Propaganda Defined

Sharia Law and the “Arab Fest” in Dearborn, MI

Bill Maher May Have to Eat his words: Makes “Birthers an Offer” They can deliver on

“I’ll show you Obama’s birth certificate when you show me Sarah Palin’s high school diploma.”

How much is airfare to Wasilla?

State Department Position on “Natural Born” Citizen

The State Department also asserts that “the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes.”

^{http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86757.pdf}

^{Secretary of State Hillary Clinton}

Leftist View on Birth Certificate: Eliminate the “Natural-Born” Requirement from the Constitution

Yet another Liberal Columnist cedes the point on Obama Birth

 

The Real Agenda of the Progressives: Abolish the Citizenship Requirement

by Eric Dondero:

Last week we ran a story here at LR, “Liberals in full retreat on Obama Birth Certificate: Progressives now Say US born citizenship requirement should be Abolished” (Read it here.)

We quoted Joshua Keeting of National Public Radio who made the following statement on his radio show, and in his weekly column:

Let’s imagine that Barack Obama had been born in Indonesia or Kenya or anywhere else for that matter, and hadn’t become a citizen until moving to Hawaii to live with his grandparents. Is there one good reason why that would make him less fit to be president?

Put another way, is there one good reason why foreign-born governors Arnold Schwarzenegger and Jennifer Granholm can’t legally run for president but Mark Sanford and Sarah Palin can?

Naturalized citizens like Henry Kissinger, Zbigniew Brzezinski, and Madeline Albright have been allowed into the highest positions in the U.S. national security establishment without anyone questioning their loyalty. Why shouldn’t voters be allowed to decide whether a foreign-born candidate is American enough to be president? New York voters didn’t mind the fact that Hillary Clinton had never lived in the state before running for its senate seat.

We speculated that this was the true agenda of the Progressives; not to necessarily debunk various Obama birth certificate theories, but rather to abolish the Constititonal requirement of US birth and citizenship for the Presidency altogether.

It’s taken only one week for yet another major liberal publication/columnist to join in.

Popular Liberal Columnist Mark McKinnon of the Daily Beast had this to say in his column today, “So What if Obama is Foreign?”:

More fundamentally, so what if he was born somewhere else? If he was, he was teleported to Hawaii in nanoseconds. There is no more an American story than Barack Obama. The rationale for Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution, which bars foreigners from becoming president, was to eliminate the possibility of America’s leader from holding dual or treacherous alliances with other countries. The Founding Fathers wrote this clause into the Constitution in 1789 because of scandal in Europe involving Austrians moving to other countries.

So what would be the legitimate concern about Obama?

Indeed. For those who want to abolish the US Constitution what would be the big deal?

Posted by Eric Dondero at 4:43 PM

http://libertarianrepublican.blogspot.com/2009/07/yet-another-liberal-columnist-cedes.html

Nationals and Citizens of United States at Birth

This is the Federal Statute as signed by Pres. Ronald Reagan in 1986

TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER III > Part I > § 1401 (g):

§ 1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth

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…

The statute does not use the words “natural born citizen”. What was the text on August 4, 1961?

Intent of HR 1503: Keep Birther Controversies from Arising in Future Elections

And Mary Ann Aker’s blog on The Washington Post opines about Rep. Louie Gohmert’s (R-TX) recent cosponsorship of HR1503:

Does Gohmert believe the conspiracy theorists who argue — despite plenty of evidence to the contrary — that Obama was really born in Kenya, not in Hawaii?

“I don’t know if it’s true or not,” Gohmert told the Sleuth in a telephone interview Wednesday evening. “But I read that Lou Dobbs said [Obama's] original birth certificate was destroyed.” (That would be Lou Dobbs of CNN, who has helped to perpetuate the Internet-fueled rumorthat the copy of Obama’s birth certificate produced by his campaign last year is fraudulent.)

Gohmert says he’s “shocked that people are saying the people who signed onto the bill are conspiracy theorists.” The whole point of the bill, he argues, is to “eliminate all this conspiracy talk.”

He pointed out that questions were raised last year about the true citizenship of Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), who was born in the Panama Canal Zone.

When reminded that Hawaii government officials had affirmed and reaffirmed this week that Obama was indeed born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961, Gohmert said, “That’s what they say… I don’t know if it’s true or not.”

Gohmert is in the same company as Rep. Roy Blunt (R-Mo.), the former No. 2 House Republican who is running for Senate in 2010. Blunt, though not an official co-sponsor of the birther bill, wasvideotaped this week on Capitol Hill by a reporter for the liberal blog Firedoglake questioning Obama’s birth creds.

“What I don’t know is why the president can’t produce a birth certificate,” Blunt said. “I don’t know anybody who can’t produce one. That’s a legitimate question — no health records, no birth certificate.”

Well, isn’t that something? Apparently Rep. Gohmert and I are of the same mind. I guess that officially makes him a “birther” too, huh? He doesn’t know for sure, but he’s not stopping anyone from trying to get to the truth of the matter… and neither is Rep. Blunt.

http://www.therightsideoflife.com/

Scary (for the opposition), huh?

America’s Right: The Birth Certificate Issue Is About Obama’s Honesty, Integrity, and Transparency

From Jeff Schreiber at AmericasRight.com:

Assigned Reading: Suborned in the U.S.A.
(FROM: National Review)

Even on the day I broke the story of the first lawsuit filed with regard to the ongoing controversy surrounding Barack Obama’s birth, I cautioned that I could not attest to the veracity of the claims in the suit. I still cannot, and I don’t see a problem with it. Why? Because, to me, the controversy isn’t just about Obama’s birth, but about his personal history and personal accountability as a whole.

Andrew McCarthy, in this lengthy article at National Review, does a phenomenal job of wrapping up exactly what the continued questions mean to me. (I say “lengthy” because reading it took up much of my time at this Internet terminal at a local mall, not as a judgment of how readable or necessary it may be.) See, the controversy has been about the greater issue of Barack Obama’s honesty — that’s why, as the theories became more and more “out there,” such as the Frank-Marshall-Davis-as-Barry’s-Real-Father idea, I drew further and further away here at America’s Right. To me, it’s never been about the details, never about the proverbial pissing match which erupted between various factions of those seeking the truth about Obama’s background. It’s been about his accountability, on this and on everything else. Not to mention the failure of the mainstream press to do its job.

Anyway, I saw the McCarthy piece, and felt that everyone here needed to read it. My time here is done. I’ll see all of you stateside in a few days’ time.

http://www.americasright.com/2009/07/heart-of-birth-controversy.html

Al Sharpton and Ann Coulter Debate Racism

Logging into Gov’t site= the Gov’t now owns the Content of YOUR Computer

A Comment Posted on YouTube:

Where are all those who were screaming the twisted notion that Bush was ‘spying’ on average citizens when the TRUTH was that they were only looking at international calls to or from KNOWN TERRORISTS?

What POSSIBLY could be their argument FOR this now??? You bet they’ll come up with why it’s fine for Obama’s administration to do this!