Oklahoma Representative Mike Ritze (R-Broken Arrow) has pre-filed a bill, requiring candidates for public office to submit a copy of their Birth Certificates. Ritze is a professor of Forensic Science and a physician, and was just elected to his first term in the legislature in November 2008. Ritze introduced his bill because he does not believe that President-Elect Barack Obama has demonstrated that he meets the constitutional qualifications.
Ritze also says that he is trying to persuade U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe to object to counting electoral college votes for Obama, when Congress counts the electoral votes on January 8.
The Oklahoma legislature does not convene until February. Oklahoma legislators are free to pre-file bills, but the Oklahoma legislature’s web page does not yet have the text of pre-filed bills, so the text of Ritze’s bill is not available. Since presidential nominees of qualified parties do not actually file for the November ballot in any state, it is not clear how Ritze’s bill can accomplish its objective, relative to general election presidential nominees of qualified parties.
I believe that I heard Rep. Ritze on Plainsradio and found him to be very articulate and sensible. He deserves support on his common sense solution to moving through the distractions of legal procedures and arbitrary political posturing. On one hand the U.S. Senate will not seat a “tainted” senator from Illinois, but yet it will close its eyes to the thousands of letters demanding an investigation of our tainted President-elect.
Ritze’s bill would level the playing field.
Anyone on this or other co-posted lists who is a regular retired (US
military) line officer, should consider immediately joining or starting
their own federal litigation challenging SCOTUS to clarify “natural born
citizen” eligibility for the office of CINC (and POTUS).
finally something good comes out of Oklahoma
If Ritze’s requirement been Oklahoma law before the election, Obama would have submitted a copy of the Certification of Live Birth document — the same type that’s been shown — to Oklahoma elections officials. And that’s fine.
But tit wouldn’t satisfy the people insisting on the “long form.” And if Ritze IS specifying that the long form must be submitted, well, good luck with that. Even when the person himself applies for it, the state of Hawaii no longer issues copies of the “vault” original, also known as the “long form.” The only one anybody can requisition is the short form, the computer-generated version like Obama already produced.
I’d have to see a copy of the bill to understand what Ritze is actually trying to accomplish.
Roselani: You are not correct on your statement. Obama produced what is called a short form Certification of Live Birth. Certified copies of the original birth certificate are easily available if Obama would sign a form and pay $10.00. Read pages 7-11 and it shows the form to fill out. While this deals with a Hawaiian land program it demonstates that the long form certified copy of Obama’s birth certificate is available:
http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/Loaa%20Ka%20Aina%20Hoopulapula.pdf
The form produced by Obama is not good for a drivers license, passport or much due to the fact that it does not contain any verifiable facts such as the name of the hospital where the birth occurred, the name of the delivery doctors or any witnesses.
As with the land program cited above, if Obama cannogt produce a certified copy of a birth certificate further investigation and evidence would be required.
Below are two official emails that dispute the public version of Obama’s Birth and his mother’s marriage to BHO Sr.
From: pubrec@u.washington.edu [mailto:pubrec@u.washington.edu]
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008
Subject: Re: Stanley “Ann” Dunham 1960 to 1970 class registration
Ms. Stanley Ann Dunham (BHO II’s mom) was enrolled at the University of Washington for:
Autumn 1961
Winter 1962
Spring 1962
The records responsive to your request from the University of Washington are above as provided by the Public Disclosure Laws of Washington State. This concludes the University’s response to your Public Records request. Please feel free to contact our office if you have any questions or concerns.
Madolyne Lawson
Office of Public Records
206-543-9180
From: Stuart Lau [mailto:stuartl@hawaii.edu]
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008
Subject: Re: Inquiry
The University of Hawaii at Manoa is only able to provide the following information for Stanley Ann Dunham:
Dates of attendance:
Fall 1960 (First day of instruction 9/26/1960)
Spring 1963 – Summer 1966
Fall 1972 – Fall 1974
Summer 1976
Spring 1978
Fall 1984 – Summer 1992
Degrees awarded:
BA – Mathematics, Summer 1967 (August 6, 1967)
MA – Anthropology, Fall 1983 (December 18, 1983)
PhD – Anthropology, Summer 1992 (August 9, 1992)
Sincerely, Stuart Lau
****************************************
Stuart Lau
University Registrar
Office of Admissions and Records
University of Hawaii at Manoa
Ph: (808) 956-8010
****************************************
Commentary on University Emails:
For the BHO II Hawaiian Aug 4 1961 COLB to be accurate the following improbable events needed to occur:
1 month after starting classes, Stanley Ann Dunham, Barack’s mom, at age 17, got pregnant by the only black African man on the entire chain of Hawaiian islands.
2 months after getting pregnant, she drops out of college.
3 months after getting pregnant, she marries BHO Sr.
10 months after her first day at the U of HI, she delivers BHO II and immediately leaves her parents, her new husband, and her home, to fly alone with a newborn 2800 miles to Seattle to start college at the U of W.
Stanley Ann Dunham does not return to Hawaii until AFTER BHO Sr left the islands for Harvard.
This is an implausible series of events made even more nefarious because Obama II in his 2 bio books never mentions his mom left Hawaii when she was married to BHO Sr, nor does he mention she was in Washington State during this time.
Well done. The international civil and political rights organization AXJ is looking into this matter. http://www.axjus.com
This is defiantly a bill that should be passed and should be retro before Mr. Obama takes the oath of office.
It’s sad that the Federal Government won’t try to fix this problem. Does Obama really expect this to go away? This will be the legacy that he leaves as president. This will be his ,”I never had sex with that woman” legacy. The first man to be considered an imposter president.
The Oklahoma State Constitution spells out eligibility for holding various state offices. It seems a bit dubious to think that there would be statutory requirements onto the constitutional requirements for state offices.
Ritze is a freshman Representative. The bill isn’t going anywhere.
Also:
“Ritze’s bill requires all candidates, running for any office, to show a copy of a certified birth certificate as well as driver’s license or other government-issued identification upon registering with the Election Board.”
So.. you’d need the birth certificate (presumably no COLBs), and ID that you can only get with a birth certificate.
Oklahoma may be completely insane when it comes to third party access, but they’re not that dumb.
Elf Ninos Mom (“Last Free Voice”) Is Tamara Johnson from Huntington WV
badda bing badda bang badda boom
allahu akhbar
MESSAGE TO EVERY MEMBER OF CONGRESS:
When counting the electoral votes, either Congress finds by 1/8/09 that Obama, not being an Article II “natural born citizenâ€, fails to qualify as President whereupon Biden becomes the full fledged President under 3 USC 19 (free to pick his own VP such as Hillary) or thereafter defers to the Supreme Court to enjoin Obama’s inauguration with Biden becoming only Acting President under the 20th Amendment until a new President is duly determined.
The preferable choice, at least for the Democrats, should seem obvious.
It seems there is some selective outrage here. Is it merely a co-incidence that you guys only seem concerned about birth certificates when it comes to Presidents who have more than the minimum amounts of melanin?
Unless all Presidents back to George Washington present their full and complete birth certificates, including hospital records (being born in a log cabin is no excuse) all laws and orders issued by them are hereby invalid.
No President, prior to Obama, hid the documentation of his past. He has hidden not only his birth certificate. He hides all his college records, health records and State Senate records as well. Obama is acting like a slime bucket and the media let him get away with it whereas, they would never have allowed this of a Republican or a melanin challenged fellow. The Presidency is not an affirmative action pick where the elite can violate the constitution to get the Black guy elected.
See the ROT of the last years and days of the Roman Republic when LAW when out the window and down the toilet.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augustus_Caesar
Does history repeat ??? Duh.
Hi! I have been studying this issue and it all begins with the sealed original birth certificate.
Please go to http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov
and on the right click on
Hawaii Revised Statutes
and then enter the search term
birth certificate
and
then
certificate of birth
and there are a lot of Hawaii Revised Statute
HRS sections to read.
They allow for a person born in a foreign country to receive a Hawaii birth certificate.
They allow for hearsay evidence to establish facts upon which a birth certificate can be established, amended or altered.
They allow for the original birth certificate to be sealed, and a new birth certificate to be issued.
They allow for a person born in Hawaii to have a name change and seal the original birth certificate and have a new one issued.
It is clear that Governor Linda Lingle of Hawaii has sealed Barack Obama’s original birth certificate.
It is not clear why.
There are so many different HRS sections for sealing an original birth certificate and getting a new one issued.
The birth certificate laws of Hawaii are so ambiguous as to conceal material facts voters need to know to be certain the 44th President is a natural born citizen.
The certificate of birth laws of Hawaii allow a child to receive a birth certificate of Hawaii even when there is no certainty as to what foreign country the child is born in,
a “probable country of foreign birth” is adequate.
The birth certificate laws of Hawaii are unconstitutionally vague and overly broad.
I have been writing a proposed petition, and I need to find an attorney to file it pro bono for myself and all interested voters.
The central question is:
SHALL the Supreme Court of the United States strike down, repeal, amend, void, Hawaii Revised Statute sections on ‘birth certificates’ and certificates of birth’;
and do so retroactively,
and determine then
if Barack Obama is a natural born citizen.
Right now, he can say whatever is on his new
birth certificate. It is a prima facie case that his current birth certificate is new and that it has different facts than the original, because the original is sealed when a new certificate is issued, and a new certificate is issued when there is an application to alter or amend the facts.
A sealed birth certificate is only sealed when a new birth certificate with different facts is issued.
Because the Hawaii Revised Statutes require that when a new certificate of birth is issued,
that the original birth certificat SHALL BE SEALED,
then Barack Obama can have justifiable reliance on the new facts stated in the new birth certificate.
The problem is that these Hawaii Revised Statutes about birth certificats are allegedly unconstitutional because they deprive voters of material facts to know if Barack Obama was born in the United States.
And another problem is the Hawaii law on hearsay that allows a family member to state the facts of birth as they believe them to be, and to have those used as facts, and to have those hearsay allegations to be used to alter or amend a birth certificate and have the original sealed and receive a new one.
In other words, these laws allegedly create a lawless free-for-all in Hawaii.
Hey dude!
As far as I know, none of the Petitions to the Supreme Court of the U.S.
have asked this Question that I am asking.
I think it is a far kinder approach to “attack” the laws of Hawaii for being unconstitutional and overly vague and overly broad
rather than to imply Barack Obama did anything wrong.
Within the family laws there are requirements regarding investigative facts and reports kept when a child is adopted, and because there are some allegations of Barack Obama being adopted, his original birth certificate may have been sealed in order, not to conceal all and any other
names he has had, but to conceal the underlying investigative reports about any possible abuse
to his mother that may hurt his feelings to have exposed, or abuse to him as a child by one or more of his male parents that would hurt his feelings to have exposed, or the underlying reasons he lived with his grandparents and what court orders enabled them to have custody, without which they may not have been able to have custody, etc.
Once you start with reading all of the birth certificate laws and then start reading the adjacent family court laws,
ooooooooooooeeeeeeeeeeee!
what a mess!
Cris Ericson
http://crisericson.com
Let’s dispose of these pieces of nonsense one by one:
1. Birth records. Show me even one previous President who provided “vault copies” of his birth certificate or hospital records. The early Presidents were born at home and their births were often not recorded until well after the fact. Obama’s birth record is as exhaustive as any of his predecessors, including Bush, Clinton and other recent ones.
2. College records. It’s a matter of documented fact that he graduated from Columbia and Harvard Law. So what are you looking for? Was he an affirmative action pick? Could be. And I suppose you think it says in black and white on college records “This student admitted through affirmative action”. Hardly. Did he claim to be a Kenyan citizen? Why would he? The admission standards are as tough or tougher for foreign students (they are generally better prepoared than the average US student) and the fact is that there is less, not more, financial aid for foreign students unless their home government pays their way. Since Obama Sr. was on the outs with the authorities in Kenya by the time Jr hit college, this is pretty far-fetched. Anyway, a half-black, half-white kid from a prestigious prep school in Hawaii would have had his pick of any Ivy League school, likely with a full scholarship. College admissions officers salivate at the prospect. Did he come through with gentleman’s Cs? I doubt it. But suppose he did? Most of the early Presidents didn’t go to college and even in this century, most were undistinguished students (Bush, Reagan, LBJ). McCain was at the bottom of his clas at Annapolis. IMO that was irrelevant to his aqbility to be President.
3. Health records. Now here you are simply in fantasy land. Hiding serious health problems is a long and proud Presidential tradition. A few examples-FDR took enormous pains to hide his being in a wheelchair. Lincoln had numerous serious conditions, including Marfan’s syndrome and, likely, bipolar disorder. Harrison was so sick that giving his inaugural address killed him. Even in recent times, there is no question Reagan was showing early signs of Alzheimer’s by the time he ran for a second term. Obama is young and looks pretty healthy, so I doubt he is hiding anything, but if he were, he’d be part of a long tradition.
4. State Senate- His votes, speeches, etc. are a matter of public record, so what are you referring to?
Anarchy – we’ve really not had a president of past who’s birth was in question. YOU may not question his birth place, parents, citizenship – but I do. And I only question it upon Obama’s actions. The fact that he ‘appears’ to be hiding something – just produce the documentation and get on with being president. If he doesn’t, Michael Borge above is totally correct. His presidency will be shrouded in suspicion and taint. He will NOT be remembered as the first Affirmative Action African American President – he will be remembered as the usurper – no matter what he is able to accomplish during his term.
I’m not so concerned with his college records, but the fact that he sealed them and ‘appears’ to be hiding something, makes me question his motives for doing so. If he is to be MY president, I would appreciate if he were open and honest (you know that ‘transparancy’ word he kept using during his campaign?). I just want to know who he is and what his past is.
And I’m sick to death of being accused of being a racist because I want to question something that Obama himself wants to hide. That’s like saying I shouldn’t wonder where my child was when he comes home 3 hours late, but he’s ok and is home now – don’t worry. It is my duty as a parent to find out – just as it is my duty as a citizen to know who is running my country. I could care less if the man is purple, pink, orange or azure! It has nothing to do with race, it has everything to do with principal and integrity. Are you saying that because he happens to be African American he doesn’t have to have morals, principals, or integrity? To be totally honest about the race issue, I don’t even view him as African American. I see him as Caucasian. He certainly wasn’t raised, educated, or lived as an African American (from what I’ve read and am allowed to know). Whatever his race – I feel my president needs to be honest, upstanding, and have the integrity to let the people of his nation know who he is.
There is the rub – the US is NOT his nation though. He was born with dual-loyalities and the US can only be the nation where he was born and he can never call the US HIS nation. And if he considers the US HIS nation WHY in the holy heck did he go to Kenya (well after his 21st birthday) to campaign for a paternal relative who believes in Sharia Law? THAT action leads me to believe he continues to hold on to his dual-allegiences that he had at birth.
On the matter of health records….are you saying because others before him have hidden health issues, that makes it ok for it to reoccur and for Obama to do it as well? 2 wrongs make a right? Or should we learn from past mistakes in history and require that our presidents be honest and possess enough integrity to show his medical records – ALL of them? I think I’d like to see them, since he has withheld them and ‘appears’ to be hiding something.
On his state senate papers, I believe they are referring to the papers that he ‘says’ were destroyed. You know those papers that he said he would release if Hillary would release her First Lady papers? Then she did and he didn’t?
The man seemingly is a man without a past – to the point where he is almost a man without a country. It’s the ‘appearance’ hiding something that cuases the most concern. If he would just release ALL his information, I don’t have to like everything that I learn, but at least he wouldn’t ‘appear’ to be hiding anything.
And I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one who believes he came through Chicago politics untainted by the Chicago Machine. He played at politics just like Blogo has – it’s the Chicago way and he wouldn’t have climbed so quickly through the machine had he not played by their rules. I may not have standing to see his vault BC, but I’m not stupid.
RE: To Sally
There is some debate about whether President Chester Arthur was born in Canada or not, about 14 miles north of the Vermont border.
During the 1880 U.S presidential election a New York attorney, Arthur P. Hinman, was hired to explore rumors of Arthur’s foreign birth. Unfortunately, like today, his claim fell on deaf ears.
Arthur was very well connected politically, and a part of the New York political machine. The more things change, the more they remain the same.
College records.
If they are something to be proud of, why hide them?
>>>> So what are you looking for? <<
Perhaps financial aid as a foreign student.
Sally- I have in front of me my birth certificate and those of my 2 children. They all have the same information as Obama’s- date and place of birth and child’s and parents’ names. One is specifically the long form from Maryland. If someone wanted more, I don’t know what I else I could provide, since what appears on the forms is controlled by the state where the birth occured. I guess I must be hiding some deep dark secret.
As far as dual citizenship, I am unconvinced by the arguments that “natural born citizen” excludes dual citizens, either by the plain meaning of the words or the intent. From what I have read, most legal scholars support my position. Furthermore, whether a US-born child is entitled to other nationalities based on their parents’ origin is a function of foreign laws. Many countries extend nationality to the children and grandchildren of their nationals. Israel extends citizenship to any person of Jewish ancestry. Thus, many millions of US-born children are potentially nationals of other countries. I, for one, don’t think they should lose the possibility of growing up to be President because of the laws of their ancestors’ countries, nor do I think that was the intent of the founders.
Obama has cultural ties to Kenya (and Indonesia0, for sure, as Kennedy did to Ireland, as Richardson would have had to Mexico or Cuomo to Italy. I believe those enrich the US as a country and are a positive for America’s standing in the world. It’s your right to believe that is a negative and vote against Obama on that basis; however, there is no sound basis whereby that disqualifies him from office.
As for his health records, he released a letter from his doctor stating that he is in excellent health. As 48 year old who plays a pretty mean basketball on a regular basis, I suspect his BP and lipid profile would put yours and mine to shame. Some candidates released more detailed records, many did not. I doubt he’s hiding anything, but again you can believe what you want.
The fact is, Obama is the President. If you want to consider him illigitimate, go right ahead. Many people in 2001 considered Bush illigitimate, based on a stolen election in Florida. What did that achieve? He still got to launch a war and ruin the economy. I doubt Obama can do any worse. He will be judged for re-election and by history by what he does in office. For all our sakes, I, for one, hope he does great things.
To Anarchy in the US: You seem to be part of the Obama press and blog corps. Obama, the Democratic Party and the Obama press corps are responsible for this debacle. While you try to take the party line you raise straw-man arguments, red herrings and just plain BS.
It is obvious from your posts that you, like all of the Obamabots have gotten to a point where you are simply sticking your fingers in your ears and yelling:
1. Birth Certificates: If you had taken the time to research the issue of birth certificates on our early Presidents you would have found that as the United States did not exist prior to the signing of the Constitution the Framers put in the Constitution a Grandfather clause. This stated that any one alive at the time of the signing of the Constitution were considered natural born citizens. So, unless there is a painting in Obama’s attic getting very old this exception would not apply.
2. Obama’s Birth Certificate: You did not look at the post above. Obama could, for $10.00, produce a copy of his certified birth certificate. Here is the post again, if you cannot understand it have someone explain it to you:
http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/Loaa%20Ka%20Aina%20Hoopulapula.pdf
“In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL.”
Note above the difference between Certification and Certificate. Obama has produced the Certification of Live Birth, not the Certificate of Live Birth. The important difference is the Certificate would include the name of the hospital, doctors and witnesses. These facts can then be followed up and the birth verified.
3. Natural Born Citizen: Your arguments on health records etc. are not even worth commenting on. Obama is either a “natural born citizen” or he is not. If he is not he cannot legitimately serve as President. Even if he takes the oath of office it will not get around the fact that he is not eligible. When, not if, the information that Obama is trying so hard to suppress comes out and IF it shows Obama is not a “natural born citizen”, he will have to be removed from office. All acts that he takes will be null and void and there will be a Constitutional and National crisis.
4. How did we get here?: This issue was first raised by Hillary PRIOR TO THE PRIMARIES. Obama and the Democratic Party have had since at least last February to answer this question. Obama could have produced all of his records and answered this fully and transparently to avoid a National and Constitutional crisis of having an ineligible President elect, and if Obama takes the oath of office an ineligible President.
http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=16505
So this is not a “right wing” conspiracy, sour grapes, racist or anything other than a legitimate request of citizens that Obama applying for the highest job in the Nation produce evidence to demonstrate that he meets the “natural born citizenship” test.
5. What Obama produced is worthless. Here are all items that require a certified copy of the birth certificate, that as shown above Obama could easily produce by signing a release and paying $10.00:
A. Hawaii Drivers License:
http://www.co.honolulu.hi.us/csd/vehicle/dlrequirements.htm
Acceptable Documents for Proof of Name and Birth Date: Including 18 years old
1. U.S. Territorial Driver’s License (expired/valid with photo).
2. U.S. Passport only.
3. U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Document/Card.
4. Alien Registration/Refugee ID Card.
5. State of Hawaii ID Card w/photo.
6. Military Documents: Consular Report of Birth and U.S. Military issued Certificate of Birth (SF-240/SF-545).
7. State Certified Birth Certificate with both parents listed or State Certified Birth ID Card.
B. Job in Hawaii:
http://hawaii.gov/labor/wsd/pdf/forms/3-6-07/wsd-CL-1.pdf
C. Passport:
http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/first/first_830.html
“Primary Evidence of U.S. Citizenship (One of the following):
Previously issued, undamaged U.S. Passport
Certified birth certificate issued by the city, county or state*
Consular Report of Birth Abroad or Certification of Birth
Naturalization Certificate
Certificate of Citizenship
*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. Please note, some short (abstract) versions of birth certificates may not be acceptable for passport purposes.”
Note that Obama produced a short form abstract and not the certified copy which, again in case you missed it, is available if Obama would sign the release and pay $10.00.
Obama has been expunging his records or having them sealed. The State of Hawaii has not sealed his birth certificate, but under Hawaii law it can only be produced under very limited circumstances. The fact that Obama has let this crisis grow without “openly and transparently” producing his birth certificate or other records to put an end to this is only proving that there is something that he is hiding.
There are now upwards of 20 lawsuits filed around the country. In none of these cases to date has the Court allowed discovery. The cases that have been dismissed were done so under a legal technicality for lack of standing, which means that a citizen has not been damaged by having an ineligible candidate on the ballot. There are now several lawsuits filed that will not have this technicality including the Keyes case filed in California. The Berg case is set for two conferences at the Supreme Court on Jan. 09 and 16, 2009.
At some point a Court is going to allow discovery and require Obama, the Democratic Party or one of the State’s Secretaries to come to Court and produce the evidence used to qualify Obama. Further, subpoenas are being served in some of these cases to the Department of Health in Hawaii seeking the birth certificate.
It will not take long for a Court to go through the records once they become available to make a final determination on this. If it shows Obama is not a “natural born citizen” he will be out of the office.
>>I doubt Obama can do any worse. <<
On this we agree.
On the not so gradual destruction of that “G-D piece of paper,” we seem to have opposing points of view.
I hope this bill passes in OK, and in some other states as well, and forces release by Hawaii of the original birth certificate in 2012 or before. It doesn’t seem likely much will happen before then.
I have my college records here in front of me. Transcripts from Indiana University with a D- in finance (a course I later taught for IU after earning an MBA in finance from Purdue), and everything else from Fall 1976 through a Mongolian Throat Singing course I audited as a member of the IU faculty in the Fall of 2002.
Every employer I’ve applied to has asked for, and gotten those from me. $11.00 a copy. (As well as my MS in Finance ones from Purdue — those are free.)
So as Obama’s “employer,” how come I don’t have the right to see his college transcripts?
As for the record of his birth, it’s my understanding that it wouldn’t even get him into the Little League — they want the one with hospital, doctor’s name, etc.
All that said, I suppose like most Americans, I’m hopeful this guy will do a decent job. The 14 years living in the USA seems to trump the birth issue; if not in law, then in the post-Republic, nationalizing, fascist-tilting. individual liberty destroying state we seem to find ourselves in today.
hahahahahah
Joe- My wife has an Indiana birth certificate (and is a proud IU grad). It doesn’t list hospital or doctor; nor do my kids’ or my own from other jurisdictions. None of us have ever been in little league, so I don’t know what they ask for, but we all have passports. By the way, not everyone is born in a hospital even in the modern USA. My wife’s cousin gave birth at home within the last 20 years, by personal choice. As for transcripts, I have a PhD and have not usually been asked for transcripts for most jobs, just proof of degrees obtained.
To be clear though, you as individual voter can demand anything you want from a candidate and vote or not vote for whomever you choose. My objection is to those who want to continue to contest, without end, an election that has already occured and been decided by a clear margin.
By the way, since this site is supposed to be dedicated to ballot access for 3rd parties and independents, let me observe that if 3rd parties and independents choose to focus on arcana like whether a doctor’s name appears on a Hawaiian birth certificate from 1961, rather than on issues that the majority of Americans actually care about in their daily lives, the US will remain a 2 party state for the forseeable future.
Anarchy, Bubbie you did not address the information showing that Obama and the Democratic Party have failed the American People by their failure to vet or qualify Obama BEFORE THE ELECTION. This is about that failure and allowing the primaries and election to proceed when they had clear notice of this potential deficiency. This is a fraud on the American voters and nothing less if Obama did this knowing he is ineligible as he is a Constitutional attorney and knows full well if he is eligible or not.
Obama appears perfectly willing to roll the dice on this issue to the detriment of the American People for his own personal gains.
This was not a landslide vote 53% to 46% hardly rises to that level. You and those people that voted for him are simply out of luck if he is proven to be “inelible”. If that happens you need to address your ire to Mr. Obama and the Democratic National Committee for allowing this to get this far. To help you understand:
in·el·i·gi·ble (n-l-j-bl)
adj.
1. Disqualified by law, rule, or provision: ineligible to run for office; ineligible for health benefits.
2. Unworthy of being chosen; unfit: considered her ineligible for the job.
n.
One that is not eligible.
Obama appears to be frantically digging into the government so deep that he thinks he cannot be removed from office. He is wrong. Just like a tick, if he is shown to be ineligible, he will be dug out and removed from office. Ineligibility, like ugly never goes away.
To this day there is no valid evidence provided that Obama was born in Hawaii. It does not matter what you or your wife’s birth certificate says, irrelevant buddy. If you tried to get a passport with a short form that you, your wife apparently have, or that Obama produced, it would be denied and you would be told to produce other evidence such as a birth certificate.
Finally, please stop talking about irrelevant issues. Obama can produce a birth certificate for $10.00. If that says he was born in Hawaii in a hospital, as Obama is clearly on the record saying, for many of us that would end this issue. There are others that try to take a more narrow interpretation that dual citizenship renders him ineligible, but speaking for myself I would just like to see the confirmation with actual evidence that Obama was born in a hospital in Hawaii. And please do not go into the newspaper clippings. Clippings would be circumstantial evidence that could be used to confirm the birth in a hospital once Obama produces the certified copy of his birth certificate. Simple two step process here:
1. If Obama provides a certified copy of his birth certificate and if it says he was born in a hospital in Hawaii that is fine. The hospital can be contacted, the doctors and witnesses contacted, and circumstantial evidence such as the newspaper announcement can be used to substantiate the birth.
2. On the other hand. If the birth certificate says Obama was born in Kenya, or if it says he was born at home, in a taxi or anywhere else but a named hospital in Hawaii there will be issues. It would raise the question of the veracity of Obama as he has clearly stated verbally and in writing in his books that he was born in a hospital in Hawaii. Second, it would likely mean that Obama was born overseas and not in the US and as in the Department of Hawaiian Land program noted above, further investigations would be needed to confirm the location of his birth. If Obama cannot prove he was born in Hawaii or US soil he is ineligible and he is out of office.
Joe, You said:
“All that said, I suppose like most Americans, I’m hopeful this guy will do a decent job. The 14 years living in the USA seems to trump the birth issue; if not in law, then in the post-Republic, nationalizing, fascist-tilting. individual liberty destroying state we seem to find ourselves in today.”
I am not sure what your point is. The question of whether Obama is a “natural born citizen” is determined at his birth. He is or he is not so 14 years in the US or any other argument has no bearing on this. It is not simply a law, it is a Constitutional mandate.
I posted above the law that was, and still is in effect, on this point. Obama would have had to be born in US territory for him to be a “natural born citizen” as only his mother appears to have been a US citizen. For her to transfer that status, Obama Mama had to live in the US for 5 years past her 14th birthday.
http://www.volokh.com/posts/1227910730.shtml
“[Eugene Volokh, December 1, 2008 at 12:07pm] Trackbacks
Correction About Natural-Born Citizen Law:
I’m afraid that I made a legal error in a conversation I had with a Chicago Tribune reporter several weeks ago, and the error understandably made its way into print. Now that I realize I’ve made this error, I need to try to correct it. Just to make things clear up front, I have no reason to doubt that President-Elect Obama was born in Hawaii, and is therefore a natural-born citizen. The legal issue I discussed here is a based on the purely hypothetical question of what would be the law if President-Elect Obama were not born within the U.S. Nonetheless, I commented on this hypothetical question, in a way that I now believe was incorrect, so I think I need to correct my error.
The relevant passage is in a Chicago Tribune story from Oct. 30, 2008:
Any person born in the U.S. automatically is a “natural born citizen,” said University of California Los Angeles law professor Eugene Volokh.
Even if a person is born outside the United States, … [a]t the time Obama was born, the law stated that a person would be considered a “natural born citizen” if either parent was a citizen who had lived at least 10 years in the U.S., including five years after the age of 14 — in other words, 19.
Dunham was three months shy of her 19th birthday when Obama was born. But subsequent acts of Congress relaxed the requirement to five years in the U.S., including just two years after the age of 14, meaning Dunham could have been 16 and still qualified even if Obama was born in another country, Volokh said. Congress made the law retroactive to 1952, doubly covering Obama.
Any legal challenge would have to argue that Congress can’t make someone retroactively a citizen at birth, and prove Obama was born outside of the U.S. after all.
My error came in misreading the last sentence in 8 U.S.C. § 1401(g):
(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of Title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person (A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or (B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of Title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date;
I foolishly read the last sentence as applying to the entire provision, § 1401(g); but the last sentence refers to the “proviso,” and thus just to the clause that begins with “Provided.” Public Law 89-770 enacted both the “Provided” and the last sentence mentioning the “proviso,” without repeating the first clause — this supports the view that the “proviso” refers only to the “Provided” clause.
Moreover, the change to “at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years” was made by Public Law 99-653, Nov. 14, 1986, which was enacted after the “Provided” clause and the last sentence were added: “SEC. 12. Section 301(g) (8 U.S.C. 1401(g)) is amended by striking out ‘ten years, at least five’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘five years, at least two.'” Two years later, the Immigration Technical Corrections Act of 1988, Public Law 100-525, Oct. 24, 1988, provided:
(r) EFFECTIVE DATES. — INAA [the Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1986 (Public Law 99-653)] is further amended by adding at the end the following new section:
“EFFECTIVE DATES
“SEC. 23….
“(d) The amendment made by section 12 shall apply to persons born on or after November 14, 1986.
So, as I now read 8 U.S.C. § 1401, “a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States” before Nov. 14, 1986 is a natural-born citizen only if the citizen parent “was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than ten years, at least five of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years” — the same rule that was in place in the early 1960s. See also United States v. Flores-Villar, 497 F. Supp. 2d 1160, 1162-64 (S.D. Cal. 2007) (taking the same view and concluding the change from ten years/five years to five years/two years only applied to people born after 1986), aff’d, 536 F.3d 990 (9th Cir. 2008) (so assuming but not discussing it in detail); Rico-Ibarra v. Mukasey, 281 Fed. Appx. 694, 695 n.1 (9th Cir. 2008) (not precedential).”
Bottom line, unless Obama was born in a hospital in Hawaii as he claims, or anywhere in US territory he is not eligible to be President.
a FOIA lawsuit has finally been cleared for progress in the USDC-DC district. civil action no. 08-cv-2234 Strunk v US State Dept. related mandamus also at USCA for the DC circuit as well as at SCOTUS
Anarchy and Joe: I have 2 birth certificates from IN: one from the state, and one from the hospital. Obama not having or producing either one is troubling. If a person does not possess their own BC, then they cannot even prove they exist!
The stupid thing is what has been commented ad nauseum already: produce the damn thing and put it all to rest, or say he doesn’t have it, which is the minimal implication right now.
“choose to focus on arcana . . . rather than on issues that the majority of Americans actually care about in their daily lives, the US will remain a 2 party state for the forseeable future.”
This is not the core problem which has created a two party state. Nonetheless . . .
The “arcana” as you mischaracterize it here, is the attack upon the Constitution.
I realize this argument may SEEM arcane to many, a result of years of attacks on the Constitution, but the principles in it are under attack and have been for some time.
If Obama ran for President knowing he was not Constitutionally qualified, with a team of at least a few others who likewise knew that he was not Constitutionally qualified, THAT is a serious issue and not arcane at all.
IMO that’s exactly what happened.
And as I’ve said, I doubt anything more will come of this in the next 4 years. I hope he and his team do a good job. I don’t believe this argument will go anywhere, and agree with you that it is a waste of time and self-destructive for third parties.
AND I hope several states in addition to Oklahoma pass legislation requiring solid proof of being qualified for the elective office they seek.
What’s wrong with that? Seems something we could and should ALL support.
And if they do that, I doubt Obama will choose to, or will be able to, run for re-election in 2012.
What the consequences might be then for having had a Constitutionally unqualified president for four years are hard to imagine, but are likewise not, IMO, fringe or arcane.
What else explains the refusal to produce a simple document, birth certificate, medical records, college transcripts.
Don’t you find that lack of transparency troubling going forward? Can’t you imagine the media would be all over this if the president elect was McCain behaving in this way?
Best,
Joe
[[ Ritze also says that he is trying to persuade U.S. Senator Jim Inhofe to object to counting electoral college votes for Obama, when Congress counts the electoral votes on January 8. ]]
Good luck with that, Dr. Ritze. And if by some miracle that occurs, good luck with getting the state of Oklahoma, not to mention Jim “Evolution is the greatest hoax of the 20th century” Inhofe, NOT to be seen as a major laughingstock.
[[ Since presidential nominees of qualified parties do not actually file for the November ballot in any state, it is not clear how Ritze’s bill can accomplish its objective, relative to general election presidential nominees of qualified parties. ]]
Precisely. I suppose his bill doesn’t address presidential electors?
Sorry, substitute “global warming” for “evolution” above. 🙂 Major Freudian slip there. Thought it wouldn’t surprise me if he felt the same way about both.
Michael Seebeck: I’m curious what Indiana birth certificate you have that lists a hospital or doctor. My wife’s, which is in front of me as I type, has her name, date and city of birth and her parent’s names and place of birth. That has been sufficient for her to get an SSN, several passports, a driver’s license, a teaching license and anything else she has needed (though she never played little league). This is the same information that appears on Obama’s Hawaiian certificate. It is also similar to the information that appears on my own birth certificate and our childrens’.
I don’t know why it’s so difficult for you (unlike 99.9% of the American people) to accept the official Hawaiian Certification provided by Obama, a document vouched for by several state officials (the governor is currently of the opposing party). All that says he was not born in Hawaii are the second or third-hand accounts of the ramblings of an elderly woman in a foreign language about events that happened 50 years ago, never sworn or subject to cross-examination.
To call that weak would be a gross understatement.
Joe-I have no problem with Oklahoma asking candidates for a birth certificate. The problem is that they can’t compel other states to put particular information on it, particularly for births that took place long ago. The US has long resisted the type of national ID cards that other countries have.
I don’t see an attack on the Constitution. As I’ve noted above the only official documents anyone has seen place Obama’s birth in Hawaii. I have no doubt he believes he was born in Hawaii-since none of us can remember our own births, how would he know otherwise? Even if, strictly for the sake of argument, he were born in Kenya it is by no means open and shut that he would not still qualify. Either way, life would go on. As an analogy, suppose tomorrow someone came forward with 3,000 Gore votes from Florida in 2000 that had been “lost” in a warehouse. Would the Republic collapse? No, we would try to put better procedures in place and move forward.
As for 3rd parties I don’t think a focus on arcana is solely or even principally responsible for a 2 party state. But an inordinate devotion to causes that are far from people’s daily lives will not help their cause.
Global warming is a scam. There are a lot of industries and environmentalists that are relying on that to keep them employed. If Obama signs on to the BS that is the Kyoto Accord he is selling us down the river. The carbon credit scheme is just a way to redistribute wealth to third world countries, which is on the Obama agenda.
No doubt that we need to clean up the air, water etc., but to try to pin global warming on pollution is just not supported. Google “change in the magnetic poles” for example. You will see that the Globe heats up during this process which is underway at this time. There are way to many unknown variances.
Any plan that includes carbon credits is not in our national interests. Also, Greenland was named that for a reason. The world has gone through warming and cooling cycles since it was formed, and will likely continue in the future.
Anarchy , you are doing it again. No Hawaiian State official has said anything other than in very carefully worded statements that they have the original birth certificate. No State official has said he was born in Hawaii. If you have something that says that please post it. Several lawsuits have been filed in Hawaii and subpoenas have been issued by lawsuits in the US seeking a copy of the birth certificate that the State of Hawaii have kindly announced that they are holding, which as we now know Obama could produce it for $10.00.
Joe, I think you are wrong on what will happen here. There are now upwards of 30 lawsuits going on around the country. In one of these lawsuits the Court will allow discovery and there will be an answer to this question. If Obama is not eligible he will be removed from office.
This has nothing to do with the election in 2000 as that involved a vote count. This is a fundamental issue on whether he is eligible to hold the office. He either is or is not eligible. If does not matter when it is discovered, if he is ineligible he will removed from office, by force if he does not leave voluntarily. That will be followed by his being disbarred, criminal actions for election fraud and how he is going to repay the $750,000,000.00 he collected. That will be an impressive number of license plates.
The other problem is that as an ineligible President any acts he takes while in office will be null and void. This needs resolution before Obama takes office to avoid this.
The Bull Moose Party shall rise again!
Leaving aside all the other nonsense, please be so kind as to cite recognized authorities for the following statement, “as an ineligible President any acts he takes while in office will be null and void.”
Obama is eligible to be president and he won the election in accordance with the –flawed – electoral process. A handful of, mostly, ultra-conservative, possibly racist, right-wingers seems to have a problem with Obama and thus has been selling this story. Why should they be taken seriously?
After all, most of these lawsuits came after the election, come from people who are from the far right-wing, if not also racist, and are making statements about the law that are simple not truthful.
from wnd questions http://forums.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=284
What are your thoughts on Barack Obama as commander and chief?
He’ll be a great leader of the military since he’s not a trigger-happy cowboy like the last guy
He’ll use the troops more intelligently and judiciously than Bush did
His willingness to engage in diplomacy with our enemies will lessen the need to use the military
However he performs, he can’t be any worse than Bush
As long as he performs his duties with honor he’ll gain the respect of the troops
He may be inexperienced militarily but he will surround himself with expert advisers we can trust
No president-elect is ever prepared for this job – we’ll just have to wait and see how he responds to the challenges
I feel sorry for the brave military personnel who have to take orders from such a naive neophyte
His campaign promise to bring the troops home early shows he’s more interested in being a politician than commander and chief
His plans for accelerated removal of troops from Iraq will surrender U.S. gains to the terrorists (and Iranians) who will replace us
His pledge to overturn the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy regarding homosexual service members will cause experienced personnel to retire when we need them
I’m concerned since he has no experience leading troops in uniform
America’s enemies will take advantage of his inexperience and his dovish posture
His plan for a “civilian national security force” to be funded equally with the Defense Department can only be accomplished by defunding the military
I worry about how he will use the military within our own borders
The lingering questions over his eligibility to serve as president undermine his authority to send our military into harm’s way
The idea of Barack Obama as commander in chief scares me and keeps me awake at night
Other
TO: Bill Lussenheide
Reply to your post from January 2nd at 7:22 pm.
First according to the following:
The main point above Chester Arthur father was not
a United States Citizen at Chester Arthur Birth.
Now to the present. The Globe for January 12, 2009
states in article as centerfold entitled “Obama Presidency Illegal!” states that Barack Obama was born at 7:24 pm in the Coast Province General Hospital, Mombasa, Kenya on August 4 1961. This
story lacks reality in part. Mombasa did not become
part of the Kenya until Sultan Jamshid of Zanzibar
ceded that island to the Republic of Kenya on December 12, 1963 and if Stanley Ann went into labor at the Portreitz Airport while waiting for the 4:05 pm EAA flight on August 4, 1961 (DC-3 aircraft), she would have been taken to the Port
Reitz Regional Hospital next to that airport.
Now on to the undocumented alien named John Sidney McCain III who is not a citizen of the United States, who falsely claims he was born in the
Panama Canal Zone in a hospital that was not started to be constructed till late 1941, when in
fact he was born out of wedlock at 6:25 pm at the
Colon Hospital, City of Colon, Republic of Panama,
on August 29, 1936.
For those readers that have not read the disinformation book of John Sidney McCain III, entitled FAITH OF MY FATHERS. My suggestion you
read it. It will tell you McCain lies about the
events related to his birth and wedlock status.
Pages 48 to 50 are the most interesting.
Highlights include “My parents met when my father,
a young ensign, served on the battleship USS Oklahoma, which was homeported at the time in Long
Beach, California.” “When my mother met my father,
she was a beautiful nineteen-year-old student at the University of Southern California.” “Ensign McAvee developed a crush on my mother. He took her
out on several occassions and often invited her to visit the Oklahoma. On one of those visits she met
my father, who was dressed in his bathrobe when McAvee introduced them. My mother only remembers
thinking how young my father looked, and small, with cheeks, she said, like two small apples. My
father, however, was infatuated at once.” “My parents were married in 1933 at Caesar’s Bar in
Tijuana, Mexico. They had eloped.”
McCain is lying. His parents could have been married in Caesar’s Bar, because that Bar has never
been an office of the civil registry of Baja California. Since 1927 all marriages in Baja California must be at an office of the civil registry.
So on October 15, 2008, I went to the Directorate
of Civil Registry in Mexicali, Baja California to
conduct a search of all marriages from 1927 to the
present. To locate a marriage between John Sidney McCain (born 17 January 1911) and Robert Wright
(born 7 February 1912). There was none. So, Lic. Rogelio Aros Guzman, Director del Registro Civil del Estado de Baja California, issued a “Certificado de Inexistencia de Registro de Matrimonio” # B 0015879 stating the Jack McCain did not marry Roberta Wright.
By the terms of the Collective Naturization Act of
August 4, 1937 [8 USC 5e], repealed on January 13,
1941, which require a parent of a child born in the
Republic of Panama to get the United States Citizenship after birth, one or both of the parents in wedlock had to be employed by the United States Government or the Panama Railroad Company (or successor in title). John Sidney
McCain II never married Roberta Wright prior to
John McCains birth and Roberta Wright list herself
on that August 29, 1936 birth certificate for employment as a housewife. Because John Sidney McCain III was born out of wedlock, he does not
get any citizenship rights from John Sidney “Jack”
McCain II, and therefore is currently not a citizen of the United States. He therefore could
not be a legal United States Senator, nor was he a legal officer in the United States Navy.
In a move to get the above October 15, 2008 certificate full faith and credit, I recorded it
on October 28, 2008 as Instrument # 20080001666
at the Office of the Hidalgo County Clerk, Lordsburg, New Mexico at 02:38:57 PM.
With a return 42 cent SASE and a check made out to
the Hildago County Clerk for $1.50 you can get
a certified copy of this document showing that John Sidney McCain III parents never got married
in Baja California. The birth certificate in the
Republic of Panama for 29 August 1936, will be posted on line, if at least one person asks for
in this entry on B
I have visited Mr Berg’s website and several times listened to the audio recording of Pastor Ron McCrea and Sarah Obama in Kenya….in the interview the paternal grandmother says that Barak was born in America….Pastor McCrea asks her where in America and she says Hawaii… I have seen other people call attention to this…I have gone back several times and listened again and the recording has not been changed. Any thoughts ?
(Berg’s case)
ALL OF THE COURT DOCUMENTS FILED IN THIS CASE
Newest court documents are first; oldest are last
title of document
12/30/08 U.S. Supreme Court Complaint for Interpleader and Declatory and Injunctive Relief
12/30/08 U.S. Supreme Court Plaintiff’s Ex-parte Motion Requesting an Order Shortening Time for Defendants, Barry Soertoro aka Barack Hussein Obama and Joseph R. Biden, Jr. to Respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint
12/18/08 U.S. Supreme Court Application to Justice Antonin Scalia for an immediate injunction to stay electoral college
12/12/08 U.S. Supreme Court Application to Justice Anthony Kennedy for an immediate injunction to stay electoral college
12/04/08 Emergency for an immediate injunction prohibiting the certification of electors filed with the United States Court of Appeals from the Third District
10/31/08 Order from the United States Court of Appeals from the Third District
10/30/08 U.S. Supreme Court Writ of Certiorari
10/30/08 2 Exhibit Charter Schools Rainbow Edition Newsletter
10/30/08 3 Exhibit Star Bulletin Obama born in different hospital
10/30/08 Exhibit Plaintiff Request for Admissions to Obama
10/30/08 Application to Justice David H. Souter for stay of the Presidential Elections
10/30/08 Affidavit of Bishop Ron McRae
10/30/08 Affidavit of Reverend Kweli Shuhubia
10/30/08 Exhibits for Affidavit of Bishop Ron McRae
10/24/08: Judge Surrick’s Memorandum and Order Granting Obama and DNC’s Motion to Dismiss (signed by Judge Surrick, faxed copy)
10/24/08: Judge Surrick’s Memorandum and Order Granting Obama and DNC’s Motion to Dismiss (unsigned clear copy)
10/21/08: Motion for Order Deeming Request for Admissions Admitted
10/09/08: Berg’s Opposition to Obama and DNC’s Request for Protective Order Re: Discovery
10/06/08: Motion for First Amended Complaint
10/06/08: Obama and DNC’s Request for Protective Order Re: Discovery
09/29/08: Berg’s Opposition to Defendan’t Motion to Dismiss
09/24/08: Obama and DNC’s Motion to Dismiss
08/21/08: Memorandum in support of temporary restraining order
08/21/08: Plaintiff’s motion for temporary restraining order
08/21/08: Complaint for declaratory and injunctive relief
08/21/08: Temporary Restraining Order
“Michael Seebeck: I’m curious what Indiana birth certificate you have that lists a hospital or doctor.”
Geez, you can’t read either.
I have a “Certificate of Birth Registration” from the county health department where I was born. It includes the Book, Page, and Certificate number of my Birth Certificate. The original is on file with the Indiana state department of Vital Statistics.
I ALSO have a hospital-issued birth certificate, which has the hospital, doctor’s name, and my infant footprints on it. I had that one first.
“My wife’s, which is in front of me as I type, has her name, date and city of birth and her parent’s names and place of birth. That has been sufficient for her to get an SSN, several passports, a driver’s license, a teaching license and anything else she has needed (though she never played little league). This is the same information that appears on Obama’s Hawaiian certificate. It is also similar to the information that appears on my own birth certificate and our childrens’.”
So? She’s not running for President, and she’s neither Barack Obama or John McCain.
“I don’t know why it’s so difficult for you (unlike 99.9% of the American people) to accept the official Hawaiian Certification provided by Obama, a document vouched for by several state officials (the governor is currently of the opposing party).”
I don’t know why it’s so difficult for Obama to simply produce or release the thing in the first place. It’s not an unreasonable request. When given the choice of the original evidence or vouching for the original evidence, vouching loses every time.
“All that says he was not born in Hawaii are the second or third-hand accounts of the ramblings of an elderly woman in a foreign language about events that happened 50 years ago, never sworn or subject to cross-examination.”
I never said he was or wasn’t. What I have been saying, had you pulled your head out enough to engage in comprehensive reading, was that the process has gaps, those gaps need to be addressed, and that Obama happens to be the guinea pig due to his own actions. Possessing an providing one’s own birth certificate–evidence of one’s acknowledged existence–is hardly nuclear physics. I would be saying the same thing had John McCain, conclusively born in Panama and not natural-born, been elected.
“To call that weak would be a gross understatement.”
Nope, just your lack of comprehension. Let me make it clear to you: For me, it’s not about Obama, it’s about the process. The process is flawed and needs fixing. IT’S THAT SIMPLE!
Anarchy, Go to the Sacramento Superior Court website:
http://www.saccourt.com/
Click on the right hand side Civil and Probate Cases. Change the Year to 2008 and enter case 80000096, this will take you to the Alan Keyes case and open the writ and read paragraph 70. Berg has similar allegations in his complaint. This is a complicated area of law that will involve many law firms and a lot of money to figure out.
As Alan Keyes was the Independent Party Presidential candidate, on the ballot with Obama in California, Keyes has standing and this case will not be dismissed on that legal technicality as most of the other cases were. Mr. Keyes is also represented by a very good attorney Gary Kreep, where many of the other lawsuits were filed by citizens without benefit of counsel.
ETJB, Obama cannot win an election if he is ineligible. If you have evidence to show Obama is eligible please post it. If it is the same old tired Certification of Live Birth posted on pro-Obama websites do not bother.
If Obama does not meet the Constitutional Standard of a Natural Born Citizen he cannot serve. It does not matter if he won the election, as eligibility is a precursor to taking the office. The Democratic Parties failure to qualify Obama, and Obama for failing to produce his records, are the ones that will have to accept responsibility.
This was raised long ago. It was first raised in February of last year well before the primaries by Hillary:
http://www.hillaryclintonforum.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=16505
Obama’s and the Democratic National Committee failed to respond, and in June Obama first posted the worthless Certification of Live Birth. The DNC’s silence on this issue is deafening. Phil Berg, the first attorney to file suit is a life long democrat and Hillary supporter. Mr. Berg filed his suit prior to the election. Here is a site that will give you a list of the 30 or so law suits that have been filed and the list is growing. Military officers are now filing suit, that will be followed by federal employees if Obama takes the oath of office as they have taken a pledge to uphold the Constitution and an ineligible President cannot issue valid orders.
Whatever it is that Obama has been trying to hide will come out. As I have said, one of this courts is going to allow discovery to proceed. Subpoenas will be sent for the birth certificate, school records, bar records and all of the other documents that have now been requested given Obama’s obstinate refusal to pay $10.00 and release a certified copy of his birth certificate. These records should have been produced and the determination made before the election. This issue is not going away.
Left off cite:
http://countryfirst.bravehost.com/phpBB3/
Michael Seebeck-It is you who have trouble reading. You said in #29 “I have 2 birth certificates from IN: one from the state, and one from the hospital.” I asked whether they list the hospital and doctor. Then you call it a “Certificate of Birth Registrationâ€, so you don’t seem to be too sure what you have. Tha fact is that no birth certificate in my family lists a doctor or a hospital and they have been accepted by the US government, several states and 2 foreign countries (in one case they had to be translated by a certified translator) for every purpose required.
The facts are very simple:
1. One and only one document exists in this case; that is the Certification of Live Birth that clearly states under Place of Birth -Honolulu. Now some of you want to concoct a scenario in which a very pregnant teen mother flies halfway around the world to a third-world country, gives birth, then rushes back with her newborn the next day, just to register the birth, because she somehow felt her baby would grow up to be President. Is this possible? Sure, in the sense that if I flip a coin 20 times it’s possible that all will come up heads. But I wouldn’t bet my money on it.
Regardless, courts don’t deal in possiblilities, they deal in facts. And right now, Obama’s certificate is the ONLY fact in this case.
2. Even if your wacko scenario occured, it is by no means clear cut whether or not being born to a US citizen in Kenya would render Obama a natural-born citizen. There are simply no court rulings either way.
3. Of the 43 former Presidents, which ones meet the standards of proof you demand of Obama? Can you PROVE they were not born in Canada or Mexico and then brought to the US and their births registered? How many have hospital birth records? (answer-most born prior to 1900 don’t, because they weren’t born in hospitals). For that matter can you PROVE the father listed on their birth certificates really was their father? Are we going to require DNA testing? To require from 1 (who happens to be of a mixed-race background) what was not required from the other 43 violates the equal protection clause of the Constitution and fundamental fairness.
Here is a challenge to Michael Seebeck and “John Adams”. I am very confident that none of this nonsense regarding his birth certificate will have the slightest impact on Obama’s serving out his term and standing for re-election (though I am not ready to predict right now whether his job performance will ensure his re-election). I will put my money where my mouth is and make a wager with either or both of you to that effect. Now, let’s see if you are confident enough in your positions to respond.
A further point to Michael Seeback-None of the above is to imply that there are not flaws in the process. The flaws have little to do with the nerdish intricacies of Birth Certificates. They have to do with the fact that the US is the only country I know of that allows national elections to be controlled by partisan local officials. The US could do itself a big favor by looking at Canada, where Federal elections are run by a non-partisan commission and have uniform ballot formats and rules throughout the country.
This is a very interesting site. Thanks for putting up all the information. I do have a question and hope someone can clarify for me. In the list of docuements there is one that says the Star Bulletin newspaper reports that Obama was born in a different hospital….are they saying that he was born in Honolulu but in another hospital. If he was really born in Hawaii he would be a US citizen. I just retired from a Virginia county government position and we shared a building with the health dept. and sometimes illegal aliens would come in with a baby born in Virginia. The baby was a US citizen and rec’d services just as any other child. The local Catholic Church would begin helping the parents to make them legal. These babies were called anchor babies as they would help the parents become legal and perhaps later new citizens. I do not think any health dept would keep birth certs for people born elsewhere. The gov. of Hawaii is a Republican…I don’t think the Gov. would be part of a secret plan to help a non eligible person become President.
If this bill passes it will ban an person adopted in Oklahoma or 43 other states from running for public office in Oklahoma. Adoptee birth certificates are sealed. I suppose that’s “different.”
As to the newspaper announcements. Obama and his family have claimed that he was born at two different hospitals in Hawaii. Obama’s grandmother in Africa says she was present for his birth in Kenya. One of the hospitals claimed by Obama’s family did not exist at the time of his birth. This has raised questions about where he was born.
Please read the posts above. Obama could easily produce his certified birth certificate, which the State of Hawaii has announced they are holding. Obama needs to fill out a form, send in $10.00 and he could produce a certified copy of what Hawaii is holding. This form would include the name of the hospital, doctors and witnesses. Again, read pages 7-11:
http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/Loaa%20Ka%20Aina%20Hoopulapula.pdf
The newspapers announcements would be secondary evidence that could then be used to confirm the birth stated in the certified copy of the birth certificate.
As in the DHLL land program cited above which does not accept the Certification of Live Birth, the document Obama produced does not contain any verifiable facts to prove he was born in Hawaii. Just like this DHLL program additional evidence is required to make the determination if Obama is a “natural born citizen” and eligible to hold the office of the President.
Once Obama produces the $10.00 certified copy of the long form or birth certificate (which as noted above is available to Obama for $10.00) the hospital can be contacted, the doctors contacted and the witnesses can be contacted. Secondary evidence such as this and the newspapers articles would then support the birth in Hawaii.
After Hawaii became a State in 1958 it was riff with immigration fraud. Anyone could register a baby a year after the birth with no collaborating evidence. Those laws were changed in 1972, but people familiar with the laws know that there could be a foreign birth certificate for Obama that the State of Hawaii is holding.
There is the possibility that Obama’s parents brought Obama back from overseas and registered his birth in Hawaii. That is what they did with his half sister who was born in Indonesia. His sister could produce an identical short form abstract or Certification of Live Birth, the only difference would be her name on it. Would that prove she was born in Hawaii?
If Obama’s certified copy of the birth certificate names a hospital, doctors and witnesses that will lead to verification he was born in Hawaii.
If the birth certificate says he was born at home, in a taxi or anywhere but a hospital it will likely mean that he was born overseas and his parents brought him back to register him. It would also raise the question of why Obama would lie about what is contained on his birth certificate.
Obama and the Democratic Parties failure to respond to this issue is a slap in the face to the Constitution and the American people. They should have resolved this issue before the election to avoid the prospect of an ineligible President. The issue and lawsuits are not going away and it is being driven by this refusal to produce a $10.00 birth certificate. Obama and the DNC had since at least last February to resolve this. Obama’s only response was to produce a worthless document to pro-Obama websites. There has been no statement from the Democratic party saying they have received all of these records and Obama has been through a vetting process. Zip, nothing. The silence from the Democratic party on this issue is more than disturbing.
Assuming tha Obama WAS born in Hawai’i; he became an Indonesian citizen; which eliminated his US citizenship because Indonesia didn’t allow “dual citizenship”. After returning to the USA, Obama would have become a “naturalised citizen”.
This is the biggest fraud on the American people by the Dumbocrat party and the non-transparent obama people. He has not even taken office yet and he has so much obama drama Govenors, commiting felonies this is just the beginning for him and the chicago way. We will see what our country looks like in four years with an illegal alien running the U.S.A. PRAY FOR OUR COUNTRY!!!
Thankyou
Richard,
Texas law (Election Code Sec 192.031) limits presidential nominations by political parties to qualified candidates:
PARTY CANDIDATE’S ENTITLEMENT TO PLACE ON BALLOT. A political party is entitled to have the names of its nominees for president and vice-president of the United States placed on the ballot in a presidential general election if:
(1) the nominees possess the qualifications for those offices prescribed by federal law;
It would be a reasonable extension of this law to require documentation of said qualifications.
Alternatively, a State could require that the actual presidential candidate file for office. An application for a presidential candidate would have signatures and documentation of qualification for the presidential and vice presidential candidates, and the presidential candidate.
In the case of party candidates the application would also include the signature of a party official. For independent candidates, a petition signed by individual citizens or voters.
No, I am not that Michael Seebeck. This is my first post.
I have a birth certificate from NY. It is from 1949 and lists the hospital, doctor, parents has a state seal, etc. It was provided to us in a plastic laminate with a blue back. It is the only birth certificate I ever had. Three years ago I had to renew my passport. They would not accept my birth certificate. They did not like the laminate.
I had to request a new one from NY over the web. I paid my money and got a nice certificate with a state seal on it. No doctor, hospital, etc. But good enough to get a passport.
Stop trying to derail the electoral process using manufactured issues. Lets get on with the work of rebuilding this country.