The following is from Michael Bresciani at www.renewamerica.us , and it sums up the reasons why Barack Obama should face the Birth Certificate issue once and for all:
November 25, 2008
The question of whether Barack Obama was actually born in Kenya thus disqualifying him to run as a presidential candidate will not go away. It is like the little mushrooms that appear every morning under the tree, they keep coming back. What should the President Elect do?
It is not fair to label those who want answers as racists, disillusioned right wingers, conspiracy nuts or any other convenient appellation thereby asking them to simply shut up. Lawsuits filed to require that an official vault document be produced have come from African Americans, democrats and a host of constitutionally concerned citizens.
In fact one You Tube offering about the matter garnered 750,000 views alone and the total viewing of videos and articles on the subject is somewhere near three million to date.
The problems with the birth certificate offered on the extreme left website the Daily Kos and a few other internet sites are too many to ignore. The short list is first that the document is not signed. Secondly it has no seal. Third is that the security border doesn’t match similar documents from the same time period. Other objections are that the race of Obama’s father is listed as African. In the early sixties the State of Hawaii listed African Americans as Negroes.
What is missing from the document is the doctor’s signature and physical characteristics at birth that every original birth certificate reveals.
Some interested party’s have submitted the internet document to the scrutiny of Adobe and graphic experts who all agree the document is highly questionable or a complete fraud. Is it? Who knows at this point? What is far more intriguing is the resistance being thrown at uncovering the true vault document. This is what is spawning suspicion and doubt.
Attorney Philip Berg has filed a writ of certiorari that should force the President Elect, the DNC and Co-Defendants to produce the document in accordance with law. Ambassador Alan Keyes has pending suits and a total of seventeen others are submitting their quests to various levels of state courts.
Here are the important reasons President Elect Obama should cooperate and put the whole matter to bed as quickly as possible.
- Because he can. With a simple request to the Hawaii Bureau of Vital Statistics he can quash all doubt and get on with his administration.
- He will remove the suspicions of millions of Americans, republicans, democrats and independents alike.
- If ignored it could cause a constitutional crises unlike anything ever seen in this country. It would make questions of chads and incomplete voting cards look like a kindergarten problem by contrast.
- It will indicate that Obama means business when he takes the oath of office and declares that he will uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States.
- It will give confidence to many of his opponents who may not agree with all his policies, but want to know that he is a completely honest man with the country’s best interest in mind.
- It would put to rest the assertion that he is an elitist. All Americans must submit proper documentation of birth to get Social Security cards, driver’s license, security clearance and passports. He should be willing to carry out the first and the least of all his campaign promises contained in the slogan ‘Yes, we can.’ In America we can and according to law ‘we must.’
- We will all sleep better at night!
It is a surprisingly simple matter to make it all go away but it is presently entrenched in court battles and suspicion. In a full page ad in The Washington Times Nov. 17, 2008 three questions are asked. Was Barack Obama born in Kenya? Is he really a citizen of Indonesia? Does the constitution still matter?
Good questions, we’re listening.
As a footnote even Jesus Christ was questioned about who he was and where he came from. “We know that God spake unto Moses: as for this fellow, we know not from whence he is.” (Jn 9:29) His own sisters and brothers warned him about doing things openly. “For there is no man that doeth any thing in secret, and he himself seeketh to be known openly. If thou do these things, show thyself to the world. (Jn 7:4)
© Michael Bresciani
21 comments
Comments feed for this article
November 26, 2008 at 6:53 pm
jonolan
How about the simple fact that multiple American citizens have demanded that he do so? If Obama doesn’t believe that any and every American has the “standing” to ask for his constitutionally required credentials to be POTUS, then he doesn’t have to right to draw breath within our country, much less hold political office.
November 26, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Interested Bystander
JAMES,
Thanks for the good article.
I just can’t believe that the man who stated when he announced his candidacy that he was “going to bring integrity ad transparency back to Washington.”
His actions concerning his Birth Certificate shows neither.
I have posted for at least three months (as has many others) for Obama to release the document.
Obama has been to Hawaii twice since this issue came to light.
Bringing up Hawaii, have you heard ANYTHING about Grandma “Toots’” funeral? Did Obama attend? I haven’t heard ANYTHING about this since she passed the weekend before the election. Understanding that this should be a family matter, you would think that at the very least it should have been reported about Obama going back to attend the funeral.
But to get back on topic, just release the “vault” certificate President elect Obama, and face whatever it is that you are going to be embarrassed about. Best to get it over now, unless of course it shows that you are not eligible to hold the office you have been elected too.
Now wouldn’t that be interesting and historical (not hysterical, actually kind of disgusting).
One more thing,
Is he the first President elect to stand behind a podium with an “Office of the President-Elect” logo? Don’t recall anyone else having this. Kind of shows his arrogance if you ask me.
To Everyone,
Have a Happy Thanksgiving all.
In this Holiday season, let us forget the difficulties that are facing the country for this one day, and give thanks for being with family and friends, and for the men and women in harms way, that allow us to be with family and friends.
We have much to be thankful for, and when we come out of this mess we are facing, we will be better for having to go through this difficult time.
Keep your head up Americans.
Thanks for the great blog JAMES.
November 26, 2008 at 7:11 pm
JAMES
Jonolan: If we as citizens do not have standing to question his qualifications, exactly who does, under the law, have standing? What a massive waste of time in our judicial system on an issue of MAJOR importance that could be readily resolved by Obama himself… the more he has “ignored” this matter, the more validity I give the scenarios that he is in fact not eligible to be POTUS.
November 26, 2008 at 7:12 pm
JAMES
Jonolan: This is a great outline of the birth certificate issue at AmericanThinker:
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/11/why_the_barack_obama_birth_cer.html
November 26, 2008 at 8:53 pm
Sparkling
TAKE ACTION and DEFEND OUR CONSTITUTION! Stop The Fraud by Obama!
The Donofrio v Wells Case Regarding Obama Birth Certificate Question Will Be Discussed In Conference By The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday, Dec. 5. If 4 of 9 Justices want a full hearing, then oral arguments may be heard. Read: “The Great Birth Certificate Scandal-Cover-Up of the 2008 Election” by Joan Swirsky
http://www.rightsidenews.com/200811222725/editorial/the-great-birth-certificate-scandal-cover-up-of-the-2008-election.html
If Obama gets into office without verification that he has met the requirements of the U.S. Constitution, if you care about life, liberty or the family, you’re going to have to make hundreds of calls to try and fight an agenda that seeks to silence you.
There is a way to help prevent this. Our founders sacrificed their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor. I’m asking you to do three things.
Fast and pray for all the hidden things to come to light.
Call the Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee – in their district offices while they’re home this week for Thanksgiving. Ask them to “Please hold congressional hearings to investigate whether Barack Obama meets the basic constitutional requirements for the highest office of the land.” Link For Contact Info: http://www.f2a.org/NewsStory.cfm?Story_ID=2545
Write a letter to the nine Justices of the United States Supreme Court and put them in a FedEx (or other overnight) envelope to: U.S. Supreme Court
See Justice Names and Sample Letters at this site: http://libertynjustice.wordpress.com/2008/11/14/write-to-us-supreme-court-justices-regarding-obama-birth-certificate-etc
Contact your members of Congress automatically via email at this easy to use site: http://www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualification/1244/
November 26, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Ted
Best explanation (following 2 you tube videos) I’ve seen for the total media blackout of what is the single greatest news event and domestic threat — let’s call it OBAMAGATE — since the outbreak of the American Civil War and for the sincere prayers of the American people that the United States Supreme Court — let’s call it OUR LAST HOPE — now to have the courage to save our great nation as we have come to know it:
November 27, 2008 at 8:02 am
obama campaign website | Digg.com
[...] Why Obama should stop ignoring the Birth Certificate Questions The problems with the birth certificate offered on the extreme left website the Daily Kos and a few other internet sites are too many to ignore. The short list is first that the document is not signed. Secondly it has no seal. … [...]
November 27, 2008 at 9:23 am
lawyer ad campaign | AMD.com
[...] Why Obama should stop ignoring the Birth Certificate Questions He should be willing to carry out the first and the least of all his campaign promises contained in the slogan ‘Yes, we can.’ In America we can and according to law ‘we must.’ We will all sleep better at night! … [...]
November 27, 2008 at 6:27 pm
smrstrauss
Here’s what it would take for Obama to have been born in Kenya.
(1) It would have taken a lifetime of covering up by his mother before and after the birth of Obama in Kenya (IF he were born in Kenya of course).
She could not have told a friend at college that she was excited that she soon would be travelling to Kenya to see her in-laws because, of course, a friend could have remembered it all the way to 2008. Or the friend could have told another friend.
And, she could not have told a friend after the birth in Kenya “Say, let me tell you, it’s really an experience giving birth in Africa” because a friend could have remembered it even to 2008, or the friend could have told another friend, who would have remembered.
And, she could not have told even her son when he was a kid or a teenager because kids and teenagers tend to talk, and the friends that they have told could have remembered it even to 2008.
Even though she went to Kenya to see her in-laws and was presumably proud that she was doing that, she did not have any pictures taken with them or leave any pictures of her with them. Or, she or Obama himself arranged for all the photos to be burned in the years following that trip.
So, in order to believe that Obama was born in Kenya, a lot of what is normal about taking trips and talking frankly about your life has to be eliminated. It is normal to take photos, but there are no photos. It is normal to tell people about trips, but no one was told (or they are all dead or sworn to secrecy, which is hard to believe in itself).
(2) Obama’s mother, Ann, would have had to travel to Kenya in the ninth month of pregnancy.
This is intrinsic to the born-in-Kenya theory.
But let’s examine it. For most pregnant women, even today, if they had a chance to travel before the ninth month of pregnancy, or after it, they would. Why? Because it is easier to get around and see things when you are not carrying all that weight, and because there is always a chance of sickness. This was even more the case in 1961, when the statistics of stillbirth were higher than now.
So, if they went to Kenya at all (which is unlikely because of item 1 above), it is more likely that they traveled before the ninth month, such as during the Christmas break from college, or Spring break, or right away in June when the college ended courses for the summer. Or, they planned to travel after the birth, taking Obama with them, but never made the trip because a year later the couple was breaking up. It is highly unlikely that they took the trip in the ninth month of pregnancy, and even more unlikely LATE in the ninth month, when the birth might occur on a plane or in a car in Kenya.
Also, since it is a long trip, and they did not have direct flights Hawaii-Africa at the time, it would be more likely that they would want to see some of the sights along the way. Doing that makes a long and expensive trip seem more worthwhile, since in the process of going to Kenya you also get to see New York and London and maybe Rome or Cairo on the way to Kenya, or the other way via Tokyo. But to do this would mean that you planned the trip to take it when when walking around and seeing the sights is not so difficult for a pregnant woman, such as as many months as possible before the birth, or after the birth.
(3) Obama’s mother would not have wanted to travel to Kenya when she was pregnant because to travel to Africa in those days required a Yellow Fever shot, which is not good during pregnancy.
(4) IF Obama’s mother had traveled to Kenya in 1961, there would be official records of that trip available in Kenya.
According to the theorists of Obama’s birth in Kenya, this is explained by the Kenyan government having sealed Obama’s files, which otherwise would have shown his Kenyan birth documents, his mother’s arrival in Kenya, and his own travel documents (or his being entered on his father or mother’s passport) after his birth in Kenya.
But to say explain the absence of such official documents to the Kenyan government requires it to be part of the conspiracy, and it has to be a universally successful conspiracy in Kenya. By that I mean that not only is the Kenyan government covering up, but all members of the government or hospitals who may have had a chance to look into either the immigration or birth records must be keeping the secret. That means that many people who knew about Obama’s mother being in Kenya or about the birth in Kenya must be keeping the secret. But why should they? They might mention the fact that they saw the files at a bar for a free drink. Or they might bring the story to a newspaper, or a wire service.
(5) Not merely the Kenyan government has to be party to the conspiracy.
The officials in the state of Hawaii have to be conspiring as well. You will recall that in early November they issued a press release and subsequently were interviewed by the Honolulu Advertiser, saying that they had looked into Obamas’ files and from the contents of those files could confirm the accuracy of the Certification of Live Birth that Obama has posted on Fightthesmears.com and shown to FactCheck.org and Polifact.com.
There are some conspiracy theorists who assert that what the officials in Hawaii did not say was that they had looked into the files and found a KENYAN birth certificate in the files. If so, they were intentionally misleading and were part of the conspiracy. To say that the certificate of live birth, which says on it that Obama was born in Honolulu, on the Island of Oahau, and in the County of Honolulu, is accurate after seeing a document from Kenya is a lie, and if it were shown that Obama really had been born in Kenya after giving the impression that he was born in Hawaii, the officials would be subject to prosecution for fraud. They would be very very unlikely to do that.
So, the officials in Hawaii and FactCheck and Polifact would have to be part of the conspiracy.
(6) On the other side of the story, the only “facts” that seem to weigh against the officials from Hawaii’s evidence that Obama was born in Kenya and the vast improbability of his mother traveling in the ninth month of pregnancy, is the tape recording of Obama’s Kenyan grandmother, who apparently said that she was present at his birth in Kenya.
There are a number of explanations for this: the most obvious being that she did not understand the question, the one that is not so very nice is that she is an old lady. The point to remember about this interview (and I urge you to listen to it again) is that it was not conducted in order to obtain useful evidence that Obama was either born or not born in Kenya. It was designed to get a “yes” to the question whether she had been present when he was born.
If the interview had been a fair investigation of whether Obama had been born in Kenya, it would have asked questions to demonstrate that Obamas’ grandmother understood the question or that she was not confused about being “present.”
In such cases, it is normal to ask verifying questions along the following lines: “How long were Obama’s parents in Kenya before the birth?” “Did they travel to your village first, or go to the hospital and deliver the child first?” “How many days did Obams’s mother spend in hospital after delivering the child?” “In what month was the birth?” “What hospital?” And then there are questions along these lines: “If he was born in Kenya, why aren’t there any photos of him with his grandparents in Kenya?”
(7) Other than the grandmother, who is on tape, there are also claims that other Obama relatives in Kenya said the same thing, that he was born in Kenya. However, these reports all stem from the same sources, Corsi and WND, and have not been verified by anyone else. And, they also have not been asked such questions as how long Obama’s parents were in Kenya before the birth and why there are no photos.
Re: the simple question: “Mr. Obama, where is your birth certificate?”
The first answer to this is that a certification of live birth is a birth certificate, but not in the sense of being the original document issued either by the hospital or by the state at the time of birth. But it is a birth certificate in the sense of being a document issued by the state relevant to the birth and declaring that the person was born at that time and in that place.
But you may say, “why hasn’t he released his original birth certificate?” The first answer is that it is unnecessary. The officials in Hawaii have confirmed that there is a document in the files showing that he was born in Hawaii. The certification of live birth, with the location of birth being in the USA, is enough for the US state department to issue passports, and in this case it has.
A longer answer would be along the following lines: Has anyone prior to this election asked to see the birth certificate of any president or presidential candidate before? I mean, did we ask to see Tom Jefferson’ s birth certificate, Tyler’s, Polk’s, Lincoln’s, Wilson’s, Hoover’s, FDR’s, JFK’s or either of the two Bushes’?
But in this case, the person has already shown his certification of live birth. Despite that a few people are asking that he show even more than that.
Why, since the certification of live birth proves his birth in the USA, since it is incredible to think that his mother traveled to Kenya in the ninth month of pregnancy and kept the secret all her life, and since the only ones who are asking for him to POST his original birth certificate are right-wing bloggers, should he do it?
To be sure, there are still some law cases pending, which might have the effect of requiring Obama to show his hospital birth certificate. IF so, there is an original birth certificate, in the files, (we know because the officials in Hawaii said so) and Obama can arrange to have it shown to the court. A court would be the right place to show it, not on-line, and a court would have the facilities to authenticate such a document. But unless a court asks to see it, why should he post it?
IF a court doesn’t ask to see it, then what? Well, you can keep on thinking that he was born in Kenya, although there is no evidence and it is most unlikely, or you can get on with your life. Did you know that there are still some people who believe that the US government continues to hide the bodies of aliens in Rosewell, NM?
November 28, 2008 at 9:04 am
Interested Bystander
smrstrauss
The only problem with your whole thing is that Obama stated when he announced his candidacy that he was going “to bring integrity, and transparency back to Washington”.
He has done neither, by not releasing his “vault” birth certificate.
As his employer, it is our responsibility to ask these questions.
Where is college entrance papers? Under what passport did he travel to Pakistan? If he traveled under an Indonesian Passport (as he wrote in his book), would this not make hime ineligible?
The bottom line is, he could stop this if he just released this document.
It costs 10 bucks to get a “vault” birth certificate, and it has been reported that Obama has spent 800,000 dollars to keep it from us.
Does this not make you question why he would go to this much trouble?
November 28, 2008 at 5:08 pm
JAMES
I am working on a new post pertaining to some of the state’s Children and Family Services, but in the interim, for all who think it is so wrong that we challenge the eligibility of the man who will sit at the desk next to the “button” that could start a nuclear holocaust, I challenge you to go to your state’s Children & Family Services site, or the site for an application for a concealed weapon permit– either of these applications require more information (one of them is 20 pages) than Obama has been required to be President.
November 29, 2008 at 9:18 am
smrstrauss
Re: The only problem with your whole thing is that Obama stated when he announced his candidacy that he was going “to bring integrity, and transparency back to Washington”.
Let us try to put this into perspective. If Obama was born in Hawaii, as he was, his original birth certificate and his hospital birth certificate will show you nothing more than the fact which we already know, which is that he was born in Hawaii.
To show those documents on line, however, allows anyone who claims to be able to find fraudulent documents to claim that the posted documents are frauds. And, it allows the right-wing bloggers, and only the right wing bloggers, to say “look, we have so much power that we forced the president elect to post his hospital birth record.”
And, we do not even know that the original document or documents continues to exist in paper form. There is something in the files, but it may be in the form of microfilm or have been digitized already — to save space, as has been the case with many old records.
And, there has been some discussion over the possibility that Hawaii might not even release the original records if he asks for them. Some postings say that they do not do that even when requested. They would do it for a court order, of course, but maybe not even if requested.
So, what is wrong about the certification of live birth? What makes you believe that it is a fraud? Are you convinced that the officials in Hawaii are lying? If so, why — they are not Democrats, and even if they were, to lie in this case subjects them to arrest for fraud if what they say were ever shown not to be true.
Since Obama has shown the only official document that proves his birth in Hawaii (Yes, the state record is the official document. Hospital records are not official and cannot be used in many cases. They are not accepted for example by the state department in getting a passport.), he can be said to be “transparent.’
And this is particularly true when the other side claims crazy things like his mother traveled to Kenya in the ninth month of pregnancy when you had to get a Yellow Fever shot and there are no photos of her in Kenya. Moreover, they claim that the only reason that there are no official records of Obama’s mother being in Kenya in 1961 is that the Kenyan government is part of the conspiracy. This could be true, but there is no confirmation of it.
Relax. Only if a court asks to see the Obama documents will there be an issue. If so, he has the documents and can show them, and the court is the ideal place to show them — not on line where anyone can and will claim that they are forged.
Now, turning from the Kenya issue, you ask about what if he lost his citizenship due to dual nationality in Indonesia and travel to Pakistan on an Indonesian passport.
There are three approaches to the not-eligible-despite-being-born-in-Hawaii theory (if I can coin a phrase):
(1) Obama allegedly lost his US citizenship due to dual nationality with Indonesia, when he went there when his mother re-married and when he attended Indonesian schools.
(2) Obama allegedly lost his US citizenship due to allegedly having traveled on a foreign passport (an Indonesian passport).
(3) Obama allegedly not being a natural-born US citizen due to the combination of his having dual nationality at birth because of his father’s being a Kenyan (at the time a British subject since Kenya was a colony at the time).
Taking these up in order.
As to (1) there have been several Supreme Court rulings on this, with the decision being in all cases that a child cannot lose his US citizenship due to having the combination of dual nationality and his parents renouncing his US citizenship when he was a child. The court ruled that only when a person becomes an adult can she or he themselves relinquish US citizenship, and they cannot do this by accident.
You will see the proof of this at:
http://www.richw.org/dualcit/cases.html
In particular look at the Elg case:
Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939)
Marie Elizabeth Elg was born in the US to Swedish parents, who took her back with them to Sweden when she was a baby. Shortly after her 21st birthday, she obtained a US passport and returned to the US.
Some years later, the US government attempted to deport her on the grounds that when her parents had taken her to live in Sweden, she had become a Swedish citizen (under Swedish law), and as a result had lost her US citizenship. It was argued that an 1869 citizenship treaty between the US and Sweden, providing for the orderly transfer of citizenship by immigrants, called for loss of US citizenship following Swedish naturalization. This was one of the so-called “Bancroft Treaties” enacted between the US and numerous other countries between 1868 and 1937.
The Supreme Court ruled, unanimously, that the actions of Elg’s parents in obtaining Swedish citizenship for their daughter could not prevent her from reclaiming US citizenship and returning to the US as an adult, provided she did so within a reasonable time after reaching adulthood.
Obama returned to the USA before he was an adult.
As to (2). It turns out that this is based on a completely mistaken premise. The US has no policy that would strip someone of US citizenship due to she or he traveling on a foreign passport. This is simply not mentioned in the State Department’s advice on the matter. See:
http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_778.html
In addition to travel on a foreign passport not being a reason that one can lose US citizenship, the State Department stress that it is difficult to lose citizenship by accident. This is because its standard for loss of citizenship requires someone to take an active role in relinquishing citizenship. In its words, “with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship.” The State Department guidelines read:
“…the actions listed above can cause loss of U.S. citizenship only if performed voluntarily and with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship. The Department has a uniform administrative standard of evidence based on the premise that U.S. citizens intend to retain United States citizenship when they obtain naturalization in a foreign state, subscribe to a declaration of allegiance to a foreign state, serve in the armed forces of a foreign state not engaged in hostilities with the United States, or accept non-policy level employment with a foreign government.”
As to (3): This is a completely novel legal theory brought by Leo C. Donofrio, which argues that even if Obama was born in Hawaii the simple fact that his father was from Kenya and did not have US citizenship at the time of Obama’s birth meant that Obama was not “natural born” because natural born means more than the place of birth. Donofrio argues that the natural-born citizenship requirement of Article II should be read in the context of the 14th Amendment which says that a citizen must be born or naturalized AND “subject to the jurisdiction” of the USA.
Donofrio argues that Obama was not subject to the jurisdiction of the USA because his father was not a citizen and hence Obama was under the jurisdiction of the other country.
This is a highly novel theory, but the Supreme Court does not often accept novel theories. Moreover, this flies in the face of the simple fact that Article II of the constitution does not specifically rule out dual nationality, and that the common-language definition of a natural-born citizen has so far meant a person who was born in the USA. The issue of jurisdiction is unclear. It is unlikely to mean what Donofrio says, which was that Obama at the time of his birth was under the “jurisdiction” of Kenya or Britain.
More likely, jurisdiction means only that Obama was not born in a foreign embassy or consulate, where he would be under the jurisdiction of a foreign government.
To be sure, he had dual nationality, but the constitution does not rule out people who have dual nationality from being president. If it had intended to do so, it would have.
So, the Donofrio theory is unlikely to get the votes of the strict constructionists on the court, and the theory is certainly not likely to get the votes of the liberals or the swing votes. In other words, it is a very very remote possibility. I’d say one in a 100 that there are four votes to consider the issue. We will find out on Dec. 6 or perhaps a couple of days later, since Dec. 5 is a Friday.
November 29, 2008 at 11:32 am
JAMES
How about the fact that Obama AND his sister, in separate interviews (one interview was both of them together), they have stated his birthplace at two different hospitals. Since the hospital in Mombasso is setting itself up as a shrine to Obama as his birthplace, wouldn’t you figure the Hawaiian hospital where he was allegedly born would have that “claim” in its literature or advertisement. Hell, they tried to sell his waffle on ebay!
Obama has fueled this controversy by first ignoring it, then posting a fake document along with his leftwing supporter Daily Kos, and now spending a fortune to keep it hidden. This only fuels the speculation. I have said again and again, his campaign had to anticipate questions along this line given his father’s Kenyan citizenship.
Also, the question of a President having dual citizenship has never been addressed by the Supreme Court. The framers of the Constitution clearly grandfathered themselves in as natural-born citizens, but, one could also interpret their actions as clearly making it single citizenship a key factor as well.
I agree that there will be, at a minimum, 4 of the justices who want to consider this issue. Given the increasing number of lawsuits arising over this issue, at least one of the more liberal justices will see that this issue must be heard, if, for no other reason than to clearly answer Obama’s eligibility so it does not remain as a hovering cloud over his actions.
November 30, 2008 at 11:06 am
smrstrauss
Re: “How about the fact that Obama AND his sister, in separate interviews (one interview was both of them together), they have stated his birthplace at two different hospitals.”
It means that he was born at one of the two hospitals. When someone says first says that he was born at Hospital X in Hawaii and then says that he was born in Hospital Y in Hawaii, it does not mean that he was born at a hospital in Kenya. It just means that the person who was speaking, the sister, did not know which of the two hospitals in Hawaii he was born at.
I heard this weekend a sportscaster say “the Tennessee Titans lost the first ten games of the season,” and then he fixed it by saying “Oops, I mean they won the first ten games of the season.” That does not mean that the Tennessee Titans have won only five games, or that they were from Kenya. It just means that the sportscaster made a misstatement.
I recall a Republican candidate for president saying something at one time about “the border between Iraq and Pakistan.” That does not mean that there is a border between Iraq and Pakistan, or even that the candidate did not know that there is no border between the two. It just meant that he made a misstatement.
However, the certification of live birth, which is an official document of the the state of Hawaii says on it three times that Obama was born in Hawaii, and the officials of Hawaii said that they looked into the file and found confirming evidence that the certification of live birth is accurate. The US state department has already accepted Obama’s certification of live birth in order to give him a passport.
There is some deliberately misleading junk going around on right-wing blogs that Hawaii allows parents to register the birth in Hawaii of children who were not born in Hawaii. This was not true in 1961, when Obama was born, and it is not true today and was NEVEE true that Hawaii issued a certification that said on it “born in Hawaii,” or “born in Honolulu” if the person was not born in Hawaii or Honolulu.
Now, as to the hospital in Mombassa. If they really believe that this is true, let them show some kind of document. But, until then, there’s no reason to believe it, since the document from Hawaii is official and valid, and since it would require us to believe that Obama’s mother traveled to Kenya in the ninth month of pregnancy at a time when you had to get a Yellow Fever shot, and IF she did it, there are no photos of her in Kenya (why not, was she plotting for her child to be president even at that time?) or of Obama with his grandparents (why not, was that part of the plot?).
November 30, 2008 at 4:18 pm
JAMES
The right wing blogs are not misleading about allowing births to be recorded outside of Hawaii, per se. Given that home births were still quite prevalent in 1961, one could go to vital statistics to record the birth. I believe that Obama’s record will show he was born in Hawaii, but the actual vault record will also bear the vital stats (wieght, etc.) and be signed by someone from the hospital. If it was recorded at any other point than his hospital birth, it would be signed by the person providing the information.
Do I expect the entire document to be placed online– John McCain’s is. But, I believe that the information necessary to remove the cloud over Obama’s eligibility could be provided, and all other information clearly covered.
As far as Mombasso goes, I made my comment with a bit of sarcasm, because it is my belief that Obama was born in Canada, which, like Kenya, was a member of the British commonwealth at that time, and the British citizenship rights would have been important to Barack Sr.
November 30, 2008 at 4:21 pm
Hope's Audacity
Smstrauss:
http://hopesaudacity.wordpress.com/2008/07/22/a-theory-on-obamas-birth-theory-based-on-the-social-climate-of-1961/
December 2, 2008 at 1:22 am
smrstrauss
Re: “The right wing blogs are not misleading about allowing births to be recorded outside of Hawaii, per se.”
Sure they are. Every blog I go to that discusses this matter has someone, usually several people, posting remarks along the lines of “Hawaii allowed births made overseas to receive Hawaii birth certificates” in response to comments saying that his Hawaii birth certification that says he was born in Hawaii proves that he was born in Hawaii.
This must mean that they received the information from some place that you could get a Hawaii birth document even if you were born in Kenya and the document would say on it “born in Hawaii.” The fact is you could get a Hawaii birth document (certification of live birth), but it would NOT say “born in Hawaii” on it.
Let me repeat. You can get a birth document from Hawaii if your child was born on Krypton. BUT it would not say “Born in Hawaii.” It would say: “location of birth – Krypton.”
Obama’s birth document, the certification of live birth, says on it (three times) that Obama was born in Hawaii. And the officials of Hawaii subsequently looked into the files and announced that it confirmed his certification of live birth which said that he was born in Hawaii.
Re: “Given that home births were still quite prevalent in 1961, one could go to vital statistics to record the birth.”
You raise a good point. If Obama was born at home or in a taxi on the way to the hospital, how do the officials in Hawaii know that he was born in Hawaii?
Well, one way would be to ask the parents? Was he born in Hawaii? And if they answered “Yes,” and he wasn’t, they would be lying and probably violating some kind of law. The question then arises, why would they lie over the place of birth if he was born in Kenya or Canada or Krypton in 1961? Why lie? Did they already think that he would be elected president in 2008?
Re: “I believe that Obama’s record will show he was born in Hawaii, but the actual vault record will also bear the vital stats (wieght, etc.) and be signed by someone from the hospital. If it was recorded at any other point than his hospital birth, it would be signed by the person providing the information.”
Yes, but of course, as you say, if he was born at home, it wouldn’t provide anything much more than that he was born in Hawaii. But if he was born in a hospital, and it did provide his weight and the name of the doctor, what does that add to the official document that says he was born in Hawaii? Verifying details, sure.
But let us remember, if Obama or anyone goes to the records in Hawaii and asks for a birth certificate, she or he gets the certification of live birth. The state regards that document as enough to establish the fact that someone was born in Hawaii, and so does the US state department.
In Obama’s case, he had a copy of this official document posted on line and won the election, and now there are still people who continue to say that they do not believe it, and will not believe it until they know is birth weight and the name of the doctor. And, they want this new document posted on line, so that they can claim – as they did with the certification – that it is forged.
Re: “Do I expect the entire document to be placed online– John McCain’s is.”
I searched for McCain’s document, and found this: (http://panamajohn.dominates.us/articles/McCain_Certificate_1_1936x2.jpg)
It appears to be an original document from the Panama Canal Health Department, and it has the name of a doctor. But it does not have the weight. Moreover, it is not the original document from the hospital, it is an official document from the government of the Panama Canal. Is it official? Sure (though there are some who say that the Colon Hospital was actually outside the Canal Zone). But it is purely an accident that McCain’s family kept it. Obama’s family probably lost the original, so he had to go to the state of Hawaii and got the certification of live birth.
The fact that McCain and Obama made their birth certificates public does not change the fact that from the time of George Washington to G. W. Bush no one ever asked to see the birth certificates of presidents or presidential candidates. McCain’s birth certificate was of interest because he was not born in one of the 50 states or a territory, but he was born in a US-administered area, the Canal Zone (if the Colon Hospital was in the Canal Zone). But Obama was born in a state, with an official state document proving that he was born in a state, so why is there interest in seeing another document that would merely confirm that he was born in a state?
Re: “remove the cloud.” Well, as a said, there continues to be a cloud over whether Colon Hospital was in the Canal Zone, so I doubt that posting another document would remove the cloud over Obama because there are a group of people who would simply refuse to believe it. They would insist that the second document was forged. They are of the fanatic sort, the kind of people who refuse to believe that James IV of Scotland was not killed at the Battle of Flodden Field or that the US government has the bodies of aliens hidden in Roswell NM.
Since we know that the birth certificates of Washington, Lincoln (there continue to be controversies over which territory he was born in), Nixon, JFK, Carter and the Bushes, Etc were never published, are there still “clouds” over them?
Re: “it is my belief that Obama was born in Canada, which, like Kenya, was a member of the British commonwealth at that time, and the British citizenship rights would have been important to Barack Sr.”
You continue to believe this despite an official document from the State of Hawaii that says that he was born in Hawaii and the fact that the officials in Hawaii have gone the extra step of looking into the files and finding evidence that the document is accurate. Is this not like believe in that James IV of Scotland was not killed at the Battle of Flodden Field or that the US government has the bodies of aliens hidden in Roswell NM?
But, at least it is not as crazy as birth in Kenya, which would have required his mother to get a Yellow Fever shot (bad during pregnancy).
Still, I’m afraid it has the following drawback: The Canadian immigration officials would not have allowed a pregnant woman in the ninth month to go to Canada to give birth to a kid. They might have allowed her in in the seventh or eighth month, if she said he was planning to travel on before the birth, but not in the ninth month? Why not? Because they do not like people coming to Canada to create Canadian citizens any more than we like people coming to the US to create US citizens. (And, if in the seventh or eighth month, then the couple would have had to stay in Canada for a while, or travel around in Canada, which is fine, but it is an expensive way to get a child to a Canadian hospital.)
IF Obama had been born in either Canada or Kenya, his parents would have had to get official birth certificates from either place and then get travel documents for him to travel on. (Even infants cannot travel to other countries without some kind of travel document.) This might have meant going to the US embassy or consulate to get Obama put onto his mother’s passport. Or it might have meant going to the Kenyan department of immigration to get Obama on his father’s passport. Or, in Canada, to the nearest British High Commission to get Obama on his father’s passport.
And then, when they rushed back to Hawaii, they would have to declare to the officials in Hawaii (although they might worry that the government of Hawaii might find out that they had recently arrived in Hawaii on a plane) that Obama was born in Hawaii.
They would have to lie about that, and we do not know why, but we do know that lying about is being born in Hawaii despite his traveling on a plane from Canada to Hawaii or Kenya to Hawaii is a risky thing to do.
This lie, this plot, seems unusually complicated. In most cases, if you have a child overseas, you are proud of that fact. Why would Obama’s parents be any different?
If he was born in Canada or Kenya, wouldn’t it be likely that they would say that he was born in Kenya or Canada? And, if so, why would they even need to get a Hawaiian birth certificate, since they already had one from Canada or Kenya. And, if they did get a Hawaiian birth certificate, why get one that said that he was born in Hawaii? Why risk making that lie?
If you tried to get a Hawaiian birth certificate that said your child was born in Hawaii, and the officials found out that you had just arrived on a plane with him, wouldn’t you think that the officials would be irritated by that, and maybe even charge you with making a false statement? And if you were Obama’s father, who was only a visitor to the US on a student visa, would a charge of making a false statement open the possibility of you losing your visa and hence your education?
Too complicated, too much risk. The Hawaii document says he was born in Hawaii. The officials of the state of Hawaii say that it is accurate. They would not lie. The parents would not lie in saying that he was born in Hawaii. It is difficult to travel in the ninth month of pregnancy, particularly in order to give birth in another country. Obama was born in Hawaii.
December 2, 2008 at 6:57 am
JAMES
All points well taken. However, state officials do LIE! Case in point, Ohio’s Ms. Kelly who is the scapegoat for the “many” unauthorized checks into Joe the Plumber. Also, in their statement, the Hawaiian officials stated “certificate” and “certification”. We know the “certification” form shows Hawaii…. they did not confirm the certificate.
I have repeatedly said that Axelrod knew these issues would come up, and they should have been forthright and transparent from the start. Now, their word is meaningless, having produced a forged altered document. And even if the document were the legitimate certification, it would not be accepted in Hawaii for homestead purposes, why should the electorate accept it for vetting the POTUS-elect. Is there a tie to his unwillingness to release his college records, perhaps because they show some other indication of citizenship- afterall, the Presidency wasn’t in his sights in 1979 either.
December 2, 2008 at 6:11 pm
JAMES
Hawaiian law that allows for the issuing of birth certificates to individuals who are foreign nationals:
[§338-17.8] Certificates for children born out of State. (a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.
** The Hawaiian officials, in their Oct. 31st statement, carefully verify the existence of the document, but they NEVER confirm the place of birth:
On October 31, 2008, Dr Chiyome Fukino, Department of Health, Hawaii, issued a press release in which she stated, in part:
Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.
On October 31, 2008, the Associated Press reported the following:
Health Department Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said Friday she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama’s original birth certificate.
Notice that neither the actual press release nor the Associated Press article state that Obama was born in Hawaii or that he is an American by birth
December 8, 2008 at 2:09 pm
smrstrauss
In case anyone missed the news today:
Barack Obama
Supreme Court Declines to Hear Obama Nationality Case
By Robert Barnes
Washington Post, Dec. 8
The Supreme Court this morning unceremoniously declined to hear an emergency appeal from a man who claimed President-elect Barack Obama is not qualified for the presidency because he is not a “natural-born” citizen.
The court without comment declined to hear “Donofrio v. Wells,” a suit that had attempted to keep Obama off the New Jersey ballot. Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick had claimed Obama had dual nationality at birth, because of his Kansas-born mother and his Kenyan-born father, who was a British subject at the time.
Just to be nonpartisan about it, Donofrio also contended that Republican Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) and Socialist Workers candidate Roger Calero also were not natural-born citizens and should have been kept off the ballot.
The case had little chance at the high court, but became the subject of a tremendous amount of speculation and debate on ideological political blogs.
Right-wing blogs were outraged when Justice David H. Souter denied Donofrio’s petition for an injunction, and left-wing blogs smelled trouble when Justice Clarence Thomas referred the matter to the full court for consideration.
In fact, both were routine procedures, as the court’s action today shows. There were no recorded dissents to the decision dismissing the case.
End Quote
December 8, 2008 at 2:33 pm
smrstrauss
Re: “Notice that neither the actual press release nor the Associated Press article state that Obama was born in Hawaii or that he is an American by birth.”
What you should understand about Hawaii law is that, while you can obtain a Hawaii Certification of Live Birth for a child who was not born in Hawaii, that certification cannot lie. In other words, while the child would be granted a Hawaii certification, it cannot say “born in Hawaii on it,” if the child was born in Tokyo or Hong Kong or New York or Kenya.
Why not? Well (1) The law does not provide for entering a selected place in Hawaii if the child was actually born somewhere else. There is simply no procedure for doing this. (2) For the state of Hawaii to issue a certification saying that a child was born in Hawaii when she or he was born somewhere else would be lying; (3) If Hawaii issued birth documents saying that a person was born in Hawaii when they were actually born in some other country would mean that Hawaii birth documents could not be used for US passports, and we know that they are used for US passports.
Therefore, there cannot be a Kenya birth certificate in Obama’s file.
So, we have the situation of the officials saying that they went into the file and found a birth document that proves the COLB that Obama has posted. The COLB says that he was born in Hawaii. The officials say that they saw a birth certificate. It cannot have been a Kenyan birth certificate (or else the COLB would say “born in Kenya”), therefore it must be a Hawaii birth certificate.