GF says:

Yeah, it doesn’t really matter. ::rolleyes::

Olo Baggins of Bywater says:

Why did you post this garbage?

the haunted sheep says:

I thought it a distraction too, as it isnt going to make him leave even if we find out he wasnt born in hawaii I guess it doesn’t matter, but it does seem pretty fishy. I dunno why they havent simply forged one. I figured they would have done it a long time ago. Unless that’s the game.

ubiquitous talking head says:

This is World Net Daily. It’s like the nutjob right-wing version of the national inquirer. There’s nothing but an invisible talking head reading a script over b-roll footage of people nobody but their mother would recognize.

That said, just show us the fucking birth certificate if there is one.

David says:

Any reporting with the name Jerome Corsi attached to it can be immediately discarded and ignored. But for the record, I’d still like to see the birth certificate. And college records while we’re at it.

Donald Silva says:

This is an interesting issue. If Obama is not a citizen then he can’t hold office. And they can’t produce the birth certificate. I have one being born in Hawaii. Why doesn’t Obama have one. Seems really fishy to me.

Grandpa says:

Somehow it seems appropriate that the first partially black President is from another country since most of his election money comes from overseas and his most important legislation benefits overseas interests.

Greg Allen says:

>> For the record, I have never considered this issue anything more than a distraction. Now I am beginning to wonder..

Listen to your first instincts.

Otherwise you’ll soon be making posts about the “Moon Landing Hoax” and “Climategate.”

Benjamin says:

Rush, Beck, O’Rielly, and Coulter said that Obama was born in Hawaii, so Obama was born in Hawaii. No further investigation is needed here.

He is not a Muslim either. We all know he went to Jeremiah Wright’s wacky church.

He is a fascist. Evidence is the fasist health care plan he passed.

granite1 says:

Re: “dual citizenship”

Answer: Dual citizenship at birth (which lapsed by the way) has no effect on the Natural Born Citizen status of a child born in the USA. To think that it does means that you think that a foreign law can determine whether a US-born child is eligible to be president. We have never allowed foreign laws to have that much power.

Moreover, the citizenship of Obama’s father has no effect on Natural Born Citizen status. ALL US citizens who were born in the USA, as Obama was, are Natural Born citizens. Only naturalized citizens, citizens who were not born in the USA, are not Natural Born Citizens.

“Natural born citizen. Persons who are born within the jurisdiction of a national government, i.e. in its territorial limits, or those born of citizens temporarily residing abroad.” — Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition

“Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are “natural born citizens” and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are “natural born citizens” eligible to serve as President …”—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

Re: “having US “Certificate of live birth” (which is the one Obama produced) – but NOT having US “Birth Certificate”’

Answer: The name is Certification of Live Birth, and it is the official and only birth certificate that Hawaii issues.

The Wall Street Journal said:

“The birthers have also misrepresented the law in the claims they have made about Obama’s birth certificate. In truth, Obama has proved that he is a native of Hawaii, and this proof would hold up in any legal or administrative proceeding.

In order to explain the birthers’ deception on this point, it is necessary to delve into the arcana of Hawaiian vital records. The document that Obama has released, which carries the title “certification of live birth,” confirms that the president was born in Honolulu. It is a legal birth certificate, and, as the Honolulu Star-Bulletin notes, it is the only kind of birth certificate the state of Hawaii issues….

Further, if Congress were to pass the so-called birther bill, Obama would be able to comply easily. The bill would require presidential campaigns to submit “a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate” to the Federal Election Commission. The certificate Obama has released publicly would meet this requirement.”

Re: “because parents chose to register him with Birth Certificate of the other country…”

Obama was born in Hawaii, in Kapiolani Hospital, as both the former governor of Hawaii, a Republican, and this witness (

http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article137495.ece0

Also, in 1961 Hawaii would not accept a foreign birth certificate. It was not allowed to place a foreign birth certificate in a Hawaii birth registry file. Only Hawaii documents could be placed in the Hawaii birth files in 1961, and the officials in Hawaii (members of a Republican governor’s administration) have confirmed repeatedly that there is an original birth certificate in Obama’s file and that it VERIFIES that he was born in Hawaii.

Re: “Hence, though born in US he may hold Kenyan birth certificate.”

Why don’t you call the Kenyan embassy and ASK whether Obama has a Kenyan birth certificate (there have been some obvious forged “Kenyan birth certificates” but you would ask if there is a real one)? Also, it is highly unlikely that Kenya granted a birth certificate to people who were not born in Kenya back in 1961.

However, the key point is birth in the USA, which he was.

Re: “Obama is cleverly using the issue to demonize opponents.”

Answer: This would be sad, but not illegal. In fact, it may be smart politics. But, if you are saying that he could release the original birth certificate, the answer remains that Obama does not have it because it was not sent to him. He has the official birth certificate, and has published that.

Ah_Yea says:

Ok, let’s go over this again:

Obama was born in Hawaii and all this birther stuff is a distraction from the real questions:

“Just to clear things up, again…

Obama’s birth certificate.
http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate

The REAL reason people have questions is this:
Here is a partial list of records that Obama refuses to release or has hidden from the public .

(1) the original, long-form 1961 Hawaiian birth certificate, has never been released. It’s available, so why not release it and get this over with? What about:
2) Marriage license between Obama’s father (Barak Sr.) and mother (Stanley Ann Dunham) — not found, not released
3) Obama’s baptism records — sealed
4) Obama’s adoption records — sealed
5) Records of Obama’s and his mother’s reptriation as US citizens on return from Indonesia — not found, not released
6) Name change (Barry Sotero to Barack Hussein Obama) records — not found, not released
7) Noelani Elementary School (Hawaii) — not released
Punahou School financial aid or school records — not released
9) Occidental College financial aid records — not released. (These records were, however, subpoenaed but Obama lawyers succeeded in quashing the subpoena in court. No other Occi records have been released.)
10) Columbia College records — not released
11) Columbia senior thesis — not released
12) Harvard Law School records (not mentioned below, but not released)
13) Obama’s law client list — sealed
14) Obama’s files from career as an Illinois State Senator — sealed
15) Obama’s record with Illinois State Bar Association — sealed
16) Obama’s medical records — not released
17) Obama’s passport records — not released

What does our Great Savior have to hide?”

chiarde says:

You too, John? Oh please. This is garbage, and I’m telling this to you as a long time fan and respectful listener.

You’re feeding the racists.

bobbo, progress is made by 1%, the rest of us follow usually in disagreement or awe says:

#23–Ah Yea==interesting list. I’m thinking one of his trusted advisers said its better to stand the heat for not releasing this stuff than to release it and give the loons license to go after whatever they find there. I believe all that stuff should be released as a matter of law, but thats just me – putting the “public” transparently into “public office.”

I wonder how long such a list is for each President we have had, like Bush’s military record, but not that much.

People disagree about what he said in public on videotape at the Tucson Eulogy. No need for more darkly considered things.

granite1 says:

Replying to MikeN:

Re: “But perhaps she was already out of the country when pregnant.”

Answer. You are speculating, and doing a lousy job of it. Here is how a trip would have had to have gone. There were no direct flights, and airplanes had very limited distances in those days. They would have had to have gone either via LA, New York, London, Rome, Cairo and then finally Nairobi, or the other way: via Tokyo, Hong Kong, Bangkok, New Delhi, Teheran, Cairo and Nairobi.

Where do you speculate that she stayed prior to arrival in Kenya? In what one of those cities? In any case, the birther scenario only works if she traveled late in pregnancy, apparently because earlier in pregnancy she was attending classes.

Re: “It is known that within weeks of Obama’s birth in Hawaii, she was taking classes in Washington. “

Answer: The difference between before and after is ENORMOUS.

Before birth, a woman is heavy, cannot walk easily, and there is risk of stillbith (and you had to get Yellow Fever shots for Kenya, which are bad during pregnancy). After birth, no risk of stillbirth, the woman could walk around easily.

IF you had a desire to make a trip via LA, New York, London, Rome, Cairo and finally Nairobi, or the other way, via Tokyo, Hong Kong, Bangkok, New Delhi, Teheran, Cairo and Nairobi, you would make it AFTER THE BIRTH. You could still show the child to the grandparents, get to see the cities along the way and no risk of stillbirth. It would still cost around $20,000 for two round trip in 2010 dollars, but if you had the money, you would spend it after the birth not before. That is not merely because of the risk of stillbirth, but because you could see the sights along the way. In those days, if you made such an expensive trip, one of the benefits was that you could stop along the way.

(But it was still one very expensive trip, and there is no evidence that they had anywhere near enough money. And, if they did, they would not waste it in travel late in pregnancy).

Re: “2) birth outside of Hawaii”

Answer: When I entered that item I considered that it might be considered double counting. Well, perhaps, but remember we are asked to believe that she gave birth in Kenya and there is no proof of a birth in Kenya, and no proof that she arrived in Kenya.

Re: “But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Stronger case is if there is evidence she was in the country prior to his birth, closer the better. Photography back then wasn’t as common of course.”

Answer: Let’s examine all the documents that are missing. IN addition to the absence of US government documents, there are no documents from Kenya either. Birthers explain this by claiming that Kenya has hidden or sealed all the files. If you believe this, you have to believe that Kenya has the enormous competency to hide the files without the US CIA, and foreign diplomats, and the hundreds of freelance and other journalists in Kenya finding out that Kenya had hidden the files. It would not be necessary to find the actual files, only to know that Kenya had hidden files, and that would lead to an investigation.

Re Pictures. People were taking lots of them in the 1960s too. Kodak had made it popular. And, when you go to see your inlaws, you take pictures of the child with his grandparents. The birther explanation of why there are no photos is that right away when Obama’s mother got there, there was a fight, and she did not take any photos and tried to rush home, but the baby came too soon so she gave birth in Kenya. This is not merely speculation but far from likely.

It also seems highly unlikely that an application for a US visa on a foreign passport in Kenya in 1961 or the change to his mother’s passport in Kenya to include Obama could have been lost, or that US officials are hiding that document.

Re: Lying about the place of birth and your response: “This is very likely. It is so much easier to just claim something and not go thru the paperwork hassles.”

Answer: Take a moment and think this out again. Unless you want your child to run for president, getting the child naturalized is just as good as his being born in the USA. A naturalized citizen has all the rights and obligations of a natural born citizen.

So, if Obama had been born in Kenya, why run the risk of lying about it? Admit the truth (which you could brag about for the rest of your life: “I gave birth in a Kenyan hospital, and let me tell you that was quite an experience”) and naturalize the child later on. Why run the risk of lying, when if they caught you in the lie, you could face criminal prosecution and Obama senior could lose his US student visa?

What the birther myth REQUIRES is both somehow getting the child through US immigration without a document and the lie to the officials in Hawaii that the child was born in Hawaii. AND, the lie has to be successful.

But there is evidence that if you claimed that a child was born outside of a hospital in Hawaii in 1961 the officials would demand proof in the form of a signed statement from the doctor or midwife or a witness of some kind. Yet the birther myth holds that somehow Obama’s parents were able to slip Obama through immigration without a document (or that the US government is so lazy or sloppy or corrupt that it cannot find such a document) AND that they lied about Obama’s place of birth AND that they got away with it.

How likely is this?

Re: “Successfully smuggling the child into the USA without a US travel document (extremely unlikely) and your answer: “I think this would have been pretty easy back then.”

Answer: I remember travel in those days. They were far more detailed in checking documents than they are today, and in this case you would be bringing a BLACK child into the USA (unless you think that the officials would not have looked at his face, which is unlikely. The family would have had to arrive at either an airport or sea port, and the officials would have asked for their documents. ALL of their documents, the mother’s, the father’s, and the child’s. Some birthers have claimed that this could have been avoided with a bribe, but that would be even more illegal and risky.

Re: “#6 Convincing the officials in Hawaii that he was born in Hawaii
This strikes me as very easy. Home births still happen today. “

Answer: Sure home births happen, but if you claimed a home birth, there is evidence that Hawaii officials required some kind of a witness statement before they would issue a birth certificate with a Hawaii place of birth on it. The PUMA Lori did the research (and she was trying to prove that Obama was not born in Hawaii to help Hillary), and she found:

“At the time, if a child was born outside a hospital, the family would have 30 days to apply for a birth certificate and Vital Records would expect to see prenatal care records, or pediatrician records of the first check up, etc. They’d also want the notarized statement from the mid-wife. Of course, they can apply later but that would noted as a different kind of birth certificate.”

(Note that both the former governor of Hawaii, a Republican, and this witness http://www.buffalonews.com/incoming/article137495.ece indicate that the birth took place in Kapiolani Hospital).

Re: “The place where he was listed in the newspaper announcement is his grandparents’ place.”

Answer: That is a legal address. It does not require that they both lived there, and he may never have lived there. It is perfectly legal to list a parent’s address,

Re: “It doesn’t strike me as implausible that they made the ad and registered a birth to make things easier for him.”

Answer: The notices in the newspapers were NOT advertisements. Hawaii newspapers did not accept advertised notices of birth in those days. ALL the notices were sent out by the department of vital records of Hawaii. To be sure, the notices were generated by the registration, and some birthers claim that you could just walk in to the DOH and claim a birth at home and that would generate the notice. But Lori’s evidence is very strong that it was not possible to just “walk in” with a claim of birth at home.

But, say that you could just walk in and claim that the child was born at home. That would be lying, and it would be lying despite the fact that the Obama had been seen or would be seen on planes or ships coming from Kenya—so it would be a risky lie. And, if you were found to have lied, there could have been some kind of criminal prosecution, and Obama’s father would run the risk of losing his visa. And why lie when you could simply say “he was born in Kenya,” get all the status of having done something highly unusual (“let me tell you what Kenyan hospitals are like”) and simply naturalize the child at a later date.