HR 1503, the bill in Congress to require presidential candidates to file a copy of their birth certificate when they file with the Federal Election Commission, now has 4 co-sponsors. The bill had been introduced on March 12 by Rep. Bill Posey (R-Florida). On May 5 the bill gained its first co-sponsor, Rep. Bill Goodlatte (R-Virginia). On June 12 it gained three more co-sponsors, all Republicans from Texas: Representatives John Carter, John Culberson, and Randy Neugebauer.
The bill also requires that presidential candidates submit “other documentation” if necessary to establish eligibilty to meet the Constitutional requirements.
This is the kind of pandering that gives pandering a bad name. The Constitution gives Congress the duty of validating the Electoral College vote, and sets a time and place for objections to be heard. All these guys were there in January and if they were so concerned, they could have objected then, which was the appropriate time to do so. The fact that they did not makes it clear that this is just foolish posturing by a bunch of bigoted fools. I would like to think the voters in their distructs will turf them out for such silliness, but I doubt they will.
Deciding if someone is eligible to be president should be done before Election Day.
Courts only have the constitution, no laws to put it into practice. No penalties for fraud.
Without a doubt, this is one of the most fundamental issues to our Constitution. The fact Obama was not properly vetted regarding the birth certificate/eligibility issue is an egregious failure of responsibility. While I completely agree his eligibility should have been proven prior to the election, the fact it was not (despite the fact McCain faced the Congressional Grill Squad for the same issue while Obama never did) does not mean it is no longer just as important and valid in the post-election. This issue absolutely must be resolved once and for all. The best plan to avoid a similar situation in future elections is to mandate proof of eligibility before being considered as presidential candidate of the United States. If this were reversed, and a Republican president’s eligibility status was in question, oh my god, one can only imagine the outrage.
susie: Can you name any past President who was vetted in a manner different from Obama? The first 25 or so didn’t even have birth certificates, because they didn’t exist until the late 19th century in most places. Of all the phony balonet diversionary issues I have ever seen, this is at or near the top.
I am no Constitutional scholar, and I myself believed for some time that a Presidential candidate had to be born in the United States to be elected, but as I understand it, the Constitution requires that one be a citizen at birth, which both Obama and McCain were. Both had at least one parent who was a US citizen, therefore they were both qualified to be elected president even there have been questions about where they both were born. Am I wrong on that one?
Shepard Smith of FOX News claimed that those of us investigating Certifi-Gate, the Obama Birth Certificate Scandal, are morally equivalent to James Von Brunn, the neo-Nazi white supremacist who shot two people at the Holocaust Museum.
Among his remarks:
“There’s been a lot of hate since this President came into Office. He has been a uniting figure in so many ways. He has brought the youth of America together in so many ways. He has been inspirational to so many people. Yet there are a lot of people who have problems with an African American man as the President. People want to talk about, ‘was he even an American citizen; where’s his birth certificate?” That needs to Stop. It’s preposterous … The level of the hate being ratcheted up in so many different quarters, on so many different web sites, and otherwise for that matter, it sometimes feels like its a very dangerous thing.”
The Certifi-Gate page on MarchReport.com is the largest single repository of information on the Obama Birth Certificate Scandal anywhere on the internet. As such, the owner of the site felt a moral obligation to speak out. This podcast is Robert Jay March’s response to Shepard Smith’s Outrageous allegations of hate and racism against those of us who have the courage to defend our precious Constitution, and the basic journalistic skills to do fact checking: something Mr. Smith apparently does not know how to do. Nine months ago, Robert also was a disbeliever, but felt an obligation to those readers who had written in with alarm to check out the story, in order to assure his half-million subscribers that their fears were unfounded. He was shocked to discover that the stories were true, and reported back accordingly. Thus began Certifi-Gate.
The Certifi-Gate Investigation and associated lawsuits are not about hate, racism, fear, or any other disingenuous motive. It is about defending the Constitution, the very foundation of our Republic.
MarchReport.com issues this challenge to Shepard Smith: PROVE US WRONG. Check the facts … objectively … as would be done with any low-level politician, and, when you find the truth (as you will), report it to your viewers, and issue an apology to those of us who did the work first.
To Listen NOW, click this link:
http://podcast.marchreport.com/20090610.mp3
If you have iTunes, you can subscribe to our podcast by clicking this link:
http://www.itunes.com/podcast?id=310481674
… or …
If you use another service, subscribe to this feed:
http://podcast.marchreport.com/podcast.xml
Reply to Gregg Jocoy:
We have not seen Obama’s original birth certificate so we don’t know what it says about where he was born. What we do know is that he was born a British Subject by virtue of his Kenyan Father and later obtained citizenship in Indonesia through his adopted father in order to attend public school in that country, and that his Grandmother has stated on the record that she saw Barack Obama born in Kenya. This brings into doubt Obama’s claims to natural born US citizenship. There is even the possibility that he reentered the United States illegally after living in Indonesia.
What about the CertificaTION of Live Birth he posted on the internet?
Even if real and not forged the document doesn’t say where he was born and it is well documented that such CertificaTIONs were issued to non-US citizens by the newly established Hawaiian state government. We also know that the secretary of state of Hawaii has on file Obama’s original birth certificate that does state where he was born, but won’t release the document, let anyone look at it, or state for the record if that birthplace was Hawaii, Kenya, or elsewhere; and Obama is spending millions of dollars on legal teams to fight off scores of subpoenas for the original birth certificate even though the Constitution clearly makes establishing natural born citizenship an eligibility requirement for President of the US. Why would he do that?
Furthermore; now that we have McCain’s original hospital birth certificate posted online ( http://www.vietnamveteransagainstjohnmccain.com/birthcertificatelanding.htm ), we know that he was in fact born in the Republic of Panama at Panama’s Colon Hospital and NOT the Coco Solo Hospital in the US Canal Zone as we were told. In fact the Coco Solo Hospital didn’t even exist yet, it wasn’t built until 1941.
Is John McCain now a US Citizen? Yes, but not by birth on US soil.
Is Barack Obama a US citizen? We will find that out when either he stops stonewalling the release of his original birth certificate, or one of many lawsuits prevails in forcing Hawaii to release it.
On the question of a US Citizen parent transmitting US natural born citizenship to a child born to him or her on foreign soil, the US state department says ‘no’. US Citizenship is not automatically bestowed upon such persons. Natural born citizenship is, by definition, citizenship tied to the land where a child was born. In McCain’s case, he is a natural born citizen of the Republic of Panama and received his full US Citizenship some years later when congress passed a law making persons having been born in Panama to US parents statutory citizens of the US, which is a form of naturalization. Prior to that children born to US parents in Panama and the US Canal Zone were given only ‘US National’ status rather than full US Citizenship.
Barack Obama was born to a Kenyan Father and American mother, probably on Kenyan soil and then brought to the US and then subsequently taken to Indonesia and then brought back to the US. His American mother had not reached the age where she could, according to Hawaiian law at the time, transmit US citizenship to a child born of a foreign father.
So the case for doubting Obama’s citizenship is substantial and compelling and needs to be settled in court, and quite frankly it is a scandal that it wasn’t settled or even questioned by election officials prior to his being allowed on the ballot, certified the winner of the election, and installed in the White House. Scores if not hundreds of people should be fired for this failure to obtain eligibility documents from the candidate.
Britcom, WOW!
“I am no Constitutional scholar, and I myself believed for some time that a Presidential candidate had to be born in the United States to be elected, but as I understand it, the Constitution requires that one be a citizen at birth, which both Obama and McCain were.”
It never ceases to amaze me that a person can, in one breath, acknowledge their lack of knowledge and in the very next make some idiotic statement of “fact” which absolutely proves the first statement true.
Being born in America does confer citizenship (unfortunately) but does NOT satisfy the carefully crafted “natural born” clause of the Constitution.
So what is a “natural born” citizen?
Prior cases decided by the United States Supreme Court, involving the determination of “natural born†have used Vattel’s “The Law of Nations†definition which states, “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.†(Part I, Chapter 19, Section 212). Factcheck.org states that Obama was a dual citizen at birth.
The fact that Obama’s father was a Kenyan national and a British Subject is precisely the situation our forefathers were afraid of when they wrote the Constitution in the first place and why they grandfathered themselves (otherwise NOBODY would have qualified ).
Please note that Vattel’s definition ALSO makes McCain ineligible to seek the office of POTUS as he was born in Panama.
As I see it, in order to live up to the words and the meaoriginal intention of the Constitution, we either must validate the Vattel definition as supported by the SCOTUS or we must amend the Constitution to eliminate the “natural born” requirement. I think we should support the intent of the founding fathers so I must vote for the former and insist that it be enforced. I will NEVER acknowledge AKA Obama as my President. Why should I?
If it passed in Congress and Obama vetoed it, would kind of outrage would it cause?
Britcom wrote: â€We have not seen Obama’s original birth certificate so we don’t know what it says about where he was born.â€
Wrong. President Obama has obtained a certified copy of his birth certificate from the state of Hawaii and has made it available on the internet. It clearly states that he was born in Honolulu. This is from the state of Hawaii, not Obama. The state says that he was born in Honolulu.
Britcom wrote: “ What about the CertificaTION of Live Birth he posted on the internet?
Even if real and not forged the document doesn’t say where he was born â€
YES IT DOES. Are you that stupid? It says quite clearly that he was born in Honolulu. Do you have a reading deficit issue?
Britcom wrote: “and it is well documented that such CertificaTIONs were issued to non-US citizens by the newly established Hawaiian state government. â€
Documented by who, WND nut cases? As it so happens, the State of Hawaii went “paperless†in 2001. All vital statistic information was entered into an electronic database. ALL requests for certified copies of BCs are filled out using the form that Obama has posted. This is the STANDARD form issued today.
Oh, and BTW, the newly formed “state†government of Hawaii was actually the old “territorial†government that had been in place for over 50 years prior to statehood. The state did not issue birth certificates to children born outside of the state or territory.
Britcom wrote: “ We also know that the secretary of state of Hawaii has on file Obama’s original birth certificate that does state where he was born, but won’t release the document, let anyone look at it, or state for the record if that birthplace was Hawaii, Kenya, or elsewhereâ€
First of all, it is the Hawaiian Department of Health, not the Secretary of State. Please try to keep up.
By law, the DOH can only release a copy of the birth certificate to the person who is on the certificate, or someone with a “tangible interest†(i.e. an immediate relative). This is the law.
Second, the state registrar has indeed stated for the record where President Obama was born. This is clearly stated on the certified document that President Obama has released.
Let me repeat this one more time, The document that President Obama has released is an official, certified state document. It clearly states that President Obama was born in Honolulu. That document is valid legal proof of that fact and nothing you can say will ever change that.
Britcom wrote: †Obama is spending millions of dollars on legal teams to fight off scores of subpoenas for the original birth certificate even though the Constitution clearly makes establishing natural born citizenship an eligibility requirement for President of the US. Why would he do that?â€
You have absolutely no proof that he has spent any money at all on this issue, let alone “millions of dollars.†I love the way that the birther claims regarding that number keep growing and growing. I predict that by the end of the summer, the birthers will be claiming that President Obama has spent a billion dollars on this. LOL
This particular legislation is not about Obama. These legislators realize that Obama got in through a loophole that they couldn’t do a whole lot about because there was no “requirement” to display a birth certificate, and no-one ever asked him to in an official capacity. He posted one on the Internet to satisfy the public, but the public has already proven themselves to accept everything they see on the Internet, especially from someone like him, as legit.
This legislation is about the ones who come after to make sure that this “oops” doesn’t happen again.
So many folks have much misinformation. The birth certificate on the Internet was significantly proven to MANY to be a fake. If it hasn’t proven it to EVERYONE, that is neither here nor there. The fact that many, many people both here and abroad understand it to be a fake places us in a very precarious situation that needs to be rectified somehow.
Also, discussed even as early as last year during the course of coming to a resolution about John McCain’s eligibility, congressional leaders acknowledged that BOTH parents needed to be American citizens in order to be a natural born citizen. Obama was a co-sponsor of that resolution. It is beyond me as to how a similar resolution was not discussed about Obama.
Even on Obama’s own website his discusses that his father held British citizenship and that he, therefore, did also.
It is indeed a big mess that we are in, and if nothing comes of it in the case of Obama, at least we can try to avoid such national embarrassments in these eligibility questions in the future.
“You have absolutely no proof that he has spent any money at all on this issue, let alone “millions of dollars.†I love the way that the birther claims regarding that number keep growing and growing. I predict that by the end of the summer, the birthers will be claiming that President Obama has spent a billion dollars on this. LOL”
Alferd, that’s being a little silly. It is a fact that there are lawsuits being fought over this, and there are lawyers showing up to sit at the other side of the table fighting these cases tooth and nail. Who do you think is paying for that, or do you thing they’re such Obots that they’re working pro bono?
Britcom wrote: †What we do know is that he was born a British Subject by virtue of his Kenyan Fatherâ€
So, lots of natural born American citizens have dual citizenship. The laws of a foreign country do not trump the laws of this country.
Britcom wrote: †and later obtained citizenship in Indonesia through his adopted father in order to attend public school in that country, “
No, his father claimed that Barack was an Indonesian citizen, there is no proof that this was indeed the case. In fact, given the xenophobic nature of the Indonesian government at that time, it is extremely unlikely that they would have granted him citizenship. It is a moot point, since President Obama only live in Indonesia from age six to age ten, and it is impossible for a minor child to renounce his American citizenship.
Britcom wrote: â€and that his Grandmother has stated on the record that she saw Barack Obama born in Kenya. “
No, she did not. This claim is part of a con job designed to scam money from birthers. In the original and unedited tape she clearly states that President Obama was born in Hawaii. Someone went to a great deal of trouble to make you think otherwise. Why? To scam money from you.
Britcom wrote: â€This brings into doubt Obama’s claims to natural born US citizenship. There is even the possibility that he reentered the United States illegally after living in Indonesia.
Give me a break and stop being such a dope.
Prsmith wrote: †Being born in America does confer citizenship (unfortunately) but does NOT satisfy the carefully crafted “natural born†clause of the Constitution.
Pr, Pr, Pr, my old friend. How are you. Still trying to spin your personal interpretation of the Constitution, I see. Well good luck to you, everyone needs a hobby.
Alferd, that document posted is a Certification of Live Birth. It does not say nor is it signed by an attending physician or notorized by the hospital. It is ONLY a Certification of Live Birth and is NOT a Birth Certificate. You are the blind dummy.
Our friend sure is using his handbook well. Very familiar packaged talking points and name-calling.
Natural born citizens CANNOT have dual citizenship. They’re citizens, yes, no question, but when we’re talking about presidential eligibility, no. My father, for example, understood his whole life that he could never be president because he was born to an English mother, even though he was unquestionably an American citizen.
You would be a citizen, there is no question there, but you would not be a natural born citizen if you are born with dual citizenship.
This is a widely-known interpretation, but unfortunately left ambiguous, which is the root of all this mess. It needs to be clearly defined for posterity. That is why this legislation is such a good thing.
“The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society can not 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 a 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.”~~From the Laws of Nations
Oh, and PR, what do you make of this quote from Vattel?
“Finally, there are states, as, for instance, England, where the single circumstance of being born in the country naturalizes the children of a foreigner.”
It appears to me that he is regonizing the fact that under British Common law,, being born within the realm, made on a natural born subject of the king.
Don’t you agree?
Naturalized is not same as natural-BORN. Those 2 terms are not interchangeable.
Leilanie : Alferd, that document posted is a Certification of Live Birth. It does not say nor is it signed by an attending physician or notorized by the hospital. It is ONLY a Certification of Live Birth and is NOT a Birth Certificate. You are the blind dummy.
According to the this article
http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html
— — —quote — — —
The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.
The department only issues “certifications” of live births, and that is the “official birth certificate” issued by the state of Hawaii, she said.
And, it’s only available in electronic form.
Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in 2001.
“At that time, all information for births from 1908 (on) was put into electronic files for consistent reporting,” she said.
Information about births is transferred electronically from hospitals to the department.
“The electronic record of the birth is what (the Health Department) now keeps on file in order to provide same-day certified copies at our help window for most requests,” Okubo said.
Asked for more information about the short-form versus long-form birth documents, Okubo said the Health Department “does not have a short-form or long-form certificate.”
“The birth certificate form has been modified over the years and decades to conform to national standards and models,” she said.
Okubo also emphasized the certification form “contains all the information needed by all federal government agencies for transactions requiring a birth certificate.”
She added that the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized the state’s current certification of live birth “as an official birth certificate meeting all federal and other requirements.”
— — — end quote — — —
That kind of throws a damper on your little fantasy, doesn’t it?
I’m in full agreement that every Representative, and Senator in the Legislative Body of Congress should support this bill.
The Founders didn’t make it a requirement to produce Proof simply because they were under the impression that loyal patriots, and God fearing men would not even consider entering the race to become our President unless they were fully qualified to run for the Office.
However that was then this is now, Dishonest men and Women have chosen to seek Public Office, with no knowledge of or intention to observe our Constitution, the Oath they take to support and defend means absolutely nothing to them.
Those of us that now question Obama’s Legal right to be our President are pointed out to be a bunch of cooks, that are part of a Right Wing Conspiracy, I say that we have no Right Wing, Conspiracy only the love of GOD and Country, and a solid wish to return to our Republic Form of Government not this Fascist Democracy, now prevalent in the Country Today.
Please urge your Representatives to support this effort, before we don’t have a Country left, that would be worth support of any kind.
“Natural born citizens CANNOT have dual citizenship”
Wrong, wrong, wrong.
Why do you keep insisting that the laws of a foreign country trump U.S. laws?
Seriously. That is the basis of your whole argument.
You are claiming the President Obama is ineligible based on British law.
Are you aware that promoting the overthrow of the U.S. constitution in favor of the laws of another country is called sedition? Why do you do that?
Cecelia-You have one interpretation of the term “natural born”. Every court that has heard these cases, federal and multiple states, has dismissed them as without merit. By denying review on multiple occasions the Supreme Court has said that these courts acted correctly. All of these judges were aware of the citizenship of Obama’s father, which no one disputes and judged it irrelevant. Before you tell me that they denied based on the plaintiff’s lack of standing, in many cases 9not all) that was true, but the SCOTUS has wide latitude to review cases whenever it sees an issue. It saw none here.
The Constitution means not what Cecelia says it means, but what the courts say it means and they say you are dead wrong. For what it’s worth, I agree with them. This waste of time proposed bill won’t change the long-standing position of the court either. Case closed.
“Those of us that now question Obama’s Legal right to be our President are pointed out to be a bunch of cooks”
What are you cooking?
Cecelia wrote: “So many folks have much misinformation. The birth certificate on the Internet was significantly proven to MANY to be a fake. If it hasn’t proven it to EVERYONE, that is neither here nor there. The fact that many, many people both here and abroad understand it to be a fake places us in a very precarious situation that needs to be rectified somehowâ€
Well, if it is indeed a fake, then why hasn’t the Governor of Hawaii done anything about it? She is a Republican, you know. Let’s say that instead of Hawaii we were talking about Alaska, Texas, Louisiana, Florida, or any one of the other states with Republican Governors. Do you seriously think that if President Obama posted a fake birth certificate from ay of those states that the state governors along with their attorney generals would have hesitated for a second to charge him with fraud? It is against the law to fake a birth certificate.
Why do you claim that Hawaii won’t do the same?
Cecelia, wrote: †Naturalized is not same as natural-BORN. Those 2 terms are not interchangeable.
Naturalized at birth is the same as natural born. Under British common law, which was the law in this country up until the moment that the Constitution was adopted, if you were born in the country, they you were a natural born subject of the country. The only change was that the framers of the Constitution changed the term subject to citizen. This is a well established principle and was the bases for the SCOTUS decision in 1897 United States v. Wong Kim Ark. That court decision established once and for all the fact that being born in the U.S. wakes one a natural born citizen. End of the argument.
The word “Natural†in “Natural born†simply means that it is innate at birth. If you are born a citizen then you are a natural born citizen. There is no way that you can get around this fact.
Vattel was not a framer of the Constriction, he was a Swiss philosopher. The Framer’s of the Constitution were trained in British law. They understood the term “Natural born†in the context of British common law.
Under British common law, the term “natural born subject†meant someone who was born in the country, regardless of the status of the parents.
There is zero evidence that the framers of the U.S. Constitution redefined this basic legal term.
The reason Obama was not “vetted” before the election is that no elected member of the government or member of the supreme court had the courage to do it. It would have meant immediate attacks on them for being racist or discriminatory against “people of color”. You see, it wouldn’t be “politically correct” to ask one of them to follow the same rules that White people must follow. And that is why this whole native born issue can not be addressed. None but a very small handful of people in Congress have the balls to do anything about it. I can count the number of them on the fingers of one hand. Congress and the U.S. Supreme Court (Supreme Cowards) have utterly failed to do their jobs relating to this issue and it will have dire consequences.
Ah, Randwulf pulls out the race card. . . .
I’m not talking about laws. That’s why there needs to be clarifying legislation.
I’m talking about what makes a presidential candidate eligible. I’m not talking about what makes an average, every-day person a citizen, or even eligible to be a senator (even that is a different “level” of citizenship. OF COURSE a person can be a citizen with dual citizenship, but we’re talking about candidates for the United States Presidency here. It’s a whole different level of citizenship.
The whole point of Article II is that the President must have absolute and total Allegiance to the United States of America and no Foreign Ruler or Government, Church, or Political Entity. I do not think it is a big stretch to agree that our president needs to be somebody who has never (and will never) experienced a divided allegiance between our country and another.
Cecelia writes: “It’s a whole different level of citizenship.â€
Don’t be silly, Cece, there are only two categories of citizenship. Citizenship acquired at birth, that is natural born citizenship (think of it as innate to the process of birth) and citizenship acquired at some point in time after birth (this is not a natural citizenship, the person must be “Naturalizedâ€).
Two types, and two types only.
Alferd said: “Well, if it is indeed a fake, then why hasn’t the Governor of Hawaii done anything about it? She is a Republican, you know. Let’s say that instead of Hawaii we were talking about Alaska, Texas, Louisiana, Florida, or any one of the other states with Republican Governors. Do you seriously think that if President Obama posted a fake birth certificate from ay of those states that the state governors along with their attorney generals would have hesitated for a second to charge him with fraud? It is against the law to fake a birth certificate.”
As I said, which of these people would want to be the one to deprive us all of our “first African-American president”? And what makes you think there is any difference between Republicans and Democrats on this whole issue anyway? It has absolutely nothing to do with those two parties or McCain or W. or anything else partisan. It has everything to do with being “politically correct”, meaning: not being racist or exclusive. All the people you mentioned and most of the rest of our “government” are scared $hitless of having any kind of racist stigma attached to them. Oh, and we still haven’t seen a real birth certificate. When people say they don’t know where he was born, they are usually referring to the actual hospital in Honolulu and something mentioning the attending physician, with his signature and a serial number that isn’t “blacked” out. You know, the complete deal, like other people born in Hawaii all had issued at the time of their births during this time period. For example. There is one on the internet. Why don’t you all Google that one and see the difference between it and Barry’s. Do you want me to find the link and post it here for you?
BTW, Cecelia, what do you think of Randwulf’s post? Do you agree with him that President Obam “got a pass†because he is black?
Alferd sais,”Ah, Randwulf pulls out the race card. . . .”
Is there any other card as relates to Obama?
I have to admit, Randwulf, it is refreshing that you are at least honest enough to admit that it is a racial issue for you. Most birthers will deny this to the end.
In answer to Alferd’s:
“I have to admit, Randwulf, it is refreshing that you are at least honest enough to admit that it is a racial issue for you. Most birthers will deny this to the end.”
It’s not a racial issue with me. It’s a racial issue with the powers-that-be. If it were McCain, congress would have looked into it very closely. Oh, that’s right! They did! Didn’t they.
First, somehow I don’t recall hearing that Mr. Wong Kim Ark was trying to be President of the United States.
I quote from an article by Nancy Salvato: “There is a need to have an acceptable definition of natural-born citizen that cannot be politicized. The definition must be ensconced in the Constitution. Whether common law ideas or Vattel’s ideas prevail, we need to define what is to be acceptable in our Commander in Chief. Furthermore, evidence of birth in allegiance to the United States must be required of all candidates for president of the United States. All of the arguments made by the Framers regarding foreign influence must be taken into consideration because they knew then as we know now; the sovereignty of our great nation is at risk.”
Randwulf: Where does the Constitution mention Birth Certificate? Where is Abe Lincoln’s BC? To whom did Harry Truman show his?
When you make a rule different for 1 person than another, well, I don’t know if that’s rascism, but it’s certainly discriminatory.
Well, here it is Alferd.
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://buenavistamall.com/HIbirthcertificate.jpg&imgrefurl=http://buenavistamall.com/Sanchez.htm&usg=__C-55PG5bR6wNAeyU2k0Na
You Obama guys love to point to internet posted “birth certificates” as some kind of proof of something, well, here’s one for you! Google this! It belongs to some guy named Alan who’s father was in the US Army and he was born in a US Army hospital in Hawaii in 1963. Notice the name of the medical facility and attending physician and all kinds of other pertinent information included in this one. So as of at least the year 1963, we know that the State of Hawaii was still issuing long form birth certificates that looked like this. THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE WANT TO SEE FROM MR. OBAMA! For the really dense anti-“birthers” out there, let me repeat: THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE WANT TO SEE FROM MR. OBAMA! I don’t see any way to be more clear about it. I don’t see any way for anyone to make any kind of remotely logical argument that Obama should not show his copy of this version of his birth certificate (if indeed he has one). Why do you suppose he doesn’t do that Alferd? I’m asking you personally since you seem to be a self-appointed expert on this particular subject. WHY?
Jerry Baker, thank you for making the point that this issue needs legislation.
Jerry Baker asked me:
Randwulf:
“Where does the Constitution mention Birth Certificate? Where is Abe Lincoln’s BC? To whom did Harry Truman show his?
When you make a rule different for 1 person than another, well, I don’t know if that’s rascism, but it’s certainly discriminatory.”
That is a great point! I’m wondering if some of those old time presidents didn’t sneak into the United States and usurp the office of our highest executive! Happily, with the invention of the widely accepted “COLB” or “Birth Certificate” program in nearly all 57 states over the course of the last century or so, we now have at our disposal, a way to protect ourselves from such impostors and non-native born felons engaging in such deceptions. If only we would use that system.
#40-If you lost the original, and ordered a new copy it would look exactly like Obama’s. Try ordering one from the state you were born in and then post it for us.
Let me ask you one question-why would his certificate say Place of Birth-Honolulu, if he was born somewhere else? Now if you want to say his mother lied, then prove it. The law says primary documents such as this are prima facie true unless proven otherwise. That’s several hundred years of law right there.
Arguing with Alferd is a waste of time. Thank God Congress is beginning to pay attention to this problem. Maybe we can get Barry to pony up his documents to qualify for the 2012 election – assuming, of course, he hasn’t driven us into the ground by then and installed himself as our ‘benelovent’ dictator.
#42-I said no such thing. This issue is a complete waste of time for “cooks” who can’t move on.
#43 I answered your question, now answere mine.
“The law says primary documents such as this are prima facie true unless proven otherwise.”
At that time, the law allowed parents to give verbal testimony re. their child’s birth and Hawaii often registered babies born out of the country. You are correct about the prima facie evidence which is precisely why it is important to get a look at his Kenyan records – assuming, of course, that any exist however the fact that said records have been locked by the Kenyan government implies that they do which only exacerbates the question at hand.
None of that proves anything, of course, but it really isn’t relevant given the fact that he was born a British subject, the specific concern of our founding fathers at that time. It is criminal that our Congress has allowed this travesty to happen but as we all know it isn’t the first time they’ve ignored the Constitution.
This is ONLY about moving on….not the opposite. Frankly, I’m very interested in finding out whether or not a brilliant, up-an-coming favorite Republican leader is constitutionally eligible to run for president or not. According to everything I’ve read, he sadly wouldn’t be.
But you said yourself that When you make a rule different for 1 person than another”….so the question must be asked. That’s why, for the future, and since we can’t make a rule different for 1 person than another, it’s probably going to have to be legislated. It certainly wouldn’t be fair if we tossed this around about Obama but not about this up-and-coming Republican, now would it?
You birthers are just HATERS. You can’t stand a black man being president!!! RACISTS! It doesn’t matter where he was born. The people ekected him!!! You people watching Fox News are so brainwashed you can’t even see how much you HATE! Barak is gonna change everything and you rich white people will know what it’s like. Suckers!@!!
Bill said:
“You birthers are just HATERS. You can’t stand a black man being president!!! RACISTS! It doesn’t matter where he was born. The people ekected him!!! You people watching Fox News are so brainwashed you can’t even see how much you HATE! Barak is gonna change everything and you rich white people will know what it’s like. Suckers!@!!”
I REST MY CASE.
GOT AMMO??
Bill, your blog says it all, “Barak is gonna change everything and you rich white people will know what its like”. Your the one thats brainwashed, and you been brainwashed by groups like Acorn and the and other power grabbing left wing community org groups. Maybe theres a reason why some of us are rich and you are poor.
“You birthers are just HATERS. You can’t stand a black man being president!!! ”
WOW!! Talk about playing the race card! Hahahahahahahaha!
“Barak is gonna change everything and you rich white people will know what it’s like. Suckers!@!!”
I could not agree with you more. We’ve already seen Barry’s ‘change’ and you will see it too real soon now. Yep, you elected him and now you get to live with the consequences along with those of us who see what’s happening. Best of luck, my friend.
#1 How do you know people commenting here AREN’T black, Bill? The most verbal “birther” I know is a black woman. She also happens to adore her country and her constitution. Our main speaker at our local meetings is a black man. None of those people are “rich white people” or racist. Sometimes people do look at people and apply rules to the people just because they’re PEOPLE…no-one is held to different standards. It is a very refreshing thing, you should try it.
#2 Personally, I don’t have a television.
Randwulf-Still ducking my question from #44 I see. Obviously you have no answer.
As far your point in #43, there is a decent possibility that Chester Arthur was born in Canada of at least one parent who was a British national (possibly both). He served his Presidency-he was neither the best nor the worst of all time- and you know what, the Republic survived. So let’s all drop the pretense of this being a matter of earth-shattering importance.
That’s true, Jerry.
The problem is that Chester Arthur appointed the Supreme Court nominee who wrote the opinion in Wong Kim Ark. A very convenient outcome, eh?
If Arthur was an usurper and announced to be such, Wong Kim Ark would be thrown out…as it should be…since consequent study of that case has shown it to be a flawed decision.
I don’t understand what the problem is with getting this all concretely defined with no gray areas.
Jerry said:
“#40-If you lost the original, and ordered a new copy it would look exactly like Obama’s. Try ordering one from the state you were born in and then post it for us.”
BULL$HIT!! To get a passport, I must have a stamped, sealed copy of the long form original. If I lost mine, my state of birth would have to go into the vault, get my original out of a folder, make a copy, stamp it, sign and date it and then send me that. I think most states follow the exact same procedure for certain security requirement levels of proof of who an individual is.
Then Jerry said: “Let me ask you one question-why would his certificate say Place of Birth-Honolulu, if he was born somewhere else? Now if you want to say his mother lied, then prove it. The law says primary documents such as this are prima facie true unless proven otherwise. That’s several hundred years of law right there.”
We don’t give a rat’s a$$ about what his mother said or who claimed what or what we would like to believe or any of the rest of that kind of crap. What we want to see is the long form that is allegedly in the Hawaiian vault. Not some computer generated brief. The question is: Was there a doctor present at Obama’s birth, and why would he lie about anything?
And then he said:
“#42-I said no such thing. This issue is a complete waste of time for “cooks†who can’t move on.”
Move on to what? And what does preparation of food have to do with it?
And finally he asks me:
“#43 I answered your question, now answere mine.”
I did “answere” your question. If they would have had BCs in the 1780s, they would have used them. The law infers that “natural born” status could be determined by whatever means necessary.
Randwulf: Bullshit on you! I have a replacement BC for my daughter from Maryland. It looks exactly like Obama’s Hawaiian form and has the same information:
Mother’s name
Father’s name
Place of birth- town or county, NOT hospital
No doctor’s signature. Computer generated signature of Health Commissioner. The Passport Office seemed not to have a problem with. Why don’t you spend $12 and order one from your birth place and see what you get-you might learn something. No state issues the kind like you posted from 1963, not in 20 years at least.
PRSmith: â€At that time, the law allowed parents to give verbal testimony re. their child’s birth and Hawaii often registered babies born out of the country.â€
— — —
Do you have any proof that Hawaii registered babies born out of the country as being born in Honolulu?
Ceceilia Wrote: â€The problem is that Chester Arthur appointed the Supreme Court nominee who wrote the opinion in Wong Kim Ark. A very convenient outcome, eh? “
Ceceilia, you do realize the Wong Kim Ark case was argued before the Supreme Court over 10 years AFTER Chester Arthur died, don’t you? Besides, there is more than one justice on the Supreme Court, if you haven’t noticed.
Actually, Jerry, most states have gone to the electronic files over the past 10 years or so. Hawaii converted to an all digital system in 2001. In fact, new births are recorded on a computer linked directly to the state database. I guess this means that according to birther logic, no one will be eligible to be president in 30 years. LOL
Randwulf: “Was there a doctor present at Obama’s birthâ€
What are you implying there rand?
“What we want to see is the long form that is allegedly in the Hawaiian vault.â€
Waaaahh, Whaaah, Whaaah!!!
Jerry said:
“Randwulf: Bullshit on you! I have a replacement BC for my daughter from Maryland. It looks exactly like Obama’s Hawaiian form and has the same information:
Mother’s name
Father’s name
Place of birth- town or county, NOT hospital
No doctor’s signature. Computer generated signature of Health Commissioner. The Passport Office seemed not to have a problem with. Why don’t you spend $12 and order one from your birth place and see what you get-you might learn something. No state issues the kind like you posted from 1963, not in 20 years at least.”
You are incorrect! I have a certified copy from Texas of my original long form. Doctor’s information, hospital name, birth weight, mom and dad information and a legible number! Required for me to get a passport. That was right after 911 though. Maybe it is relaxed now a bit.
My point is that even though Hawaii chooses to send out these abbreviated forms of COLB these days, in 1961, nothing like that existed. The original(if there ever was one for Obama) is still there or should be. However, at this point, anything could have happened to it. There must be some reason why it can’t be produced. Most people are beginning to think it never existed and it has been shown that there are many reasons to believe that the “Fact-Check” thing is a forgery. So, until the original is copied and produced or the original is caused to be produced and made available to some judge in one of the many lawsuits now working in the court system, how will we ever know for sure? Like Chester Arthur’s birthplace rumors, it could remain forever a mystery. Oh, but that’s right, in 1961, Hawaii had a system of recording births whereas in 1829 Vermont, there wasn’t one. Like I said, if they’d have had ’em, they’d have used ’em.
Randwulf: â€The original(if there ever was one for Obama) is still there or should be.â€
So what? The “abbreviated forms of COLB†as you call it is derived from the original and certified to be true by the state. There is not a court in this country that would not accept the COLB as a true copy of the original.
Your desire for additional information is immaterial to that fact.
Live with it.
So when I said:“What we want to see is the long form that is allegedly in the Hawaiian vault.â€
This was Alferd’s response:
“Waaaahh, Whaaah, Whaaah!!!”
Now that’s rich!
Hey Alferd, did you Google the copy of the real long form, doctor signed birth certificate like the one that Obama doesn’t have?
Here it is again. Now Google and weep. Because you boy doesn’t have one like this. I guarantee it!
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://buenavistamall.com/HIbirthcertificate.jpg&imgrefurl=http://buenavistamall.com/Sanchez.htm&usg=__C-55PG5bR6wNAeyU2k0Na
Randwulf: â€Most people are beginning to think it never existed and it has been shown that there are many reasons to believe that the “Fact-Check†thing is a forgeryâ€
Be careful, You can get in a lot of legal trouble by falsely accusing someone (in this case the director of the Hawaiian DOH) of a crime.
Do you have evidence that the Hawaiian DOH has committed a crime by ignoring an altered certified document?
Why would they do this?
Where is your evidence?
“You are incorrect! I have a certified copy from Texas of my original long form. Doctor’s information, hospital name, birth weight, mom and dad information and a legible number! Required for me to get a passport. That was right after 911 though. Maybe it is relaxed now a bit.”
I don’t know what Texas did when you ordered yours, nor what they do now. My wife and I and our children all have ones that look like Obama’s from a variety of jurisdictions. All of us have obtained passports multiple timesm as well as Driver’s Licensces professional licenses, etc. You are simply full of crap. What’s more I suspect you know you are.
This question has been asked a couple of times already.
Why would the State of Hawaii register a baby born out of the country as having been born in Honolulu?
One more question:
Why would the State of Hawaii ignore a criminal act (the falsification of a certified document)?
“Where is your evidence?”
Alferd-They have none, which is why they argue so hard. Every judge that they have appeared before has said the same. Are all the judges corrupt? Every loser in court always says that. And that’s what they are-losers.
Stand on “the law” and “the Constitution” birfers, but the law and the Constitution say you get your day in court,you get to appeal up to the SCOTUS and then the ballgame is OVER.
“Why would the State of Hawaii register a baby born out of the country as having been born in Honolulu?”
The birfers will never answer that one, because of course the State of Hawaii wouldn’t. Nor would anyone else.
Alferd, you said: “So what? The “abbreviated forms of COLB†as you call it is derived from the original and certified to be true by the state. There is not a court in this country that would not accept the COLB as a true copy of the original.”
No, that is just plain wrong. You wish. Where is the serial number? What is it? Can we see the original?
I don’t believe that is a legitimate COLB in the first place. I believe it is a forgery. The number is blacked out on it. It can’t even be cross referenced. No one has ever come forward to say they were present at Barry’s birth except his paternal grandmother who states that he was born in Kenya and even specified the hospital and municipality. There is a deliberate deception here. There are lies to uncover. This whole thing stinks. There is no transparency here at all. Quite the contrary.
This won’t go away. The first time someone is charged with a criminal complaint under any federal law signed into existence by BHO, any defense counsel worth his salt will declare that law null and void by virtue of the fact that it was signed by someone ineligible for the office of POTUS. The prosecution will then either have to answer that with documentation (prove he was eligible) or drop the charge. So we will find out sooner of later. Or a whole lot of federal laws will become meaningless as more and more defense attorneys use this tactic.
Jerry Baker Says:
June 18th, 2009 at 9:48 am
“Why would the State of Hawaii register a baby born out of the country as having been born in Honolulu?â€
The birfers will never answer that one, because of course the State of Hawaii wouldn’t. Nor would anyone else.
————————
How would you expect us to answer it, Jerry? We have no way of knowing what was in the minds of Hawaiian officials at that time – we just know that a.) the law said it was OK to take the parent(s) word and that b.) it was done. I expect that they would NOT have registered a baby that way if they knew at the time it was born out of state.
I’ll tell you what, Randwulf, why don’t you be the first. pick a law signed by President Obama, break it, turn yourself in, then use that as your defense.
LOL.
“.) it was done”
Do you have proof that a baby born outside of the country was registered as being born in the U.S.?
Alferd, you said:
“Be careful, You can get in a lot of legal trouble by falsely accusing someone (in this case the director of the Hawaiian DOH) of a crime.
Do you have evidence that the Hawaiian DOH has committed a crime by ignoring an altered certified document?
Why would they do this?
Where is your evidence?”
I wish they would charge me with that or file a civil suit against me for making the statement. My very first “request for productions” in a civil suit would include any and all birth records retained by the State of Hawaii for Obama (or whoever he is). Same in a criminal complaint. I have the right to have the court order and have produced any documents that would prove me to be not guilty of the charge.
Why would they do this? Fear.
Where is my evidence? In the Hawaiian records vault.
Oh, and the “Fight the Smears” and “Fact-Check” posted COLBs didn’t come from the Hawaiian records anyway. Who knows where this “thing” was actually printed out. In the offices of the Democratic National Commitee I would assume.
# Alferd Says:
June 18th, 2009 at 10:01 am
I’ll tell you what, Randwulf, why don’t you be the first. pick a law signed by President Obama, break it, turn yourself in, then use that as your defense.
LOL.
It could happen.
“This won’t go away. The first time someone is charged with a criminal complaint under any federal law signed into existence by BHO, any defense counsel worth his salt will declare that law null and void by virtue of the fact that it was signed by someone ineligible for the office of POTUS. The prosecution will then either have to answer that with documentation (prove he was eligible) or drop the charge. So we will find out sooner of later. Or a whole lot of federal laws will become meaningless as more and more defense attorneys use this tactic”
If you’re counting on a judge to take such a ridiculous argument seriously, you should be the first to test it. I suggest you bring a toothbrush and other personal effects you will need in jail with you to court, though.
# Alferd Says:
June 18th, 2009 at 10:04 am
“.) it was doneâ€
Do you have proof that a baby born outside of the country was registered as being born in the U.S.?
The real birth certificate is in Hillary’s safe deposit box. It is from Kenya. How else could the b1tch have gotten her current job after all the nasty things she said about BHO? So only she has the proof at present.
So Jerry said: “If you’re counting on a judge to take such a ridiculous argument seriously, you should be the first to test it. I suggest you bring a toothbrush and other personal effects you will need in jail with you to court, though.”
So Jerry. Now you are saying that a person charged with a crime no longer has the right to ask a judge to insure that the law under which he is being charged is a valid one. Even if the request only amounts to a $12 piece of paper from some state records archive. Wow, you guys are really getting Stalinist on us.
Wow, you guys are really getting Stalinist on us.
—————-
Stalin, Mao, Chavez, Soetoro, Hitler. All the same side of the same leftist, tyrannical coin.
Oops, should have been different sides of the same . . . So sue me
Randwulf-You can raise any argument you like. Judges don’t have to agree with you, though. That’s not Stalinist, that’s the law. And not one judge has given even the slightest weight to your phony baloney arguments so far. What I’ve seen suggests that judges are losing what little patience they had with this crap and are assessing penalties for frivolous arguments. You know what frivolous is? Like a clown. Very apt.
The judges need to be very careful how they proceed from this point forward. People are watching closely and remembering. There will be a reckoning on all of this and it is coming soon. There is already a growing discontent with the “justice system” in this country (and with government in general). Maybe WE will lose our patience with them. You know what “serious” is? Well, it isn’t frivolous or funny like a clown. It’s more like Bunker Hill in 1775. More apt.
So now you’re threatening judges? Your true colors are showing and they aren’t pretty.
natural born = AT BIRTH allegiance to a regime (tribal feudal stuff from the Dark Age or earlier.
See Blackstone’s Commentaries (1760s) — obviously used to write the early State Constitutions and the 1787 U.S.A. Constitution.
Any bill regarding proof of qualification for members of the gerrymander Congress (or for ANY other U.S.A. office) ???
Jerry said:”So now you’re threatening judges? Your true colors are showing and they aren’t pretty.”
What are your true colors Jerry?
Mine are red, white and blue. My ancestors came in through Jamestown in 1607 and their descendants fought at Bunker Hill in June of 1775 and throughout the first American Revolution. They were on both sides in the “Civil” War and have been in every conflict since without complaining. I am a veteran myself. But there comes a time when you have to ask yourself where to draw the line between supporting the government and following it’s orders or defying the government and forcing it back into representing the will of most of the people instead of doing whatever their power will let them get away with. What I have seen our congress and supreme court doing lately is reprehensible. And don’t even ask me what I think about the “Executive” branch. The White House press secretary (Gibbs?) can’t seem to be able to answer a simple, forthright question that over 400,000 people (I guess you would call them all crazies or something) have signed a petition asking to have answered. So there it is. If we can’t get the government to do it’s job and defend the constitution, what can we expect from them next? We may have to follow Thomas Jefferson’s advise on this. And that would be a little more serious (not like clowns) than simple threatening a few judges.
Who gives a crap where your ancestors “came through”? Did they ask permission of those who were already here?
None of that means that you are in charge of interpreting the Constitution. But perhaps, you’d like to tell me whether you think torture might be a serious violation of the Constitution as well as basic human decency? Did I miss your getting up in arms over that?
Antwat, nothing justifies threatening judges, which by the way is a crime.
So after all of this why should we not make sure that people meet the legal requirements to hold the office they seek?
“So after all of this why should we not make sure that people meet the legal requirements to hold the office they seek?”
———————————-
PRECISELY!
OBAMA IS A REASONABLE MAN–THERE IS A $25 MILLION REWARD FOR HIM TO RELEASE THE BC LOCKED IN A SAFE IN HAWAII!
http://www.rewardforobamasbirthcertificate.com
WHY DOESN’T HE JUST DO IT?? AS HE IS A REASONABLE MAN!
last post says 11:47 AM This was getting good I’d like to add my 2cents. If this posts I’ll be right back.
Tiresome Jerry said:
“Who gives a crap where your ancestors “came throughâ€? Did they ask permission of those who were already here?”
Answer: I care. And yes, apparently they did have the permission of the ones already there because the natives helped them out with getting settled in as I recall.
And then he spews on with:
“None of that means that you are in charge of interpreting the Constitution. But perhaps, you’d like to tell me whether you think torture might be a serious violation of the Constitution as well as basic human decency? Did I miss your getting up in arms over that?”
Answer:No but since your precious judges seem to be falling down on the job of considering the constitution at all, perhaps a groundswell of public indignation might spur them on. And as for torture, I’m generally against it except for foreign “infidel”-beheading terrorists (who by the way, are not US citizens and therefore have no constitutional rights anyway) and for silly F@cking liberals who stick up for them. For them I would happily make an exception. And Jerry, from your statements thus far, I’m sure you were proHO during the Vietnam war. You should be very proud of how your comrades treated our US military POWs when they were guests of Miss Fondas friends up north.
And then he tries to continue with: “Antwat,” (WTF is that?)….”nothing justifies threatening judges, which by the way is a crime.”
When they fail to be fair and balanced, the are part of the political machine and therefore forfeit their rights to be treated as judges. And recent events have shown me that what they have done in closed session in the Supreme Court with Barry and his attorneys without the plaintiff’s attorney being present, (one of the “birther” cases) they are definitely in violation of some of their own rules concerning court procedures. Highly unethical. Probably illegal. We’ll let the courts decide. HA! Fat chance of that happening. Oh, and BTW, technically, it is illegal to threaten anybody.
OK, lets go back to the issue of the true definition of Natural Born. This gives people fits and it has NEVER been decided by the SCOTUS. But it is right there in front of our noses just like the undisputed fact that Barack Hussein Obama was born a British Citizen.
You see, all of our Founding Fathers were born British Citizens, just like Obama, and all of the Founding Fathers WERE NOT NATURAL BORN CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, just like Obama. They knew this beyond a shadow of a doubt, and were aware that adding the Natural Born requirement to their new Constitution would make each of them ineligible to hold the office of President. So they added “unless you are a Citizen of the Untied States of America at the adoption of this Constitution”. Now anyone that was an American Citizen before the Constitution was adopted could now be President even though they were born British Citizens and therefore were not Natural Born. This worked for our Founding Fathers, they were alive and American Citizens back in 1787 and could be President if elected.
Barack Hussein Obama, was not alive and an American Citizen back in 1787 at the adoption of our Constitution, so he being a British Citizen at birth and not being Natural Born, and with out the language the Founding Fathers wrote to exclude themselves from the Natural born requirement, is not and can never be eligible to hold the office of President of the United States of America. It would be a violation of Constitutional Law. His setting in our White House today is in violation of that said Law. Now, Alferd don’t say that British Law can’t trump American Law. That is just one of your misdirections, British Law made him a British Citizen just like he was born in London England. American Law can’t take that away from him any more than it could change Tony Blair’s British Citizenship or allow Tony to run for President. These are the facts and no other documents or sources are needed. WE do not have a President and have not had one for 6 months.
Again, why is this proposed law bad?
Thankyou Old1!!
So refreshing to hear someone using logic, properly citing historical events and actually making sense.
After the day I’ve had with Alferd and Tiresome Jerry, I was glad to see you weigh in on this.
Have a great presidentless day!
Randwulf: You know nothing about me. But knowing nothing doesn’t inhibit you fromn spouting your idiocies. You are a creep. But you already knew that.
Google Alftird who is blogging above, “Alferd Obama birth certificate”. I think Alftird is an ACORN employee as he has been blathering away on this issue non-stop since last year.
Alftird still cannot produce any statement from the Federal Election Commission or the Democratic National Party that Obama was vetted. He keeps citing a photograph of an image posted on a pro-Obama website as if that is evidence. It is not evidence, it is not admissible in court. Further it is an altered document and even assuming it was legitimate that would render it inadmissible.
But we all know that the State of Hawaii has the original vault birth certificate. There are provisions for a copy of the vault certificate to be produced under Hawaii law. Alftird go ahead and provide the cite.
Obama could produce the vault birth certificate by signing a release and sending a $10.00 check to the State of Hawaii. He refuses to do so.
It is interesting how rabid the Obamabots get over this issue. Obama will be a one term president over this. States are also enacting laws to close this loop hole. Further, the instant that Obama’s name appears on a primary ballot there will be a lawsuit in that State.
There are numerous lawsuits still in progress around the Country. They are not getting any coverage but all it will take is for one judge to allow discovery to be opened and subpoenas could be sent to the State of Hawaii, the various colleges Obama attended, etc. Once these records are made available to experts in immigration law and documents a legitimate answer to this question can be obtained. Andy Martin has an appeal proceeding in Hawaii seeking a copy of the vault birth certificate.
Yeah, I once was on a website where the Obamabots had 2.5 hr. shifts. No kidding, I clocked it.
Jerry,
You are a coward, an idiot and a left wing menace to western civilization and if I had you here in front of me I would squash you like a worm and feed your otherwise worthless remains to my fish. Don’t try to intimidate me. I am a United States Marine and you are a zero. I’ve put bullets through better men than you and they were Sandanistas. At least they had the balls to take up arms and fight for their misguided ideology. I doubt you would ever be able to do so. Now go creep, skulk, slither (or whatever people like you do) back to your little leftist commie hole in the ground and cringe there, waiting for the inevitable. We will put you out of your misery. And on that happy note I bid a good night to all!! Semper Fi!! We have seen the enemy and he is us!
Interesting reading about a break-in to the passport office and Obama’s records:
http://defendourfreedoms.net/2009/04/19/obama-legal-fees-admission-key-witness-in-passport-fraud-dead-new-quo-warranto-suit-submitted.aspx
Shocking this did not get much coverage.
“Yeah, I once was on a website where the Obamabots had 2.5 hr. shifts. No kidding, I clocked it.”
Has to be a union job.
Hawaii law stating a copy of the vault certificate can be produced:
§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]
Randwulf has a very vivid imagination. Marines? Sandinistas? The Marines last fought Sandinistas in 1933.
Now your Mom wants to use the compuiter you moron, so get off.
The passport office break-in was an inside job and it’s mission was to alter or remove damaging information about OBAMA only. The files for McCain and Clinton were also accessed but only to do a wing-drag distraction (diversion) to make it look like they were just thrill seekers of something. There was some information in Obama’s file that would have made it damned difficult for the Obots to claim that he was constitutionally eligible. I have no doubt that they are doing everything in their power to stonewall any attempts to access the Hawaiian birth records until such time as they have been able to bribe, terrorize and forge their way to having a believable document to parade out (when the aging process is complete). This lying F@CKER will do anything to stay in power. And yes, Alferd (whose shift at ACORN must have ended a few hours ago and another turd named MAINE SKEPTIC are all over every blog concerning the birth of BHO issue. I only join in once in a while but every time I do, I see those two. I’m sure there are many more and some are probably smart enough to occasionally change their monikers. I never change mine so come and get me boys! It’s gonna be fun when it happens. Semper Fi!!
Bill said:
“You birthers are just HATERS. You can’t stand a black man being president!!! RACISTS! It doesn’t matter where he was born. The people ekected him!!! You people watching Fox News are so brainwashed you can’t even see how much you HATE! Barak is gonna change everything and you rich white people will know what it’s like. Suckers!@!!â€
Lets expose the racist lie here.
Since I did a lot of the early grunt work and exposed the facts of natural born citizenship on this subject, I am probably qualify as the king of the so called “birthers”. So, if my ends were racism, it would stand to reason that I would have begun my task at the moment a black man was nominated for POTUS. Right? However, Long before Barack Obama was nominated I was hammering the natural born citizenship issue with regard to another candidate, John McCain. I did so on my blog at NewsBusters
( http://newsbusters.org/forums/latest-news/q-panamanian-born-john-mccain-natural-born-citizen-united-states-19392 )
where I exposed John McCain as having lied about his birthplace by digging up the fact that the hospital he claimed he was born in was not yet built at the time of his birth and the nearest hospital was outside the US Canal Zone. Later when his original birth certificate was posted on the internet as a result of discovery in a lawsuit, my research was validated when it was shown that McCain was in fact born in the Republic of Panama and not in the US Canal Zone. So… am I a racist? They don’t come any whiter than McCain and I, y’know. or am I just a seeker of the truth and it is people like Bill who are bating racism in a desperate attempt to shut down debate on a subject that Bill and his comrades are fearful of having exposed to wide public scrutiny?
Hey Jerry,
Try the 1980’s you stupid inbred F@ck! Oh, and that was cute about my mother and the computer but you are probably the one who lives in your mother’s basement. Or ACORN’s basement.
Sandanista is just a name commonly used to describe all the stupid f@cking Marxist criminal wanna-be leftie trouble makers in most of Central America. Of course, they all have their own uniquely un-original democratic people’s f@cking this or that names for their criminal organizations but they are all just basic “Sandanistas”. You do live in a hole, don’t you!
You’re just a pathetic little worm Jerry, now slide back down your slimy little worm (ACORN?) hole. Your “president” is a F@cking criminal impostor, just like most of the rest of Illinois politicians except worse. We well bring all this out before its over, with or without your precious “judges”. Randwulf out.
All people like Alfnerd do is prove how brain dead some people are. For God’s sake all one has to do is Google this and you can find in five minutes the fact that the State of Hawaii issued this Certification to anyone that applied for them back in the early sixties. So this Certification of Live Birth does not prove he was born in Hawaii. End of story!
Section III of the 20th Amendment states;
“…if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified;…”
So Joe Biden is currently our de facto Acting President. If Obama is not eligible to hold the office of POTUS and it is found out that he is not eligible during his term, all of his executive orders, laws, etc. will have no force in law unless Biden sees fit to go back and resign all of them.
IF HOWEVER Biden and Obama complete their term of office, no one will be able to go back and re-sign those orders, acts, etc. and they will all have to be stricken from the books as void for lack of a valid signature of the Executive.
So, this is good news! If Obama gets away with this ruse during his term, all of his actions will be undone and voided. If however he is found out during his term, then Biden will finish his term and either way, the Democratic Party will be disbanded for performing the most massive election fraud and cover up in history. At this point the Dems must know that this is their last dance before all the masks come off, so they are just trying to hold it all together for as long as possible and try not to think about the mess that is going to ensue when the music stops.
Oh what a happy day that will be! I can’t wait!
Pete wrote “Hawaii law stating a copy of the vault certificate can be produced: . . . . “
Pete, you don’t deal with government agencies much, do you.
That law allows the DOH discretion in the method that they choose to issue the document.
They only issue computer printed documents now.
too bad for you.
Hammy, before you start calling people brain dead, you should read this
http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html
Thanks.
—- —- —–
Question: What is the state’s policy for issuing a “Certification of Live Birth” versus a “Certificate of Live Birth”? My first, second and fourth children received certificates, but my third and fifth children received certifications. Why the difference? The certificate contains more information, such as the name of hospital, certifier’s name and title; attendant’s name and title, etc. The certification has only the child’s name, date and time of birth, sex, city/island/county of birth, mother’s maiden name, mother’s race, father’s name and father’s race. Why doesn’t the state just issue certificates? When did it stop issuing certificates? Is it possible to obtain certificates for my third and fifth children?
Answer: No, you can’t obtain a “certificate of live birth” anymore.
The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.
The department only issues “certifications” of live births, and that is the “official birth certificate” issued by the state of Hawaii, she said.
And, it’s only available in electronic form.
Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in 2001.
“At that time, all information for births from 1908 (on) was put into electronic files for consistent reporting,” she said.
Information about births is transferred electronically from hospitals to the department.
“The electronic record of the birth is what (the Health Department) now keeps on file in order to provide same-day certified copies at our help window for most requests,” Okubo said.
Asked for more information about the short-form versus long-form birth documents, Okubo said the Health Department “does not have a short-form or long-form certificate.”
“The birth certificate form has been modified over the years and decades to conform to national standards and models,” she said.
Okubo also emphasized the certification form “contains all the information needed by all federal government agencies for transactions requiring a birth certificate.”
She added that the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized the state’s current certification of live birth “as an official birth certificate meeting all federal and other requirements.”
The issue of what constitutes an official Hawaii birth certificate received national attention during last year’s presidential campaign. Those who doubted Barack Obama’s American citizenship called the copy of the Hawaii birth document posted on his campaign Web site a fake.
Asked about that document, Okubo said, “This is the same certified copy everyone receives when they request a birth certificate.”
In reference to Alferd’s posting of Okubo’s “statements”:
What a load of dung. Okubo is not telling the whole story. It doesn’t matter what the state does now with recording live births or what was done in 2001. The matter at hand revolves around what was done back in 1961. We already know that as late as 1963, the long, typed, doctor signed forms were still in use and copies of them were issued to people to use as their proof of who they were. All of this other discussion of what is issued now and what it is called, and going digital, etc. etc. is superfluous. It’s just wing-dragging, distraction, diversion, stone-walling, disinformation, procrastination and on and on….Enough already! And what is the F@cking serial number on Obama’s so-called “produced”, whatever-you-want-to-call-it birth documentation? Again, just go to this website:
http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://buenavistamall.com/HIbirthcertificate.jpg&imgrefurl=http://buenavistamall.com/Sanchez.htm&usg=__C-55PG5bR6wNAeyU2k0Na
You will see here that some guy named Alan got a typed, signed, long form in 1963 and you can see what they looked like at the time. Why is it that Barry can’t show one like this? It’s really simple. Is this Okubo person saying that they actually went back and shredded all the old original copies of these and digitalized the information from all of them? Or were they simply scanned and the image saved. And if that was done, are they avaiable in some kind of numerical order based on sequence of issue? Because what we need to see is that sequence of numbers with Obama (or whoever) there in the middle somewhere with his very own number.
Hey Alftird, your BS does not answer the question as to why Obama refuses to produce a copy of the vault birth certificate. It is available, I posted the law above.
The issue here is how a candidate was allowed to be placed on a primary ballot without being properly vetted. It should never have happened. The Democratic party was more interested in winning than the interests of the voter. The Democratic party and the Federal Election Commission are at fault here. Abdicating the vetting process to factcheck and a photo shopped version of a short form abstract of birth does not equate to vetting. Will the evidence when it becomes available show this is voter fraud? There is much at stake over the answer to these questions.
The viability of our election system has to be based on confidence that the candidates presented by a party are qualified. This question has never been answered for Obama. So the laws being put in place to require proper vetting should be applauded. Somehow you are trying to argue there should be no standard and no one responsible for the threshold question of whether a candidate is qualified for the position they seek.
So Altird, once again post a cite to any statement from the Democratic National Committee or the Federal Election Commission wherein they state Obama was thoroughly vetted for the office. If you cannot then please stop posting the tripe you continue to spew.
A further concern for Obama are the declarations under penalty of perjury that he filed in many States stating he is a natural born citizen. Should it be shown he lied there will be repercussions for him. Here is an example of the declarations he signed under penalty of perjury:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/11107727/Barack-Obama-Presidential-Candidate-Nomination-Paper-State-of-Arizona-2007
One of Obama’s birth certificate sites is now showing an image in which we see this number 151 1961-010641. I assume that this would also be the same number that one would find on any original certificate of live birth if there is one. So somewhere on the rolls of live birth registrations in Hawaii or for foreign births registered there, on or about the dates of August 4-12,1961 there should be an entry with this number along with other pertinent information about it. And in one of the file cabinets in the Hawaiian records vaults there should still be an actual piece of paper containing this number that we can find and physically examine (unless it has mysteriously disappeared). Or we may find that this number was used on some other person’s birth certificate altogether. Wouldn’t that be an interesting twist. Maybe it belonged to someone who died early in life and is now being used on the BHO COLB which is currently being professionally created and aged by forgery experts. Well, all we have to do is start following the paper trails for 48 years and we find the truth at some point. Or we will have a lot more questions.
Personally, I don’t think it matters what his birth certificate ends up looking like. Presidential candidates are supposed to be from 2 parents who are BOTH American citizens, and regardless of what his birth certificate says, we already know this isn’t the case.
Remember when the commies wanted us all to “question authority”, where has their curiosity gone?
Cecelia and Noway2no both made very good points. Sometimes I think there may be hope yet.
Semper Fi! I took an oath in 1979 to defend the constitution and it is still in effect.
Noway2no, so? what are you planning?
Randwulf, You need to seriously consider why you are so angry at the world. See a doctor if that helps.
Noway2no, Semper Fi!
Alfturd, my shrink told me to tell you to cut your own F@cking head off with a dull deer antler. You and yours make me angry with the world and when you are all gone, I will be quite happy and at peace.
Shalom Bubbie!
This is all BS, you need to show your BC to get a drivers license so how in the world could someone get on a ballot without proving their citizenship? I think anyone that doesn’t see the importance of this issue should pack their bags and head for Iran where legal elections don’t matter. Where anyone with enough money or influence can dictate to the masses. Have we lost our minds?, This isn’t a game, this is our very country we need to honor those who have died for it by at the very least upholding the laws of this land.