawsuit". It's how I got your intelligence-insulting bit of Swiss cheese argument. Along with the attack-dog Liberal "arguments" from those whose Mommies didn't soundly whip their little butts pink for using naughty words.
Bill Whedon
http://www.byebyebarack.wordpress.com
Posted by: Bill Whedon | November 20, 2008 12:47 PM
All of this is tangential to the real issue: what idiot came up with FIFA's international eligibility rules??
Manchester United midfielder Owen Hargreaves, Canadian through-and-through, could have played for England, Scotland, Northern Ireland, or Wales (due to his parents' citizenship), or even Germany (due to his years at FC Bayern Munich)! The traitor!
Toronto-born midfielder Jonathan de Guzman is in the Netherlands' U21 squad simply because he's been at Feyenoord since 2005! Thank God his brother, Julian, is loyal to his country.
(Let's forget for a minute that Canadian striker Tomasz Radzinski was born in Poland.)
Posted by: Adrian W. | November 20, 2008 12:50 PM
Wrong. Dead wrong.
"Fucktard" is a kind description.
Posted by: gwangung | November 20, 2008 12:51 PM
Bill,
That was a load of drooling stupid that you just posted. But, it at least was honest. You don't want to have Barack Obama as President, and will grasp at any straw you have to avoid it.
Generally, I reserve manners for people who have proven that they deserve it.
Posted by: BGT | November 20, 2008 12:55 PM
You, and John Adams (if you are different people) do realize that not liking him has absolutely nothing to do with his eligibility, don't you? You do realize that about 50% of the population was as unhappy about having Bush (twice) as you are of having Obama, don't you? It really doesn't matter what you want at this point, you had your vote and your were overruled. That's kind of the whole point of a Democracy, sometimes you get a guy you don't agree with, especially if your views don't happen to be in the majority. Accept it and move on with your life please.
Posted by: MyPetSlug | November 20, 2008 1:10 PM
First, I have never seen any Certificate of Live Birth for any Mr. Soetoro. I have seen one for a Barack Hussein Obama. I don't suppose you have any actual documentation, like a legal change of name, or fingerprints, or something that indicates we should consider these two people one and the same?
A COLB should not be taken as gospel. It should be taken as valid legal proof of citizenship by birth, which it most assuredly is under the law. That isn't faulty logic, that's the law of the United States.
Oh, she testified, did she? I don't suppose you have, you know, a trial transcript or an affidavit to support that claim?
Posted by: DaveL | November 20, 2008 1:10 PM
See my post @ 12:40am 20 Nov for the situation regarding citizenship.
As to your other "claims" EITHER PRODUCE HARD EVIDENCE OR STFU.
Your guy lost, big time, GET OVER IT -DJ
Posted by: DIngoJack | November 20, 2008 1:11 PM
Bill Whedon wrote: Even though his mother was a US Citizen, there are rules of law that state that at her age when he was born, she cannot pass that citizenship on to her offspring of her own right.
Liar. The rules for citizenship are spelled out up above on this thread. Try reading.
Posted by: tomh | November 20, 2008 1:16 PM
Bill Wheadon
It's called abortion. And it's legal here. What a turd.
Posted by: Mike | November 20, 2008 1:23 PM
Wow, this thread is the gift that keeps on giving! Two days in, and the same indignant xenophobes are still sputtering the same patchwork conspiracy theories, still refusing to provide any evidence for their claims, and still ignoring any evidence they don't want to hear. Please continue!
Posted by: WScott | November 20, 2008 1:39 PM
I also love that the same people who used Obama's full name as a slur during the campaign now want us to believe that's not really his name. If you'll excuse me, I'm off to eBay to shop for a new irony meter!
Posted by: WScott | November 20, 2008 1:42 PM
Bill Whedon: I don't care whether or not Barry Soetoro is eligible to be President. I don't like him...
And this is really the whole issue, isn't it? None of you wackaloons really cares whether or not Obama is eligible for President, do you? You're really just desperately trying to find anything, anything at all, that might, just might work to discredit him. And, if all else fails, maybe you can create enough of a distraction that maybe you can prevent the President chosen by the majority of the people from being able to govern.
-
...and his citizenship is definitely up for the question.
And is this because an official birth certificate clearly stating that Obama was born in the United States is not sufficient proof as long as you don't like the guy?
But I do grudgingly respect your honesty in this matter. It is a bit tiring listing to John Adams and -- who else was it? These wackaloons are running together in my memory -- pretend that they are making a disinterested attempt to ensure that the proper laws are being obeyed when in reality you all just don't like Obama.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 20, 2008 1:44 PM
One part of Mssr. Adams' last screed that hasn't yet been fisked:
Even if you truly in your heart of hearts believe the bulk of the media is incurably liberal, please explain why you think Fox News, Rush Limbaugh, and even Matt Drudge are assisting in this huge cover up? For that matter, why didn't they make an issue of it before the election, when it might've helped their candidate win?
Posted by: WScott | November 20, 2008 1:47 PM
WScott: I've long suspected that Billy-O, et al., are just puppets of the Fascist Liberal Zionist media conspiracy to make the Right look ridiculous.
Will the wackaloons in this thread kindly move to a newer one once it drops off the front page? I like to do a minimal amount of clicking to get to my compile-time entertainment.
Posted by: Adrian W. | November 20, 2008 2:00 PM
Wow. Now we get "Bill Whedon" wading in, dragging his knuckles and everything!! Good show!!
Just imagine, these tards tied to their chairs, forced to live in a country ruled by liberals. Now you know how folks like me have felt for the last 8 horrifying years.
I think they should start a webcam site- "View my frothing, foaming rage! $3.95 a minute!!"
I'd pay real money to see that. You turds are GIVING it away.
Posted by: Rick R | November 20, 2008 4:32 PM
John Adams,
So, John, will you accept my wager, outlined above? If the Supreme Court rules at any time in the next 4 years that Obama is not a U.S. citizen, I will give $100 to your favorite charity. If the Supreme Court does not so rule in the next 4 years, you will give a mere $10 to my charity.You sound so certain--"When he is deemed ineligible--that surely you're willing to take this bet, right?
I'm serious about this. $100 to your charity, or a mere $10 to mine. Are you confident enough to risk a mere $10 at some point in the next 4 years?
James Hanley
jhanley@adrian.edu
Posted by: James Hanley | November 20, 2008 4:39 PM
I think all of this may be moot. Hillary Clinton is being vetted for SecState, which means that the nefarious BillyJeff Clinton will soon be calling the shots over at State AND operating the hand up the Obama puppet.
If nothing else the whackadildos (es?) are consistent in their fuckedupness.
James Hanley:
Dude, tell THOSE motherfuckers to put their guns in their mouths after election day (well, at least as soon as all of the recounts are done). I mean, JEEZUS EFFIN CHRIST, they make me look totally rational!!
Posted by: democommie | November 20, 2008 5:01 PM
"Yeah. Anyone who disagrees with the faulty logic of the people who consider Mr. Soetoro's COLB, with no vault birth certificate showing as validation, should be taken as gospel, followed by massive name-calling ("fucktards" .. your mommy should have taught you better manners..) are idiots and other less savory names, need to take a course in logic and go back to second grade to learn manners."
So explain to us LOGICALLY why Obama should be obliged to provide his COLB when other candidates aren't.
Then explain to us why the certification of Obama as a candidate by6 the relevant state authorities should be overturned.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 20, 2008 6:46 PM
A couple of peripheral issues:
1. Obama's grandmother apparently doesn't speak English. Her "testimony" consists of a US radio host asking questions in English to a Kenyan man who repeats them to the grandmother in her native language. The lady is obviously very old and unwell and the Kenyan man' English is pretty poor.
But given their passion for getting to the facts, I'm sure John Adams and Mr Whedon relied upon their impeccable Swahili (or was it Luo?) language skills.
2. Indonesian attitudes to names are difficult for westerners to understand. Indonesia's first President, commonly known in the west as Sukarno, used about a dozen different names in the course of his life, he never bothered to change his name legally. Westerners found it confusing that he only had one name so he added Achmed for their convenience,
Gus Dur, President of Indonesia in the 1990's is also known Abdurrahman Wahid.
"Tommy Suharto", son of the dictator Suharto is also variously known as Hutomo Mandala Putra; Bambang and several other names.
These are not exceptional examples, Indonesians will typically change their name several times over the course of their life and typically do so without taking any legal steps to do so.
So the claim that Barack Obama's step-father allegedly registered him in school as Barry Soetaro, even if true, has no real probative value regarding his legal name or citizenship.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 20, 2008 7:09 PM
Yesterday, for illustrative purposes, Raging Bee introduced the following scenario, noting in particular the bolding of its initial word:
"If a starship enters Earth orbit from the Galactic Center and her commander produces a birth certificate saying Obama was born on a planet whose name can't be pronounced by humans, that is going to raise questions that will need to be asked of Obama as to why he would lie about that."
I entirely agree with this, but I would also like to point out that, in the event that this (purely hypothetical) scenario becomes actual, there would in fact be further questions which were raised by it, and indeed, those questions (e.g. "ZOMGWTF?!?!" is the one I myself would raise, or, possibly, "Where's Bill Pullman when you need him?") would, in such a case, seem much more pressing at the time than the one Mr. Bee actually mentions.
Posted by: Dave M | November 20, 2008 7:10 PM
I'm sorry... but can we go back to the taxicab for a moment?
Wtf? Why?!
Why would something so stupid even present itself as a thought in the brain of an otherwise apparently functional person?
I know I should not be surprised that people say dumb things, we all do it. But Jesus H Jumping Christ, it's just so damn weird that I can't figure out which field this one even came out of.
Bill Whedon (whom I seriously hope is in no way related to Joss) wrote:
I would imagine the fact that a majority of Americans support legalized abortion is also "beyond" you.
Posted by: Leni | November 20, 2008 7:34 PM
Actually, the "murder of babies" line cuts to the quick, the religious right are simply unwilling to accept the legitimacy of any President who isn't one of them.
The nonsense they'll manufacture to support that claim (remember the "Friends of Bill" email?) may vary but the bottom line is when the say "America is a Christian country" what they mean is only Christians (their sort of Christians naturally) should allowed to vote of hold public office.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 20, 2008 8:02 PM
Leni -
(whom I seriously hope is in no way related to Joss)
You are such a fucking dork, I cannot help but love you.
Posted by: DuWayne | November 20, 2008 8:49 PM
Oh DuWayne, you don't even know the half of it :)
Posted by: Leni | November 20, 2008 9:06 PM
While we're raising the bar in terms of paperwork required from presidential candidates, I have an idea....
We had a guy here in Washington in the 60s and 70s named Something Patrick--I can't remember his first name--who ran for some office in every election that came along, SoS one time, Lt. Gov. the next, Land Comm. maybe, I don't remember exactly. People accused him of being crazy, so he had a psychological evaluation done, and after that, he would wave around this paper certifying him "Not Insane" and challenge his opponents in the primary to do the same.
They never did, so he advertised himself as the only candidate from either party "Certified Not Insane." Maybe we should institute something like that in the Presidential election? I would particularly like to know how McCain (or Reagan for that matter) would have fared under such a requirement....
Posted by: Lurkbot | November 20, 2008 10:12 PM
People,
Originally, the long form was the only form. It gave the father's name. If the woman was unmarried, the father would be marked "unknown." Every time the person produced their birth certificate, the person who demanded it would know that they were a bastard. Bastards were not fit for polite company or good jobs.
Some lefty liberal social activists eventually got the government to agree to hinder the discrimination by issuing a short form which gave name, date, and place of birth. Thus illegitimate children could produce a birth certificate which would prove their citizenship but wouldn't ruin their chances.
Of course we know that President-elect Obama's parents were married.
Posted by: Monado | November 21, 2008 1:48 AM
[sarcasm]Do we? Have we seen the long form of the marriage certificate? If it exists, are there any suspicious markings or colorations on it? How do we know it's genuine? Can we find someone at a gas station in Pawtuxet who will claim he overheard his parents talking in 1960 about faking a marriage? As long as such a person may exist, we can't assume they were married.[/sarcasm]
Posted by: Dave S. | November 21, 2008 8:01 AM
Democommie,
You're right. I did ask them to stick bacteria-laden forks in their own eyes, but that probably doesn't go far enough.
So John Adams, if you're not man enough to accept my bet, please stick a fucking gun in your mouth and pull the trigger. Bonus points if it's loaded.
Posted by: James Hanley | November 21, 2008 8:14 AM
Mr. Hanlye:
Now I feel validated. BTW, where on earth were these crazyfucks roosting (upside down) before the election?
Posted by: democommie | November 21, 2008 8:44 AM
Democommie asks the rhetorical question:
Early in the campaign season they were focusing on tinfoil conspiracy notions regarding John McCain, e.g., arguing he was not a natural born citizen, or they were working on attacking the Democratic brand by blaming six - eight years of failed GOP/Bush economic policies on Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, or certain Democratic minority members of congressional committees. They were laying-off their 1990s target, Hilary Clinton, and instead praying she'd win the Democratic nomination so they could resume their accusations of her drug dealing, murders, and being a lesbian pedophile.
After it became clear early this summer that they couldn't stop McCain and Obama was THE ONE; they then started really focusing on Obama. The last good one I heard right before the election was that Obama's family in Kenya was successful in placing a "witch curse" on both McCain and Palin who urgently needed our prayers.
I'm wondering if this thread and related one attracted the crazies by Ed waking up Freepers in an unrelated post. They appear to have the same style: hiding their partisanship, convinced their arguments are reasonable and logical, and assuming their concerns are being heard and considered by those in political power or in the media when those groups and thinking people general acknowledge their bat-shit craziness.
Democommie - you know me. I used a pseudonym here given whom we're discussing, where you said it best, "some crazy motherfuckers". Hint - you sent me an email a couple of months ago suggesting I subscribe to a certain trade magazine and post a URL in my comment posts so people could see I'm not a Christianist gay-hater who shares my name.
Posted by: Anonymous | November 21, 2008 9:15 AM
Democommie,
I did hear this stuff earlier in the year, about 6 months ago. I just couldn't believe that people could take it so seriously.
What really still stuns me is the repetition that his certificate of live birth in Hawaii is not satisfactory evidence of having been born in Hawaii.
Posted by: James Hanley | November 21, 2008 11:01 AM
It is sad that people cannot discuss these topics without calling each other nasty names and trying to make this personal. I have tried to keep my comments civil. The simple point here is that the Certificate of Live Birth does not answer the question of whether Obama is a "Natural Born Citizen" as defined under the Constitution. The original "Birth Certificate", which can only be release by Obama signing a release and paying $12.00, remains sealed by the State of Hawaii.
It should not be too much to ask that Obama produce a copy of his original "Birth Certificate" to end this. The fact that he refuses to do so and has had all of his records sealed should trouble all citizens.
If this question is not answered before Obama takes the Oath of Office there will be a large segment of the population that will never accept him as the legitimate President. All of this over a $12.00 birth certificate that he refuses to produce.
So yes, until Obama or some formal government agency steps forward and says that they have reviewed the records and Obama is deemed a "natural born citizen" I will consider Obama ineligible as no proof has been presented to the contrary.
At some point someone will get information on what Obama has been trying to hide. There can be no other conclusion that he is trying to hide something because that is what his actions say.
So there are two cases now pending before the Supreme Court. One has a hearing on Dec.1 and the other has a Conference of the Justices on Dec. 5 to discuss this case and decide if they will take it up. I hope they do and review the records and make a ruling on this issue so that we can all move forward. If there is something embarrassing in Obama's records then produce the records to the Court in private and let the Supreme Court rule on the issue and then seal the records. I and every reasonable minded person in the Country would accept that.
I recommend that you go to the Sacramento Superior Court website and follow the steps to bring up the Writ of Mandate filed by Keyes against Obama, Biden, the California Secretary of State and the 55 California Democratic Electors. This lawsuit does not have the lack of standing issue that the other lawsuits have been dismissed under. This lawsuit also places the burden on Deborah Bowen to vet or qualify Obama or she cannot certify the 55 Democratic Electors. If Obama does not show up and does not finally answer this question he risks losing the 55 California electors. Once declared ineligible in California other States will have to follow.
Again, if you want to understand the legal arguments I highly recommend that you pull up the Writ of Mandate filed in Sacramento Superior Court by Keyes. It lays out the issues clearly and cites the law. Keyes attorney Gary Kreep is a very fine attorney and competent in this area of the law. The Keyes case for the first time presents a legal challenge that cannot be simply dismissed on the technical defense of lack of standing. As Keyes was on the ballot in California he has damages and can circumvent that defense.
If Obama sends in the same three law firms to fight the these cases instead of showing up in Court and providing the documentation it should raise serious questions about what are in those records. I continue to ask why would Obama and the DNC spend hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting these lawsuits, rather than spend $12.00 and produce the original birth certificate?
Posted by: John Adams | November 22, 2008 2:30 PM
No matter how simple your point may be, the fact remains that it is flat-out wrong. The long-form birth certificate does not contain any additional information that would be relevant to Obama's citizenship.
How many other presidents have you said this for? I would guess zero. That's because you're a hypocrite and probably a racist. Don't expect that to earn you a lot of respect here.
I've read Keyes' lawsuit, and it's laughable. He tries to make the argument that every member of the Electoral college has the duty to examine every candidate's "vault copy, long form" birth certificate, which is ludicrous because, as far as I know, it's never been done before.
Obama's disinterest in these cases does not reflect badly on him. No sane person has any good faith reason to question his citizenship or eligibility. There's no burden or expectation for him to play the games of lunatics.
Posted by: DaveL | November 22, 2008 3:15 PM
Sorry DaveL: The difference between a COLB and an actual Birth Certificate is the heart of this issue. On the original vault version of the birth certificate there is much more information. Such as the name of the hospital, the names of the doctors, etc. You can compare here:
http://www.gopmom.com/2008/10/compare-1961-and-1963-hawaiian-birth-certificate/
There are many sites that will show the difference between the two. The importance is that the original birth certificate will say what hospital, the names of the doctors. The COLB produced by Obama does not. Look at the difference between the two and you will see the differences. That is the whole part of the argument. A short form COLB like Obama has produced is just that, a short form summary of basic information. The information that would show if Obama was actually born in Hawaii will only show up on the original vault birth certificate still under lock and key by the State of Hawaii.
I also disagree with your take on the Keyes lawsuit. It asks that Deborah Bowen vet Obama. The 55 electors have been named so that any decision of the court is binding on them. The burden is on Bowen, if she cannot make the determination that Obama meets the "natural born" standard she cannot certify the electors. So if Obama or the DNC does not provide more than the COLB then it will be interesting.
Posted by: John Adams | November 22, 2008 3:28 PM
You claim that you're part of a "large segment of the population", but really you are just one of a very few number of sore losers who are reaching for any bit of hope to avoid the reality of the future Obama Presidency.
McCain does not support your side. Palin doesn't support your side. Bush doesn't either. Neither does the National GOP or any state Republican party. Nobody. ...just people who, for reasons external to this alleged "controversy", were already considered cranks and crackpots.
I'm sorry if you feel like we're being mean and rude and condencending towards you. But you aren't taking a rational position and therefore are quite deserving of all the claims of lunacy and idiocy that we've been calling you.
Posted by: doctorgoo | November 22, 2008 3:39 PM
Again, I do not know any of you and to accuse people of being racist or retarded only indicates that you cannot have an adult discussion of issues. So, I am rubber and you are glue, blah blah.
So, IF (and I am not saying he was only that we do not know)the vault version of Obama's birth certificate confirms that he was born in Kenya then it will raise questions about whether he meets the natural born standard. IF the vault version says anything other than Obama has clearly stated on the records that he was born in a hospital in Hawaii, then there will be additional inquiry and records required to confirm if he meets the standard. But that initial information will only be on the original vault version and not the short form COLB. AGAIN, I am not saying he was or was not born in Kenya. Only that the answer to this question is on the vault version which Obama continues to refuse pay $12.00 and produce. That is what is fueling this debate. We all know it exists and until it is aired in the light of day this speculation will not end. Why not just produce it and end this?
This should have been done before the election. To leave this unanswered until now President elect Obama is filled with dangerous possibilities and mischief.
Let me ask all of you this. If Obama is found by a legitimate court of law to not be eligible for the office as he is not a "natural born citizen", I assume that you will all applaud the working of our democratic process and watch as Obama quietly folds his tent and goes home. Unfortunately as indicated by the rabid and vitreolic posts on this site people will start saying it is racist, Obama should be given a free pass, we should amend the Constitution, etc. If Obama had wanted any of that he should have produced the records before the election. None of that will fly now that the election has passed.
If obama is found ineligible it will likely be Hillary and Biden in Office, which may be one of the reasons Clinton personnel are filling many of the government slots.
Posted by: John Adams | November 22, 2008 3:56 PM
JA -
Please explain what large segment of the population you are talking about. Please explain why the GOP and those who ran against Obama, aren't supporting this effort. Please explain why it is only Obama that you would demand show this extra "proof" above and beyond that demanded of any other president or presidential contender.
If you want to be taken seriously and want people to stop calling you the fucking moron, we all think you are, all you have to do is actually respond to what people are saying. Though it would also help if you were to produce actual evidence to support your assertion that Obama isn't a natural born citizen. If all you're going to do is repeatedly spout the same stupid bullshit, over and over, instead of providing substantive responses, then people are going to continue to think you're a fucking moron and continue calling you that. Put up, or shut up - the same old bullshit is getting boring.
Posted by: DuWayne | November 22, 2008 4:06 PM
Obama has already shown enough proper evidence to support his presidential eligibility. The fact that you, and a few others, insist on seeing further proof is nothing more than a witchhunt. Any reasonable objective observer, regardless of political persuasion, can see this quite plainly.
Nobody considers this to be anything more than a farcical witchhunt. So why bother to cave in to this whim of a few cranks? Obama could spend all his time disproving every crackpot theory out there, but I'd rather see him spend his time wisely, getting his cabinet ready for mid-January when the crunch time really starts.
Really, JA, it's time for you to admit that Obama will be the next President. You are losing your grip on reality with your wacky theories.
Posted by: doctorgoo | November 22, 2008 4:32 PM
"So yes, until Obama or some formal government agency steps forward and says that they have reviewed the records and Obama is deemed a "natural born citizen" I will consider Obama ineligible as no proof has been presented to the contrary."
This is exactly what the Hawaii Governor and Attorney General have done.
I look forward to hearing from you why their statements don;t satisfy your demands just as I look forward to hearing why the refusal to hear the case by the Supreme Court in a week's tiem will also not resolve the matter.
If and when the original long form birth certificate is released I look forward to your lengthy exigesis on why its a fake or how the dropped lower case "l" in Honolulu disqualifies Obama from the Presidency.
"If obama is found ineligible it will likely be Hillary and Biden in Office, which may be one of the reasons Clinton personnel are filling many of the government slots."
Your political naivete remains extraordinary. If Biden assumes the Presidency he gets to nominate the new Vice-President. As a weak President with no popular mandate there's no way in hel;l he's going to appoint a VP who's more popular and influential than he is.
Posted by: Ian Gould | November 22, 2008 4:55 PM
Again, you show yourself for a blithering idiot. The name of the hospital, of the doctors, etc. are irrelevant to citizenship. There is no additional information on the long form certificate that would be relevant to his citizenship.
Posted by: DaveL | November 22, 2008 5:38 PM
Loons. It's why the GOP is dead. Loons. lol.
Keyes jumped into the ring. Gee... brought his loony veep selection with him. The minister from California who asked his followers to pray for the deaths of his opponents. Praise the Lord.
Loons. Sore losers and loons.
If they concentrated on issues more than conspiracies, they might have a chance.
Posted by: sus | November 22, 2008 5:42 PM
It should also be mentioned that the case that Thomas has decided to bring to the Dec. 5 conference has little to do with whether or not Obama was actually born in Hawaii, which has pretty much been established. It is Donofrio's contention that Obama's Kenyan father makes Obama a non-natural born citizen for purposes of being President.
Only wackaloons doubt that Obama wasn't born in Hawaii. The documents so far provided establish that he was born in Honolulu. The so-called "vault long-form" isn't going to have any information that is going to contradict that.
Posted by: Chiroptera | November 22, 2008 6:10 PM
For those who are interested, snopes discusses this as well. It also includes a link to the Obama's Certificate of Live Birth.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/citizen.asp
Posted by: doctorgoo | November 22, 2008 6:30 PM