G. Gordon Liddy: Obama Was Born in Kenya

By
Thursday, June 04, 2009 at 11:17 am

Glenn Greenwald passes along a clip of Richard Wolffe discussing his new Barack Obama biography, “Renegade,” on G. Gordon Liddy’s talk show, in an interview that rather quickly dovetails into Liddy’s conspiracy theories about Obama’s citizenship.

LIDDY: You mentioned distractions. One of these distractions right now is these lawsuits that take the position that he is not constitutionally eligible to be president of the United States because he is not a naturally-born citizen. Now, he could clear that up in an instant by producing a genuine birth certificate. And yet he refuses to do it. He says he has one but he won’t do it. What is behind that? Hubris or what?

WOLFFE: Well, I’m going to differ with you on this one. This came up during the campaign. A copy of the birth certificate is out there. Anyone can see it. He was born in Hawaii. There are documents from the state of Hawaii that prove it. I don’t know what else you really expect me to do.

LIDDY: Well, here’s the thing. The document you speak of is a “certificate of live birth,” which is not a birth certificate. You can’t get a passport with that, you can’t even register your kids…

WOLFFE: Yes you can. That’s what I do. That’s what everyone does. The certificate of live birth is exactly what you get a passport with.

LIDDY: No, it’s a birth certificate.

WOLFFE: That’s — the copy of the birth certificate, everyone has copies of birth certificates. They use them all the time. Nobody hands out the one original document.

LIDDY: No, I wouldn’t expect them to.

WOLFFE: When you go to the DMV you take a copy with you. You don’t take the real… and it’s an official copy, it has to be embossed and stamped, it’s not just like a xerox. But that’s what it is, and it’s widely accepted.

LIDDY: Why is it redacted? Why is it redacted?

WOLFFE: I haven’t seen any redactions.

LIDDY: The one that’s on the internet, that’s the one that I’ve seen, and that one has the serial number redacted.

WOLFFE: I have no idea. I’ve seen one with serial numbers on it and everything. So I don’t know what the problem is here. Do you have an idea of where he was born if it wasn’t in Hawaii?

LIDDY: Yeah, there’s an affidavit from his grandmother that says that she observed the birth in Mombassa, Kenya.

WOLFFE: Yeah. You know, I just think that that is completely false.

Liddy conflates multiple conspiracy theories about Mombassa — Obama’s step-grandmother has never said anything like this. I’ll just clip what I wrote last year in Slate:

On Oct. 16, an Anabaptist minister named Ron McRae called Sarah Hussein Obama, the president-elect’s 86-year-old paternal step-grandmother, at her home in Kenya. Two translators were on the line when McRae asked if the elder Obama was “present” when the president-elect was born. One of the translators says “yes.” McRae contacted Berg and gave him a partial transcript of the call with a signed affidavit. He opted not to include the rest of the call, in which he asks the question more directly—”Was he born in Mombassa?”—and the translators, finally understanding him, tell him repeatedly that the president-elect was born in Hawaii.

That little nugget is the basis for multiple Kenya conspiracies.

TWI is on Twitter. Please follow us here.

Follow David Weigel on Twitter


Comments

429 Comments

Ramon
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 8:57 am

G. Gordon Liddy is a convicted felon and a liar. Why should anyone take his word on anything?


prsmith
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 9:23 am

Nobody should take anybody's word for anything especially if it comes from the Internet or any media source – they should do the proper research and examine the relevant documents.

What is frustrating to me is that the birth certificate issue is irrelevant – it's a smoke screen. What is relevant is the fact that AKA Obama's father was a Kenyan national and British subject. That is precisely what our founding fathers feared at the time when they inserted the 'natural born' clause into the Constitution. So what's the definition of 'natural born citizen'? Here are the founding fathers' thoughts:

But they do not truly understand what the terminology “natural born citizen” truly means, or indeed what it meant to the writers of the Constitution.

Two words you MUST understand with regard to “natural born citizen” are “allegiance” and “sovereignty”. According to Senator John A. Bingham who WROTE the 14th Amendment here is what natural born citizen actually means.

Senator Bingham said while speaking about the rights of citizens in the U.S. House of Representatives on March 6, 1866 the following :

[I] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…. . . ”

- John Bingham in the United States House on March 9, 1866 (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))

And furthermore, Senator Bingham's definition of “natural born citizen” is in direct keeping with the understanding of the writers of the Constitution, who had access and frequently referred to Vattel's book “Law of Nations” which simply states

“ The natives, or natural born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens “ and
“ I say that in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen, for if he is born of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth and not his country. “ (Emmerich Vatel – Law of Nations)


Raw Replay - Revisiting History
Pingback posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:43 am

[...] David Weigel notes that G. Gordon Liddy claimed President Obama was born in Kenya during an interview with Richard Wolffe Thursday. Liddy claimed that the copy of Obama’s birth certificate seen on the internet is fake. LIDDY: Why is it redacted? Why is it redacted? [...]


Ryan
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 10:59 am

There are actually 3 different types of documents in play: A long-form birth certificate, which is universally recognized, a “Certificate” of LIve Birth, which has the hospital and doctor information and the stats on the baby, and then there's the “Certification” of Live Birth, which is the short-form and does NOT show where he was born. Obama's Certification of Live Birth has also been proven to be a forgery. See: http://polarik.blogtownhall.com/ for proof.


Dexter Morgan
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:11 am

When is the mainstream media going to expose this fraud Obama and acknowledge that he isn't a natural-born citizen and was in fact born on Mars?! I mean, come on; the proof is overwhelming.


bamalaw
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:14 am

Now, THAT was funny Ryan!! Thanks for the link!


LaLee
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:31 am

Ryan, are you for real or is your comment is tongue in cheek?

In case you're serious i'm gonna respond with a response a creationist or an IDist deserve when he/she tries to peddle their ignorance.

WHAT IS YOUR PROOF?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:34 am

Yawn, Are you stil at this, Mr. Smith? Your arguments have been debunked repeatedly, yet you still persist in this delusion. Oh, Well. I guess everyone needs a hobby. Posting Conspiracy nonsense on the internet may not be the best use of your time, but it's rather harmless in it's way.


LaLee
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:34 am

Mister Smith, if what you said about “Natural Born Citizen” is true then how could CHESTER A ARTHUR whose father is CANADIAN (IIRC) can be POTUS?

How can you explain that?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:36 am

Ryan Wrote: –”and then there's the “Certification” of Live Birth, which is the short-form and does NOT show where he was born”–

Hmm, then why does it say: “City, Town or Location of Birth: Honolulu” on it?


Rick
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:38 am

Never take the word of ANY politician. Get the evidence. AND this case the evidence would be a birth certificate showing the who, when & where. Not this certificate of live birth. It's not the same thing. Anyone who doubts this should take a look at their own certificates and compare the two. Clearly he has something to hide or he wouldn't spend millions and have 16 (or it it more now) lawyers fighting to have a $5.00 document released. The only official government document that's available is the final decree in his parents divorce. That OFFICIAL court document states, “one child under the age of eighteen, born in Kenya.”


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:41 am

I like the way Liddy gets totally face planted in that exchange.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:43 am

Rick make the outrageous claim: —“The only official government document that's available is the final decree in his parents divorce. That OFFICIAL court document states, “one child under the age of eighteen, born in Kenya.””—

That is simply not true, you big stinking sack of lies.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:48 am

—”Not this certificate of live birth. It's not the same thing”—

The Certificate of Live birth is a legal document issued by the State of Hawaii. Under Hawaiian law this document is the same as the original document. The State has certified the fact that he was born in Honolulu. There isn’t a court in this land that would not accept the COLB as legal proof that he was born in Hawaii. Not one. Nada, Nix, Zero, Zilch, Bubkis, no way, no how. You lose.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:51 am

Or, what about Vice President Charles Curtis, whose mother was an American Indian and at the time of his birth, not an American Citizen.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:54 am

To “Dr. Smith,” SCOTUS ruled quite definitively in 1898 that if you are born in this country then you are a natural born citizen. United States v. Wong Kim Ark.

There is no way of getting around that rulling.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 12:05 pm

I heard he showed up in the center of a crop circle in a pineaple plantation.


Mary
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 12:07 pm

Obama had to have been 'vetted' when he became a state senator, and later a US Senator; and finally president. Whoever was initally responsible for investigating his background (to protect the American people) should be held accountable. How do we find the ones responsible for his vetting? We are now more than four months into Obama's questionable presidency and he is still ignoring demands to show absolute proof of his citizenship. Who is this arrogant man who is above the law; who surrounds himself with questionable characters and is protected by the media? He should not be allowed to hold office one more day without this proof, so why is he allowed to get away with this sham? Who is looking out for this country?.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 12:11 pm

Actually, Mary, president Obama was “vetted” by one of the most powerful groups in this country, the GOP. That’s the way it works in politics. Every candidate for public office is thoroughly scrutinized by the opposition party. No flaw, problem or issue is too obscure or too small for the opposition party not to take advantage of. So if you want to blame anyoone, blame Rush!


LaLee
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 12:15 pm

Mary, Obama's birth certificate has been AUTHENTICATED by Hawaii State Health Director CHIYOME L FUKINO no less.

Do you want a more thorough “vetting” than that?


trinks
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 12:15 pm

Liddy is a troglodyte. This, combined with his recent inane ramblings about 55-year-old Sonia Sotomayor being unable to perform on the court when she's “menstruating,” show just how ignorant and irrational this knuckle-dragger really is. Why is this man still on the air? And why do we care what this cave dweller has to say?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 12:17 pm

And the Republican Governor of Hawaii as well.


Yinzer
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 12:18 pm

None of the “birthers” on here get it. Why should the President provide additional proof of his citizenship? Just because a bunch of fringe characters like Liddy, Orly Taitz and Andy Martin want it? Just because a bunch of mouth-breathing losers gorging on Chee-tos and surfing the net in their mommy's basement demand it? No, no. He'll wait until a real GOP heavyweight latches on to this stupidity, like Sarah Palin, Mitt Romney, Mitch McConnell, Mike Steele, or John Boehner. Then he'll release the documents and make the GOP politically radioactive for the next 70 years. If and until that happens, there's nothing at all to be gained by humoring a bunch of internet losers.


trinks
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 12:18 pm

Yes, “Polarik,” the noted expert who goes by an alias and is afraid to put his name to his ludricous assertions. You people are raving loons!


JBL in Maine
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 12:20 pm

And if Rush and the GOP are actually part of this conspiracy, so are the states of Hawai'i, Illinois, and New York, as well as the INS, Homeland Security, the IRS, and the Supreme Court.

Birthers. Sheesh.


MadLibrarian
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 12:25 pm

Barack Obama's mother was an American citizen, so it wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference where he was born. The children of an American mother or father are natural-born American citizens no matter where they are born. My sister, born when my American parents happened to be in Spain, is a perfect example, and you'd better believe she could be President.


RobertSeattle
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 12:37 pm

I wish Liddy would do that Candle trick again – just with a much bigger Candle.


See
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 12:47 pm

To all the birthers, I don't ask that you stop what you are doing.

Please, keep it up. Stay on course with your ridiculous conspiracy theories. No amount of evidence will satisfy you. You just keep making the conspiracy that much larger when presented with solid evidence. And it only hurts your side in the long run.

There are people who believe the earth is flat and that the moon landings were faked. What are you gonna do? People are stupid. They believe whatever is emotionally comforting to them.

So they can sit and post silly online blogs about how Obama isn't the real president. That's fine, they can be ignored while the grownups get to work


catherder
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 12:53 pm

You know, a smart person would ask where Obama's mom was when she gave birth. You need a passport to get from the US to Kenya and I have yet to hear of a woman who is giving birth in one country having her baby arrive in another multiple thousands of miles away.


old1
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:06 pm

Don't need the Birth Certificate. His father being a British Citizen at his birth, caused his new born son to be born a British Citizen under the British Naturalization Act of 1948. A British Citizen can not be considered a Natural Born American Citizen. Our Founding Fathers knew this and knew they were not Natural Born American Citizens at the signing of our Constitution so they added the language “unless you are an American Citizen at the adoption of this Constitution.” to Article 2. Section 1. paragraph 5. of their new Constitution. This Article has never been amended nor changed and still states the same Law as it did in 1787. Being born a British Citizen to a non American citizen father, makes Barack Hussein Obama Jr. ineligible to hold the office of President of the United States of America, unless he was born before 1787 and was then an American Citizen. Now that would be a story!


Bobby
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:11 pm

What would be the surprise, really if President Obama was not born here? Mr. The laws are breaking down in every area in the United States, and it is causing the corrupt politicians to get away with literally murder, foreign nationals by the millions have no business being in this country, but instead, they protest and threaten Americans, while Janet Napolitno is the latest chief of HLS who will do nothing to guard our borders with one of the most corrupt nations in the world, and on and on. Of course all of this is only possible because Americans allow it. When the big hammer falls, ignorant, deluded, and self deceived Citizens will wonder WHA THE F–K HAPPENED. TOO LATE THEN. We are not carrying out our responsibilities as free citizens.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:12 pm

See, you are right. Some even believe this usurper is really President. What fools!


trinks
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:12 pm

Except he was born in America, moron…there goes your whole fantasy.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:17 pm

Mad, being a librarian look up Natural Born American Citizen, “Born of Blood and Soil” old English Common Law. You see our Founding Fathers were old English Lawyers and knew this phrase well. Born of Blood from two citizen parents and Soil from the place of birth.


pianoguy
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:21 pm

The document I used when I got my passport is indeed called “Certificate of Live Birth.” My parents, who gave it to me, called it my birth certificate, and I suspect they were right.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:21 pm

Yinzer? How about Alan Keyes, good enough for you? Are does his being black make it irrelevant?


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:23 pm

Medically, racist Sonia could still be fertile. Wouldn't be the oldest on record. Try 67!


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:30 pm

This is BS! US v Ark ruled no such thing.
If he was VETTED show – 1. Who., 2. Where., 3. When., 4. Witnesses., The smoke is getting on the mirrors and they just don't look as brite as they used to. America s learning the truth! Give it up.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:35 pm

The fact his father was a Brit and the British Naturalization Act of 1948 make Jr. a British Citizen at birth. Makes him ineligible for Natural Born American Citizen status. He could have been born in Chicago and it wouldn't help him.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:38 pm

We know what Gordon was, he didn't spend a million dollars to hide his past!


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:43 pm

Alferd, your logic is 3 wrongs make a right? Pretty slim! I give you a “F” on this point. Try to do better next time or you will be relpaced.


MaryASanDiego
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:44 pm

The 'long form Birth Certificate' is what is needed to confirm he was born in Hawaii. His paternal grandmother said she was at his birth in Kenya. His half-sister named 2 hospitals in Hawaii where he was born. Where is the BC with the delivering Dr.'s name and the name of the hospital. A COLB from HI does not mean he was born in Hawaii. He could have received that COLB when he returned to HI after being born in Kenya. If he's a natural born citizen, why won't he release the real thing? Why are his medical and all school records sealed? If he has nothing to hide, why go to all the work and expense of keeping all his records sealed? He's inept and doing terrible harm to the U.S. If he's impeached, we'd then have the honor of having Joe Biden and Princess Pelosi in office. I hope the voters are awake in 2010 and 2012 and remember all this. So many people are undereducated and easily swayed by the rhetoric that the compaign throw at them. They never bother to research for themselves. The candidate with the most money and best story wins. That needs to change. We certainly got 'change' all right with Barry, but not the kind we 'hoped' for.


MaryASanDiego
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:48 pm

Obama's mom had a passport. Her husband was from Kenya. So Obama's mom was in Kenya when Barry was born. And you're right; she couldn't have given birth to Barry in Kenya and have him arrive in HI – until later – and then she got a COLB for him.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:49 pm

MORON? IQ 136, not great, but I bet I got you beat! Lets go slow— CITIZEN is one thing— NATURAL BORN AMERICAN CITIZEN is a different classification. Kind of like WATER, and BEER, both are liquids, but not the same. trinks you think you get it now.


MaryASanDiego
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:50 pm

Barry's mom was not old enough at the time of his birth to confer US citizenship on him. His father was a British citizen.


MaryASanDiego
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 1:52 pm

He should provide proof of his citizenship because to this point he has not provided adequate proof and the Constitution requires proof of his natural-born citizen status. So it's only the Constitution that he's violated but no one seems to have the ***** to stand up to him for it.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:02 pm

Mary, you can relax it wont be Joe of Nancy. All the Obots will be removed from office and a new election held as soon as we can have another Primary and Election. Some Constitutional Lawyers say that George may be asked to come back and hold the reigns until the process is completed, seeing he was the last legal setting President. Also, John will be ruled ineligible because of his birth place and the fact that the Senate OK him will be overturned now that Eligibility has came under the spotlight.


VivaLaMigra
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:05 pm

Liddy is absolutely correct; a “certificate of live birth” is NOT a “birth certificate!” The latter documents the actual BIRTH of a human being within the sovereign territory of that state. The former merely serves to identify someone who was born outside of it. It's nothing more than an official courtesy. The birth certificate would be witnessed by an attending physician, midwife, or other person who was present at the birth. The other document is merely an attestation to the effect of: “I am the mother of this child and I know where he was born and when.” BIG difference. That's why if you only have a “certificate of live birth” on file you must ALSO have a certificate of NATURALIZATION – ie. proof that you're now a US citizen! – to get a US passport.


JW Stepp
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:06 pm

Where is the SUPREMES are they not charged with the ultimate responsible to uphold the Constitution?
Inaddition WHAT ABOUT THE PRESS. Do we no longer have any truth in the press. It appears all the newspapers and television stations and new organizations are all HEADED BY COUARDS< WHIMPS or Worse yet TRAITORS> Is therte not a man amoung them? It appears NOT???????


Polarik
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:08 pm

What's posted on the Internet is a forgery, a fabricated image, and not a copy of a real document.

Obama's “Certification of Live Birth” does not exist and never did.

Obama's Press Secretary confirmed that they posted this document fraud, and everyone involved in its creation, distribution, and its cover-up are guilty of felony document fraud — a crime that carries a maximum five year prison sentence and $250,000 fine for each offense.

Do you think that this is motivation for not showing us the real thing?

Obama knows that the information contained in this forgery is bogus. Otherwise, he would have submitted a PAPER COPY to members of Congress like John McCain had to do in March of last year.

People forget that it was McCain's eligibility that was first challenged in the courts three months before Obama was prodded to post a forged birht certificate to throw everyone off the scant, so to speak.

Now, you see how effective this image deception has been? It got millions of American voters, bloggers, news reporters, Congressmen, and even Federal Judges to believe that this is a REAL COPY instead of a FABRICATED FAKE!

That is the issue. FORGERY is the issue. DOCUMENT FRAUD is the issue. CRIME is the issue.

REMOVAL FROM OFFICE is the solution.


madlibrarian
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:22 pm

But what possible difference would it make, even if he were born in Kenya? The child of an American mother is an American. Period. If you went on vacation while pregnant and delivered a baby in Kenya, it wouldn't make your baby a Kenyan, and she could still grow up to be President. American babies are born overseas EVERY DAY. And it is no big deal.

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.”

Obama was born in 1961, and his mother was an American citizen who had certainly resided in the US for more than 10 years, having been born and raised here.

So, even if you could prove that he wasn't born in Hawaii, which he obviously was, what difference would it make? He is still a natural-born citizen and therefore eligible to be President.


lincoln
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:25 pm

NO! U!


DaveS64
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:28 pm

Yes, you keep saying this. Do you have ONE SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE of anything that you claim here? No, you don't. All you do is insist that the voluminous evidence that Obama was in fact born in Hawaii is fake. Even when definitively authenticated by the hawaii officials, you keep spewing out your same nonsense.

You are accusing people of crimes, so don't you think you should be the one with the burden of proving (or at least supporting) that accusation? But you don't have anything. Nothing at all but an enourmously wide pie-hole that you refuse to close.

PLEASE. Give us all a break. There are serious issues for this country to deal with, and we're all sick and tired of your juvenile nonsense and lies.


DaveS64
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:32 pm

Just because you say something doesn't make it so! I was born in California in 1964, and when I requested a copy of my birth certificate to get a passport, I was mailed something called “Certificate of Live Birth”.

So where are you getting your facts, VivaLaMigra?? It appears that, just like Republicans do on a regular basis, you are pulling them directly out of your ass.

Please give us all a break. If you have evidence to share, then share it. If all you have is unfounded accusations without any evidence, then please don't waste our time.


Anais
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:32 pm

Oh, for HEAVENS' SAKE! Obama's birth certificate, kept in Chicago, was shown to Internet truth-seekers (Snopes.com or another well-known site), who verified its authenticity. But even if you can't believe that, Hawaiian authorities have also verified that Obama was born there. What does it take to convince people? Seeing the birth certificate in person? That's like Thomas asking to see the Lord's wounds himself. Obama was born within the 50 states of the United States of America, which is more than you can say for John McCain. And the results of Obama's election were not in question, which is more than you can say for the results of 2000 and 2004. He's your president. Deal with it. We had to deal with the last godawful eight years.


DaveS64
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:34 pm

Are you illiterate, Mary? Can you not even read the english language??? HIS GRANDMOTHER NEVER SAID HE WAS BORN IN KENYA. NEVER. Do you get me? Not once. Never.

Just because you keep saying it doesn't make it true. IF you have any EVIDENCE, then present it. If not, than spare us your stupidity.


DT
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:36 pm

I heard the recording and Obama's grandmother makes it very clear he was born in Kenya. There is no doubt of what she said.


DaveS64
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:36 pm

My goodness, but the wackos are out in full force today, aren't they?

John McCain was born in Panama, but he is STILL a “natural born US citizen” under US law because his father was a military officer serving in Panama at the time, so his child, while born in Panama, was still a US citizen. This is the LAW. You know, that pesky thing that determines how we do stuff, NOT the factoids you pull out of your ass.

Will all the ignorant morons please stop wasting bandwidth????


DT
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:39 pm

Hawaiian authorities HAVE NOT confirmed Obama was born there. They only said they have a valid birth certificate on file, not where it's from or what is on the certificate. It could be from anywhere in the world. All they said is there is one on file.


DaveS64
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:41 pm

Good point, Catherder. There is, in fact ABSOUTELY NO EVIDENC WHATSOEVER that Barrak's mother EVER travelled to Kenya. If she had, there would be a record of it. But she didn't, so there isn't. It's as simple as that.

One would think that the people making these allegations would have ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE supporting their views. But, no. No evidence whatsoever. Only insults, lies, and nonsense.


DaveS64
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:44 pm

Do you have ANY evidence for what you just said? No, of course you don't. Once again you simply stick your finger up your butt and pull out a “fact”, and then expect us all to simply accept it as truth on your word alone! Sorry, babe, it doesn't work that way. IF THERE WERE ANY EVIDENCE OF WHAT YOU ALLEGE HERE, it would already have been released. But there is no evidence of this, because it's not true.

Are you aware of something called the Ninth Commandment? You SHALL NOT bear false witness against your neighbor. There is no exception to the ninth commandment for political purposes. I strongly suggeset that you re-think your inclination to lie, else you be damned to hell for all eternity.


DaveS64
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:47 pm

Nonsense. I have also listened to that recording, and she says nothing of the kind.

We are all so sick and tired of you liars!


He Was Not Vetted
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:51 pm

“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.”

1. His mother was 18, she would have needed to be at least 19 (14+5=19).

“Mary, Obama's birth certificate has been AUTHENTICATED by Hawaii State Health Director CHIYOME L FUKINO no less.”

2. Hawaii allows the registration of foreign born children Statute 338 to obtain a Hawaii Birth Certificate. No one has verified that he was born in Hawaii, only that there is a file which could be a foreign birth registration to obtain the Hawaiian certificate.

3. His sister was born in Indonesia, a well documented fact, but she also has a Hawaiian Birth Certificate.

“Obama had to have been 'vetted' when he became a state senator, and later a US Senator; and finally president. “

4. He was NOT VETTED by anyone, the states say the feds should do it that they don't, the feds say the states should do it before he got on the ballot, NO ONE vetted him.

5. Michael Steele said this on a radio talk show teo weeks ago:

“The problem that we have with this president is that we don't know him,” he said. “He was not vetted, folks. … He was not vetted, because the press fell in love with the black man running for the office. 'Oh gee, wouldn't it be neat to do that? Gee, wouldn't it make all of our liberal guilt just go away? We can continue to ride around in our limousines and feel so lucky to live in an America with a black president.' Okay that's wonderful, great scenario, nice backdrop. But what does he stand for? What does he believe? … So we don't know. We just don't know.”

6. Senator Martinez said as far as he was concerned the people vetted him when they voted for him.

7. Roger Calero was on the ballots, he has a green card and is from Nicaragua, no one checked anything or anyone except when Obama questioned McCain's eligibility.


James
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:51 pm

Why is Obama hiding his true birth location?
Is he afraid he will be prosecuted for Perjury ?


BookEmDanno
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:52 pm

This is a pretty silly conspiracy theory:

1) The Hawaii State Dept of Health verified that Obama's birth certificate is authentic. (Associated Press. “State Department of Health Declares Obama Birth Certificate Legal.” Honolulu Star-Bulletin. 31 October 2008.)

2) Both Honolulu papers had birth announcements for BHO in August 1961.
http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/obama-1961…
and
http://whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/ObamaBirth…

3) What can you infer about the GOP keeping quiet about this? You know they've done a full research of BHO — if they've found an irregularity in his birth records, what are they waiting for?

Birthers need to take a shave with Occam's Razor…


Jack Carter
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:54 pm

Oh, this is ridiculous. Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii and is a natural-born citizen. The “certification of live birth” issued by the state of Hawaii (as well as most other states) is accepted as valid proof of identity and citizenship by federal, state and local governments. You can use it to get a passport, driver's license or any other government document. He's a citizen, get over it.


DaveS64
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:57 pm

That's actually not quite true, MadLIbrarian.

Per 8 USC 1401 et seq., in order for a child of a US citizen, who is out of the country when the child is born, to be considered a “Natural Born Citizen”, the parent must have been “physically present” in the US or a US possession for 10 years prior to the child's birth, 5 of which after the parent turne 14 years old. This only applies to children born before 11/14/86.

The conclusion in the case of Obama is clear: he is a natural born citizen.

The funny thing about this is that all the “birthers” are incapable of presenting one shred of actual evidence. For them, it's all accusation. But as soon as somebody familiar with the law examines the issue, it becomes clear that it's complete and total nonsense.


Kelvin
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:57 pm

Ah, the birther movement. You guys keep up the good work. We definitely could use the laughter in these dark times.


DaveS64
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:58 pm

Nice try, Mary, but there is NO SUCH LAW. You REALLY need to concentrate on truthfulness if you ever expect to convince anybody of anything.


He Was Not Vetted
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 2:59 pm

“(Snopes.com or another well-known site), who verified its authenticity”

1. Snopes is a blog, nothing but a hobby BLOG!!!!! It is run by a husband and wife, it is nothing more than a blog. Since when did the government or the people of this country give a BLOG such as Snopes or Factcheck the authority to conduct forensics on official documentation, GEE, do they also do the background checks on the FBI and CIA applicants.


Louisiana liberal
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:00 pm

Pitiful. These 'birthers.' Wow. I'm kind of a loss for words. So, let's try these out:…
Y'all's thinking is pathetic, desperate, delusioanal, and sad. To still be harping on this conspiracy theory/idiocy, well, y'all's brains and nervous systems must have the fire power of a brontosaurus.
I'm sorry for the ad hominem attacks, but, shoot, it's so easy… and almost necessary.
Birthers, I'm sorry you live in the world do. It must be a tragic place. Full of fear, absolute thinking, and paranoia.


Swami_Binkinanda
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:02 pm

Your handle should be Polock, because your contentions are a bad ethnic joke. You should be removed from your office and gently taken to a facility where you won't harm yourself or others and maybe you'll find someone to talk with about your unicorns.


Christopher Earle
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:02 pm

What it will TAKE for “people” to accept the FACT that Obama was born in Hawaii is for a nice, white conservative president to be elected. DT, I just said that Mickey Mouse has a Habanero up his *!@@, that doesn't make it true ;-).


Swami_Binkinanda
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:03 pm

lie.


DT
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:03 pm

DaveS64, watch all of both….someone is lying if they now claim he was born in Hawaii.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGWcD5OHm08

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4FqVRWgrNw&NR=1


Swami_Binkinanda
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:04 pm

Bologna.


He Was Not Vetted
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:05 pm

“The “certification of live birth” issued by the state of Hawaii (as well as most other states) is accepted as valid proof of identity and citizenship by federal, state and local governments.”

1. This particular “Certificate Of Live Birth” is a limited value document in Hawaii, it can NOT be used for homestead and many other legal matters. This is the same certificate Hawaii issues to parents who have a child that was born in a foreign country.

2. Hawaii did NOT verify what they had in their files, it may be the Kenyan Birth certificate that was needed to apply for the Hawaiian certificate.

3. No one ever verified anything.


Beowulf
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:07 pm

The beauty of this strategy by the right is that they make themselves look incredibly stupid. If this is all they have, that's just too bad. We are at present, as a nation, on the verge of bankruptcy, huge unemployment numbers, two wars we can't win and the conservatives have no idea or desire as to how to help this country climb back out of the Bush-Cheney abyss. Team players they are not.


Swami_Binkinanda
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:07 pm

Cocaine is a hell of a drug, isn't it? Did you see the Yellow Submarine, too?
Some constitutional lawyers say that George is going to be considered a war criminal and worldwide pariah for his campaign of rape, torture, murder and mayhem perpetrated via demonstrable lies. He'll be dodging pickles in jail house showers long before anyone will put him back in charge of anything valuable.


Swami_Binkinanda
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:09 pm

Your mom wouldn't believe this cock and bull story if you were Jeffy from Family Circus demonstrating where you'd been all day. If you were a real American you would know this and not be making up this convoluted story. Oh wait, maybe you never paid attention in class or when you got your voting ID. Does it hurt to be this much of a fibber?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:10 pm

Better yet, look up United States v. Wong Kim Ark for a lesson in Constituional law. You might also, read Perkins v. Elg for good measure.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:14 pm

You are correct about one thing, Our Founding Fathers were indeed British lawyers and as such they were well acquainted with the principle that under British common law, being born in the realm made one a natural born subject of the realm. Thus when they included the term “natural Born” in the Constitution without redefining it, one has to interpret in light of the precedent British Common Law. Too bad for you.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:14 pm

It doesn't matter, he was born in Honolulu.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:15 pm

A Roman Candle?


bodhikai
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:16 pm

Dear “G”: Go to Factcheck.org. You can see a photograph of the official, embossed birth certificate without the redaction. The simple explanation is that Obama's staff didn't know what the serial numbers referred to, or whether they needed to be protected (like someone's social security number). Once they found out it was innocuous, they allowed factcheck to actually handle and photograph it without any redaction.

If you're going to come up with wingnut theories, at least stay on top of the latest information.

Personally I think you should spend at least as much energy looking at bush's heavily redacted TANG records. They tell a much more interesting story of laziness, slackery, and shirking of duty. It's fun reading.


DT
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:17 pm

Christopher, you are nothing but a parrot for Obama. It is NOT a FACT he was born in Hawaii. And frankly, it's clear he has much to hide otherwise he would produce ALL documentation to put this issue to rest including his college admissions forms and student loan information showing if he applied as a foreign student. He is not above the law as much as he and you might wish.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:19 pm

My god that is the stupidest thing that I have ever read.


bodhikai
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:21 pm

Go to factcheck.org. You can look at people actually holding the birth certificate, pointing out the raised seal, etc. It IS a paper copy, not electronic.

You should take your head out of the sand. How do you know he didn't submit a paper copy to Congress? Do you even know what you're talking about? I suppose he also went back in time and posted a birth announcement, knowing he'd need it someday to “prove” where he was born.

Oh, and sure, his press secretary said it was fraud. In what universe (inside your head?) did THAT happen?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:23 pm

Sorry, not under U.S. law. In this country there are only two classes of citizenship, natural (i.e. acquired at birth) and naturalized (acquired after birth).


DT
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:24 pm

Bookemdanno, birth announcements in a local paper mean nothing. They are just announcements, nothing more. The Dept. of Records said nothing more than there was on file a valid birth certificate. They did not say where it's from. It proves nothing until it is revealed and the real thing has yet to be. That birth certificate could be from Kenya, no one knows until Obama releases it to the public.


bodhikai
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:25 pm

If they don't remove presidents for lying about their military service, or lying us into war, or war profiteering, or being retarded, then they won't remove a president because he can't produce photos of his head popping out between his mom's legs in front of a well-known Hawaiian landmark to satisfy tinfoil hat nutjobs.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:25 pm

Ha – that means you were born in Kenya


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:28 pm

Mary wrote: “A COLB from HI does not mean he was born in Hawaii. He could have received that COLB when he returned to HI after being born in Kenya.”

Sorry, Mary, but that is not how the law works. The COLB is an abstract of the original document with the place of birth written right on it. Why would it say he was born in Honolulu if he wasn't?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:33 pm

“Liddy is absolutely correct; a “certificate of live birth” is NOT a “birth certificate!” The latter documents the actual BIRTH of a human being within the sovereign territory of that state. The former merely serves to identify someone who was born outside of it.”

That is so, so wrong. Are you a pathological liar or are you just a nincompoop?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:34 pm

Don't insult your betters, sonny. They are a lot smarter than you can ever hope to be.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:36 pm

Hey, whatever your name is, care to address the debunking of your nonsense at this iste?

http://www.hackerfactor.com/blog/index.php?/arc…


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:37 pm

You are a lying sack of crap and you know it. Do you kiss your mother with that mouth?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:38 pm

Nope. The COLB quite clearly states that he was born in Honolulu. Why do you have a problem with that?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:39 pm

Nah, it's just to mess with the heads of all you wing nuts.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:43 pm

So, if the document that was posted on the internet is fake, why hasn't the State of Hawaii prosecuted Obama for breaking the law. The Governor and the attorney General are Republican'ts, why haven't they jumped all over this?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:46 pm

Quote:== “3. No one ever verified anything.”

So why hasn't the Republican Governor and the Republican Attorney General of Hawaii prosecuted Obama for Fraud?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:48 pm

QUote== “2. Hawaii did NOT verify what they had in their files, it may be the Kenyan Birth certificate that was needed to apply for the Hawaiian certificate.”

What are you babbling about. If he had a Kenyan BC, Hawaii would not issue him anything. The COLB is a digital abstract of the data in the files, it clearly states that Obama was born in Honolulu. Why would it state this if he wasn't?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:53 pm

Quote=== “1. This particular “Certificate Of Live Birth” is a limited value document in Hawaii, it can NOT be used for homestead and many other legal matters.”

The Homestead program is valid for NATIVE (ethnic) HAWAIIANS only. Additional information is needed for applicants into that program to prove that they have greater than 50% native Hawaiian blood. This included the BCs of their parents and often their grandparents. Obama is not applying for a homestead lease and as far as I know there is no requirement to be a native Hawaiian to be president.

quote==“This is the same certificate Hawaii issues to parents who have a child that was born in a foreign country.” You seem to be referring to a law that was passed in 1982. Obama was born in 1961. How is this relevant?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:55 pm

Birth announcements at that time were placed by the hospital staff.

The announcements were made less than a week after he was born. How is this possible?

The BC was filed with the state registrar just a few days after he was born. If he was born in Kenya, how is this possible?

Tie up your loose ends, you are becoming unraveled.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:57 pm

The State of Hawaii has legally certified the fact of his birth in Honolulu. The COLB is valid in ANY court of law for that proof. You lose.


24AheadDotCom
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 3:57 pm

Liddy is probably wrong, and his statement above and his other statements aren't exactly helping.

That said, many sources have lied about this issue. In fact, where BHO was born has never been definitively proven. Please note that I'm NOT claiming that BHO was born in some particular place. What I'm actually saying is that those – like Weigel – who claim he was born in a particular place are lying because no definitive proof has been provided.

That distinction is too subtle for many, but hopefully you the reader will be able to understand the difference.


24AheadDotCom
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 4:00 pm

Birth announcements at that time were placed by the hospital staff.

Couldn't they also have been placed by someone else? Do you have any evidence whatsoever that those papers only accepted them from hospitals? Do you have any evidence whatsoever of who placed the ads?

The BC was filed with the state registrar just a few days after he was born.

No state official has ever said anything like that; Alferd is lying.


DT
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 4:00 pm

Alfred, could you please document your statement here? “Birth announcements at that time were placed by the hospital staff.”

How could you know this if you haven't seen the BC?
“The BC was filed with the state registrar just a few days after he was born. If he was born in Kenya, how is this possible? “

I think you are the one with loose ends! You take a lot for granted and that is very dangerous in today's world!


24AheadDotCom
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 4:02 pm

The State of Hawaii has legally certified the fact of his birth in Honolulu.

That's a lie. The only thing the state of HI has said is that he has a valid cert on file. They specifically noted that they are legally forbidden from confirming anything on the cert.

To see that Alferd is once again lying, read the full statement from the state of HI.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 4:02 pm

It states that right on the COLB, you dingleberry.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 4:03 pm

Moron, the COLB is a legal document. it is a certified document. It is valid in ANY court of law.

Don't be a gullible dope.


24AheadDotCom
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 4:11 pm

Apparently understanding simple topics is too much for Alferd. The “COLB” is, at this point in time, simply a picture on a web page. It has not been verified by the state of HI. The state of HI cannot confirm that what's in that picture matches what they have on file. Nothing in the COLB picture can be relied on until it's (at least) verified by an issuing agency.

Once again: right now, that's just a picture on a web page. If you want to trust BHO, then simply admit that. I wouldn't have a problem if people would just say, “I think BHO was born in HI because I trust him”. My problem is with those who pretend that proof has been offered when it has not.


24AheadDotCom
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 4:12 pm

See this comment.


See
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 4:24 pm

I don't think all these right wing conspiracy people really believe what they are saying about Obama and his birth certificate.

They are just reacting the only way they know how, by crying and throwing a long temper tantrum. They just want something to complain about, however ridiculous and unfounded. They lost a very historic election and this is their defense mechanism.

I have some simple questions for these birthers…

Let's say, for arguments sake, that you are all correct, and that Obama wasn't born in Hawaii.

Then how could such a secret be kept so quiet for so long? Don't you think that when Obama and Hillary were battling it out in the primary race, that if this was true that her side would have found out about it? How did Obama become a US Senator, which requires some extensive background checking if he isn't a US citizen? Why did the State Dept issue him a passport?

Why didn't John Mccain's people find out about it? If it was true, then this would be a huge story, right?

I eagerly await your long winded, unhinged rants


Bob Simmons
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 4:24 pm

Well if it isn't Dr. Ron Polarik, PhD.! Forensics expert! Tell us, Doctor, what esteemed institution honored you with a degree? Tell us sir, what is your real name?

You've never examined President Obama's COLB. You posted a report based on an image of his COLB. Sure, it's what experts do all the time!

You sir, are a fraud and to anyone with a brain, a laughing stock. Along with your buddy, Beckwith, you are the biggest perpetuator of nonsense on the internet regarding Obama's COLB.

You will have to answer to a bigger power one day, Dr. Ron Polarik, PhD!


surfer
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 4:27 pm

Thanks for your points. You spell it out well.

The point is NO ONE has confirmed that Obama is Constitutionally qualified to be President.

It is true that Hawaii confirmed they have a birth certificate for Obama but it does NOT prove that he was actually born in Hawaii.

Why not show the document? He is hiding something and for a candidate to claim a new level of transparency he isn't following through. He should produce the document and be done with it.


trinks68
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 4:47 pm

This guy has no “office” other than his mother's basement. “Polarik” is a fraud trying to pass himself off as a documents expert. If he is SOOOOooo convinced, he should reveal his identity and show us his credentials. There is a good reason he has not done so.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 4:48 pm

Who vetted him then? I'd like to know.


Wingnuts Abound: G. Gordon Liddy Thinks Obama Was Born in Kenya | New Global Civics
Pingback posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:49 pm

[...] wonderful nugget, plus the source of the crazed lunatic conspiracy theories, comes courtesy of The Washington Independent. Thanks [...]


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 4:54 pm

24, can you tell me why these Obots never want to see the birth certificate? Do they know for sure what we are trying to find, and therefore have to help hide it?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 9:58 pm

How so?

Please be specific.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 10:00 pm

Nope. Try again.

If you were born in this country, you are a natural born citizen, no matter who your parents are.

Too bad for you.


Gene Daniels
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:00 pm

Hey, it's Polarik! The expert on everything!

Even the deep thinkers at Free Republic think you're full of shit at this point. After you said that all of Obama's high-school photos were most likely faked and/or photoshopped, even the diehards couldn't take you seriously anymore.

You're no doctor. You're no expert. You're an asshole of a sore loser who can't accept the fact that Obama is president.

Stop with the lies, asshole!


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:00 pm

The State of Hawaii has only said there is “something “on file. What NO ONE KNOWS! Hawaii gave birth certificates to anybody that said they lived in Hawaii before the birth. They used to have to paddle dug-out canoes to get to the main Island and that could take weeks and was a common occurance. Liars hide the truth. Honest men have nothing to hide.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:03 pm

Alferd has a mental problem. He can't comprehend the truth.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 10:06 pm

Obviously you suffer from reading comprehension issues. If you read the decision in ,i.United States v. Wong kim Ark, you will note that Justice gray takes incredible pains to point out that the Constitution is based on British Common law, and that under British Common Law if you were born in the realm, you were a NATURAL born subject. He makes it quite clear that the same principle applies to U.S. citizens.

If you were born in the country, then you are a natural born citizen of the country.

Basically what you are saying is that the laws of another country determine who is eligible to be president in this country. How can you justify that?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 10:07 pm

No, his being crazy makes him irrelevant.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:07 pm

bo, stay on top of the latest information, George is in Dallas Tx and having a fine time with us. We are talking about the usurper in thief, illegally setting in our White House “today”!


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:10 pm

wulf, we don't team up with Communists to play any game!


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:10 pm

You wrote: “The state of HI cannot confirm that what's in that picture matches what they have on file.”

Of course they can. All they have to do is look at what they have in the file. They have that authority. What they can't do is release a copy of to you or to any other yahoo. But it is entirely within their authority and their duty to maintain the integrity of their records. If there is an allegation that a fraudulent COLB was posted on the web site, then it is within tier statuary duty to investigate that allegation.

And don't try to claim that the records are “sealed” State law does not allow the records to be released to any dufus that asks for them, but they have the right and the sworn duty to uphold and maintain the law and that includes protecting the integrity of their certification process.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:12 pm

24aheaddotcom wrote: “The state of HI cannot confirm that what's in that picture matches what they have on file.”

Of course they can. All they have to do is look at what they have in the file. They have that authority. What they can't do is release a copy of to you or to any other yahoo. But it is entirely within their authority and their duty to maintain the integrity of their records. If there is an allegation that a fraudulent COLB was posted on the web site, then it is within tier statuary duty to investigate that allegation.

And don't try to claim that the records are “sealed” State law does not allow the records to be released to any dufus that asks for them, but they have the right and the sworn duty to uphold and maintain the law and that includes protecting the integrity of their certification process.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:13 pm

Give um time. Andy Martin has been told they will release his freedom of information act papers in a few weeks. Be sure to keep up with that!


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:14 pm

The GOP. It is their duty to their candidate to vet the opposition candidate. It is their duty to find anything, no matter how trivial thatthey can use against the opposition candidate.

they are a lot smarter than you.

They looked into ti and saw it was nonsense.

The Republican Governor of Hawaii looked into it and saw it was nonsense.

Rush looked into it and saw it was nonsense.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:15 pm

Chris, great idea, we're working on it!


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:16 pm

I have that on goo authority from a LONG time labor and delivery nurse. In fact, when my son was born, the hospital placed the BA in the paper.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:17 pm

Are we making “you” nervous? We are having a fine time alerting America to the truth. Things are better every day.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:17 pm

I don't need to personally see it. It was publicly released. The state of Hawaii had a chance to look at it and say “hey, that doesn't match what we have in our files.” they did not. Why? are they part of the “conspiracy?”


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:18 pm

Great point and TRUE!


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:19 pm

They know what they have on file. If it didn't match what Obama released, why didn't they say do anything about it? That would be a clear violation of Hawaiian law.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:20 pm

A COLB is a legally certified document. Get that through your pointy little head.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:20 pm

Why is he not in jail for Election Fraud?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:22 pm

No, you are making us laugh.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:22 pm

Citizen and Natural Born Citizen are not and will never be the same. Saying that, we still do not know if baby “O” is even an American Citizen.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:22 pm

Proof, old man. proof.

If the COLB is fake, then the state would have clear proof of that.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:24 pm

Lack of information makes nothing, either true of false. Why don't “you” help us find the TRUTH?


Mike
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 10:25 pm

Just a simple question, Obama refers to himself as a Native Born citizen on his Fight the smears website, and helped write the resolution that the senate passed that said a Natural born citizen was born to US citizenS (plural) when John McCain’s citzenship eligibility came up as an issue.

If Obama wrote that resolution and has never claimed to be a Natural Born Citizen only a “native” born one, how is he eligible?

By the very definition he wrote in the senate he is not eligible.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:25 pm

There are only two “types” of citizenship.

Natural born (i.e citizenship acquired at birth)

and

Naturalized (i.e. citizenship acquired later in life)

There are no other distinctions. If you were born in the U.S. you are elegible to be president.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:30 pm

According to the State of Hawaii, Barack Obama was born Friday evening at 7:24 pm, August 4, 1961, in the city of Honolulu, on the island of Oahu. The birth record was filed with the official state registrar of vital statistics four days later on Tuesday, August 8, 1961.

Prove me wrong.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:38 pm

The COLB is a legal document issued by the State of Hawaii. The state certifies that the facts in this document are valid proof of birth, including the location and time of birth. This is a legal document. It is valid in ANY court of law.

Prove that this is not true.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:55 pm

What power do they have and under who's authority? The “O” releases information to nobody. How they supposed to get the information?

________________________________


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 5:57 pm

Lack of knowledge proves nothing, it can't!

________________________________


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:00 pm

There is only natural and naturalized.

You are either born a citizen (natural) or you become one later in life (naturalized)


Doc3
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:01 pm

Alf, please post anything from the Democratic National Committee that states that Obama was vetted. Take your time. Nothing right. The only thing the Democratic National Committee has done is to hire a team of attorneys to assist Obama in sealing his records.

Let's review:

1. Hawaiian law, at the time of Obama's birth, allowed for FOREIGN born (i.e. outside of Hawaii) baby's to be registered in Hawaii via a 'Certificate of Live Birth':

§338-5 Compulsory registration of births. Within the time prescribed by the department of health, a certificate of every birth shall be substantially completed and filed with the local agent of the department in the district in which the birth occurred, by the administrator or designated representative of the birthing facility, or physician, or midwife, or other legally authorized person in attendance at the birth; or if not so attended, by one of the parents.
The birth facility shall make available to the department appropriate medical records for the purpose of monitoring compliance with the provisions of this chapter. [L 1949, c 327, §9; RL 1955, §57-8; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-5; am L 1988, c 149, §1]

2. What a legitimate birth certificate would look like note it includes the name of the hospital, doctors and witnesses all absent from the Certification of Live Birth:
http://snarkybytes.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/…

3. Why Hawaii has not verified Obama was born there:
http://michaelpatrickleahy.blogspot.com/2008/10…

4. This birth issue was first raised by the right wing radical Hillary:
http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2008/04/11/clinton-oba…

5. Obama signed numerous declarations under penalty of perjury that he was a “natural born citizen”:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/11107727/Barack-Obama…

6. Land program that shows Obama could pay $10.00 and sign a release and obtain a certified copy of his birth certificate that would have the name of the hospital, doctors and witnesses. Just like this program the natural born standard is the highest in the land. Once a legitimate birth certificate with that information is produced the hospital, doctors and witnesses could be contacted to confirm the birth:
http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/Loaa%20Ka%20A…

7. Article that explains the law if Obama were born in foreign territory why he is not eligible:
http://www.volokh.com/posts/1227910730.shtml

The bottom line. Obama is a one term president over this issue. At some point what he has been trying to hide will come out. If it shows he lied he will face criminal charges for voter fraud, lying under oath, loss of his law license and a host of other unpleasantness. The instant his name appears on a presidential ballot in 2012 he will be sued and mootness will not be an issue.


Doc3
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:13 pm

Here is what the US Passport office has to say about the short form birth abstract aka Certification of Live Birth as produced by Obama. It is the same the State of Hawaii has to say in regards to their land use program. If you like you can also look up what is required for a Hawaiin drivers license, same thing.

http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/minors/min…

*A certified birth certificate has a registrar's raised, embossed, impressed or multicolored seal, registrar’s signature, and the date the certificate was filed with the registrar's office, which must be within 1 year of your birth. Some short (abstract) versions of birth certificates may not be acceptable for passport purposes.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:16 pm

===”Alf, please post anything from the Democratic National Committee that states that Obama was vetted. Take your time. Nothing right. The only thing the Democratic National Committee has done is to hire a team of attorneys to assist Obama in sealing his records.”===

It was not necessary for the DNC to vet him, that was the GOP's job.

Seriously, that is the way politics works in this country. It is the job of the opposition party to find and expose any weakness in the other candidate, no matter how trivial. This issue was brought up well before the election. The GOP, including the Republican governor of Hawaii had ample opportunity to investigate this issue. I can assure you that investigate it they did.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:17 pm

“registrar's raised, embossed, impressed or multicolored seal, registrar’s signature, and the date the certificate was filed with the registrar's office, which must be within 1 year of your birth.”

All of which are present on the Obama COLB.


Doc3
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:19 pm

Other interesting information regarding Obama not found in the press:

1. http://waronyou.com/topics/key-witness-in-obama…

2. http://www.hillarynme.com/2009/02/27/obama-pass…


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:20 pm

“1. Hawaiian law, at the time of Obama's birth, allowed for FOREIGN born (i.e. outside of Hawaii) baby's to be registered in Hawaii via a 'Certificate of Live Birth':

§338-5 Compulsory registration of births. Within the time prescribed by the department of health, a certificate of every birth shall be substantially completed and filed with the local agent of the department in the district in which the birth occurred, by the administrator or designated representative of the birthing facility, or physician, or midwife, or other legally authorized person in attendance at the birth; or if not so attended, by one of the parents.
The birth facility shall make available to the department appropriate medical records for the purpose of monitoring compliance with the provisions of this chapter. [L 1949, c 327, §9; RL 1955, §57-8; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-5; am L 1988, c 149, §1]“

Where does that statute say anything about foreign births? Even if a foreign birth were registered in this fashion, the birth data would indicate the actual place of birth, not “Honolulu.”


DT
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:22 pm

Alfred, you need to get real here. It's not the GOP's responsibility to vett Obama. The bottom line is, if Obama had nothing to hide he would be more than happy to show all documents in question. Plain and simple!


Doc3
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:25 pm

Alf,”Some short (abstract) versions of birth certificates may not be acceptable for passport purposes.”

But there are experts in this field that could answer this important question. Obama will not even produced the document that was produced on a pro-Obama website. Due to the law cited below the Hawaiian short form birth abstracts are not accepted for passports or other purposes.

The State of Hawaii has stated they are holding the vault copy. Obama could sign a release and pay $10.00 and produce a certified copy. He still refuses to do so.

I did not see any reference to a cite to the Democratic National Committee saying they vetted Obama. Come Alf show us the cite. We will keep waiting.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:26 pm

=====“6. Land program that shows Obama could pay $10.00 and sign a release and obtain a certified copy of his birth certificate that would have the name of the hospital, doctors and witnesses. Just like this program the natural born standard is the highest in the land. Once a legitimate birth certificate with that information is produced the hospital, doctors and witnesses could be contacted to confirm the birth:”=====

Sory, but that land program data is ten years out of date. The State of Hawaii has gone to an all digital vital statistics database. This means that from now on, there will be no more “long forms.” All data will be filed directly into the database from the hospital. What it also means is that the state no longer issues copies of the BCs printed from the microfiche records. All data is entered into the computer and a COLB is printed from that. Hawaiians looking to prove that they have greater than 50% ethnic blood need to obtain additional data elsewhere. The State no longer issues certified copies of the microfiche records.

All BC requests these days are filled with a COLB.

The COLB is legal proof of birth.


Anonymous
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:26 pm

You must be an IDIOT! OK, I’ll humor you. Quote your source. I have nothing against McCain, but he certainly is not, nor can he ever be, a Natural Born American Citizen. Congress got it all wrong for all the wrong reasons. Neither side wanted to disqualify their candidate and let their opponents candidate slide. Wake Up! Try to save America from the New Fools, don’t be one.

________________________________


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:27 pm

You have got to be kidding me. The State Registrar has the authority to examine all records under his control.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:28 pm

So why hasn't the State prosecuted Obama for forging a certified document?


Anonymous
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:30 pm

2 wetbacks swim the Rio Grand and drop a kid in a US hospital at taxpayers expense. You telling me that wetback can in 35 years be President? Cut down on the meds or sober up.

________________________________


Anonymous
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:32 pm

subject, citizen, and Natural Born American Citizen, are all words. But that is all they have in common!

________________________________


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:33 pm

Are you kidding me? It's not the GOP's responsibility to do everything possible to ensure that their candidate wins? What color is the sky in your world?


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:35 pm

===”Alf,”Some short (abstract) versions of birth certificates may not be acceptable for passport purposes.”"===

Only if they do not include the data listed, a registrar's raised, embossed, impressed or multicolored seal, registrar’s signature, and the date the certificate was filed with the registrar's office, which must be within 1 year of birth. Note that you have to submit the original embossed document with your application, so be sure to order a couple.


Anonymous
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:37 pm

History will list George as one of the Greatest American Presidents of the 21 century. Barack Hussein Obama will be remembered as the first usurper ever elected to the office of President illegally and how that almost destroyed our Great Nation, before the internet saved America from a bought and paid for MSM!

________________________________


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:37 pm

According to the State of Hawaii, Barack Obama was born Friday evening at 7:24 pm, August 4, 1961, in the city of Honolulu, on the island of Oahu. The birth record was filed with the official state registrar of vital statistics four days later on Tuesday, August 8, 1961.

The burden of proof is on you to prove this wrong.

Go for it.


Doc3
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:38 pm

Alf, Obama applied for the job. The Democratic National Committee placed his name on the ballot. The People expected that when Obama's name was placed on the ballot and they cast their ballots for him that he had been properly qualified. He had not. Posting a photograph on a website is not vetting of a candidate. The People do not have the burden of proof to show Obama is not qualified. The People have since filed over 40 lawsuits and continue to try and seek a legitimate answer to this question, but it remains a question.

If a court would actually allow discovery to open in one of these cases it would take about 90 days to prepare the necessary discovery to answer this question. Experts in immigration law and legal documents could examine the evidence and render an opinion on if Obama does or does not meet the standard. What Obama produced is a joke. There are still lawsuits proceed. Andy Martin is appealing a case in Hawaii and has a good chance of obtaining a copy of the vault birth certificate.

Obama has dug himself into a hole on this one. Obama and the Democratic National Committee have failed to meet their burden that Obama was properly vetted for the office he is now sitting in.


Anonymous
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:39 pm

Know it like the back of my hand!

________________________________


DT
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:39 pm

Lots to learn here…get educated and updated about this subject and the very strong possibility Obama is a fraud!

http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageI…


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:41 pm

The COLB is a valid legal document in the eyes of any court in the land. The burden of proof is on you to refute that.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:42 pm

So why isn't Rush all over this?

this is right up the fat boy's alley.


Anonymous
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:43 pm

Read the British Nationalization Act of 1948. Without a doubt he was born a British Citizen because Sr. was a Brit. It takes two American Citizen parents to transfer Natural Born status. One can get you citizenship but not Natural Born Citizen qualifications.

________________________________


madlibrarian
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:43 pm

I would, if English Common Law in any way ever overrode American law.

Which, you know, it doesn’t.


Anonymous
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:44 pm

Dead wrong, again!

________________________________


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:44 pm

Oh, and BTW, it's Alferd, not Alfred. I.e. Alferd Packer.

I do a mean cook out. Come over some time.


Anonymous
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:45 pm

are you confused? What’s that got to do with this string?

________________________________


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:46 pm

None of you can get away from the fact that the COLB is a legally certified document.

It is valid proof that he was born in Hawaii.


Doc3
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:47 pm

Alf, what you are saying is nonsense. If you have a cite to anything from the Democratic National Committee saying they vetted Obama then post it. Otherwise what you are saying is irrelevant. I am not an expert in immigration law or the interpretation of the Certification of Live Birth. There are qualified people that could answer this given the documents. Obama and the Democratic Party have sealed all of his records. They are hiding behind laws, such as in Hawaii, that protect the birth certificate. So saying prove it is not satisfactory when courts will not allow discovery to proceed.

This issue is not going away. It is gathering steam and at some point something will break open.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:52 pm

It states right on the COLB: This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding

you don't need to have a law degree to figure out what that means.


24AheadDotCom
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:53 pm

Alferd: can you write anything without lying? According to their state laws, HI officials cannot release the information on a cert. “Release” includes confirming what's on, for instance, the picture of a COLB on BHO's site.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:54 pm

According to the State of Hawaii, Barack Obama was born Friday evening at 7:24 pm, August 4, 1961, in the city of Honolulu, on the island of Oahu. The birth record was filed with the official state registrar of vital statistics four days later on Tuesday, August 8, 1961.

The burden of proof is on you to prove this wrong.

The world is waiting


Doc3
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:54 pm

Alf, please post the legal citations that the COLB is proof that Obama was born in Hawaii. You then have to take it the next step and show evidence of that fact. Like the hospital records, the doctor that made the delivery and any witnesses. We all know Obama could sign a release and get a certified copy of his birth certificate. Saying all that is available is a COLB is nonsense.

Here is the same form from Hawaii to apply for a certified copy of a birth certificate. Same form, same price as in the Hawaii land program:
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/pdf/birt…


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:55 pm

Later all.


24AheadDotCom
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:55 pm

Alferd: BHO needs better defenders. The picture of a COLB on BHO's website has not been verified in any way by a government agency. It's just a picture. There's no proof that it matches what HI has on file. If you want to take BHO's word for it, then fine. Just make sure you note that you're basing that on faith and not on the facts.


24AheadDotCom
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:56 pm

The COLB shown on BHO's site is just a JPEG. It has not been verified by a government agency. It has not been “certified”. It's just a picture.


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:57 pm

===(b) Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original, subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18.===

http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_…


24AheadDotCom
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:58 pm

This issue is an IQ/integrity test, and Alferd has repeatedly failed.

A COLB is a valid legal document for certain things. However, the only thing BHO has shown us is a *picture of a COLB*.

Alferd doesn't understand the difference between a COLB and a picture of a COLB.


24AheadDotCom
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 6:59 pm

The state of HI has never once said such a thing. They have never confirmed where or when he was born.


oldmagicman666
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 7:00 pm

OK BUT NOTHING WAS EVER REPORTED accept there was “something” on file!

________________________________


Doc3
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 7:00 pm

Alf, Obama and the Democratic Party have the burden of proof on this. By placing his name on the primary ballot they (Obama and the DNC) represented to the voters Obama had been qualified. That evidence should be produced. The hiding of evidence, sealing of records, sending teams of attorneys in to fight production of evidence speaks of concealment. A person is judged by their actions.

Do you understand burden of proof? I am still waiting for you to post anything from the DNC saying they qualified Obama before they placed his name on the primary ballot.


Doc3
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 7:11 pm

Thanks Alf. Guess this answers the question about whether a photostatic image of the vault birth certificate is available:

§338-19 Photostatic or typewritten copies of records. The department of health is authorized to prepare typewritten, photostatic, or microphotographic copies of any records and files in its office, which by reason of age, usage, or otherwise are in such condition that they can no longer be conveniently consulted or used without danger of serious injury or destruction thereof, and to certify to the correctness of such copies. The typewritten, photostatic, or microphotographic copies shall be competent evidence in all courts of the State with like force and effect as the original. [L 1949, c 327, §23; RL 1955, §57-22; am L 1957, c 8, §1; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-19]


anon
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 7:13 pm

1/It's Mombasa not Mombassa.
2/Obama's birth was also announced in the Hawaii paper a day or two after he was born. Just one of tthose announcements you see all over the country where they print the births esp. in smaller towns .


Truthsayer
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 12:20 am

Really, Polarik? Robert Gibbs confirmed that the document was a fraud? Is that what really happened?

What planet do you post from?

Take your bullshit and shove it up your ass.


Doc3
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 7:23 pm

Actually, the birth announcement may have been an automatic filing from the date his birth was registered as opposed to be born. I am not saying he was or was not born in Hawaii, just that the Hawaiian laws in 1961 were so wormy anyone could walk in off the street and register a child and get a birth certificate on their own word.

Obama has stated that he was born in a hospital in Hawaii. His family has said the same thing. The only way to prove that is to produce the vault certificate that lists the name of the hospital, then go to the hospital and ask for the confirming record.

It is possible that Obama was born somewhere else and he was brought back to Hawaii to be registered. If the vault birth certificate says he was born at home or in a car, or anywhere but a hospital as Obama and his family have claimed, then it raises red flags and would require further verification.


Anonymous
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 12:26 am

He just might spend the rest of his life in a federal hotel at our expense.


DT
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 7:30 pm

So much for freedom of speech. I'm being blocked from posting. Guess the truth hurts too much!


Anonymous
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 12:31 am

The COLB says nothing! Alferd come up with something new.


DT
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 7:31 pm

Several of my posts were blocked.


Anonymous
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 12:35 am

Alferd, check your pulse, settle down, you’re just loosing the string.


Anonymous
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 12:38 am

That’s what I heard.


Anonymous
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 12:42 am

surfer, well said, and you are right! 2 points!


Anonymous
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 12:52 am

Doesn’t over ride American Law, just makes him a British Citizen at birth. That British Citizenship, is what prevents him from being Natural Born.

________________________________


Lisa
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 7:52 pm

Obama is a total Fraud!
He needs Impeached!
He is Ruining our great COuntry!


Alferd
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 8:01 pm

I understand that for all practical purposes a “picture of a COLB” is the same thing as the actual COLB. Think about it, if it was fake, how long do you think it would take before someone from the Hawaiian DOH peeked at the records and blew the whistle? Do you really think that Obama would risk his entire campaign/career by posting a fake COLB? get real. Get you mind out of the conspiracy gutter. Wake up and stop being paranoid.


jai
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 8:10 pm

At the time of Obama's birth, a COLB was available to essentially anyone who applied.

And a COLB was necessary only for those without a birth certificate which would have been generated at birth to anyone born in Hawaii. The guy wasn't born there and his stalling and refusal to produce it is all the proof any intelligent human needs. He has convicted himself.

The man is too stupid to do anything but read a prompter. He's nothing but a puppet put in place by the mafia controlled unions and the oil rich Islamic countries.


Irene
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 8:46 pm

If Obama was born in the Hospital in Hawaii as he and his sister say he would have a BC not a COLB.


Ruth Robertson
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 8:51 pm

Nancy Pelosi swore to all 50 states one by one that Biden and Obama were constitutionally eligible to old their offices. Ask Nancy how she verified it.


Mkie
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 8:57 pm

HELP STOP ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION…….MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD: http://www.numbersusa.com/content/


Anonymous
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 2:00 am

I’m waiting!

________________________________


Anonymous
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 2:00 am

I’m waiting!

________________________________


Anonymous
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 2:00 am

I’m waiting!

________________________________


D-Girl
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 9:29 pm

Wrong. that is the ONLY type of certificate available to Hawaii born citizens. it has always been known as a Certificate of Live Birth (and is accepted as the commonly known name as a BIRTH CERTIFICATE)

I was born in Hawaii.


D-Girl
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 9:32 pm

Wrong (why do these lies persist 8 months after the fact they've been prove to be lies????)

NO private invdividual could just “go to the office” and file a birth certificate. Only the hospital or the attending doctor could file for this, on behalf of the parents.


D-Girl
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 9:34 pm

I was born in HAWAII and the image of Obama's COLB is the EXACT same image as mine. ITs an official document, and if you haven't been around for a while, a third part went down to Obama's campaign office and LOOKED at the official document, and provide the WATERMArk AS well as the signatory stamp (which was not shown on the website) and proved the document to be official.

WHY do you cling to this lONG debunked lie?


D-Girl
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 9:35 pm

Any resident of Hawaii could have verified that its real. I am from hawaii; MY COLB is the same as the one on his website, down to the WATERMARK that is found on the COLB.

24 head and these same guys cling onto a lie invented by morons.


D-Girl
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 9:37 pm

Actually they have. Where have you been for the last year? Posted to the Honolulu Advertiser (birth announcement section, where the paper could ONLY get this information from the Offices of Vital Statisics, where BIRTHS are reported to them)

INSTEAD of posting opinions as if they were facts, why not ask someone WHO Lives in hawaii?

I lived in Hawaii; and can happily say that you are lying through your teeth.


D-Girl
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 9:38 pm

And they are… I have my COLB right here, with the watermark and signature.


D-Girl
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 9:39 pm

Correct.


D-Girl
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 9:51 pm

Officially debunked since Nov of last year. WHY are birfers so insistent to cling to this old lie?

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in…


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 9:56 pm

In a lawsuit the Rules of Evidence and Rules of Civil Procedure would apply. In which case copies are easily bypassed. Believing otherwise is ill-informed, wishful thinking, or worse.


Colin
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 10:02 pm

Although they have absolutely nothing to do with us on the left (they are iin most caes Paulites aka libertarians) for whatever reason (spin) the 9/11 Truthers are associated with the left. It is GREAT to see the right get their very own (and very real) batsh*t insane conspiracy theorists. And they even have a cutr little name too: Birthers. Lol. I love people.

See is probably correct though. Although I think that they think they believe it. They need to believe. Otherwise getting the absolute crap kicked out of them in the election really, REALLY hurts. If the other guy cheated then it's not really your fault you lost.

I'm also always amused by the use of BHO, emphasis on the H, and all the other stupid nicknames they use to refer to the President of our great nation. Everything they accused the left of doing the last 8 years (disrespecting our leader, not supporting him in a time of war, etc) they now do themselves. It's like when you're not in power you must act like a child. Both sides.

As far as Liddy goes. I like Liddy. To an extent. Born, raised, and residing in the Washington D.C area Liddy has been a part of my life since I was a child. He was the mid-day radio show host on my favorite radio station for most of my childhood. He also frequented the used book store in my area. I met him on several occasions. He's actually a very nice guy in person. That being said, he is insane. He has always been insane. Being on the same page as him isn't a good thing. Especially if it's a conspiracy theory.


He Was Not Vetted
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 10:03 pm

His father was a British Subject, there was an excellent explanation earlier how that made BHO a British Subject.

He was adopted by his step father and used the name Barry Soretoro, an Indonesian can't be a dual citizen or otherwise, you are only a citizen of Indonesia. He used the name Barry Soretoro attending school in Indonesia and the school records showed he was a Muslim citizen of Indonesia.

Depending on his status, he may be a naturalized citizen or an Illegal Alien.

He has hired dozens of lawyers over the past few years to fight every request and lawsuit filed to compel him to release every document requested which includes
:
Vault birth certificate – adoption records – school records – college transcripts – selective service records – medical records – all social security numbers used – all passports used – all names that he has used – means of college funding , etc.

The lawyers continue to seal every record pertaining to his life and they continue to block the release of any records.

No matter how you look at it, he was never eligible to run.

As Michael Steele said, “He Was Never Vetted.”


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 10:08 pm

These so-called “facts” are not derived from any evidence in the public domain, merely from inadmissible and worthless online images, convincing for true-believers but never a court. Nothing to sustain, therefore nothing to disprove.


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 10:31 pm

Under the Rules of Evidence any paper COLB Obama's attorneys might produce in court EASILY loses prima facie status because it is not a true duplicate [1001 and 1003], not complete [106], not best evidence [1002] and easily rebuttable [301]. The COLB's loss of the presumption under Rule 301 is particularly fascinating. Alferd's rebuttal of the rebuttal would be interesting to read.

Anyhow it's clear why Obama's lawyers are not allowing his paper COLB and its prima facie status to be tested in court, however much Alferd truly believes in its image (purported).


obamination
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:21 pm

I was born in another country and my parents walked in and got me a colb. It means nothing. At that time anyone could get one in Hawaii. I have 2 uncles that also got one. I don't have an actual birth certificate so I use my COLB. So yes he wasn't born here. He's hiding it. But the liberal brainwashed antichrist worshipping obamanites will deny it until he starts wwIII. If he is impeached or shown as a fraud there will be race riots due to a bunch of low iq reverse racist that believe he is black and the first black president. He is far from black. He is a mocha fraudacinno at best.
To clear things up.
Obama is not black. His mother is white. Why is it that all the race card players say he is black. You can't do this in this case. If you mix a collie and a rottweiler do you get a collie? or is it a rottweiler? It's neither. It's a mutt and so is Obama. Not black not white but a Mutt. How does this play into the birth certificate issue. Well for all the people screaming bigotry and racism. Wake up. One of Obamafrauds biggest enemies happens to be a real black man with 2 black parents and he is going to put Fraudbomber out on the street by this fall. First reason is his fake birth certificate, which snopes and all the other liberal owned validation companies have done nothing to prove prima facia that fraudbomber was born on usa soil. He may be a citizen but not a natural born citizen. I have a hawaiian birth certificate. Not a colb and believe me there is a big difference. Obama has spent over 1 million dollars fighting in court to block the release of his non existent birth certificate. Why not just spend the $10.00 to shut up all of the racist bigots that are harassing this 100% pure black nubian prince? The reason is that he has been stalling along with the other liberals to try to figure out how to come up with a fake birth certificate that will be able to fake out the forensics team that the republicans are going to have verify the certificate. This man used a fake name to attend college and has no college records available to be seen. Why? Because he had them sealed. Why? Because they like him are probably fake. So call it what you want. But anyone who doesn't see this person for what he really is needs to stop listening to his arrogant self righteous rhetoric and demeanor and look at the hard evidence. He has no verifiable credentials. He will be out of the white house by this fall and there will most likely be race riots because people see what they want to see and percieve what they wish too. No matter how much evidence is produced that he is a fraud his die hard cult followers that have been brainwashed will never find fault with their master. I liken it to a mother who no matter how much proof is presented that her son is a fraud she will continue in a state of denial. “He would never do that.” “You have made a mistake.” etc etc. She will deny it to the grave as the brainwashed american people will also deny it until our once great country is a complete cess pool. Filled with liar,frauds, and yes obama worshipers. I can't wait till he is found out and hopefully his cancerous policy can be reversed before we become a socialist police state filled with rap music and violence. Which by the way go hand in hand.


obamination
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:30 pm

CLEARLY ANOTHER BRAINWASHED OBAMABITCH


obamination
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:33 pm

NO YOU ARE WRONG. IT IS NOT A BIRTH CERTIFICATE. IT IS A COLB. I WAS BORN IN GERMANY AND MY PARENTS WALKED IN IN 1962 BEFORE ALL OF THE ENFORCEMENTS WERE IN PLACE AND GOT ME A COLB. I DON'T HAVE A BIRTH CERTIFICATE. SO YOU ARE SO WRONG. AND BY THE WAY. I USE MY COLB AND NOBODY EVERY CHECKED IF I HAVE A REAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE.
MY COUSIN WAS BORN IN HAWAII AND HE DOES HAVE A REAL BIRTH CERTIFICATE AS WELL AS A COLB. SO GET YOUR SHIT TOGETHER AND FACTS STRAIGHT.


obamination
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:35 pm

D-GIRL (DOES THAT STAND FOR DUMB.?)
NO LIES JUST FACTS THAT HAVEN'T COME OUT YET. LOOK ANGELO MOZILLO CHARGED WITH FRAUD AFTER YEARS OF BEING THE PRESIDENT OF COUNTRY WIDE AND TOP BUSINESS MAN IN THE NATION. NOW LOOK AT HIM. HERO TO ZERO. JUST LIKE OBAMA WILL BE. OBAMA TO OSAMA.


obamination
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:36 pm

YOU SIR ARE CORRECT. CHEERS!


obamination
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:37 pm

OFFICIAL DEBUNKED BY WHO? WHAT IS THERE CREDENTIAL. FACT CHECK OR SCOPES?
LIBERAL OWNED AND PAID OFF BY THE LIBERAL OBAMABOTS.


obamination
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:39 pm

FINALLY SOMEONE WITH A BRAIN AND THEIR FACTS STRAIGHT!


D-Girl
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 4:40 am

False. the COLB short form, contains information that is found on the long form BC as filed by Hospitals (or attending doctors) when a birth is recorded in the state.

Instead of making things up, why not ask someone who lived or is living in Hawaii?


D-Girl
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 4:40 am

False. the COLB short form, contains information that is found on the long form BC as filed by Hospitals (or attending doctors) when a birth is recorded in the state.

Instead of making things up, why not ask someone who lived or is living in Hawaii?


D-Girl
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 4:40 am

False. the COLB short form, contains information that is found on the long form BC as filed by Hospitals (or attending doctors) when a birth is recorded in the state.

Instead of making things up, why not ask someone who lived or is living in Hawaii?


D-Girl
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 4:42 am

Sorry, but only a hospital where the child is born, or an attending doctor could have filed for the BC in the State of Hawaii.

I was born and raised in Hawaii, and have a COLB


D-Girl
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 4:42 am

Sorry, but only a hospital where the child is born, or an attending doctor could have filed for the BC in the State of Hawaii.

I was born and raised in Hawaii, and have a COLB


D-Girl
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 4:42 am

Sorry, but only a hospital where the child is born, or an attending doctor could have filed for the BC in the State of Hawaii.

I was born and raised in Hawaii, and have a COLB


obamination
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:42 pm

NO YOU ARE WRONG! HE WAS DECLARED TO BE BORN AT THAT TIME AND DATE. AND AFTER WAITING A COUPLE OF DAYS THEY WENT IN AND FILED THE BIRTH RECORD. MY PARENTS DID THE SAME. I AM FROM GERMANY. BORN THERE. BACK THEN THEY DID NOT EVEN REQUIRE TO SEE THE CHILD OR ANYTHING. JUST TAKE THE PARENTS WORD FOR IT.
MANY PEOPLE EVEN PAID DOCTORS TO ISSUE A HOSPITAL RECORD FOR COLBS SO THEIR CHILDREN WOULD HAVE CITIZENSHIP. WAKE UP.


obamination
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:45 pm

YOU IDIOT IT HAS BEEN PHOTOSHOPPED. FORENSIC ANALYSTS ALREADY HAVE DETERMINED THAT. JUST GO TO YOU TUBE. TYPE IN OBAMA FAKE COLB.

I CAN MAKE WATER MARKS TOO. I HAVE A COLB AND SCANNED IT AND CAN MAKE IT LOOK JUST LIKE FRAUDBAMAS.


obamination
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:46 pm

YA D GIRL AND MY UNCLE IS SANTA. I WAS BORN IN GERMANY AND I HAVE A COLB DOWN TO THE WATERMARK. I ALSO HAVE SEEN A PHOTO SHOPPED ONE THAT IS POSTED ON THE INTERNET THAT MORONS LIKE YOU BELIEVE IS REAL. EVEN IF IT WERE REAL IT PROVES NOTHING. ANYONE AT THAT TIME COULD GET A COLB.


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 4, 2009 @ 11:54 pm

Lies?

Section 57-18, 19 & 20 of the Hawaii Territorial Public Health Statistics Act, 1955.

If a person was born in Hawaii but NOT attended by a physician or midwife, then, up to the first birthday of the child, an adult could, upon testimony, file a “Delayed Certificate”, which required endorsement on the Delayed Certificate of a summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance for delayed filing, which evidence must be kept in a special permanent file. The statute provided that the probative value of the Delayed Certificate must be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence.

Still say it's all lies?


John
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 5:59 am

You are working on shoving a habanero up Mickey’s !@@?????


John
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 5:59 am

You are working on shoving a habanero up Mickey’s !@@?????


John
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 5:59 am

You are working on shoving a habanero up Mickey’s !@@?????


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:01 am

All data (all field entries) from pre-2001 pre-COLB birth records (eg Obama 1961) were not “entered into the computer” to comprise the COLB database record. A pre-2001 birth record printed as a Hawaii COLB derives from a limited, incomplete database that does not LEGALLY duplicate (under required the Rules of Evidence) all data from pre-COLB records.

If anyone doesn’t believe me then please read the back of a Hawaii COLB which states this and go to Factcheck.org who confirm it. Stamped on the back of a Hawaii COLB: “I Certify this is… a[n] ABSTRACT of the record on file…State Registrar”.

I’m sure Alferd can see the implications of this in court under the Rules of Evidence for any Obama COLB claiming to be legal proof of birth: it is NOT prima facie evidence.


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:01 am

All data (all field entries) from pre-2001 pre-COLB birth records (eg Obama 1961) were not “entered into the computer” to comprise the COLB database record. A pre-2001 birth record printed as a Hawaii COLB derives from a limited, incomplete database that does not LEGALLY duplicate (under required the Rules of Evidence) all data from pre-COLB records.

If anyone doesn’t believe me then please read the back of a Hawaii COLB which states this and go to Factcheck.org who confirm it. Stamped on the back of a Hawaii COLB: “I Certify this is… a[n] ABSTRACT of the record on file…State Registrar”.

I’m sure Alferd can see the implications of this in court under the Rules of Evidence for any Obama COLB claiming to be legal proof of birth: it is NOT prima facie evidence.


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:01 am

All data (all field entries) from pre-2001 pre-COLB birth records (eg Obama 1961) were not “entered into the computer” to comprise the COLB database record. A pre-2001 birth record printed as a Hawaii COLB derives from a limited, incomplete database that does not LEGALLY duplicate (under required the Rules of Evidence) all data from pre-COLB records.

If anyone doesn’t believe me then please read the back of a Hawaii COLB which states this and go to Factcheck.org who confirm it. Stamped on the back of a Hawaii COLB: “I Certify this is… a[n] ABSTRACT of the record on file…State Registrar”.

I’m sure Alferd can see the implications of this in court under the Rules of Evidence for any Obama COLB claiming to be legal proof of birth: it is NOT prima facie evidence.


Tony
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:05 am

Thank you, and kudos for “knuckle-dragger.” “Morans” and imbeciles really aren’t worth wasting time upon, yet they do seem to yell louder and more annoyingly, don’t they? Take FOX “News” for instance. (Please, take them!) They’ll spew and spout and sputter and squirt and sooner or later people with a functioning frontal corteex are forced to argue and refute thecockamamie meme that was either drug-induced or should and would have been flushed in any country with a functional sewage system.

Liddy is patently insane. And for some bizzarroland reason people keep poking michrophones at his mug and then opining on his ramblings.

People are some stupid monkeys for the most part. The traditional press folk? A whole new species of stupid.


Tony
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:05 am

Thank you, and kudos for “knuckle-dragger.” “Morans” and imbeciles really aren’t worth wasting time upon, yet they do seem to yell louder and more annoyingly, don’t they? Take FOX “News” for instance. (Please, take them!) They’ll spew and spout and sputter and squirt and sooner or later people with a functioning frontal corteex are forced to argue and refute thecockamamie meme that was either drug-induced or should and would have been flushed in any country with a functional sewage system.

Liddy is patently insane. And for some bizzarroland reason people keep poking michrophones at his mug and then opining on his ramblings.

People are some stupid monkeys for the most part. The traditional press folk? A whole new species of stupid.


Tony
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:05 am

Thank you, and kudos for “knuckle-dragger.” “Morans” and imbeciles really aren’t worth wasting time upon, yet they do seem to yell louder and more annoyingly, don’t they? Take FOX “News” for instance. (Please, take them!) They’ll spew and spout and sputter and squirt and sooner or later people with a functioning frontal corteex are forced to argue and refute thecockamamie meme that was either drug-induced or should and would have been flushed in any country with a functional sewage system.

Liddy is patently insane. And for some bizzarroland reason people keep poking michrophones at his mug and then opining on his ramblings.

People are some stupid monkeys for the most part. The traditional press folk? A whole new species of stupid.


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:07 am

Under the Rules of Evidence any paper COLB Obama’s attorneys might produce in court EASILY loses prima facie status because it is not a true duplicate [1001 and 1003], not complete [106], not best evidence [1002] and easily rebuttable [301]. The COLB’s loss of the presumption under Rule 301 is particularly fascinating. Alferd’s rebuttal of the rebuttal would be interesting to read.

Anyhow it’s clear why Obama’s lawyers are not allowing his paper COLB and its prima facie status to be tested in court, however much Alferd truly believes in its image (purported).


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:07 am

Under the Rules of Evidence any paper COLB Obama’s attorneys might produce in court EASILY loses prima facie status because it is not a true duplicate [1001 and 1003], not complete [106], not best evidence [1002] and easily rebuttable [301]. The COLB’s loss of the presumption under Rule 301 is particularly fascinating. Alferd’s rebuttal of the rebuttal would be interesting to read.

Anyhow it’s clear why Obama’s lawyers are not allowing his paper COLB and its prima facie status to be tested in court, however much Alferd truly believes in its image (purported).


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:07 am

Under the Rules of Evidence any paper COLB Obama’s attorneys might produce in court EASILY loses prima facie status because it is not a true duplicate [1001 and 1003], not complete [106], not best evidence [1002] and easily rebuttable [301]. The COLB’s loss of the presumption under Rule 301 is particularly fascinating. Alferd’s rebuttal of the rebuttal would be interesting to read.

Anyhow it’s clear why Obama’s lawyers are not allowing his paper COLB and its prima facie status to be tested in court, however much Alferd truly believes in its image (purported).


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:14 am

These so-called “facts” are not derived from any evidence or documents in the public domain, merely from legally inadmissible and worthless images, convincing for true-believers but not a court. No evidence to sustain these so-called “facts”, therefore nothing to disprove. Simple as that.


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:14 am

These so-called “facts” are not derived from any evidence or documents in the public domain, merely from legally inadmissible and worthless images, convincing for true-believers but not a court. No evidence to sustain these so-called “facts”, therefore nothing to disprove. Simple as that.


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:14 am

These so-called “facts” are not derived from any evidence or documents in the public domain, merely from legally inadmissible and worthless images, convincing for true-believers but not a court. No evidence to sustain these so-called “facts”, therefore nothing to disprove. Simple as that.


Anonymous
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:27 am

Not Mickey’s!

________________________________


Anonymous
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:27 am

Not Mickey’s!

________________________________


Anonymous
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:27 am

Not Mickey’s!

________________________________


myson
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 1:29 am

I believe you are lying !!!
you're claiming your folks committed fraud & lied about your place of birth, maybe you should let us have proof of the fact of your birth ??? & i'm almost certain that even your folks will never admit to this under oath


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:37 am

Obama’s 1961 newspaper birth announcements would have been generated by a list of local birth records compiled by Hawaii Vital Records and released to the local press. The hospitals had no role other than to forward records to Hawaii Vital Records; BUT contrary to Alferd’s suggestion, a birth record could officially make the list in various ways before the list went to the newspapers, and not just by being sent to Hawaii Vital Records exclusively by a hospital.

Hawaii COLBs and the limited and incomplete database from which they draw their data do not include any hospital information, so neither do the inadmissible and evidentially worthless Obama COLB images. Obama and family have given contradictory statements about which hospital Obama is claimed to have been born in, therefore any connection right now between Obama’s birth and any Hawaii hospital is a matter of faith and devotion for true believers, not legal or documentary evidence.


Non-Partisan
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:37 am

Obama’s 1961 newspaper birth announcements would have been generated by a list of local birth records compiled by Hawaii Vital Records and released to the local press. The hospitals had no role other than to forward records to Hawaii Vital Records; BUT contrary to Alferd’s suggestion, a birth record could officially make the list in various ways before the list went to the newspapers, and not just by being sent to Hawaii Vital Records exclusively by a hospital.

Hawaii COLBs and the limited and incomplete database from which they draw their data do not include any hospital information, so neither do the inadmissible and evidentially worthless Obama COLB images. Obama and family have given contradictory statements about which hospital Obama is claimed to have been born in, therefore any connection right now between Obama’s birth and any Hawaii hospital is a matter of faith and devotion for true believers, not legal or documentary evidence.


Liz
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 3:17 am

The birth certificate could be largely irrelevant.

The requirement to be a Senator or Representative is “Citizen”, but the requirement to be President is “natural born Citizen”. The Constitution makes this clear.

From the 14th Amendment:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside.”

“subject to the jurisdiction thereof” meant subject only to that jurisdiction.

This was recently accepted in a Congressional hearing on dual citizenship. http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/judiciary/…

Now, Obama was born a british subject also, at his own admission and as detailed on fightthesmears and factcheck etc. This heritage came from his father, who was never a US citizen. This means that he was not born with sole allegiance to the US, and whilst he could be a citizen if he was born in Hawaii by renouncing any other allegiance, it would not change the fact that he could not be a natural born Citizen. “Eh?” many of you will say.

Further clarification as to the definition of the term “natural born Citizen” can be found within Vattel's Law of Nations (1758), a law text often relied upon by the Founders, and even more recently in March 2008 relied upon by the Supreme Court in the case of District Of Columbia Et Al. v Heller.

To quote Vattel:
Ҥ 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”

You see that? It says “natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of PARENTS who are citizens.” note the plural.

Whether born in Hawaii or elsewhere, Obama is not a natural born Citizen and therefore is ineligible for the Presidency, since he does not meet the criteria as per Article 2 Section 1, namely the grandfather clause:

“No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;”

The Founders added this clause to the Constitution in proof of this fact, to allow themselves to be President, for they knew that they could never be classed natural born Citizens, having been born subject to the British Crown. There is no other reason for this to be there!

To quote the apparent expert on this subject, Leo Donofrio:

“It’s the difference between a fact and a legal status.

Whether you are a natural born citizen is a fact of nature which can’t be waived or renounced, but your actual legal citizenship can be renounced. The difference is subtle, but so very important. “Natural born citizen” is not a different form of “citizenship”. It is a manner of acquiring citizenship. And while natural born citizens may end their legal tie to the country by renouncing citizenship, they will always have been naturally born into that nation as a citizen.”

There you have it ladies and gentlemen. So if someone can provide proof of his vetting and meeting of the above requirements, do so. The birth certificate may prove his ineligibility, or it may not. But Barack Obama has actually proven it himself already by his admission that he was born a British Subject too, so the birth certificate doesn't matter, unless it states his father is actually someone else..

Have a good day.


Liz
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 5:35 am

Perhaps the author, Mr Weigel, would care to comment on this. Or is he committed to continuing to only give one side of the story? What spectacular journalism…


Sally Hill
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:02 am

You think he is lying about what? Being able to get a BC when in fact he was born outside of the US? Why would he lie about that? That's absurd – especially when it has been shown time and again to be a possibility.

From personal experience – the COLB will NOT get you a passport. Like Obama, I was born in 1961. I skipped down to my health department and requested my BC, sent in my COLB with my passport application – which was promptly turned down. NO COLB's – only Certified Copies of my original long-form will do.

Here was the easy part. I went back to my health dept. and said, I need a certified copy of my BC for a Passport. OH! you should have said that the first time you were here. Yeah, you can't get a passport with the COLB. You will have to pay a little extra for our time to go back through the records and find your original and make a copy and then certify it – but sure you can get it. There is no where to request this on their form – you have to ask for it VERBALLY. – but yes, you CAN get it – IF YOU WANT IT. My guess is – Obama doesn't WANT it, so he lies and says it is not available. See he can say he isn't lying because there isn't anywhere to actually check off to say this is what I want – so his half truths keep his kool-aid drinkers (like myson) happy.


Al R
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:15 am

Which COLB? There have been two published online, both very different and both fakes, go to this site read everything, and then make a choice for yourself

http://polarik.blogtownhall.com/


m@d@sh3ll
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 11:49 am

You’re wrong. The state of Hawaii never said that Obama was born in Hawaii. Whoever placed that piece of sh*t COLB on the internet is purporting that Obama was born there; the stae of Hawaii never made such a claim. If you open the image posted on fight the smears it will show that the image was created in Adobe Photoshop. It’s unbelievable to me that people will accept an image posted on the internet as fact in a day and age when someone can take a picture of you and place it on a naked body and say that it is a naked picture of you. Since when did factcheck and snopes become the authority on anything? At the very least, this requires additional investigation. Prima facie evidence will stand only until additional compelling evidence is brought forward to refute it. There is a great deal of counter-evidence. The questions need to be answered once and for all.


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 7:28 am

do it! do it! show us how! prove it! and more CAPZ too!


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 7:33 am

Obamination wrote: ===”there will most likely be race riots

Why do I get the impression that the prospect of race riots excites you?


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 7:34 am

The only fake on that web site is polarik himself


Polarik
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 7:42 am

Factcheck is a major player in this birth certificate ruse, D Girl. They posted a fabricated scan image, and in support of this obvious forgery, in which they indicted themselves as being complicit, they created another one using the same bogus COLB form that Obama's Campaign constructed.

If you think that you were looking at a real document, think again. It's not.. It doesn't exist.

Factcheck ois owneed by the annenberg Foundation who hired Obama to chair the Chicago Annenberg Challenge and work with fellow board member, William Ayers, the Pentagon bomber and domestic terrorist. Factcheck is funded by billionaire George Soros, a socialist. Factcheck has always been a shill for Obama, spreading lies about him while trying to debunk the truths.

They failed. They've been exposed by me.

Read my 160-page report. It can be found on:

http://polarik.blogtownhall.com (Obama's Born Conspiracy)


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 7:50 am

Look it’s all very simple. President Obama was born in Honolulu in 1961.

His birth was registered with the state of Hawaii a few days afterward.

In 2007, in response to a request from then Senator Obama, the Hawaiian DOH issued him a certified COLB on it’s standard form. The State of Hawaii has switched to an all digital vital statistics database and no longer issued certified copies of the original microfilmed records. Under Hawaiian law, the certified copy has the same legal validity as the original (which no longer exists anyway, just the microfilm records).

This document is perfectly valid and legal proof that he was born in Hawaii.

The COLB is all the proof that he needs. Accept this and move on with your lives.

For those who insist that the COLB posted on-line is a fake, all I can say is that you are incredibly naïve. While it is illegal for an employee of the Hawaiian DOH to release a certified copy of a COLB to anyone with out a tangible interest in it (i.e. the person or a direct family member), there is nothing to prevent someone in the DOH from examining the computer database and comparing the data to the one on-line. In fact, I can almost guarantee that this was done. Remember that the Governor of Hawaii is Republican. The director of the DOH is her appointee. Anyone who thinks that Obama could post a fake, certified document from the State of Hawaii on-line and not have the State of Hawaii figure it out is. . . well let’s just say that they are “special.”

For those of you who claim that Obama was born in Kenya and his mother filed a BC when she returned to Hawaii, please explain ho the document was filed by the state registrar on August 8, four days after Obama was born. Do you seriously contend that she flew back from Kenya with a 3 day old infant? On circa 1961 airlines? Oh, wait, didn’t someone on this thread already suggest that they paddled him to Oahu in a dugout canoe?


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:05 am

Now, for those of you who contend that President Obama is ineligible because his father was a British subject, well I have a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn.

Basically there are two problems with this argument.

To begin with this issue was settled back in 1898 when Justice Gray wrote the decision in United States v. Wong Kim Ark. In this decision, Justice Gray went to great lengths to point out that the U.S. Constitution was based on British Common Law. Under British Common Law at the time the Constitution was written (and until the Constitution was formally ratified, British Common Law was still the law of the land in this country) the founding fathers, British trained lawyers, understood that if a person was born within the jurisdiction of the country, that person was considered a natural born subject or citizen of the country. This applied no matter it the parents were aliens or citizens themselves.

To Repeat, based on the Constitution, and as clarified in Wong Kim Ark, if you are born in this country, you are a natural born citizen of this country, period.

Now the second part of this argument goes like this: “His father was a Brit and under British law, he was born a Brit, so therefore he is ineligible.”

This quite frankly is B.S. This argument is based totally on the premise that the laws of another country can affect who is eligible for president in this country. That is absurd. For instance, any American citizen whose parents or grand parents were born in Ireland is considered an Irish citizen as well. This is based on Irish law.

Furthermore, this argument is directly refuted by the decision in Perkins v. Elg which held that dual citizenship did not deprive one of their inherent rights as a natural born citizen.


Liz
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:11 am

In case you missed it, Alferd.. Obama cannot be eligible because his father was not a US citizen as is required. Enjoy.

The birth certificate could be largely irrelevant.

The requirement to be a Senator or Representative is “Citizen”, but the requirement to be President is “natural born Citizen”. The Constitution makes this clear.

From the 14th Amendment:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and the State wherein they reside.”

“subject to the jurisdiction thereof” meant subject only to that jurisdiction.

This was recently accepted in a Congressional hearing on dual citizenship. http://commdocs.house.gov/committees/judiciary/

Now, Obama was born a british subject also, at his own admission and as detailed on fightthesmears and factcheck etc. This heritage came from his father, who was never a US citizen. This means that he was not born with sole allegiance to the US, and whilst he could be a citizen if he was born in Hawaii by renouncing any other allegiance, it would not change the fact that he could not be a natural born Citizen. “Eh?” many of you will say.

Further clarification as to the definition of the term “natural born Citizen” can be found within Vattel's Law of Nations (1758), a law text often relied upon by the Founders, and even more recently in March 2008 relied upon by the Supreme Court in the case of District Of Columbia Et Al. v Heller.

To quote Vattel:
Ҥ 212. Citizens and natives.
The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”

You see that? It says “natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of PARENTS who are citizens.” note the plural.

Whether born in Hawaii or elsewhere, Obama is not a natural born Citizen and therefore is ineligible for the Presidency, since he does not meet the criteria as per Article 2 Section 1, namely the grandfather clause:

“No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President;”

The Founders added this clause to the Constitution in proof of this fact, to allow themselves to be President, for they knew that they could never be classed natural born Citizens, having been born subject to the British Crown. There is no other reason for this to be there!

To quote the apparent expert on this subject, Leo Donofrio:

“It’s the difference between a fact and a legal status.

Whether you are a natural born citizen is a fact of nature which can’t be waived or renounced, but your actual legal citizenship can be renounced. The difference is subtle, but so very important. “Natural born citizen” is not a different form of “citizenship”. It is a manner of acquiring citizenship. And while natural born citizens may end their legal tie to the country by renouncing citizenship, they will always have been naturally born into that nation as a citizen.”

There you have it ladies and gentlemen. So if someone can provide proof of his vetting and meeting of the above requirements, do so. The birth certificate may prove his ineligibility, or it may not. But Barack Obama has actually proven it himself already by his admission that he was born a British Subject too, so the birth certificate doesn't matter, unless it states his father is actually someone else..

Have a good day.


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:14 am

Liz wrote: ===” The requirement to be a Senator or Representative is “Citizen”, but the requirement to be President is “natural born Citizen”. The Constitution makes this clear.===

That is true. Arnold Schwarzenegger is a citizen and can be elected to Congress or the Senate, but he is not eligible to be President or Vice President.

Barack Obama, on the other hand is a natural born citizen by right of the fact that he was born in Hawaii.


Doc3
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:14 am

Alftird is a name of some Obamabot that has been posting on this issue since last year. There is a group of them called MaineMoron, Cube and others. Google Alferd and Obama birth certificate. The earlier posts by Alftird were much more articulate. This Alftird is likely hired by ACORN from prision or high school to post on these sites. You should have the original Alftird come back as that person could at least form an intelligent thought.

We all know the State of Hawaii is holding the original vault birth certificate. We all know it contains relevant information to this question. Obama continues to try and stonewall its production. Until that happens this scandal is going to continue.

I posted below about Obamagate. There was a break-in at the passport office to cleanse Obama's passport file. One of the people involved was subsequently murdered. If this had been Bush or Nixon the press would have swarmed over this story. Have any of you even heard of it? What were they trying to cleanse? Why were the suspects released and not questioned? The head of the company that employed the burglars is a friend of Obama and has now been given a high placed position? Where is the press on this?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23736254/


Cody Judy
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:14 am

Alferd,
Do you care that Obama has spent over 800,000 dollars hiring lawyers so he didn't have to show his 1 little tiny qualification to serve America as President to a Court or a Congress body?

Well, I do. I also have spent my money to defend the U.S. Constitution without which this Country would be little more then one third what we are today. The fact America has been blessed to do what we have, and grow as we have, deserves this very small $12 dollar consession of our President, if only to assure all Americans that he is indeed Constitutionally qualified.

If you conseed the Constitution, you conseed your freedom and liberty… your FREEDOM your LIBERTY.

To me, YOUR FREEDOM, YOUR LIBERTY , YOUR PROSPERITY matters… because we live in the same Country.. a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC. Do YOU like not being accused wrongly and having a fair shake at defending yourself in court? Do you like the many many inventions and innovations that have come to you through men and women of our Country filled with the Spirit of Freedom and the American Dream that maybe there actually was a chance to get ahead, own a piece of property, feel free to live your dreams?

That is what we are defending… and Obama has been free by this Country to live a dream and of all her citizens should be honored to show that very small courtesy and respect for what this Country has honored him with. To hide, and foil, and not produce… is shameful, disrespectful, and very ungreatful.

Sorry, not characteristics evan close to what anyone would want or think appropriate for an American President. We are living a very sad day of betrayal… Mr Barrack Obama.. Please.. show us your qualificication .. show us your honor….show us your integrity shines through more then your audacity.

http://www.codyjudy.us


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:18 am

Oh, and BTW, Vattell was a Swiss Philosopher, he was not a Constitutional Delegate, in fact he was not an American Citizen, natural born or otherwise. Even he admitted that under the British system a child born within the realm was a natural born citizen of that realm. The Vattel argument is a red hearing and has no bearing on the meaning of the term natural Born in the U.S. Constitution. Again, refer to the Wong Kim Ark court decision for further clarification. You lose, Liz.


DT
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:18 am

Liz, you are absolutely right. There is no way around this and that is why Obama has refused to produce any REAL documents. He cannot be president. My guess is that his documents will reveal even more trouble for him than just citizenship. When all this comes out he could be charged with several crimes that could put him away for a very long time. It will also bring to light those who should have vetted him and instead covered for him. It will be really messy!


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:20 am

Judy wrote: ===” Obama has spent over 800,000 dollars hiring lawyers”===

And your proof of this is what? Some right wing wack job web site, right?

Get real.


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:21 am

Cody Judy, where is your proof for the following: Obama has spent over 800,000 dollars hiring lawyers so he didn't have to show his 1 little tiny qualification to serve America as President to a Court or a Congress body?

Please prove this statement. Thank you.


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:22 am

Sory, Liz, I destroyed that argument as well.

Have a nice day yourself.


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:24 am

Judy's slipping, I've already seen birthers claim that it is over 1 million already.


Qreader
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:26 am

2 other possible reason to hide real cert. Possible father= Malcom X or Frank Marshell Davis.


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:27 am

You live in a backward state, not Hawaii. Hawiian Certified COLBs are valid for passport purposes.


Liz
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:30 am

Justice Gray in Minor v Happersett, as quoted during Wong Kim Ark:

” ‘At common law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country, of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further, and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case, it is not necessary to solve these doubts. It is sufficient, for everything we have now to consider, that all children, born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction, are themselves citizens.’ Minor v. Happersett (1874) 21 Wall. 162, 166-168.”

“As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first” – ie “all children born in a country, of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners”.

Again, it mentions parents – plural. For the purposes of Wong Lim Ark they didn't need to establish whether to “include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction, without reference to the citizenship of their parents” as natural born citizens.

There you have it, Wong Kim Ark is irrelevant, they only decided on whether he was a citizen, not a natural born citizen, as it was not necessary for the case. In fact, given that they did not, this could be considered evidence, given the specific omission, that Wong Kim Ark was not a natural born citizen, the same as Obama.

If we review Minor v Happersett further we find that they are specifcally referencing Vattel's Law Of Nations. They had the chance to officially rule themselves that Wong Kim Ark was a natural born citizen but did not because he was not!

In the case of Elg, “Marie Elizabeth Elg … was born in the United States of Swedish parents then naturalized here”; but it says nothing about Steinkauler’s mother. Therefore it is again not releveant, since it cannot establish that someone born in the US of a naturalized US citizen and a foreign citizen is definitely a natural born citizen or not. It suggests instead that Steinkauler, born in the US of at least one naturalized US citizen, is a natural born citizen, presuming he had no dual citizenship at birth. It is the dual citizenship, or allegiance, that is the issue.

Do keep providing further evidence though that he is ineligible. Thank you Alferd :)


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:30 am

Quick, call Rush and let him know!!!!


Liz
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:38 am

Refer to more recent response, which destroys your pathetic attempt to hide the truth. I say pathetic, because the cases you refer to are further evidence that Obama is ineligible due to not being a natural born citizen.


Doc3
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:53 am

Actually if you go to the Sacramento County Superior Court Website and do a name search for Alan Keyes you will find the Keyes vs. Obama lawsuit. Look at the declaration of Obama's attorney in the pro hac vice motion where the attorney states under penalty of perjury that he has been traveling the country fighting these lawsuits. There is the evidence on the legal fees Obama is spending (or we are spending) fighting this issue.


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:53 am

Well to begin with, a minor quibble, Justice Gray, in Wong Kim Ark was quoting Justice Waite who wrote Minor v. Happersett. That being said, have you actually read Minor v. Happersett? Perhaps you missed this quote:
===
”Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides that “no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,” and that Congress shall have power “to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.” Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.”
===
That pretty much ruins your claim that there are three types of U.S. citizenship. It pretty much states there that you are either a natural born citizen or you are naturalized.

An epic fail on your part.


Doc3
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:54 am

Actually if you go to the Sacramento County Superior Court Website and do a name search for Alan Keyes you will find the Keyes vs. Obama lawsuit. Look at the declaration of Obama's attorney in the pro hac vice motion where the attorney states under penalty of perjury that he has been traveling the country fighting these lawsuits. There is the evidence on the legal fees Obama is spending (or we are spending) fighting this issue.


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 1:58 pm

Proof that Obama has spent a “million dollars to hide his past” is where exactly? I keep seeing this number, but none of the birthers provide proof.


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 1:58 pm

Proof that Obama has spent a “million dollars to hide his past” is where exactly? I keep seeing this number, but none of the birthers provide proof.


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 1:58 pm

Proof that Obama has spent a “million dollars to hide his past” is where exactly? I keep seeing this number, but none of the birthers provide proof.


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:06 am

Liz wrote: ===” -“It is sufficient, for everything we have now to consider, that all children, born of citizen parents within the jurisdiction, are themselves citizens.’ Minor v. Happersett (1874) 21 Wall. 162, 166-168.”

“As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first” – ie “all children born in a country, of parents who were its citizens, became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners”.-

Again, it mentions parents – plural.”===

Liz, are you familiar with the concept of collective nouns?

In your quotes, the term “Children” is a collective noun. It can mean multiple children or a single child. Obviously if you intend to take the term “children” as valid in the plural form only, you would then restrict citizen status to multiples only and not include any “only child” as being a U.S. citizen. This, of course would be patently absurd. The same situation exists with the term “parents.” This is also a collective noun. It has the plural form but it also refers to a parent in the singular.

Thus, your contention that the use of the plural form of the word parent restricts natural born status to only situations where both parents are citizens is linguistically false.


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 2:07 pm

No, he’s not.


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 2:07 pm

No, he’s not.


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 2:07 pm

No, he’s not.


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:07 am

Alan Keyes is insane. So what does that prove?


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:08 am

Did you know that the lawyer representing Obama in that suit is working Pro Bono?


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 2:11 pm

Needs more capz lock.


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 2:11 pm

Needs more capz lock.


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 2:11 pm

Needs more capz lock.


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:14 am

From Minor v. Happersett:
===
”Additions might always be made to the citizenship of the United States in two ways: first, by birth, and second, by naturalization. This is apparent from the Constitution itself, for it provides that “no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,” and that Congress shall have power “to establish a uniform rule of naturalization.” Thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization.”
===

I think that that is pretty clear and pretty much destroys the claim that President Obama is not a natural born citizen.


Doc3
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:15 am

Alf, I am still waiting for you to post a cite to anything from the Democratic National Committee stating that they vetted Obama before placing his name on the primary ballot. Obama posting a photograph of a Certification of Live Birth is not vetting, nor is factcheck an official democratic party organization that would vet a candidate. A picture of a COLB on the internet is not evidence and would not be accepted in court.

2vet
Function: transitive verb
Inflected Form(s): vet·ted; vet·ting
Date: 1891
1 a: to provide veterinary care for (an animal) or medical care for (a person) b: to subject (a person or animal) to a physical examination or checkup
2 a: to subject to usually expert appraisal or correction <vet a manuscript> b: to evaluate for possible approval or acceptance <vet the candidates for a position>
— vet·ter noun
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/vetting


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:18 am

One more time. It is the duty of the opposition party to find any flaw they can in the opposition candidate.

Obviously the GOP looked into this and concluded that it was nonsense.


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:20 am

Hahah, well done, Alferd. Birthers to the left of me, birthers to the right… I also like how Doc3 didn't include any links or cut and paste of the actual info requested. Amazingly great. G-d, I love the birthers!


Doc3
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:21 am

Alf, your cite below is not on point. True one can be a citizen, but the issue is does that citizen have the qualifications to be President. Arnold is a US citizen so can he be President of the United States? Obama nor the Democratic National Committee have provided the evidence that Obama meets the standard of a natural born citizen to hold the office of the President.

There are experts in this area of the law. All of the documents should be produced by Obama and they can render an expert opinion on whether Obama is or is not a natural born citizen. This is a complex issue and is not satisfied by the only evidence produced by Obama and the Democratic National Committee to date.


liz
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:22 am

“no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution”

looks to me, that the line above, as quoted by yourself, actually means that the two are different. do you not understand the language or something? it's quite clear. to be president, one has to be a natural born citizen or a citizen that was alive at the time the consitution was penned. Why would they put that in there if they were not making a point?

the quote you have highlighted shows nothing – it's starts off talking only of citizens, not natural born citizens, two differing terms. again at the end is says “thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization” – it's talking about citizens, not natural born citizens.

home run


liz
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:23 am

“no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution”

looks to me, that the line above, as quoted by yourself, actually means that the two are different. do you not understand the language or something? it's quite clear. to be president, one has to be a natural born citizen or a citizen that was alive at the time the consitution was penned. Why would they put that in there if they were not making a point?

the quote you have highlighted shows nothing – it's starts off talking only of citizens, not natural born citizens, two differing terms. again at the end is says “thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization” – it's talking about citizens, not natural born citizens.

home run


liz
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:24 am

“no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution”

looks to me, that the line above, as quoted by yourself, actually means that the two are different. do you not understand the language or something? it's quite clear. to be president, one has to be a natural born citizen or a citizen that was alive at the time the consitution was penned. Why would they put that in there if they were not making a point?

the quote you have highlighted shows nothing – it's starts off talking only of citizens, not natural born citizens, two differing terms. again at the end is says “thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization” – it's talking about citizens, not natural born citizens.

home run


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:24 am

look, there are two types of citizenship. natural born and naturalized. Arnold is naturalized, Barack is natural born.

That is the long and short of it.


Doc3
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:25 am

“One more time. It is the duty of the opposition party to find any flaw they can in the opposition candidate.

Obviously the GOP looked into this and concluded that it was nonsense.”

Alf please that is the most ridiculous thing I have seen on this post. You actually want people to believe that the other party has the responsibility to vet the other parties candidates? This is patently absurd. What this episode shows is that there is a loop hole in the election laws that Obama was allowed to skirt through. That will not happen in the next election.


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:28 am

The part that states “or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of the Constitution” was put in there so that people like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, etc, would be elegible to be president since they were not natural born citizens of the Unitied States of America, this country not being in existence when they were born.


Doc3
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:31 am

If Obama were born in Vancouver BC, the high seas, Kenya or any other place other than US Territory he is not a natural born citizen. There are others which have posted here that take a more narrow view and say that because his father was British Obama is not a natural born citizen.

For myself I simply want to see the actual vault birth certificate (which is available under the laws you posted from Hawaii), and now his school records to show that he did not go to college as a foreign exchange student from Indonesia.

The longer Obama hides these records the more this controversey is going to grow. As I have said before Obama is a one term President over this issue.

So Obama has not provided evidence that he is a natural born citizen.


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:31 am

Liz wrote:

===”the quote you have highlighted shows nothing – it's starts off talking only of citizens, not natural born citizens, two differing terms. again at the end is says “thus new citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization” – it's talking about citizens, not natural born citizens.”===

Reading Comprehension is not your strong point, is it?

The quote specificly states that there are two forms of citizenship, Natural Born and Natualized.

That's it.

You failed again.


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:34 am

Doc, it's a basic function of politics. You find your opponents weakness and you attack it. Are you that naive that you don't think that is how it works?


liz
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:37 am

natural born citizen is clearly different to just citizen.

as per Marbury v Madison, Chief Justice Marshall stated “It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect; and therefore such construction is inadmissible, unless the words require it.”

let us not forget the words of John A. Bingham, chief architect of the 14th Amendments first section: “simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…”


liz
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:39 am

natural born citizen is clearly different to just citizen.

as per Marbury v Madison, Chief Justice Marshall stated “It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect; and therefore such construction is inadmissible, unless the words require it.”

let us not forget the words of John A. Bingham, chief architect of the 14th Amendments first section: “simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen…”


liz
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:41 am

You are correct – they had allegiance to GB, as did Obama. Unofrunately Obama was not alive back then and therefore is eligibility is not “saved” by the grandfather clause.


liz
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:46 am

and the quote is actually showing their two forms of citizens eligible to be POTUS.

1. Natural Born Citizens
2. Citizens alive at the time of constitutional signing.

If all citizens are natural born citizens, what is the need for the clause and number 2 above? You cannot win this argument.


DT
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:47 am

Q&A With Obama Birth Certificate Doubters — Politics Daily

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2008/12/02/qanda-w…


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:48 am

And you did see Alferd's reply to this when you posted it the first time, correct?


DT
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 9:49 am

Q&A With Obama Birth Certificate Doubters — Politics Daily

http://www.politicsdaily.com/2008/12/02/qanda-w…


obamination
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 10:19 am

YEP OBAMA NATURALIZED IN UNITED STATES AND NATURAL BORN IN THE JUNGLES OF AFRICA.


obamination
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 10:23 am

NO IT IS NOT PRO BONO. THIS IS A CIVIL SUIT FILED OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF GOVERNMENT COVERED EXPENSES. I HAVE A FRIEND WHO WORKS WITH SOME OF THE CURRENT LAW SUITS AND FRAUDBAMA IS DIPPING DEEP INTO HIS OWN POCKETS TO QUELL THIS FRAUD.


obamination
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 10:25 am

LIZ IN OBVIOUSLY A BRAINWASHED OBAMA*****. HE WAS NOT BORN IN HAWAII. HE HAS NO BIRTH CERTIFICATE THUS THE OUTRAGEOUS SUM OF MONEY HIS IS SPENDING TO FIGHT OFF THE BIRTHERS TO PRODUCE IT.


obamination
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 10:27 am

I was born in another country and my parents walked in and got me a colb. It means nothing. At that time anyone could get one in Hawaii. I have 2 uncles that also got one. I don't have an actual birth certificate so I use my COLB. So yes he wasn't born here. He's hiding it. But the liberal brainwashed antichrist worshipping obamanites will deny it until he starts wwIII. If he is impeached or shown as a fraud there will be race riots due to a bunch of low iq reverse racist that believe he is black and the first black president. He is far from black. He is a mocha fraudacinno at best.
To clear things up.
Obama is not black. His mother is white. Why is it that all the race card players say he is black. You can't do this in this case. If you mix a collie and a rottweiler do you get a collie? or is it a rottweiler? It's neither. It's a mutt and so is Obama. Not black not white but a Mutt. How does this play into the birth certificate issue. Well for all the people screaming bigotry and racism. Wake up. One of Obamafrauds biggest enemies happens to be a real black man with 2 black parents and he is going to put Fraudbomber out on the street by this fall. First reason is his fake birth certificate, which snopes and all the other liberal owned validation companies have done nothing to prove prima facia that fraudbomber was born on usa soil. He may be a citizen but not a natural born citizen. I have a hawaiian birth certificate. Not a colb and believe me there is a big difference. Obama has spent over 1 million dollars fighting in court to block the release of his non existent birth certificate. Why not just spend the $10.00 to shut up all of the racist bigots that are harassing this 100% pure black nubian prince? The reason is that he has been stalling along with the other liberals to try to figure out how to come up with a fake birth certificate that will be able to fake out the forensics team that the republicans are going to have verify the certificate. This man used a fake name to attend college and has no college records available to be seen. Why? Because he had them sealed. Why? Because they like him are probably fake. So call it what you want. But anyone who doesn't see this person for what he really is needs to stop listening to his arrogant self righteous rhetoric and demeanor and look at the hard evidence. He has no verifiable credentials. He will be out of the white house by this fall and there will most likely be race riots because people see what they want to see and percieve what they wish too. No matter how much evidence is produced that he is a fraud his die hard cult followers that have been brainwashed will never find fault with their master. I liken it to a mother who no matter how much proof is presented that her son is a fraud she will continue in a state of denial. “He would never do that.” “You have made a mistake.” etc etc. She will deny it to the grave as the brainwashed american people will also deny it until our once great country is a complete cess pool. Filled with liar,frauds, and yes obama worshipers. I can't wait till he is found out and hopefully his cancerous policy can be reversed before we become a socialist police state filled with rap music and violence. Which by the way go hand in hand.


Anoymonous
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 10:58 am

Duck,Duck ,………………KENYAN<INDONESIN CITIZEN? If this man wasn't he would prove it to the world,but If he admits he was a muslim, then turned chistrian ,then some one from jihad would have to destroy him?It's Islamic law?If this Barrack Hussien Obama,aka barry Soetoro was Registerd as a Muslim in 1968 in two different schools,he travel to Pakistan as a Indonesian Citizen? The USA DID NOT HAVE RELATIONS WIYH THESES COUNTRIES AT THIS TIME? how did he go” Right” as a Indonesian?? Duck…….Duck>>> ………………………………… British born,Kenyan,Indonseian citizen?
IF NOT SHOW US THE PROOF THAT”S ALL?


runninbear
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 11:08 am

just have the Kenyan poney up on the Doucments and all this will be cleared up?OOPS can't do it ?


runninbear
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 11:24 am

He said “Parents ” that means, more than one, and his father was a british borned Kenyan who wasn't an “AMERICAN” whose allegiance is and never was to America?When Obama tried to have McCain disqualifed like the way he won his frist election. Which blew up in his face.Then when some one started shining the light on him he started hiring lawyers. by the wayJohn Blingam was talking about citizens like McCain.He fit the bill as a “Naturalized American by having “BOTH PARENTS from the” same country”?”'America”",doing their duy in the service of their country and he was third generation soldier,I Know his colors what color is Obama?White or Black?….. neither?…………..I can tell who's RED/ WHITE/ and BLUE? can you??????????


runninbear
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 11:38 am

Thank you liz finally some one who actully understands the point ?I have hope that we stop this twisting of words of this doucment?and trying to destroy the Contitution that I have defended ?


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 11:44 am

A friend!? Well that settles it. Please please please keep this up and please keep being a member of the CAPZ LOCK POSSE!!!!


slimslowslider
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 11:45 am

Please back up this statement with some proof:

The USA DID NOT HAVE RELATIONS WIYH THESES COUNTRIES AT THIS TIME?

Ya know, now that I look at this isolated, it doesn't make any sense. Glad to see you are another member of the CAPZ LOCK POSSE!!!! though.


obamination
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 5:17 pm

I AM JUST A LOWLY PERSON NOT THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES THAT IS RUINING THE COUNTRY. AND NO THE WON’T ADMIT IT UNDER OATH JUST LIKE OBAMA OR HIS PARENTS WON’T. YOU PROVED MY POINT. THANKS


Old Geezer
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 8:17 pm

Polarik, why do you do it? Why do you continue the lies and the unsubstantiated nonsense?
Your report is a rambling, messy, incohesive, unconvincing mess. Do you think anyone with a high-school degree actually takes you seriously?

The Annenbergs were Republicans. That’s easily referenced. They are not complicit in any crime here.

It is you, through impersonating a PhD, and libelling the President, who are committing the crimes here. Son, this is all bound to catch up with you. A bit of advice, have a heart-to-heart talk with your Mom and rethink your motives. While you’re still a free man.


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 3:59 pm

Obviously a history major {/sarcasm}


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 4:00 pm

Why are you fixated on President Obama's racial status?


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 4:05 pm

Did you miss my post about the function of Collective Nouns in the English language?

You must have.

Back to School for you.


obamination
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:31 pm

YOU DON'T NEED A RELATIONSHIP IN 1962 IDIOT THE WAR WAS LONG OVER. WHAT AN IDIOT.


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:56 pm

What are you babbling about, now?


Alferd
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 6:58 pm

Because they were natural born subjects of the king. The United States of America did not exist when they were born. How hard is that to understand?


obamination
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 7:22 pm

HEY AFRO NERD. NOPE NOT A HISTORY MAJOR LIKE YOURSELF.


obamination
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 7:28 pm

NO FIXATION. JUST A CLARIFICATION THAT HE IS IN FACT NOT A BLACK MAN OR THE FIRST BLACK AMERICAN PRESIDENT AS THE MOST PROCLAIM. GOES HAND IN HAND WITH NOT BEING QUALIFIED. ERGO. NOT A REAL BLACK MAN AND ALSO NOT A REAL PRESIDENT BECAUSE HE DOESN'T MEET THE QUALIFICATIONS TO OBTAIN THE OFFICE.
I HAVE MANY FRIENDS WHO ARE IN FACT TRUE BLACK MEN. THEY DO NOT LOOK AT OBAMA AS A BLACK MAN, BUT AS HALFBREED.


Truthsayer
Comment posted June 5, 2009 @ 7:31 pm

Liz, give it a rest. You're in over your head here.


chris
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 4:40 am

The fact that Barry Soetoro, aka Barack Hussein Obama, has not been forthcoming with a copy of his original birth certificate is very telling. Further, his legal expenditure to three law firms on the matter — upwards of a million dollars, opposed to spending $12.50 for a birth certificate copy is also very telling. He appears to be perpetrating a historic fraud on the American people which, too, shall be reported one day.


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 6:16 am

Ah, here is another birther with the same old, tired, debunked claims. welcome Chris.


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 6:38 am

Alferd, there is no way to “vet” a document that it's illegal for anybody but Obama to see.

Obama HAS shown what he claims is his COLB. Trouble is, there are telltale signs that only make sense if it is a forgery. For instance, Go to http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_ce…
and trace the circle dissected by the top fold. It’s distorted, it bends with the fold. The “seal” dissected by the bottom fold is folded at the same angle. If you have a laptop tip the screen back so you can see the shape of that circle. It’s perfectly round. I’ve tried every combination of page fold and camera possible and could never get that angle to produce a perfectly round circle. That “seal” was not on that page.

Could I just be mistaken? Double check it this way:

Notice that right under the bottom fold is the place where the father’s name is printed: Barack Hussein Obama. It’s the longest line on the bottom part of the page.

Now look at http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_ce…

Right underneath the fold, where “Barack Hussein Obama” is supposed to be, there is nothing. This can’t be the same document as on the other page. Why did factcheck post a photo of somebody else’s seal as though it was Obama’s? Because Obama’s didn’t have a seal; it was added to the photo digitally in a shape that could never happen in reality.

Photo #5, the first one you looked at, is the only photo with both Obama’s information and the authenticating seal. Photo #1 proves that the seal on #5 was forged. That’s all Obama has ever offered.

There are lots of other signs too, but these are 2 which validate each other and which can be seen by the naked eye by anybody who is willing to look.

When you have looked, tell me what you see and why you think that is the case. Bear in mind that this is forgery, a federal crime. What could be so embarrassing that Obama would commit a federal crime rather than let us see his COLB?

Especially since he could have requested from Hawaii a real COLB which contained only the information he wanted certified as valid – could have left off the father's name altogether. He didn't even have ANY real certified copy, or he would have done a relief shot of THAT seal rather than this one which is obviously not from the COLB he posted.

Why did he do this?


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 6:40 am

Rats. It cut off my links. The first reference is to photo #5 on Factcheck. The second is to photo #1 on Factcheck.


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 6:41 am

Must read info on Hawaiian Birth Certificates

http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualin…

This clears up a lot of misconceptions that birthers have about Hawaiian BCs.


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 7:06 am

Alferd, I don't know if this site alerts you when you have a reply. I replied to you at http://washingtonindependent.com/45678/g-gordon…


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 7:09 am

I'll just repost it here so it can have its own discussion:

Alferd, there is no way to “vet” a document that it's illegal for anybody but Obama to see.

Obama HAS shown what he claims is his COLB. Trouble is, there are telltale signs that only make sense if it is a forgery. For instance, Go to http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_ce
and trace the circle dissected by the top fold. It’s distorted, it bends with the fold. The “seal” dissected by the bottom fold is folded at the same angle. If you have a laptop tip the screen back so you can see the shape of that circle. It’s perfectly round. I’ve tried every combination of page fold and camera possible and could never get that angle to produce a perfectly round circle. That “seal” was not on that page.

Could I just be mistaken? Double check it this way:

Notice that right under the bottom fold is the place where the father’s name is printed: Barack Hussein Obama. It’s the longest line on the bottom part of the page.

Now look at http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_ce

Right underneath the fold, where “Barack Hussein Obama” is supposed to be, there is nothing. This can’t be the same document as on the other page. Why did factcheck post a photo of somebody else’s seal as though it was Obama’s? Because Obama’s didn’t have a seal; it was added to the photo digitally in a shape that could never happen in reality.

Photo #5, the first one you looked at, is the only photo with both Obama’s information and the authenticating seal. Photo #1 proves that the seal on #5 was forged. That’s all Obama has ever offered.

There are lots of other signs too, but these are 2 which validate each other and which can be seen by the naked eye by anybody who is willing to look.

When you have looked, tell me what you see and why you think that is the case. Bear in mind that this is forgery, a federal crime. What could be so embarrassing that Obama would commit a federal crime rather than let us see his COLB?

Especially since he could have requested from Hawaii a real COLB which contained only the information he wanted certified as valid – could have left off the father's name altogether. He didn't even have ANY real certified copy, or he would have done a relief shot of THAT seal rather than this one which is obviously not from the COLB he posted.

Why did he do this?


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 7:29 am

Nellie, you wrote: “Alferd, there is no way to “vet” a document that it's illegal for anybody but Obama to see.”

That is not true. Anyone can see the document that President Obama has. FactCheck did.

As for as the records at the DOH, it is not illegal for the DOH to access their own records. It would be very simple for them to check their records and compare them to the document that President Obama has posted on line. Don't you agree>


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 7:30 am

You do understand that there are severe limitations in the image quality of photos posted on-line, don't you?


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 7:31 am

Nellie, you wrote: “Alferd, there is no way to “vet” a document that it's illegal for anybody but Obama to see.”

That is not true. Anyone can see the document that President Obama has. FactCheck did.

As for as the records at the DOH, it is not illegal for the DOH to access their own records. It would be very simple for them to check their records and compare them to the document that President Obama has posted on line. Don't you agree?


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 7:32 am

Did you read the article I linked to above?

Any comments on it?


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 7:33 am

Oh, and on one of those photos you can clearly see the embossed seal on the document from the front side of the document.

Give it up, already.


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 7:38 am

The Hawaii folks, in an interview with Politifact, concluded their comments by saying that they had no idea what Obama's COLB posting represented. IOW, they have never compared and would not (actually COULD not, legally) say anything about its authenticity.

I'd like a link showing me how I can get to see what FActcheck saw.

Orly Taitz has requested the Factcheck parent organization, University of Pennsylvania, to release the actual documents they saw in order to clear their name and the questions regarding their involvement in this fraud. They refused. Why?


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 7:41 am

Alfred, this has nothing to do with image quality. The two circles on the same page act as a control group for each other. If the image quality was going to be a problem it would be with both circles.

The image quality on Photo #1 is an issue because it blurs the ability to see the words, but again, there is the control aspect of it – all the other printed lines were visible; why wouldn't the longest line of all be visible?

You're evading the questions I've asked, Alferd.


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 7:44 am

Which photo? You can see it on #5. Which other photo lets you clearly examine the content of both the seal and the COLB information itself?

Let's start with the basic facts, without which there can't be any meaningful discussion. What did you see when you looked? Did you see
1) a “seal” that was perfectly round when a circle similarly placed on a fold actually “bent” with the page?

and

2) The words “Barack Hussein Obama” missing from the space directly under the fold in Photo #1?


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 7:58 am

I will explore other content when we've finished discussing this. I've seen so many explanations of what Hawaii does it could make you dizzy. But what I'm interested in is what is right in front of my face. To this date, nobody for Obama has been able to explain these very simple observations of this document that Robert Gibbs just the other day told us we should look at.

My computer's not letting me respond again to one of your comments above so I'll put it here.

If the image posted online is too poor to show the shape of the seal, wouldn't you say the image is too poor to actually prove anything?


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 8:09 am

I re-posted this as its own post so we could start a fresh discussion on it.


dave3200
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 8:49 am

This is the first true and complete posting I've been able to find on here. A COLB is not a Birth Certificate. Many people have COLB's from Hawaii but were born elsewhere. Thanks, obamination. You do good work.


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 11:45 am

Look at Number 2

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_ce…


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 11:47 am

Why won't you look at it? afraid?


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 11:51 am

See this site:

http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualin…


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 12:01 pm

====”Orly Taitz has requested the Factcheck parent organization, University of Pennsylvania, to release the actual documents they saw in order to clear their name and the questions regarding their involvement in this fraud. They refused. Why?”=====

Probably because they examined them and gave them back.


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 12:03 pm

=====The Hawaii folks, in an interview with Politifact, concluded their comments by saying that they had no idea what Obama's COLB posting represented. IOW, they have never compared and would not (actually COULD not, legally) say anything about its authenticity.=====

You are assuming that they never compared the two. They have every right to do so. The issue of what they can publicly release is a totally different matter.


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 12:19 pm

To Nellie:

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_ce…


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 12:23 pm

To Clarify, you assume that they never compared the two based on your misunderstanding of the applicable privacy laws.

I assume that they have compared the two because it is their sworn duty to maintain the integrity of their records.

(also because I know human nature, if they were different, it would have leaked out)


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 12:25 pm

And one more time

http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualin…

Any comments?


OBAMINATION
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 2:50 pm

MANY EXPERTS HAVE LOOKED AT IT AND DETERMINED IT IS JUST A COLB THAT HAS BEEN PHOTO SHOPPED.
STILL IT DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING. I WAS BORN IN ANOTHER COUNTRY (AFRICA.) AND MY PARENTS GOT ME A COLB IN HAWAII IN 1961.
SO NOTHING TO BE AFRAID OF TO LOOK AT A FAKE COLB THAT BELONGS TO A FAKE PRESIDENT LOL!


OBAMINATION
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 2:52 pm

YOU GIVE IT UP AFRO NERD. JUST GO HERE NELLIE.
I AM SURE AFRO NERD HAS AN EXPLANATION FOR THIS. SINCE HE IS OBVIOUSLY UNEMPLOYED AND ON THE INTERNET ALL DAY. LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAZAbqgpoGQ


OBAMINATION
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 2:52 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAZAbqgpoGQ


OBAMINATION
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 2:54 pm

NELLIE ALFRED AKA AFRO NERD HAS ABOUT AS MANY BRAIN CELLS AS AN AMOEBA.
JUST GO HERE AND LISTEN.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAZAbqgpoGQ


OBAMINATION
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 2:55 pm

I SEE ALFRED AKA AFRO NERD IS POSTING FACT CHECK AKA LIBERAL OWNED AND FUNDED VERIFICATION SERVICE.

GO HERE FOR THE TRUTH.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAZAbqgpoGQ


OBAMINATION
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 2:56 pm

HERE IS SOME PROOF THAT OBAMA WAS NOT BORN IN THE USA. HE IS A FRAUD GO TO THE BELOW WEBSITE.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAZAbqgpoGQ


OBAMINATION
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 2:58 pm

HERE IS YET MORE PROOF FACT CHECK IS A FRAUD AND FRAUDBAMA USED TO BE ON IT'S BORED OF COURSE THEY ARE GOING TO REPORT WHAT HE WANTS THEM TOO.

Factcheck .org is owned by Annenberg of Chicago..
Obama sat on the board of Annenberg dispersing up to 60 million dollars a year..

Draw your own conclusions..
Source(s):
http://www.patterico.com/2008/09/25/the-


Sparkicus
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 3:33 pm

Gordon Liddy is a thief, a liar, a white supremacist and a traitor. He is a retired CIA stooge. And people believe him why?


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 3:35 pm

They said they could not say what Obama's posting represented. Interpret it as you will. They specifically did NOT say that Obama's posted COLB is authentic, which is what Factcheck put on their final analysis of the birth certificate issue.

I don't know what the law says about state officials looking in the files of individuals without a warrant, some probable cause, or permission. The official in Ohio who ordered Joe the Plumber's files to be accessed got into trouble for it.


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 3:37 pm

Then why won't Obama himself show these documents to anyone? Or I guess you were the one who said anybody COULD see them. I'm still waiting for information on how I can do that.


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 3:40 pm

It's pretty much a sideways version of #5

Did you see observations #1 and #2 above? That's the first issue. Without agreeing on that, we can't get anywhere.


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 3:43 pm

Would it have leaked out if a hospital worker found the records for Obama's birth at their hospital? Why hasn't that leaked yet?


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 3:46 pm

Hospitals keep records for over 40 years?


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 3:47 pm

Walter Annenburg was a Close friend of Ronald Regan. My god the conspiracy runs deep.


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 3:48 pm

It's just a sideways version of #5. That “seal” doesn't bend with the fold either. And it still has Barack Hussein Obama immediately underneath the bottom fold – which the supposed close-up on #1 doesn't have. If anything, this just further confirms that what is observed isn't because of image quality issues.

Do I understand correctly that since you haven't corrected my observations, you agree with my description of the shapes on photos #2 and #5 and my description of the words “Barack Hussein Obama” missing from the close-up of the seal in #1?


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 3:53 pm

Nothing I've said contradicts anything they said. The issue is why Obama posted a COLB that had no seal on it (by definition a forgery, since all DOH ones have seals on them) rather than simply ordering an authentic, certified COLB which would certify his name and birthplace only.


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 3:57 pm

The seal is visible in this photo

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_ce…

which you seem to be ignoring. Why? Will that destroy your little fantasy?


Alferd
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 3:58 pm

You are completely nuts.

Buh Bye.


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 4:00 pm

I personally e-mailed Factcheck authors whose answer regarding “Born Alive Baloney” was dead wrong (no pun intended) FOUR times over the course of 2 months, giving them the exact agreement (Herbst -O'Malley) which proved them wrong. I asked for a retraction each time and they did nothing about it. I pointed out specific instances where their inaccurate information was being used in news articles all over the country. Nothing. At that point I knew them for what they are, not because of any conspiracy theory but because of my own personal experience with them and how they handle publicly-available, legally certified information that could be dangerous to Obama.


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 4:06 pm

Does the seal bend with the fold? Why are you ignoring this question? Does Photo #1 have “Barack Hussein Obama” immediately under the bottom fold? Just tell me what you see. If you won't do that there is no sense going on with this. You know what is there and in your mind you have to decide what you're going to do with it.


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 4:06 pm

God be with you.


Nellie
Comment posted June 6, 2009 @ 4:27 pm

By law medical providers have to keep records for 7-10 years but in practice, what I've seen from searching the internet, what Vicky says at http://www.davita.com/forum/showthread.php?p=21226 seems to be common. She says:

“in the hospital where i work wekeep records forever they just get archived. Before computers they were put on phish files. we even keep all medical records for 10 years after a patient has passed”

In the UK it's required that they keep medical records for 10 years after a person has died.


Doc3
Comment posted June 7, 2009 @ 10:39 am

The vault birth certificate from the State of Hawaii is available for publication. All it will take is for Obama to sign a form and pay $10.00. It is not rocket science. The Certification of Live Birth produced by Obama is worthless. The laws in Hawaii regarding birth certificates were changed in the 1970's to make it more difficult to obtain a birth certificate and required actual proof of the birth. Because the laws in Hawaii prior to that time were so easy to commit fraud they are worthless for proving if Obama was born in Honolulu. That would still require production of the vault certificate that would show the name of the hospital, doctors and witnesses. No matter how much Obama dances and his minions throw up red herrings and distractions, the bottom line is that we all know the vault certificate is there and it can be easily produced. Obama knows it as well and the fact that he refuses to produce it says he is hiding something.

Andy Martin has an appeal proceeding in Hawaii to get a court to order production of the vault certificate. Under the Hawaiian laws a copy of that vault certificate can be ordered by the Court as it is a matter of public interest. Once that is produced it should state the information listed above and then the hospital can be contacted to confirm the birth.

If the vault birth certificate does not list a hospital, but says Obama was born at home or somewhere else it raises questions. Such as where was he born? Why did he and his family lie about where he was born? Was he in fact born over-seas and his parents brought him back and lied about his birth when they registered him.

There is something in the vault birth certificate Obama does not want public. The question is does it impact his eligiblity or is it something that is embarrassing. That question will be answered at some point.

The Statements by representatives of the State of Hawaii in fact support production of the birth certificate. I think they have waived any privilege that may apply to the vault birth certificate by their vauge statements and have only raised further questions. There are experts in Hawaiian law and birth certificates that could answer these questions easily after seeing the vault certificate. I think the American pubic is entitled to those answers.

Gordon LIddy was involved with Watergate and the break-in. As I have posted below, who was responsible for the break-in into the passport office to clease Obama's records? Where is the investigation into Obamagate? One of the people that was involved with the break-in was subsequently murdered.
http://www.oilforimmigration.org/facts/?p=1681


Alferd
Comment posted June 7, 2009 @ 11:13 am

See this article

http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualin…


Nellie
Comment posted June 7, 2009 @ 7:04 pm

I'd bet money that he doesn't want us to see it because of the birthplace. Otherwise, he could have sent for an authentic COLB which validated only the information he was comfortable with showing the world – such as his name and birthplace. The fact that he posted a forgery, as shown by my posts below, leads me to believe he didn't contact Hawaii at all – probably because he didn't want to give any excuse for any of them to look at his records.


obamination
Comment posted June 8, 2009 @ 7:05 pm

Fact check is a fake moron. Obama was on the board of fact check. What a retard you are afro nerd.


obamination
Comment posted June 8, 2009 @ 7:06 pm

HERE IS YET MORE PROOF FACT CHECK IS A FRAUD AND FRAUDBAMA USED TO BE ON IT'S BORED OF COURSE THEY ARE GOING TO REPORT WHAT HE WANTS THEM TOO.

Factcheck .org is owned by Annenberg of Chicago..
Obama sat on the board of Annenberg dispersing up to 60 million dollars a year..

Draw your own conclusions..
Source(s):
http://www.patterico.com/2008/09/25/the-


obamination
Comment posted June 8, 2009 @ 7:07 pm

HERE IS YET MORE PROOF FACT CHECK IS A FRAUD AND FRAUDBAMA USED TO BE ON IT'S BORED OF COURSE THEY ARE GOING TO REPORT WHAT HE WANTS THEM TOO.

Factcheck .org is owned by Annenberg of Chicago..
Obama sat on the board of Annenberg dispersing up to 60 million dollars a year..

Draw your own conclusions..
Source(s):
http://www.patterico.com/2008/09/25/the-


obamination
Comment posted June 8, 2009 @ 7:07 pm

HERE IS YET MORE PROOF FACT CHECK IS A FRAUD AND FRAUDBAMA USED TO BE ON IT'S BORED OF COURSE THEY ARE GOING TO REPORT WHAT HE WANTS THEM TOO.

Factcheck .org is owned by Annenberg of Chicago..
Obama sat on the board of Annenberg dispersing up to 60 million dollars a year..

Draw your own conclusions..
Source(s):
http://www.patterico.com/2008/09/25/the-


obamination
Comment posted June 8, 2009 @ 7:08 pm

YEAH ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE PHOTO SHOPPED MORON.


obamination
Comment posted June 8, 2009 @ 7:09 pm

HERE IS YET MORE PROOF FACT CHECK IS A FRAUD AND FRAUDBAMA USED TO BE ON IT'S BORED OF COURSE THEY ARE GOING TO REPORT WHAT HE WANTS THEM TOO.

Factcheck .org is owned by Annenberg of Chicago..
Obama sat on the board of Annenberg dispersing up to 60 million dollars a year..

Draw your own conclusions..
Source(s):
http://www.patterico.com/2008/09/25/the-


obamination
Comment posted June 8, 2009 @ 7:09 pm

HERE IS YET MORE PROOF FACT CHECK IS A FRAUD AND FRAUDBAMA USED TO BE ON IT'S BORED OF COURSE THEY ARE GOING TO REPORT WHAT HE WANTS THEM TOO.

Factcheck .org is owned by Annenberg of Chicago..
Obama sat on the board of Annenberg dispersing up to 60 million dollars a year..

Draw your own conclusions..
Source(s):
http://www.patterico.com/2008/09/25/the-


obamination
Comment posted June 8, 2009 @ 7:10 pm

HERE IS YET MORE PROOF FACT CHECK IS A FRAUD AND FRAUDBAMA USED TO BE ON IT'S BORED OF COURSE THEY ARE GOING TO REPORT WHAT HE WANTS THEM TOO.

Factcheck .org is owned by Annenberg of Chicago..
Obama sat on the board of Annenberg dispersing up to 60 million dollars a year..

Draw your own conclusions..
Source(s):
http://www.patterico.com/2008/09/25/the-


obamination
Comment posted June 8, 2009 @ 7:10 pm

HERE IS SOME PROOF THAT OBAMA WAS NOT BORN IN THE USA. HE IS A FRAUD GO TO THE BELOW WEBSITE.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAZAbqgpoGQ


syc1959
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 4:00 pm

Natural Born is Born in country to 'Parents' who are citizens, from Vattel's “Laws of Nations” whom the Framers and Founding fathers used in the definition as in the US Constitution.
Barack Obama, he has admitted being a British citizen at birth. From his own web-site, “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.”

Read more at http://nobarack08.wordpress.com
NATIONAL ASSEMBLY OFFICIAL REPORT

Wednesday, 5th November, 2008

The House met at 9.00 a.m.

Dr. Khalwale: On a point of order, Mr. Deputy Speaker, Sir. You have heard none other than the Leader of Government Business acknowledge that because of Obama’s win in the United States of America (USA), the House is crippled.

Could we allow him to move a Motion for Adjournment so that we could also continue the celebrations of having a Kenyan ruling the USA? I humbly request! *****[note - "having a Kenyan ruling the USA"!]


whynonbc
Comment posted June 10, 2009 @ 11:07 pm

How can someone BORN with British Citizenship (something Barry admits to on his own campaign web site)…that is, someone BORN with FOREIGN citizenship be considered a Natural BORN Citizen of the United States?

Can't.

He never was, and never could be a Natural BORN Citizen of the U.S. due to his being born with British Citizenship.

The only way he gets around that is if Obama Sr. is not really his biological father.


Rick Evans
Comment posted June 11, 2009 @ 5:59 am

Certification of Live Birth
The document that Mr. Obama's cronies have posted is entitled “Certification of Live Birth”. That is different than a “Certificate of Live Birth” which is commonly called a birth certificate. The “Certificate” carries a significant amount of information about the new born as well as the attending physician's signature. A “Certification” is commonly used as identification. In Michigan you could even get a wallet sized “Certification” which I carried before I had a driver's license and used when I crossed the border into Canada. The “Certification” document that has been posted by Mr. Obama's protectors has a lot of problems which have been detailed by forgery experts. There findings can be easily found at numerous sites. But even if his “Certification” was not a hoax, it does not demonstrate birth in Hawaii. In the early days of their statehood it was advantageous from a Federal funding standpoint for them to be able to report high population numbers. Therefore they provided “Certification of Live Birth” documents to people born in other countries. It's pretty clear at this point that Mr. Obama and his supporters do not want the information shown on his “Birth Certificate” to be made public. When anyone expends as much time, effort and money as they have to keep his birth, school and passport records secret, its pretty obvious that the truth would pose a significant problem for him.


JHAWAII
Comment posted June 11, 2009 @ 6:19 pm

I went to the FACTCHECK.ORG site which claims to show Obama's COLB. Their photos show an oblique shot of the front of the COLB. There are some other close-up shots of a state seal and a stamp from the state dir. of health. I then got out my youngest daughter's COLB issued from the same office about a month later that factcheck's displayed immage. On my daughter's COLB, the state seal is raised and clearly visable accross the page from where “RACE OF FATHER” is printed. It is visable with the naked eye from 15 feet away. The factcheck site has a magnification feature allowing for closer examination of their oblique shot. THERE IS NO STATE SEAL ON THE DOCUMENT. I then looked at their separate photo of the state seal. That could be a valid seal, but there is no way to tell whose COLB it is on as no other text is visable. The separate seal photo is on a fold in the document. I enlarged each of the folds and there is no seal visable. Remember, Obama's sister, Maya, ws born in Indonesia and she also has a Hawaii COLB!


JHAWAII
Comment posted June 12, 2009 @ 1:19 am

I went to the FACTCHECK.ORG site which claims to show Obama's COLB. Their photos show an oblique shot of the front of the COLB. There are some other close-up shots of a state seal and a stamp from the state dir. of health. I then got out my youngest daughter's COLB issued from the same office about a month later that factcheck's displayed immage. On my daughter's COLB, the state seal is raised and clearly visable accross the page from where “RACE OF FATHER” is printed. It is visable with the naked eye from 15 feet away. The factcheck site has a magnification feature allowing for closer examination of their oblique shot. THERE IS NO STATE SEAL ON THE DOCUMENT. I then looked at their separate photo of the state seal. That could be a valid seal, but there is no way to tell whose COLB it is on as no other text is visable. The separate seal photo is on a fold in the document. I enlarged each of the folds and there is no seal visable. Remember, Obama's sister, Maya, ws born in Indonesia and she also has a Hawaii COLB!


Anonymous
Comment posted June 19, 2009 @ 1:31 am

HaHa moron, go to the Sacramento Superior Court website. Go to civil cases and do a name search for Alan Keyes. It will take you to Keyes vs. Obama et al. Look at the declaration of Obama’s attorney where, under penalty of perjury, he states that he has been traveling the country defending this lawsuits.

Do you know what pro bono means? Take the time to look it up before you post again as you are a waste of time.


LYNN DOUBBLESTEIN
Comment posted June 29, 2009 @ 5:07 pm

THERE IS NEW INFO THAT OBAMAS CITIZENSHIP MAY BE IN QUESTION AGAIN. IS HE LEGAL TO BE PRESIDENT OR NOT?


A ‘Birther’ Scorecard « One Utah
Pingback posted July 22, 2009 @ 4:56 pm

[...] G. Gordon Liddy, radio talk show host and former Nixon Watergate operative convicted of conspiracy, burglary and illegal wiretapping [...]


biggerman
Comment posted November 25, 2009 @ 10:36 pm

The rocks will cry out!


biggerman
Comment posted November 25, 2009 @ 10:45 pm

If born in Kenya, he's OK! You know the left sees everything as one BROWN shade; no black or white to them! You know how Slick Willy started the movement of there being no difference between getting Hootered and Nothing Happened with Monica, or Jennifer, or Kay, or Paula, or Hillery, or or or ! HaHaHa! Therefore, the place of birth doesn't matter as per The US Supreme Court! Now, let's not hear anymore about what's legal in the U.S.!


biggerman
Comment posted November 25, 2009 @ 10:58 pm

Very interesting!


biggerman
Comment posted November 26, 2009 @ 3:36 am

The rocks will cry out!


biggerman
Comment posted November 26, 2009 @ 3:45 am

If born in Kenya, he's OK! You know the left sees everything as one BROWN shade; no black or white to them! You know how Slick Willy started the movement of there being no difference between getting Hootered and Nothing Happened with Monica, or Jennifer, or Kay, or Paula, or Hillery, or or or ! HaHaHa! Therefore, the place of birth doesn't matter as per The US Supreme Court! Now, let's not hear anymore about what's legal in the U.S.!


biggerman
Comment posted November 26, 2009 @ 3:58 am

Very interesting!


freedomman
Comment posted January 3, 2011 @ 1:04 am

Alferd,,you are a communist just like O’numbnuts,,,,the lying bastard,,,


Conveyancing Solicitors
Trackback posted April 1, 2011 @ 12:02 am

Conveyancing Solicitor…

[...]here are some links to sites that we link to because we think they are worth visiting[...]…


Chiropractor
Comment posted September 6, 2011 @ 10:06 pm

Thank you so much for giving my family an update on this theme on your site. Please be aware that if a completely new post becomes available or if perhaps any alterations occur about the current post, I would be interested in reading a lot more and focusing on how to make good utilization of those methods you write about. Thanks for your time and consideration of people by making your blog available.


dieta in diabetul gestational
Comment posted September 7, 2011 @ 12:41 pm

I have beeing scouring the WWW for this information and just wanted to thank you for this post. Also, just off topic, how can i get a version of this theme? – Regards


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.