Nordyke Announcement
“Inspector” Lucas Smith claimed in comments on YouTube to have examined all newspaper birth announcements from August through December of 1961, not finding the birth announcement of the Nordyke twins (born at the same hospital as President Obama, one day later). Whether not finding was through oversight or fraud, the birth announcement is there in the newspaper on August 16 (Obama’s announcement was on August 13).
Birthers have attempted to discredit the Obama birth announcement claiming, against testimony of the newspaper and the Hawaii Department of Health that such announcements came from the department, that anyone could place such an “ad”. The very newspaper heading does not say “Birth Announcements” but rather “Health Bureau Statistics” if anyone needed further confirmation of what the announcements are. If a contemporary birth were omitted, then one would ask how, if the Health Department submitted the announcements, could one be omitted. It turns out that the objection is a fake, because the announcement is there just as it should be according to official policy. This announcement, just as the original Obama announcement, was found and published by an industrious blogger.
The Nordyke announcement is at the bottom of the column.
It’s a Photoshop job. (IA)
the conspiracy continues to grow …
</birftoon>
And a damned good one!
But seriously, finding something that should exist according to all evidence, is not extraordinary, and one is not too remiss taking such on face value. The important thing is that the announcement is now easily verified, since we know where to look.
Wow doctor a give you A+++!
Another “surprise” for Lucas Smith. He told me the Nordyke announcement was not in the papers! Of course I didn’t believe him, but I couldn’t prove it.
If this announcement is result of automated process, they it would certianly give more credibility to following media clip.
OBama – How he got his birth announcement in the paper
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXQHNMlitpY
This theory has yet to be proven or disproven because neither the State of Hawaii nor Obama will release the derivative of Obama’s COLB.
john,john, stop with the BS! the least credible news source on the net is WND!
LMAO! The “retired military commander” has PTSD. He basically made things up as he went along with no factual basis. His entire contention about method of birth registration was pure fabrication. WMD indeed.
But WND sells great miracle seeds that will grow a vegetable garden in only 3 sq ft!! Act now before Obama confiscates your property.
What Charles presents, we have no idea on whether it’s true or not. Not until, we see Obama’s derivative of his COLB, that is his long-form birth certificate. I guess Obots and Birthers can advance as many theories as they want but without the long-form birth certificate we really have no idea of which theory is the truth.
Except for dumb birthers there are no theories, Obama has been president for a year now, time for john to find other BS to cling to, this birther thing is over!
This is a little off topic, but I am wondering how many on this board supported the parents of Terri Schiavo in 2005. I strongly supported the parent’s position in that case and believe the court were dead wrong. I have seen that many birthers seem to be constistent in their conservative positions as the Terri Schiavo of 2005 was a deep conservative and liberal issue in 2005 and that many birthers supported the parents of Terri Schiavo. However, I am willing to bet that many if not all on this board probably supported the husband and courts in the Terri Schiavo case of 2005. This would be constitent with liberal supportive views regarding Obama’s eligiblity problem.
“… with liberal supportive views regarding Obama’s eligiblity problem.”
john there is no need to prove you are an A___hole, we all already know that!
by the way what did you think of the Schiavo autopsy? The one showing her brain was mulch that meant her life was over fo a long time. Her brain was dead!
I guess Obama would rather to perpetuate the Birther movement then think about ways of putting people back to work:
$10,000, no $15,000 for proof of Obama’s birth hospital
WND founder offers donation to facility on presidential records
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=121395
I think $15,000 dollars could really help out the hospital.
$15,000 could be substanial help for the hsopital in setting a nice Obama memorial wing or section to honor Obama’s birth. Obama would be proud. The only reason for the refusal is that Obama was not born there:
Try Kenya:
http://www.panamalaw.org/images/Obama-Kenyan-birth-certificate.jpg
15,000 is nothing to a hospital.
Kapiolani Hosptital only maintains records for 30 years as prescribed by Hawaiian law, Birth records are State Documents (not maintained by the hospital). Obama’s BC is the same type as my daughter who was born at Kapiolani in 1965. Her souvenir Hospital BC was rejected by US Passport people, she had to get the “short” form that State of Hawaii currently issues. Go back to WND where you can feel safe and delusional and don’t forget WND’s best columnist Chuck Norris believes the Earth is only 6,000 years old which is really strange considering Papyrus was used for writing way before that! Next you will tell us dinosaurs walked with man (as Norris did)
It certainly does not give it any more credibility. I suppose it doesn’t give it any less credibility (than it already had)–that is, there’s nothing in this information that actually contradicts this guy’s theory. But “not contradicting” is a far cry from “supporting.” It’s still nothing but pure speculation.
It’s pretty obvious at this point (if it wasn’t already) that what you guys have done is start with the conclusion that Obama must not be eligible, and then twisting anything you can find into support for the conclusion. It’s not convincing to anyone but yourselves.
Side comment: I consider the fact that I immediately knew who the Nordyke twins were, and what was the significance of their birth announcement, to be a sign that I’ve been lurking here waaaaay too much. How many people in the world would have known that?
“Chuck Norris believes the Earth is only 6,000 years old which is really strange considering Papyrus was used for writing way before that! Next you will tell us dinosaurs walked with man”
Palin believes it too. This just in: the earth is flat, and Palin’s church has protected her against witches.
When I was getting ready to drive back to Philly, one minister in Palin’s church wanted to baptize me, “if you’re killed on the way back, you’ll spend eternity in the torments of Hell.” I replied nothing will happen. Chevrolet protected me. Or was it the Buddhist amulet hanging from my rear view mirror?
I had a Buddhist prayer for a traveler hanging from the mirror, which my wife gave me. When that minister saw it, he went ballistic.
For some reason I actually feel like answering this question–I suppose the whole thing can go into that off-topic comment dump.
I’m a political Independent, and I wasn’t paying very close attention to politics in 2004. I feel a bit guilty about that, and feel that I really should have been paying attention, but there it is.
I was aware of the Schiavo case, and that there was a controversy about it. I thought it was a damn shame that anyone ever has to make a heart-wrenching decision like that, and a further damn shame that it can cause so many bad feelings within families. Beyond that, it was none of my business or anyone else’s. I assumed the courts would work it out, since that after all is their job.
The congressional action caught me totally by surprise. My first, and lasting, reaction was “What the hell is Congress doing getting involved with something like that?” I know that just goes to show how out of touch I really was, but I think that reaction wasn’t that uncommon.
That was one of the events (not the only one) that convinced me that the Republican party had gone out of its collective mind, and led to my vote for Obama.
I’ve never considered myself much of a liberal, but by your lights I suppose I must be. Your position seems to be that anyone who thinks Obama is the legitimate president must be a liberal.
John,
Prove your own point. Why don’t you post your own BC?
The courts were correct: it was a matter between her and her spouse. This is not a theocracy, which Palin and her crowd want it to be.
“In his second term as a Congressman, Anderson introduced a constitutional amendment that would “recognize the law and authority of Jesus Christ” over the United States.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_B._Anderson
Doc you need a new class of Birther Troll. This John isn’t even trying. Reinsert him in the Matrix. Fake Kenyan BC indeed.
Of course we know which is the truth. It is an irrefutable fact that Obama was born in Hawaii. The governor of Hawaii and the director of the Department of Health in Hawaii both confirmed that fact. The Nordyke twins’ birth announcement is just one more nail in the coffin of nirtherism.
John,John, John. Why the snark? The announcement is there. It comes not from Grandma or Grandpa but from the folks who collect Vital Statistics from the hospitals. Get over this John. It is done. He was born in Hawaii.
I thought her mother was treated badly. While I believed and now know the medical conclusions about her condition was correct, I also know as a mom that not one person could convince me of what I believed not to be true about one of my children. The husband should have shown grace and mercy to her mom. I never liked him even though I thought he was right about the facts.
John it is over.
“Palin believes it too. This just in: the earth is flat, and Palin’s church has protected her against witches.”
They actually hanged witches in the colonies; Birthers would love to go back there. They also jailed and beat Baptists and Catholics. Those were the good old days when religion was the foundation of government. Great place for whip and chain sellers!
Any true conservative would not have gotten involved in the case, as the issue was a private matter between the husband, the parents and the courts. That any Republican politician, let alone the president, got involved in this case by passing legislation specifically targeting it is proof that they have no interest in advocating small government unless it benefits them politically or financially.
Well, I wouldn’t go so far as to say the evidence is irrefutable that Obama was born in Hawaii, but the evidence is so strong that it would take something really powerful and direct to cast doubt on it. Something like a BOAC passenger manifest from Aug. 1961 showing “Mr. & Mrs. Barack Obama & infant” departing Nairobi. Or a Customs & Immigration document showing baby Obama entering the U.S. But the birfers have little desire to tear themselves from their computer screens and do actual research; whenever they have, it has been detrimental to the birfer cause, as are the Nordyke birth listings.
I supported neither Schaivo’s parents nor her husband (though the autopsy proved the husband was correct), but I thought the idea of Congress sticking its nose into the affairs of a single family in a tragedy was obscene beyond belief. Not to mention the cost to taxpayers of Bush flying back to Washington to sign the legislation (ever heard of FedEx?) And Bill Frist diagnosing a patient he had never examined (something you learn in the first week of Med School) was nothing but a joke.
Nevertheless, your digression points out an indisputable truth about the birthers. Every single one is 100% opposed to evry single position Obama favors. If the birthers were really motivated, as they claim, by the eligibility issue, there would be at least a reasonable sub-group who could say with a straight face, “I support Obama on most of the issues, I just wish there weren’t questions regarding his birth.” But in fact, you can’t show me a single pro-Obama-on-the-issues birthers. The fact that they seriously try to argue (despite the crystal clear language in the Constitution) that there is any possible successor if Obama were removed other than Biden is a dead giveaway. John, if you are honest, you will admit that the birthers started from, “I hate Obama,” and went looking for “facts” (i.e., making things up) in the hope (hopeless) of overturning a free and fair election.
I’m not sure that would cover the HIPPA violation and state privacy law litigation they’d trigger, or the employee’s salary once he/she was fired for releasing it. It’s easy for WND to make those empty gestures since they know no one will risk a career and come forth.
It used to be Rupublicans valued personal privacy (even if they didn’t find it in the Constitution). All that went out the political window.
$15,000 doesn’t even get you on the brass plaque in the lobby. The wing will set you back millions.
It wouldn’t come close to covering the HIPAA violation:
Covered entities and specified individuals, as explained below, whom “knowingly” obtain or disclose individually identifiable health information in violation of the Administrative Simplification Regulations face a fine of up to $50,000, as well as imprisonment up to one year. Offenses committed under false pretenses allow penalties to be increased to a $100,000 fine, with up to five years in prison. Finally, offenses committed with the intent to sell, transfer, or use individually identifiable health information for commercial advantage, personal gain or malicious harm permit fines of $250,000, and imprisonment for up to ten years.
So, John, do you have $250,000 and 10 years of your life to give up for the cause?
C’mon John. Post YOUR BC. What are you hiding? I know – you were born on the Vermont/Ontario border.
You can’t fool me.
“BOAC passenger manifest”
Bring Over American Cash (bada-bing)
“So, John, do you have $250,000 and 10 years of your life to give up for the cause?”
Of course he does not. They are all just a motley crew of armchair warriors.
Here’s one for John: have you personally patrolled a kibbutz perimeter, all night long, with an Uzi? I’m waiting.
“$15,000 doesn’t even get you on the brass plaque in the lobby.”
That plaque starts at $1M. $15K gets you a handshake.
When my mother died, I went through her house. I found the hospital bill from my birth, $15, and…
(look the other way)
my mother’s diaphram (!)
Jews are a wild bunch – especially the NY crowd.
Last time I checked, there was some question as to whether HIPAA covered information collected before the Privacy Rule went into effect. I think generally health care facilities and workers assume that it does apply just to be safe. I cannot see how a physician who retired before the Privacy Rule went to into effect could be considered a covered entity under HIPAA, but professional ethics would prevent disclosure.
I’ve personally had to make that decision in the case of my mother. It was clear that she was not going to recover, and her own wishes were also clear. She lived maybe a half an hour after they turned off the ventilator. I held her hand, trying to keep it warm. I sang a hymn for her. You know, I have never understood the conservative Christian view of keeping people breathing who are in effect already dead. They seem to be devoid of the hope that is at the core of their religion.
I assumed anyone hanging out here is hard core enough to know who Nordyke was. But speaking about some of the trivia I carry with me, I find myself saying, “I know things that people really shouldn’t know.” I mean, how many lawyers, even, have heard of Lynch v. Clarke much less that it was 1844?
And you were probably right. I hope you didn’t take that as an implied criticism, because it certainly wasn’t meant to be. It just struck me as kind of funny–why do I even know that?
I’ve learned all kinds of stuff here. Obscure bits of Hawaiian state law, birth certificate procedures, who Vattel is, old court cases that even my lawyer brother has probably never heard of, you name it. It’s been an interesting ride.
No, it definitely covers information collected prior to its effective date. It has had a significant impact on retrospective chart reviews, a key type of clinical research.
The hospital would be at risk if it allowed the information to become public. If it actively participated in its becoming public, they could face criminal charges. If they were simply negligent in allowing the information, they could face civil fines, starting at $100, and going up to $500,000 depending on the severity of the breach.
if a child would have been born at home would the vital stats people collect this info also ? or would grandpa and grandma then provide this info
I agree about the government intervention in this family matter. I was with a younger brother, who died of melanoma at 32. Decisions are difficult for everyone. My mom wanted to continue treatment even when it meant continuing with no hope and, of course, suffering. She just wanted her child to survive and never, despite facts, ever believed that there was no hope. She read about this person and that who lived because of this treatment or that. I know how we treated my mom in this situation. I will always feel that the husband could have and should have shown mercy and grace to his wife’s mother.
I agree.
chufho chews over, deeply:
what if spartacus had a piper cub?
try to answer
Soetoro/Obama was registered in a public school as an Indonesian citizen by the name of Barry Soetoro and his father was listed as Lolo Soetoro, M.A. Indonesia did not allow foreign students to attend their public schools in the late 1960’s or 1970’s, and any time a child was registered for a public school, the child’s name and citizenship status were verified through the Indonesian Government. See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia (Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945), Chapter 13, Law No. 62 of 1958 (all citizens of Indonesia have a right to education) – ** it does not say all children are entitled to an education, it specifies “all citizens” **. The Indonesian school record, indicates that Soetoro/Obama’s name is “Barry Soetoro;” his nationality is “Indonesia” and his father “Lolo Soetoro, M.A. There was no way for Soetoro/Obama to have attended school in Jakarta, Indonesia legally unless he was an Indonesian citizen, as Indonesia was under tight rule and was a Police State. See Constitution of Republic of Indonesia (Undang-Undang Dasar Republik Indonesia 1945), Law No. 62 of 1958. These facts indicate that Obama/Soetoro is an Indonesian citizen, and therefore he is not eligible to be President of the United States.
prima facie evidence
Adaption papers not inference prove adaption. Let me give you other facts. 1.Under Islam adapted children do not receive the name of their adapted parent. The prophet Mohammed, spoke against that WESTERN custom, and instead wanted the child to be part of their birth family. People do adapt but it is more of a foster child relationship. I believe the late King of Jordan adapted a child and she always retained her family name and her identity as a member of her birth family. 2. Adults cannot by their action deprive an American child of their citizenship. 3. I see no statement in the laws you cite that expressly forbids forein students from attending school. 4. I personally know folks who as children used the name of a step-parent who never legally adapted them. You must produce formal evidence of an adaption. You have not. What Soetero was saying was that President Obama was his natural child which he was not.
Oh, recently a story appeared of a young man who had survived the gas bombing of a Kurdish village during Sadam Hussein’s regime. The young man( then an infant) was found alive and taken to live with an Iranian family. Since they could not identify his family he used their name but they NEVER stopped looking for his family-the family they regarded as truly his. Everyone was overjoyed when he was identified through genetic evidence as belonging to a particular family. That family, newly found, was now HIS family and THEIR name his. Different cultures view adaption and its effects differently. That may be why adults cannot make decisions for American children that would rob them of their citizenship.
skirting the issue is simple finding the facts seems to have you all scared to death
Dear John,
Myth busted. Again.
The uppity negro is still your President.
130 million votes
62 court victories (and growing)
the 44th President of the United States
It seems to me that we’re not the ones afraid of the facts.
Why would I be scared when the evidence consistently shows you to be wrong and deluded? You are not dealing with Western culture here or its and your understanding of adaption and what it means. Again, produce a court record of adaption. If you do not have that you have nothing. Scared, no. Amused and sad that you insist on going on with this fantasy. Yes, I plead guilty to being amused and sad for you. But aside from that it is important to answer with an something other than a remark about someones state of mind. Where is the certificate or court record of an adaption? Produce it for us. Let’s see it.
“try to answer”
Actually, I think he had a Cessna 152.
This does NOT mean that non-citizens are prohibited from getting an education.
Though obviously elementary logic escapes you. I’ll bet you are not so good at math, either, since you apparently believe that if 2+2=4, then the answer to 1+3 must be something else entirely.
What we have here is a perfect example of the pathology of a belief system.
Belief has been entirely separated from the question of truth, verifiability, etc. Indeed, the pathology is reinforced the more truth you throw at it, because it is like a paranoid delusion. It’s strengthened by resistance to contradictory evidence.
The birther delusion achieves greater degree of success than some other types because it serves as wish-fulfillment for those people.
Untrue.
See “Indonesian Policies toward the Chinese Minority under the New Order” by Leo Suryadinata, Asian Survey, Vol. 16, No. 8 (Aug., 1976), pp. 770-787
The decision to let the Chinese establish SNPCs was based on various political considerations. After the closing of Chinese-medium schools [in 1965], some alien Chinese were eager to send their children to Indonesian schools. However places in these schools were limited andpriority was given to Indonesian citizens.
Foreign students were allowed at Indonesian schools, priority was given to citizens!
The citations here do not prove either that foreigners were excluded from public schools or that the name or citizenship status were checked with the government.
You don’t have a right to drive a car. It’s a privilege. Does that mean you cannot drive a car? Aliens did not have a right to attend school in Indonesia. That does not mean they couldn’t attend school in Indonesia.
The Constitution in Indonesia still says that citizens have a right to attend school, yet birthers never argue that foreigners cannot now attend public schools in Indonesia.
The Indonesian school record, indicates that Soetoro/Obama’s name is “Barry Soetoro;” his nationality is “Indonesia” and his father “Lolo Soetoro, M.A.
Asian Law Digest, Indonesian Law section 4.02:
Regional identity cards, family identity cards, birth certificates or official reports regarding taking of oath of allegiance to Indonesia are sufficient evidence to prove Indonesian citizenship.
Notice anything missing there? Something that isnotlisted as sufficient evidence to prove Indonesian citizenship?
Yeah. That’s right. If Barry Soetoro took his school application to the Indonesian passport office they wouldn’t issue him a passport. He couldn’t sign up to be in the Indonesian little league! He couldn’t get into the Indonesian military.
The school application is not sufficient evidence to prove Indonesian citizenship – according to the laws of Indonesia
Is there anything in the Constitution that says that someone cannot also be the citizen of another country?
Nope.
Here’s a clue. When we’re talking about a US President and whether he’s eligible under the US Constitution, you should first look at US law!
US law says that even if Obama became an Indonesian citizen at age 6, he did not lose his US citizenship.
Perkins v. Elg – Citizenship cannot be taken away based upon an act committed by another person. Your theory states that because of Obama’s parent’s actions, Obama’s citizenship was taken away. This goes directly against this.
Afroyim v. Rusk – Citizenship cannot be taken away without the consent of the person. Again, confirming Perkins v. Elg. Your theory is that a 6-year-old can form the legal consent neccessary to satify Afroyim.
Vance v. Terrazas – The act must be committed with explicitly the intent of taking away citizenship. The evidence of this must be seperate from the fact that he just committed the act. You have no evidence that Barack Obama ever intended to give up his citizenship. Your theory has the potential act itself as the evidence, which it is not.
Indonesian law may, or may not have considered Obama a citizen, but the United States doesn’t care. He was still a natural born citizen.
True.
The photograph of Barry’s 2nd grade school record at a private school was taken in 2007 before his records could be sealed. If you’ve ever transferred a child to a different school, the first thing the new school will want is a copy of the complete record from the prior school.
How is it the private school, using the application from the father and records from Barry’s 1st grade, was able to correctly identify Barry’s place of birth and incorrectly list his nationality? And if their record keeping was so sloppy, why did they keep the record for 40 years?
And if you got a problem with xenophobia, why doesn’t Barry open up his complete passport record to inspection. An extensive history file will be kept on a minor traveling and living outside the U.S.
John
Don’t you think that Hillary, a lawyer, and McCain exhausted all the resources to beat Obama?.. or maybe it was a cover up involving, the “REPUBLICAN” gov. of Hawaii, Lingle, Congress, SCOTUS, all the federal agencies, also Obama’s family knew he was going to be president someday.. yeah must be that.
Birthers IQ = doorknob
I debunked this theory back in February of 2009 in my article:
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/02/hollister-v-indonesian-citizenship-law/
While it has no bearing on our case, since President Obama was born in a hospital, the primary responsibility for reporting a home birth falls on the attendant at the birth (if that person were a medical professional–MD, nurse midwife), and secondly on the parents otherwise. A registration by a grandparent would have been highly unusual, and I believe would have raised questions: in 1961, there were only 14 home births in all of the city of Honolulu (0.17%), Official statistics for 1961 show zero unattended births; however, that may be the result of a failure to collect the information.
“Birthers IQ = doorknob”
Are you sure? It may actually be a tomato.
Passerby: I hope you didn’t take that as an implied criticism
No, I identified with your remark.
Good morning. I am confirming now that, yes, the Nordkye birth annoucement is listed in the August, 16th 1961 edition of The Honolulu Advertiser. This was confirmed on 01.07.2009 at the California State Library in Sacramento where microfilm going as far back as the 1920s for the said newspaper are on file. I will upload a video presentation soon which documents this finding.
My earlier statement made on youtube, under video comments of the birth certificate video, was in error. I am an objective person and believe that the facts, no matter what direction they lean towards, need to be published and made record of.
My earlier statement was never posted on my main forum page, which is my youtube profile page. The statement was posted on the video comments of the birth certificate video which runs rampant with misinformation and disinformation comments posted 24-7 by Obama supporters (Obots). In no case would I consider the video comments page (now over 9600 comments in length) as a place that should be locked upon as a Lucas Smith blog. I rarely post there and the comments there are supplied mostly (more than 50%) by Obama supporters which entail fabricated evidence, half truths and more outright lies than can be found anywhere else on the Internet regarding the Obama birth certificate factor.
I consider my profile page on Youtube.com/inspectorsmith to be the only true Lucas Daniel Smith blog, or forum, anywhere on the Internet. I caution everyone to please not confuse my profile forum with the video comments page.
Thank you to all.
Respectfully,
Lucas Daniel Smith.
I say potato.
How is the kidney for sale business going Lucas?
I wish there was a ventilator I could have had turned off for my mother (cancer victim). Her damn Taurus heart would just not stop even when she didn’t know who she was let alone me.
I’m having some significant surgery at the end of this month (knee replacement). I rest easy, I already have a advanced directive on file with the hospital and my sister has a medical POA and is fully aware of my wishes if the operation would go south for some reason.
Down clicked your post only for the “mulch” comment. Her brain activity had stopped correct though.
Thank you for confirming you are a pathological liar.
Irony alert:
I rarely post there and the comments there are supplied mostly (more than 50%) by Obama supporters which entail fabricated evidence
One can only assume that describing yourself as an “objective person” is your way of saying you are a “convicted felon”.
What? Are you saying WND is just to fricking cheap to get the info they want?~ that was snark~
I think the medical and vital records professionals in Hawaii are pretty faithful to its medical privacy and vital records laws. We all saw the letter Obama wrote to Kapiolani Medical Center before they took it off their website. He called it “the place of my birth”. He’s been President for 356 days. If there was any proof he was anyone other than who the preponderance of the evidence says he is, someone would have been able to show it by now.
(Hope you’re recovered Misha!)
And of course you are quite familiar with fabricated evidence, aren’t you Lucas!
Give me a break, it was Indonesia in 1967. On the day little Barry was set to begin school, Lolo walked into the school office and they wrote down what he told them. They simply believed what Lolo told them. Your first clue should be that it is handwritten. Give me a break about transfering and checking the records of a first grader from Hawaii to Indonesia in 1967. You people all creamed yourselves when you saw “Barry Soetoro” on that scrap of paper and you haven’t been able to think straight since.
“An extensive history file”
This one gets another “oh please” from me. Anybody’s passport records consist of application data, and the record of when they exited and entered the United States. It probably doesn’t contain a history of where you were in between because even in the days when every country stamped your passport when you entered and exited, that’s only interesting to Customs and Immigration when you re-enter the country. The Customs agent takes your passport and asks where you’ve been, where you’re coming from and thumbs the passport looking at stamps. He doesn’t necessarily record this information. Even when you need to get a visa to enter a particular country, you get that visa from the issuing country. US State isn’t advised you’ve gotten a visa. I don’t know why you people aren’t asking for Obama’s Interpol records instead. That’s what you need if you want to see what countries he visited when he was outside the US.
Hope it goes well and all progress is nothing but North! Do your therapy diligently! I had two neighbors who had knee replacements in August. One did her rehab religiously, the other not so much. By September, the one was out walking a mile each day. Even today, the other one who filched on her rehab is still using a cane.
[“the one” and “the other one” not to be confused with “The One” and “That one”!]
I remember in particular when they revealed that the autopsy reports showed she was completely blind and would have had no reaction to anyone in the room, it was all reflexes. It reminded me how sometimes we want so badly to believe our loved one might be the miracle we’ll see what we want to see. I felt quite badly for the husband who the parents and their supporters smeared so effectively. When the husband spoke, it was clear he loved Terry and sincerely thought he was trying to do what she wanted. These issues are painful enough when families disagree, it is horrible when they are dragged out into the public square.
Those felony and misdemeanor convictions are the result of a liberal conspiracy.
Just like Agnew. When the story first broke, he said it was a conspiracy to destroy him, by the media and liberals. Yeah, right.
Lucas: who is Orly schtupping this week?
In my travels, the immigraton guy asks for my passport, stamps & intials it then says “next” to get to the next person in line. How can this be translated into “extensive travel records”. Only in the deluded brain of a birther. Or maybe that guy has a fantastic memory and records your travel info later, Sure dipsh_t!
One gets the impression that most birthers have never traveled outside the United States. The idea that the State Department has an extensive file on the foreign travel of Americans is exaggerated. When I flew into Rome in 1999, I didn’t even have to stop at customs or immigration. All passengers went to baggage claim and then we were waved through to the airport exit. On another trip to Europe I flew into Germany, spent some time in Switzerland and flew home from Paris. There is no record of me entering or leaving Switzerland. At the Zurich border the Swiss glanced at my passport but didn’t scan it or stamp it; I didn’t even have to stop at the French border because it was open.
And as you pointed out, the stamping of passports is very inconsistent. I was in Barcelona in 2000, but you’d never know it from looking at my passport.
Yep. Exactly as you say, they don’t seem to have first hand experience with entering or leaving this country or any other. They don’t realize once you’re in the EU, they only glance at your passport.No stamping. That when you re-enter this country no one records where you were. I suspect most of them don’t have passports anyway. They don’t seem to know what documentation is acceptable for getting one. What we need are Obama’s interpol records 😉
Mr. Smith,
Thanks for dropping by. I’m always glad to hear from the folks who make the news in our little corner of the Internet.
In other words, Mr. Smith sometimes posts careless lies in the comments section on his page. In the profile section, on the other hand, he only posts well-crafted lies.
No doubt Interpol was keeping a close eye on the six-year-old’s movements!
Lucas Smith
You are lying. You are confirming now that you saw the ad in a California library trying to appear like an “innocent person” who just found out. You told ME you looked from Aug to Dec 1961 and the Nordyke birth announcement were not in the newspaper.
You are confirming nothing because it was ME who found out the evidence here and I posted it on your video. It was ME who posted yesterday that you were lying or needed glasses because you didn’t found the Nordyke birth announcements. I even posted the address for you to look at the copy of the Honolulu Advertizer with the Nordyke birth announcement.
“I rarely post there and the comments there are supplied mostly (more than 50%) by Obama supporters which entail fabricated evidence, half truths and more outright lies than can be found anywhere else on the Internet regarding the Obama birth certificate factor.”
“Entail fabricated evidence” “half truth”
“outright lies”
Hypocrite! What about your “fabricated” Kenyan bc that you were trying to sell on Ebay? Your stupid fake “Kenyan video” with light skin people? ( from the Caribbean or S. America)Do you think people are stupid? Why don’t you post a copy of your round trip to Kenya, as evidence you went there?
You fell in your own trap birther!
sarina, rhetorically:
lucas knows his customers are.
Sarina, the birthers actually do think people are stupid…You have to be in order to believe in their ridiculous theories…
Mr. Smith,
Whether or not you view the comments section as a “Lucas Smith blog”, you did personally claim that you had looked through every single newspaper from August through December of 1961 and there was nothing there. It was you that typed that, not another YouTube user nor an “Obot” posing as you. You personally posted what was basically a blatant lie, regardless of whether it was posted on your “official blog” or not.
What part of “the citizenship of a minor child cannot be affected by the parents action” don’t you, and the faithful to Orly, understand?
Obama’s mother could have moved to Moscow and accepted Russian citizenship for her and her children without effecting Obama’s “natural born citizen” status.
The part that has to do with ending welfare by pay pal. The old saying “There’s a sucker born every minute” applies here.
Exactly. Did you know Nixon was born with a 5 o’clock shadow?
Mario wrote: “The Weimar Republic and the Soviet Union both had perfectly good Constitutioons and they were no barrier to totalitarianism.
The question is what happened in those constitutional societies to allow totalitarianism to take control? What institutions in those societies did not do their job to allow that to happen?”
It won’t happen here because we never had a president named Schiklgruber, nor named Dzhugashvili.
Actually it’s aboout the same as a box of rocks.
dont you have to fill out a form before you land in a foreign country with all your vitals such as why where and when
I understand Dr., I myself was in the same situation with my father.It was not in anyway easy. But a better place waits us all.
“why doesn’t Barry open up his complete passport record ”
There isn’t such a thing as passport record! The only place you can see where he has been is to look at his passport & see the visa stamps. There is no other record. My guess is that Whitman never traveled and has no passport just dumb sh_t talking points.
I want to see Barry’s certified copy of his passport record.
“My face is my passport”- Vladimir Horowitz
“I want to see Barry’s certified copy of his passport record.”
why? a non citizen can’t get a passport!
Do you have his notarized consent? A death certificate? Proof of guardianship? A court order?
If not, you’re out of luck!
John,
I admit- I am stumped. What on earth does the Terry Schiavo case have to do with President Obama?
Of course I had an opinion but what does it have to do with presidential eligibility?
“his father “Lolo Soetoro, M.A.”
Do you think that Lolo Soetoro was his actual father? That is the glaring thing to me- that Soetoro was declared his father, which seems like it was done purely for expediency.
Anyway, seems like just another stretch in the multiple theories of why President Obama should not have been eligible to be president. Wish you folks would be honest enough to say that you are just looking for a theory- any theory- that will discredity the President. A person with one whacko theory they truly believed in, I might be able to believe their sincerity- advocating half a dozen theories hoping one of them might be true is just promoting your anti-Obama agenda.
Sven, if you can tell us what other President’s passport records you have seen, we would then see where your request makes sense. Or if you could show us how the President’s passport records matter in regards to the only requirements for President spelled out in the Constutution. I remember it requiring that a President be over 35, live in the US for 14 years,and be a NBC. I don’t remember it stating that the President had to have a passport and it should be inspected by the public. What are you hoping to find? That he does not have one? That he visited Kenya sometime before he stated that he did in his book? That he traveled before he moved to Indonesia? Or that he secretly visited Afganistan in the 1980’s and was a member of Al Queida and was friends with Osama?
Even as a pathological delusion, I don’t get that one.
If Obama has a US passports (which he does), then he is a US citizen.
What does it matter which country he visited? Are we back to Clinton being a KGB mole?
“Are we back to Clinton being a KGB mole?”
Worse. We’re heading back to John Birch stuff with the birthers. They’re still around, in an Appleton, Wisconsin basement.
Hmmmmm? Only citizens have U.S. passports? Are you sure?
blah, blah, blah … bunch o’stuff from the State Department and then …
If a person believes he or she is eligible under the law as a non-citizen national of the United States and the person complies with the provisions of 8 USC 1452(b)(1) and (2), he/she may apply for a passport at any Passport Agency in the United States.
It’s all explained here:
http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_781.html
which states that “very few persons fall within this category” and none of the categories described apply to Obama.
It could apply to Obama. See if you can follow this theory …
Lolo and Stanley Ann marry in Hawaii. Lolo adopts BO II. As with the divorce between Stanley Ann and BO Sr., BO Sr. does not respond to a Family Court summons.
During the adoption process, BO II has his name legally changed to Barry Soetoro with a new BC created. BO II’s BC is sealed. Stanley Ann Soetoro and Barry Soetoro apply for US Passports under their new names.
Lolo leaves for Indonesia without Stanley Ann and Barry because Indonesia will not allow entry for people with a passport less than 6 months old. Lolo uses the marriage license and adoption papers to begin the process of naturalizing Stanley Ann and Barry to Indonesian citizenship.
After a few years, the marriage begins to fail. A family friend takes Barry to the US Embassy in Jakarta and tells embassy personnel Barry has been abandoned or orphaned with a US citizen grandmother in Hawaii. After confirming his grandmother is a US citizen and that she’ll agree to take responsibility for Barry, the US State Department expedites travel documents for Barry as an Indonesian Refugee and escorts him back to Hawaii.
Between parties at his 10 year class Reunion, BO Sr attends a Family Court hearing to contest Barry’s adoption. The court agrees to void Barry’s adoption and changes his name back to BO II.
Barry’s Indonesian citizenship is voided, as well. BO II is stateless. He is a US National without citizenship who is capable of obtaining a US Passport.
what an imagination you have to dream up such an impossible situation. An Idonesion adoption follows muslim guidelines, the child’s name remains as birth fathers name (Obama) so now show us proof of adoption. Just vote against him in 2012 no need to make up crap!
Which, according to Perkins v. Elg and Afroyim v. Rusk, does nothing to change Obama’s United States citizenship.
In order to get to court, you have to plead a case. And you have to show facts that plausibly suggest what you’re alleging. It’s not enough that the facts are consistent with the story.
You’ve got a tiny set of facts which are consistent with an infinite set of explanations. Wake me up when you’ve got a fact that suggests your conspiracy.
What if a person travelled in space at speeds approaching the speed of light? According to Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity, time slows down realtive to time on a slower moving body such as Earth. That person could pass 10 Earth years in a single year. Then, what if, at the Earth age of 35 they were elected President? From the frame of reference of their space travel, they are only 26. Are they eligible?
Other than that the US laws and precedent indicate that you are wrong and other than that there is NO supporting evidence, you do have a good point.
Well, not really…
where do birthers come up with this stuff? They’re not even trying to keep one foot in reality any more.
Hey, Scientist, have we calculated what age Obama is using Einstein’s theory of special relativity? We know that Obama has taken lots of plane trips – for example, his trip to Afghanistan. Relativistic effects are felt even at relatively (forgive the pun) low speeds – albeit in extremely small amounts. Assuming most of Obama’s travel was in the Boeing 767, which has a cruising speed of 461 knots, how many flights would it take to make Obama ineligible – relativistically?
Roughly speaking, about 10 trillion flights. Nevertheless, I’d rate the odds of him being ineligible on those grounds about equal to those of Sven’s theories (or any other birther theories) being true.
Possible? Of course its possible.
It was also possible that GW Bush was actually born in Norway and smuggled into the United States by George Senior’s gardner and then George Senior bribed the hospital into reporting that the birth took place there and slipped Barbara something to make her forget that she never gave birth to George Jr. and then they just covered everything else up. I mean it is possible. It is possible that Ronald Reagan was a Soviet sleeper agent. It is possible. It is possible that Ann Coulter is an alien life form.
Almost any whacky theory that you spin in your head is possible Sven. Just because you it is possible doesn’t mean anyone is obligated to notice it, or take any time disproving it.
Provide some proof or just admit this is all just fiction intended to harm the President and the United States.
“From the frame of reference of their space travel, they are only 26. Are they eligible?”
What is that in dog years?
“Roughly speaking, about 10 trillion flights.”
Well, according to the scenarios spun by the denialists, it is entirely plausible.
Hercules is the son of Zeus and a human woman. Why not Obama?
They come up with it because they will not have this man as their President, period. As each theory is shot down they move to another. As they continue on their theories become more and more fanciful. It won’t stop. They are pathological about this. They cannot and will not stop themselves. Poor babies.
Nice job, Dick. Keep up the good work!
I’m unimpressed with the theory BO Sr. shows up in Barry’s life after 10 years of ignoring him emotionally and financially and Madelyn welcomes BO Sr. when he can work it into his social schedule.
Unless, Madelyn needed something from Senior. A complaint from Senior stating he did not consent to the Soetoro adoption would hit the reset button for Barry.
Unfortunately, as you thoughtfully pointed out, it leaves BHO stateless and unqualified to be POTUS.
Sven, Dick, do you want to rewrite the Constitution? Maybe you should go found your own country. In this country, under this Constitution, a 6-10 year-old cannot have his citizenship stripped away from him by the actions of a third person. This is true if we’re talking about adoption, acknowledgement, or whatever. This is true whether we’re talking about Indonesian citizenship, or Kenyan, or British or the Galactic Empire.
There’s a word for people who like to strip children. It’s not patriot!
sven, fluffing his own sockpuppet:
and birfers call obama narcissistic!
in the end, all they have is projection.
Sven/Dick, I guess you have decided to bring back a variation of your infamous “Indonesian refugee status” theory….It didn’t make sense then and it doesn’t now…Mainly because you neglect to take into consideration the Perkins v Elg ruling…
“SvenMagnussen says:
Nice job, Dick. Keep up the good work!”
Good night – Sven is sending notes to himself. That’s really out there.
You’ll be reading about his breakdown soon.
I see the light now! Obama is his own father as per Robert Heinlein’s ALL YOU ZOMBIES.
Thank you, Sven. Your comment is appreciated.
Hey, Sven, did you know anyone, and I mean anyone, can renounce their US citizenship?
Yes, even a 6-year-old can renounce his citizenship.
What’s that? You’re concerned a 6-year-old would be under duress or incapable of understanding what renouncing their US citizenship entails. Is that your concern, Sven?
Well, Sven, the State Department Foreign Affairs Manual (FAM) has a special set of procedures devised to ensure a minor is not being exploited or manipulated when they renounce their US citizenship. There are numerous protections available only to a minor who renounces his citizenship.
Do you understand, Sven? Anyone can renounce their US citizenship under the right circumstances. If anyone ever tells you a minor cannot renounce their citizenship, then they have an agenda separate from you and are trying to manipulate you.
Remember, Sven, any US citizen can renounce their US citizenship. Even a 6-year-old.
So Sven,
As you pointed out- technically, legally its possible for a 6 year old to denounce his U.S. Citizenship.
Can you post one example of a 6 year old successfully doing so?
I am no Consulor officer, but having been the proud parent of a 6 year old at one time, and having spent large amounts of time at our elementary school, I can honestly say I have never talked with a 6 year old who understands the concept of citizenship.
Again Sven- anything is possible- you may be an agent provocatuer from Romania but its not probable.
If you just go around making up lists of things that are possible, you will need a team of monkeys to start typing for you.
Hey- another possibility? The night of the election, every voting mechanism in the United States hiccuped and miscounted the vote.
I am really surprised we haven’t heard that yet.
Well Dick, since you brought up the Foreign Affairs Manual, I thought you might find this intersting:
7 FAM 1111 INTRODUCTION
(CT:CON-314; 08-21-2009)
a. U.S. citizenship may be acquired either at birth or through naturalization subsequent to birth. U.S. laws governing the acquisition of citizenship at birth embody two legal principles:
(1) Jus soli (the law of the soil) – a rule of common law under which the place of a person’s birth determines citizenship. In addition to common law, this principle is embodied in the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and the various U.S. citizenship and nationality statutes.
(2) Jus sanguinis (the law of the bloodline) – a concept of Roman or civil law under which a person’s citizenship is determined by the citizenship of one or both parents. This rule, frequently called
“citizenship by descent” or “derivative citizenship”, is not embodied in the U.S. Constitution, but such citizenship is granted through statute. As U.S. laws have changed, the requirements for conferring and retaining derivative citizenship have also changed.
Oh…and just to prove you wrong yet again (you may want to pay special attention to subsection e, g, i(2) particularly that last sentance about children under the age of 16):
7 FAM 1111 INTRODUCTION
(CT:CON-314; 08-21-2009)
a. U.S. citizenship may be acquired either at birth or through naturalization
subsequent to birth. U.S. laws governing the acquisition of citizenship at
birth embody two legal principles:
(1) Jus soli (the law of the soil) – a rule of common law under which
the place of a person’s birth determines citizenship. In addition to
common law, this principle is embodied in the 14th Amendment to
the U.S. Constitution and the various U.S. citizenship and
nationality statutes.
(2) Jus sanguinis (the law of the bloodline) – a concept of Roman or
civil law under which a person’s citizenship is determined by the citizenship of one or both parents. This rule, frequently called
“citizenship by descent” or “derivative citizenship”, is not embodied in the U.S. Constitution, but such citizenship is granted through statute. As U.S. laws have changed, the requirements for conferring and retaining derivative citizenship have also changed.
e. Parents or guardians cannot renounce or relinquish the U.S. citizenship of a child who acquired U.S. citizenship at birth.
g. Age limitations in the INA: INA 349(a)(1), INA 349(a)(2) and INA 349(a)(4) contain specific provisions limiting their applicability to a person “having attained the age of eighteen years.” No finding of loss of nationality may be made for these acts committed by a person under the
age of eighteen.
i. Renunciation of U.S. citizenship and minors:
(1) Consult CA/OCS/ACS: Whenever you receive a request to renounce from a minor you immediately must contact CA/OCS/ACS. CA/OCS/ACS will not approve a Certificate of Loss of U.S. Nationality (CLN) for a minor without the concurrence of CA/OCS/PRI, and appropriate consultation with L/CA;
(2) Voluntariness and intent: Minors who seek to renounce citizenship often do so at the behest of or under pressure from one or more parent. If such pressure is so overwhelming as to negate the free will of the minor, it cannot be said that the statutory act of expatriation was committed voluntarily. The younger the minor is at the time of renunciation, the more influence the parent is assumed to have. Even in the absence of any evidence of parental
inducements or pressure, you and CA must make a judgment whether the individual minor manifested the requisite maturity to
appreciate the irrevocable nature of expatriation. Absent that maturity, it cannot be said that the individual acted voluntarily. Moreover, it must be determined if the minor lacked intent, because he or she did fully understand what he or she was doing. Children under 16 are presumed not to have the requisite maturity and knowing intent;
The question is whether this presumption is rebuttable or not.
In criminal law, the common law is that under age 7, there is an irrebuttable presumption that the child cannot form intent. Ages 7-14, there is a rebuttable presumption that the child cannot form intent.
I’m sure, Dick/Sven, that you can cite case law telling us which it is.
Also, are we all agreed that absent some specific, voluntary, intentional act on the part of young Barack Obama, he cannot lose his citizenship?
Anyone else note the irony of Sven actually talking with himself…Simply amazing….So Sven is under the delusion that even though there is no evidence, that somehow a young Barack Obama was able to renounce his US citizenship, even though his mother did everything to remind him of his American heritige? I guess you have to be somewhat delusional in order to be a birther….
More Charlton nonsense…
“(Jan. 12, 2010) — The Post & Email predicts that an Orange Revolution will break out in the United States by July 2011 seeking the ousting of Barack Hussein Obama from power and sweeping his Democrat supporters in the federal government into prison.
Since his unconstitutional inauguration, more and more U.S. citizens have become aware of his ineligibility to hold the office, and outrage and anger have spread throughout the nation and all social classes at Obama’s numerous decisions which have demeaned, denigrated, and dishonored the nation on the world stage.
As part of its coverage of the Obama regime, The Post & Email has been featuring regular reports on the impending Orange Revolution. As a thematic device we are predicting a non-violent revolution in the manner of the non-violent revolutions of the Ukrainian and Georgian Republics; however, The Post & Email has no actual knowledge that such a revolution is being planned.”
http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/01/12/orange-revolution-by-july-2011/
aarrgghh, I guess it is better that what Sven is usually fluffing at that time of the evening…
Or this paragraph…
“Since Obama does not hold the office constitutionally and his installation in said office was a collaborative effort of the entire U.S. Congress and Supreme Court, it follows that the American people are no longer obliged in law to either show allegiance or pay taxes to the federal government, which has thereby cut all ties it had to its own legitimacy.”
Yeah…I bet quite a few of these birfoons try to use this excuse to not pay their taxes. This April 15th will be the first year taxes are due from Obama’s term. We know the Tea Party crowd contains a lot of the anti-tax folks already (as well as a mix of birther buffoons) and there definitely seems to be some overlap.
I suspect some of the anti-taxers will really only be trying to use the birther nonsense as another excuse to try to get out of their tax obligations. I also suspect some of the birthers will be gullible enought to try to avoid their filings or think that doing so will be some form of “protest” as well.
Of course, they are all just going to get their butts kicked by the IRS and penalized as per the law.
But I do say we should keep an eye out for this theme as April 15th comes and goes this year – I’m sure there will be some drama around these fools trying to exploit this issue.
Hmmm…I suspect they are just once again dredging up the old kook Russian theory about America’s impending breakup as their basis for this fantasy:
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2008/12/29/russian-predicts-u-s-breakup-by-2010/
“Russian professor Igor Panarin has been predicting the eventual breakup of the United States in the year 2010 for more than a decade.”
Like many crazy predictions, those who desperately want to believe or to convince others of their “pending doom” just keep recycling the old stories and pushing out the dates for “doom” further and further as each “predicted milestone” fails to come to pass. I find it fascinating that aspects of the human condition are so susceptible to this stuff.
I also find it funny (and extremely ironic) that for a group of people who seem to be so always railing against “socialism” or “communism” and such that they keep looking to “russian sources” as their saviors or their evidence sources to back up their crazy theories – Pravda, Orly Taitz, Igor Panarin, etc.
A revolution of oranges? How entertaining.
Just as an aside, I find it appalling that with possibly 100,000 or more dead and complete devastation in a nearby country that anyone feels they have the luxury to waste even a second over an issue that was settled over 1 year ago. All Americans and all human beings should support President Obama and other world leaders in sending aid to Haiti.
then what are doing posting
Think about this, fool. You guys may attack him, but there is no other President. He’s the only game in town until 2012. You birthers cannot tell me who is actually the President if it isn’t Obama. So grow up and put the country and your fellow human beings first and stop wasting time and resources on this crap that doesn’t address a single real problem.
It’ll never live up to the Attack of the Killer Tomatos!
you can’t
Thank you, SFJeff. I knew we could find common ground and be friends.
Jozeppy;
You’re quoting the FAM publised during a post-racial identity America. Quote the FAM written in 1967.
Check out the activities of Maya Angelou in the late 60’s. It would have been considered racist to prevent an African American child from renouncing his US citizenship in the late 60’s. It would have been considered especially heinous if they had moved out of the US and into a another country to begin a new life and a bureaucrat from the US government said, “No! We’ve got you. You can’t renounce your US citizenship to become an Indonesian National.”
Burden of proof, man. You made the allegation, you support it with proof.
Show us the 1967 FAM, or find us an example of a six year-old that renounced their citizenship.
Why don’t YOU quote the 1967 FAM you lazy troll.
Thank you for helping me put the pieces of the puzzle together, Sven.
It’s apparent when Barry moved to Indonesia, the US State Department was under a policy not to interfere with African Americans who wished to ex-patriot themselves from the US and become citizens of their host country.
As with Maya Angelou, Barry and his mother determined after a few years it was a mistake to ex-patriot Barry.
In a policy reversal (which happens a lot), the US State Department provided Barry with travel documents, a free plane ticket and an escort back to America. A failed policy was successfully being reversed until Barry’s grandmother decided to void his adoption, as opposed to affirmatively re-establishing Barry’s US citizenship.
Barry’s grandmother incorrectly assumed voiding the Soetoro adoption would void Barry renouncing his US citizenship. Unfortunately, it’s not true. The law is clear. Barry would have to affirmatively pledge his oath of allegiance to an authorized Federal officer of the Executive Branch to re-establish his US citizenship.
The fatal error was trying to take care of the problem through the Judicial Branch of the government. Thus, the reason the Judicial Branch doesn’t want to deal with this issue at all.
Good morning, Doctor. How are you today?
Did you know that policies are written down?
And that when bureaucrats do things, they make a record of it?
Until you provide something that even hints of this, you are just spewing your wet-dreams, Dick/Sven.
We are assured by the greatest legal minds of our time (Donofrio, Apuzzo and Taitz) that citizenship and Natural Born Citizenship are two totally different species. Therefore, even if someone renounced ordinary, everyday citizenship, they would retain Natural Born Citizenship. The State Department procedures do not even mention a renunciation of Natural Born Citizenship. It is, it seems, a burden one must carry for life, even into the White House. There is no escape.
“Thank you, SFJeff. I knew we could find common ground and be friends.”
Well I am glad we agree as to what is possible versus what is probable.
And while I doubt you and I will ever become close buddies, one of my best friends thinks highly of Sarah Palin and while I will never understand or agree, that doesn’t mean that I can’t be friends with someone I disagree with regarding a political issue.
I think Sven is writing a book:
“Obama the Ursurper’s Life Story, an Unbiased and Truthy Account as only I Could Imagine it.”
This link provides a helpful summary of citizenship renunciation cases. The bottom line is that the renunciation must be done willingly, knowingly, and with full understanding of the consequences.
Even if Sven’s fantasy turned out to be accurate, a renunciation by a ten-year old in 1971 would never stand up to judicial scrutiny per the standards set by SCOTUS in Vance v. Terrazas 444 U.S. 25 (1980).
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/120533.pdf
Good evening, Sven. I am weary from traveling.
How are you, Rickey? Wouldn’t you agree presenting oneself to a FSO at a U.S. Embassy qualifies as a voluntary act? The FSO must be convinced the minor’s attempt to renounce is voluntary and without undue influence. Extensive reports are generated.
There is no way Barry can say is Loss of Citizenship is accidental or without intent.
THE TERRAZAS DECISION
Furthermore, it is State Department policy to notify a minor who has previously renounced their US Citizenship they have the right to rescind their renunciation until they are 18 years and 6 months with a filed form and an oath of allegiance before a sworn officer of the Executive Branch.
The fact of the matter is Barry chose not rescind his renunciation. He was rendered stateless when the Soetoro adoption was voided.
Dr. C please remove this maniac. Perhaps it is best to not even respond to this crap. Why does he think he NEEDS to see the PRESIDENT’S passport.
what part of “are protected by the Privacy Act of 1974, (5 USC 552(a))” do you fail to comprehend…
Actually that was the real usurper of POTUS; George W. Bush. He wasn’t elected the first time. He was “appointed” by congress and had his daddy hire a big shot lawyer to make sure he could have the honor of destroying our country and ignore the very constitution he was given (not voted) to uphold and protect. Those birfers have their presidents confused. Silly birfers. So stupid it’s almost cute.
Proof that any of this happened? Oh yeah, it’s just your wet dream.
You know, I somehow missed the documentation of the Soetoro adoption. Can you provide a link?
Of course not, there is no scintilla of evidence to support these fantasies. But it does fascinate me to see to what extent people are willing to deny President Obama his rightful place in our history.
History does seem to repeat itself, doesn’t it?
This newspaper clipping with the Nordyke twins came a few days after the Obama announcement ran, which further calls into question how Obama’s alleged certificate number can be higher than the Nordyke twins. A good private detective would contact all those families whose children are listed in the newspaper clipping and see if that certificate number really belongs to one of them. Or, better yet, the state of Hawaii could simply release the original long form, doctor-signed certificate
Yeah, we’ve been over the certificate number thing.
How about, instead of speculating on what a private investigator should do, you could: 1) hire a private investigator; or 2) do it yourself.
Anyone who questions why President Obama’s certificate number could be higher than someone born after him, obviously never worked in an office before the advent of computers. They worked with slips of paper that got stacked as they came in. Most likely, the newer ones got stacked on top of the older ones, and they were all given numbers the next week for the previous week. Since the numbers are so close together, I see no reason to doubt it’s authenticity.
Presuming I do it myself, you’ll accept the results when it’s learned the certificate number belongs to someone else??
Is this birth certificate the form you are looking for?
“Presuming I do it myself”
I would love to see you prove your allegations. Let us hear.
Because the numbers ARE so close together and out of sequence, despite being born on different days in a facility that would have averaged about 14 births per day, I find it highly unusual that the certificates of two babies born a day later, signed and filed three or four days later than Obama’s, would be lower in the sequence. Instead of assuming what might have happened, let’s demand that the state of Hawaii show us the original, doctor-signed birth certificate and see if it matches.
You haven’t answered the question. Would you accept the findings?? It’s easy to talk tough when you’re not going to be honest about the results.
It looks about as genuine as the alleged document posted at Fight the Smears, but, the answer is no.
“let’s demand that the state of Hawaii show us the original, doctor-signed birth certificate”
Honolulu Bureau of Conveyances: 808-587-0147.
Let us know. I’ll be watching this space for your answer.
hey ksdb
Sure, but we both know you won’t check, birthers never check facts so we know you won’t! the phone number and email contact is on Hawaii gove site. easy to check, dip sh_t!
(if they did they wouldn’t be birthers)
OK, we would love for you to check but we know you won’t accept the results! Every fact or statement by Hawaiin gov has not been accepted by birthers. but go ahead and check, will you admit you are an idiot if you get the wrong answer. No you won’t infact you won’t check, Will You?
Why all the animosity?? Also, I’m a proofer, not a birther. An original, doctor-signed birth certificate should vindicate Barry Soetoro’s integrity, if he has any. Besides, I’ve contacted the spokesbabe at the HI DOH already and she used a very sophisticated technique to assert that Obama’s COLB was real … she said it looked like hers. Later, she recanted when interviewed by Poltifact. The only ‘facts,’ since that time, are that the state of Hawaii has refused to confirm the authenticity of the alleged COLB.
Why on earth would I contact the Bureau of Conveyances??? What???
You Are a birther not a proofer as you are obviously not interested in the facts.
The State of Hawaii is on the record that President Obama was born in Hawaii and natural born.
Don’t you feel stupid now?
Show your research my dear foolish friend
Well that would rule out 99.9% of the birthers.. You see it’s not really about the evidence, it’s all about the insinuations
“Later, she recanted when interviewed by Poltifact. The only facts,’ since that time, are that the state of Hawaii has refused to confirm the authenticity of the alleged COLB.”
Links please.
Close but wrong Department… Of course the DOH is on the record that Obama was born on US soil and a natural born citizen.
Those nasty facts again…
We have no evidence. The director of the DOH made two undocumented statements, neither of which confirmed the authenticity of the alleged COLB. Then she made a statement that was not based on the original birth certificate, so in effect, it has no legal weight, especially her claim that Barry was a natural born American citizen. No documents maintained by her office have the capacity to make such a statement.
Yes, it is a good thing to ask for evidence that the original statement was recanted. If it was, how come it is still on the website?
“Why on earth would I contact the Bureau of Conveyances???”
What does it matter? You’ll never call.
You may demand all you like but you have no standing.
Bummer eh?
They confirm the facts on the birth certificate and since the birth certificate had the requisite seal and signature it is prima facie legal evidence.
And of course, people in her office have all the right to use logic to interpret whether or not President Obama is natural born, all it takes is birth on US soil.
Why do you take pride in hiding the most basic form of identification for citizenship for the most public figure in the world?? What could he possibly be hiding that this document can’t be released?? It has historical value too and it should vindicate. If you really believe in him and his pledge of transparency, you should want this document to be out there where everyone can see it.
So what does the COLB contain that remains contested?
Name of the Baby – Check
Date of Birth – Check
Hour of Birth – ?? but irrelevant
Name of mother – Check
Name of father – Check
City of Birth – Check
Sex – Check
Mother’s race – Check
Father’s race – Check
Signature – Check
Raised Seal – Check
Date filed – Within range of expectations
“An original, doctor-signed birth certificate ”
Do you know that this is a souvenir BC and is not accepted for a passport or any other legal reason, also the Hospital does not maintain BC records in any State, only State govs keep these records., in fact in Hawai they are only kept for 30 years (that’s all that is required by State law).
Most birther’s and Proofers’s don’t know this, do you?
The certificate Obama got is all that Hawai will supply, and it’s good enough for a passport. My daughter was born at Kapiolani in 1965, she had to request a state issued BC (short form was supplied) as her Hospital BC was not legal, it’s a souvenir only.
You don’t know any of this do you?
Don’t vote for Obama in 2012, no need to make up crap.
Why do you lie? The most basic form of identification for citizenship, the COLB has been provided.
That this has not stopped you from making silly assertions is just evidence that further releases are not going to make any difference.
You are just not interested in the truth.
Fukino wrote:
The original long-form is not simply a ‘souvenir.’ Please. Up until 2001, this was THE official birth document for obtaining passports … Obama’s alleged COLB was stamped with a June 2007 date. He had to use a different form of birth documentation prior to that to get a passport. So let’s see that birth certificate. Also, state law in Hawaii requires the original forms to be preserved and copies MUST BE PROVIDED UPON REQUEST. Learn the facts.
It hasn’t been authenticated by the issuing agency. And Obama’s COLB has typo that is inconsistent with database-driven, computer-generated forms. A jpg at a Web site is not acceptable evidence.
The statement of birth in Hawaii is not cited from the original birth certificate. Fukino says it’s from unspecified vital records. What records are more reliable than the original, doctor-signed birth certificate?? And again, NO DOCUMENT MAINTAINED BY THE DOH declares natural born citizenship. This is either an opinion or is based on an unofficial document. It’s a toothless statement.
It has, see the signature and raised seal. As to the so called typo, that’s a new assertion. Care to expand?
That you do not even know that according to the Federal Rules of Discovery this document is admissible in court as prima facie evidence is beyond me.
Sorry, but this is what is known as an out of court statement and it carries no legal weight without presenting the alleged vital records that were cited. It’s nice double speak, but it’s certainly not what you want to think it is.
I see you are observing the missing space between the day and the year, just like in other COLB’s released by Hawaii…
Took me 2 minutes…
Are you just lazy or unable to do research?
Presuming you do it yourself, ksdb, I’ll take Reagan’s advice, “Trust, but verify.”
Why don’t you go do it yourself, and give us some good proof, and see if we accept it.
ksdb: It hasn’t been authenticated by the issuing agency. And Obama’s COLB has typo that is inconsistent with database-driven, computer-generated forms. A jpg at a Web site is not acceptable evidence.
The document itself is authenticated in that it bears the signature of the state registrar and the seal of the state of Hawaii. It is a “certified copy” if you will. While the State of Hawaii has not commented on the computer image floating around the Internet, they have commented that Barack was born in Hawaii, which is the essential point. To say that the COLB itself hasn’t been authenticated is a distinction without a difference.
Typo? What, pray tell is this typo?
A jpg on a web site is not evidence but the document it was scanned from is. Be practical. A million Internet readers are not going to get their hands on any official document like this. We have to delegate that to others. FactCheck.org viewed the original and the State of Hawaii says Obama was born there. There really isn’t any reasonable doubt remaining.
No, the document itself is sufficient legal evidence and admissible in court. That the people at the DOH are supporting this with their official statements is just icing on the cake.
In the date filed, there is a space lacking between the day and the ,year.
However a comparison with other COLBs from Hawaii shows this to be a consistent feature. That by itself strengthens not weakens the veracity of the document.
Thanks to KSDB…
Check the back of the COLB. There is a stamped signature from the State of Hawaii, Alvin Onaka, in fact, that the COLB is a true and accurate copy or abstract of the original. So, Alvin’s swearing that it does, in fact, match.
So, you don’t need the original, just depose Alvin Onaka.
You do not know where the information came from but the fact that it was verified and found that Obama was indeed born on US soil shows that Obama is natural born.
A toothless statement with a nasty bite to those who keep denying the facts.
All we’ve seen is a jpg. No document has been presented to a bona fide reporter, document expert and last of all, not to a court of law.
The typo is on the date filed. It’s missing a space between the comma and year. Databases have this information stored as separate fields: month, day, year. Certainly all COLBs are pre-formatted and spit out information in the appropriate fields … the code would be something like mmmmm#dd,#yyyy with the # sign being a space between fields. There’s no way for that space to be missing if printed from a database. Other known COLBs don’t have the missing space. Such an error is indicative of being manually typed.
If this a Polarik COLB, then it speaks for itself. We have no way of validating the legitimacy of this particular COLB … and these ‘matching’ typos didn’t show up until I pointed them out to Polarik.
ksdb, that is all true. But today is not 2001. Today the State of Hawaii issues copies of birth certificates like the one Obama published. He ordered a copy and published what he got, and what he got is official, and prima facie evidence of what it says, namely Obama was born in Hawaii.
You can cite law, and policy all you want, and you can wave forms around all you want. But in the end, Obama’s published birth certificate says he was born in Hawaii, and you cannot make that go away. And if that weren’t enough, the Department of Health web site carries a letter from its head stating that the original records for Obama say he was born in Hawaii.
Those are the facts.
Sorry, but you’re falling prey to double speak. If the original, doctor-signed birth certificate verified that Obama was born in Hawaii, there’s no need to cite so-called ‘vital records’ in the plural. Again, it’s toothless and inconclusive.
And, after 2001, this was NOT the official birth document for obtaining passports.
In 2001, Obama was a state senator. He hadn’t even formed his committee to explore the possibility of running for US Senate.
And, in 2001, the State of Hawaii decided that the short form was sufficient to serve all its needs.
Citation, please?
Moving those goal posts. No, the Courts have rejected discovery based on lack of Constitutional standing. However, according to the Federal Rules of Evidence the documents (COLB) is admissible and prima facie evidence.
Check: Hawaii Birth Certificate
You are also misrepresenting that other COLBs do not have the missing space, I linked to one of them…
The birthers lied about the COLB. Why should they be given the opportunity to gain publicity by doing the same to the so-called long form?
ksdb: The director of the DOH made two undocumented statements
What do you mean by “undocumented”?
You also didn’t answer my question. Was that one of the COLBs posted by Polarik?? There were no other COLBs released by prior to my observation about the typo that included the same typo. Find one that doesn’t have the names covered up.
And, I’ve moved no goalposts. The Obama COLB at Fight the Smears does not have a seal and signature.
Not acceptable evidence where? In court? We’re not in court.
Do you want Obama to provide you with a personalized copy of his COLB?
To suspect that Obama put a forged COLB on the web is to enter into conspiracy-land. No one on his staff leaked the info about the forgery? Alvin Onaka didn’t check to see if the doc with his signature was real? The Republican governor and her political appointee, the head of the DOH, didn’t check? None of the many, many Republicans serving on the staffs of these Republicans checked?
The ones with “date filed” instead of “date accepted” show a missing space. Seems that during the change-over from showing the date accepted to showing the date filed, the template was messed up and a space was omitted. That this feature is available on other COLBs strengthens the veracity and authenticity of the document.
The Nordyke family wasn’t embarrassed to show their long form. What is Obama hiding??
No, she took the information she had, Obama born in Hawaii, and not a diplomat, and applied what every legal scholar of any importance in the past 200 years has said, and came to a conclusion.
Anyway, can we agree that Obama was born in Hawaii?
Why would Fukino lie about that?
Unless we see verifiable COLBs, you’re making a baseless assumption NBC.
There are various COLBs available, most of them have the info redacted. As I explained on the ones with date filed, the space is missing.
And yes, according to Dr C this was provided by Polarik.
ksdb: The statement of birth in Hawaii is not cited from the original birth certificate.
I consider your statement willful ignorance. What the hell do you think a vital record is?
You’re not a proofer; you’re a troll.
Now that is hilarious. I have shown you that there are at least two with ‘date filed’ which show the same ‘missing space’, caused likely by a formatting error.
Your assertion is the one truly baseless.
“The Obama COLB at Fight the Smears does not have a seal and signature.”
You can see the seal and signature here:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
I has been established beyond a reasonable doubt Obama was born in Hawaii. You are clinically insane.
ksdb: The Obama COLB at Fight the Smears does not have a seal and signature.
It has a seal (hard to see, but present). The signature is on the back, as indicated by FactCheck.org photos.
Every legal scholar more often concludes that both parents must be citizens or permanent immigrants in order for their children to be natural born citizens. Fukino’s statement that Obama was born in Hawaii was not based on the one document that is strongest evidence of place of birth: the original, doctor-signed birth certificate. There’s no logical reason it should be withheld.
The Factcheck photos are laughable. The embedded date that the photos were taken was three months EARLIER than this amateur site claimed they were taken. The document in their photographs is not the same one scanned at Fight the Smears.
Fukino’s statements’ prove absolutely nothing. She did not stipulate whether Obama’s original certificate of live birth was a delayed registration as outlined by Statute 338. If it is a delayed registration it would mean that the information was as a result of the mother reporting the information to the Registrar of Vital Statistics. There would be no official confirmation of any of the info provided by her so she could make up whatever. But of course there would also not be a hospital named or a delivery doctor’s signature, which would contradict Obama’s claim of being born at Kapi’olani Medical Center. Obama’s mother could easily have given birth out of the country, come home with Barack, and then registered his birth. The only way to be sure that Obama was born at the Kapi’olani Medical Center is to see the orginal birth certificate with the hospital name and doctor’s signature. Period.
On the contrary. You are creating your argument by interpreting statements in odd ways. “Vital records” means “birth certificate” (since in context it couldn’t refer to one of the other vital records like a death certificate). You are being willfully ignorant of normal English usage.
“Every legal scholar more often concludes that both parents must be citizens or permanent immigrants in order for their children to be natural born citizens.”
Name the scholars, and provide links. And we just moved the goalposts.
Sorry to disappoint you, but we’re not in court!
And you won’t get past the COLB if you get into court. It is sufficient evidence, on its own. It has a state seal, it is signed, the registrar has attested that it is a true and accurate copy or abstract.
It is self-authenticating, and it is admissible as an exception to the hearsay rule.
As for the statements of DOH, they can be used to impeach the testimony of them if you ever did get into court. So, it’s not like the officials at the DOH are going to be telling lies willy-nilly.
Which is why they are so relevant. If the typos were machine generated, one would have noticed a difference between Obama’s COLB and others. I have shown that in fact these COLBs show the same missing space.
It completely undermines your argument and in fact validates the authenticity of Obama’s COLB.
For that we should be grateful. Thanks KSDB…
That’s a total lie. In fact there are few scholars who have reached this conclusion and certainly even fewer in the early days when the Courts almost consistently held that natural born only requires birth and subject to jurisdiction.
Your lies are becoming tiresome. Or should we just blame ignorance?
Again ignoring the fact that the COLB does show a seal and signature. In fact, the seal is visible even in the scanned version, but requires some enhancements.
You fool
ksdb: I’m a proofer
So where’s your proof?
You’re more like the petulant child who keeps responding “why” no matter what you say. Hugely annoying.
I’ve asked TWICE if these were COLBs scanned by the infamous Polarik. It makes a difference because no one knows where these alleged COLBs came from or how authentic they are. Polarik showed how easy it was to forge COLBs and he was trying a little too hard to prove his own theories.
Right. Uh huh. They couldn’t have checked both the birth certificate AND the index data?
It could not be a delayed one as it was filed a few days after Obama’s birth.
Such foolishness…
That is entirely the question. Where is the proof that Obama’s COLB is genuine. The state of Hawaii REFUSES to say it is. I don’t claim have the proof … just that I want to see it and not a bunch of double talk and doctored evidence.
Don’t feed those two trolls.
And thus he managed to forge another COLB to validate Obama’s COLB?
Surely you must understand how incredible you sound.
At least your claim about the missing space has been shown to be contradicted by the known facts.
The fact that these COLB’s match in an area so inconspicuous that noone had noticed until recently indicates that the Obama COLB is most like authentic.
And for that observation we have you to thank.
I will be dedicating a posting on my site to your discovery…
The DOH has admitted that the data on the COLB is accurate and thus that Obama was born on US soil.
Too bad that your arguments are so foolish that you have to ignore the logical conclusions.
As I have shown, all the data shows the certificate to be authentic, including the now discovered ‘missing space’. What a find my friend. Your birther friends surely will admire you for your hard work
And yet, that is all you have to offer…
This has not been established by credible experts nor even the amateurs at Factcheck.
Oh yeah, if you enhance it and squint, it looks almost real. Please.
Find me one citation that says a child born of ONE citizen parent = natural born citizen. And stop the childish accusations of lies.
No, not even close. Schuck and Smith wrote “Citizenship without Consent,” and they’re the only scholars who state anything close to that – they think that illegal aliens shouldn’t be able to grant birthright citizenship. Of course, even they think that the current state of the law is that anyone born here is a natural born citizen. They propose a change to the Constitution to fix that problem.
Other than those two, the closest you can find in the past 200 years is AP Morse’s 1904 article. He doesn’t say that children of aliens wouldn’t be citizens, just that it would be odd if they would be eligible for the Presidency while those born abroad to US citizen parents would not.
Other than Donofrio, Taitz and Apuzzo, (who aren’t real scholars) there are NO legal scholars other than the ones I’ve named above that even come close to what you’ve claimed.
Absolutely wrong. If she meant birth certificate, she would have said THE birth certificate. Also keep in mind, Hawaiian law says it’s illegal to provide any information contained on original vital records such as birth certificates. IOW, if the original birth certificate said Obama was born in Hawaii, Fukino would be breaking state law by making that statement. If she got permission to reveal that information, she could have also got permission to say that it came directly from the birth certificate. So again, there’s no reason to say anything about vital records unless she’s talking about something other than the birth certificate. Also, she makes it a point to separate her statement from the one that she DID make about the original birth certificate … so she is clearly NOT sourcing it to say Obama was born in Hawaii. Therefore, it has no legal or substantive value.
Wong Kim Ark established the Chinese Exclusion Act did not apply, because Ark was born in San Francisco.
Neither of Ark’s parents were citizens. In fact, they returned to China with their son; they did not intend to stay. When Ark returned, he ultimately was declared a NBC.
You really should familiarize yourself with the 14th Amendment.
Ever read B’rer Rabbit?
“Please, oh, please, don’t throw me in that briar patch!”
Why not release the long form?
Because you guys are the gang that cannot shoot straight!
By this time in Clinton’s presidency, the legal-eagles that were ginning up the Whitewater conspiracy had already driven Vince Foster to suicide. They were weeks away from an independent prosecutor.
You guys, by contrast, are focusing on nonsense, squandering every ounce of legal credibility that the Republicans could possibly have. Want to disqualify Hillary from SOS because of the emoluments clause? Sorry, the birthers have already sucked the air out of the room. Want to sue to challenge the ability of the President to force a bankruptcy through? Hmm. That sounds kinda birthery to me.
You birthers are a President’s wet-dream! Give me morons for enemies, who will focus on nonsense!
The index data is derived from the original birth certificate … and the only information that can legally be released from index data is name, gender and type of vital event. It doesn’t allow the release of the place of birth. Index data is not a vital record … but a listing of vital records.
If she checked the birth certificate AND the index record, wouldn’t that be vital records?
Couldn’t it be, possibly, the birth certificate PLUS something else?
The Wong Kim Ark decision was dependent on the parents being PERMANENT immigrants making their domicile and doing business in the United States. Obama’s father was clearly not a permanent immigrant and even Obama’s mother was not what you would a long-term resident of the United States.
Since the DOH validated the location to be Honolulu they must have verified the original data.
The Court clearly indicated that any child born on US soil would be a natural born citizen. As such the logic that the court followed in unescapable.
You know your talking points but lack any depth or understanding.
But we do appreciate your help in validating Obama’s COLB due to the missing space…
Remember your original argument about a missing space and other COLB’s not showing such a missing space. Since you obviously limited yourself to older COLB’s which mentioned date accepted, you missed the simple fact that for ‘date filed’ COLBs the space is indeed lacking.
As such this validates the Obama COLB even more.
For that I am incredibly grateful as this independent finding by a birther should lay to rest any doubts.
There may not be original data … and of course, that might explain why Obama didn’t release an original certificate. Maybe the place of birth was only declared through supplementary documentation. Notice how on the newspaper announcements, a place of birth is not listed, so we are left only to guess or rely on ambiguous statements.
Are you a troll, or merely clinically insane?
John Guendelsberger, “Access to Citizenship for Children born Within the State to Foreign Parents,” 40 Am. J. Comp. Law 379 (2002).
Henry Ide, “Citizenship by Birth, Another View,” 30 Am. L. Rev. 241 (1896).
Bernadette Meyler, “The Gestation of Birthright Citizenship,” 15 Geo. Immigr. L. J. 519 (2000)
James C. Ho, “Unnatural Born Citizens and Acting Presidents,” 17 Const. Comment. 575 (2000).
Randall Kennedy, “A Natural Aristocracy?” 12 Const. Comm. 175 (1995), “It is important that a formal proposition of American life is that every native-born American child could conceivably grow up to become president.”
George Collins, “Citizenship by Birth,” 29 Am. L. Rev. 385 (1896)
Johnathan Drummer, “The Nephews of Uncle Sam,” 9 Geo. Immigr. L. J. 667 (1995)
Charles Gordon, “Who can be President of the United States: The Unresolved Enigma,” 28 Md. L. Rev. 1 (1968) (“It is clear enough that native-born citizens are eligible and that naturalized citizens are not.” )
Warren Freedman, “Presidential Timber: Foreign born Children of American Parents,” 35 Cornell L.Q. 357 (1949-50).
Van Dyne, “Citizenship of the United States,” p. 32 (1904) (“it is almost universally conceded that citizenship by birth in the United States was governed by the principles of the English Common Law.”)
Hon. Pinckney McElwee, “Natural born citizen,” reproduced in 1967 Cong. Rec. 15875.
Those are just the ones in my google docs. I have a half-dozen or more left.
Can you cite me a single scholar who has published a real article stating your view?
The Wong Kim decision was not premised on his parents being permanent residents. That barely got mentioned in the case.
Whether Obama’s father was a permanent domiciliary, however, is not determined in retrospect. It’s determined at, in this case, at the instant of Obama’s birth. At that point, Obama Sr. had married a Hawaiian citizen, was being educated at a Hawaiian University and had a fixed address.
It’s not a cut and dried question whether Obama Sr. had developed a domicile in Hawaii.
You guys are so cute, pretending to know law and stuff. One of the first things they teach you when you get out of law school is to remember common sense. You’ll need it to relate complex information to the jury.
In common sense, if I’m checking the files to see if there’s an adoption record for Obama (because the birthers have claimed he was adopted either in Hawaii or Indonesia) and checking other files to run down other birther rumors, I might say I checked the “vital records.”
Of course, common sense says that “vital records” sounds better than “vital record,” so I might say that even though I’d only checked the birth certificate.
Of course, you and common sense have had a falling out, haven’t you? You want Fukino’s statement to have zero weight, except, of course, where she says she checked plural records.
Oh, and the division within the DOH that handles birth certificates? Vital Records. Plural.
Nonsense, the info was filed a few days after Obama was born.
There is no evidence to support your ignorance.
But I do thank you for certifying the authenticity of Obama’s COLB.
Don’t be desperate, you meant well.
Ouch, that must sting…
Shows you how ill prepared these birthers really are.
But accuracy is not their goal really…
Actually that’s exactly what it says in Vattel. I’m surprised you didn’t check.
When I read claptrap like this I have to wonder, have birthers even read Wong Kim Ark, do they assume we haven’t, or both? Please, quote exactly where the court stated that you are required to have permanent immigrant parents to be a natural born citizen (and I thought birthers claimed they had to be citizens, not just residents).
every time ksdb is shown his error he comes back with another birther talking point, he has a severe learning disabilty caused hating Obama. (common among birthers) He avoids showing proof because he has none, answering him is a waste of time, it’s time to ignore the troll. No more responses to an idiot please!
he said ” A good private detective would contact all those families whose children are listed in the newspaper clipping and see if that certificate number really belongs to one of them.” when he said he may do it, he lied, he won’t do it, birthers lie and are idiots!
Misha: “Are you a troll, or merely clinically insane?”
A perfect example, two examples in fact, of what I wrote before about pathological beliefs.
Belief is disconnected from truth, and contrary evidence actually reinforces the belief.
There is absolutely nothing anyone here could say or do that could change these people’s minds. Nothing.
Their pathological refusal to accept that Obama could legitimately be the President obviously has its source in some kind of deep-seated racism, but you’d need hours of treatment to ferret it out.
As an aside, when President Obama visited France last year, much bally-ho was made by our local press of the fact that he had visited Provence during his student years and according all verifiable evidence, he identified himself and/or was identified as an American student.
And as ashamed as I am to admit it, he would have been treated very much differently by the authorities, to begin with, if he’d been from a so-called third-world country such as Indonesia, a Kenyan, or some kind of refugee with dubious documents. An American passport, especially back then, made you one of the Masters of the Universe. Women would show you their titties, etc. (I’m joking.)
There really is a preponderance of evidence to indicate that Obama was exactly what he claimed to be: an American tourist.
you nor I have seen a birth certificate for BOH anything spoken is only by DOH is hear say and not fact or proof
sir i feel sorry for your shallowness
I got sucked into his game at first. Then I realised he’s pathological.
They always start out asking a semi-plausible question, and then half way down the page…uh, oh.
That’s when I realised I was a fool for even looking into the rabbit hole, much less putting my foot into it.
I have to fix my radar.
We put up with 8 years of someone with a criminal record, and none of these people said a word. Look at their CV:
GWB: misdemeanor conviction
Agnew: felony conviction
Nixon: resigned in disgrace
Cheney: told Senator Leahy to ‘go f… yourself’
And of course making a case for war with Iraq, out of whole cloth. No wonder European progressives look at us, and wonder what went wrong. Bush said he does not believe in evolution.
True story: when President McKinley was told the US had won the Philippines, he was asked what he wanted to do. He actually had to look at a map, to find out where it was. He then said an angel appeared, and told him it was our duty to Christianize them. The fool didn’t even know that Catholic missionaries had baptized just about everyone there.
And don’t get me started on the home schoolers…
The truth does hurt, doesn’t it?
Mission Failed
Obama’s birth certificate was available for inspection and scanned and photographed. What more do you want…
so make him do this or are you shallow?
he said ” A good private detective would contact all those families whose children are listed in the newspaper clipping and see if that certificate number really belongs to one of them.” when he said he may do it, he lied, he won’t do it, birthers lie and are idiots!
She’s not “the babe.” She runs the place. If you refer to the President by his step father’s name you are nothing but a birther in proofer disguise. Get a life. I personally know people who used the name of a step parent and were never legally adapted. He was in an Islamic country where name change is not accepted and birth family identity is extremely important. I know it is tempting to believe that western values and customs prevail everywhere when they do not. For some reason, his step father tried to pass the President off as his own son. Why? I do not know.
ksdp, my Transcript of Birth from the State of New York contains less information than the COLB. It does not even name the city I was born in. Yet, it is an official document with which I can get a Driver’s License, a passport and yes, ksdp, run for President of the United States. The information on it verifies the information on my origingal Birth Certificate which I lost. New York, like Hawaii does not hand those out. My grandson, born in Oregon in August, has a certificate much like the COLB. He will never need or see a certificate like the one you demand for the President. The hospital did prepare very pretty documents with footprints and signatures. These were carefully labeled so they could not be used for legal purposes. While I was at the hospial I checked, and the information from the delivery was taken and sent to the State of Oregon. They then processed it and sent our little guy’s parents an Oregon document. That’s the way it is done now. It is called reality. I’ll say it again. All the information on the COLB came from the original information given by the hospital. It was then sent to the State of Hawaii to keep. He was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961. He is old enought to be President. He resided in the US for 14 years. My dad always told us there were needas, wantas and dreamas in life. You don’t need, you only want to fulfill a dream that this man is not your President. He is. Get a life.
Fukino is the Director of the Hawaii Dept of Health, which is the agency charged with maintaining vital records. She does not have to provide information about any underlying facts — the name of the hospital is irrelevant. All that is relevant is the official record, and whatever information is required by law to be maintained as the official record.
The “official” confirmation is Fukino herself — because she is the “official” whose job is to maintain the records.
There is no question Fukino would have consulted the Certificate of Live Birth. I think most likely Fukino was using the “bureaucratic records” sort of like the “royal we”. For example, someone had a background check; the police might say: “we have reviewed his records and found no serious offenses” when all that existed was a single parking ticket. In data systems everyone has “records” whether it be one or many: that’s just how folks talk.
ksdb: If she meant birth certificate, she would have said THE birth certificate.
You just made that up. You don’t have a clue what she would or would not have said. I on the other hand am on a first name basis with several state registrars and I work with vital records staff on a daily basis. What they hold in their databases are “vital records” and what the print and give to people are “birth certificates.” Now we all know that technically what the hospital provides the state is a birth certificate, but that’s not the way it’s described in normal conversation. That’s even more true today when hospitals report births electronically and there IS no Certificate of Live Birth beyond what states print out of their databases.
ksdb: Oh yeah, if you enhance it and squint, it looks almost real. Please.
Flatbed scanners tend to hide wrinkles and imprints. It’s the nature of the device.
I give you leave to keep posting your nonsense, but I recognize the futility of replying to someone with their fingers jammed in their ears and babbling so as not be able to hear what others say. The observation that you’re better informed that the average birther makes your willful misinterpretations all the more offensive.
DNFTT
Can you provide a link to a story about that trip to Provence?
The word is hearsay – one word. Why don’t you take a look at the rules that govern hearsay.
First, the statement by the DOH can’t be hearsay, because we’re not in court.
If you brought a case and then put Fukino on the stand, her testifying about what she had done to verify Obama’s birthplace would also not be hearsay – she would be the declarant. It would be testimony – fact and proof.
You might also look at the things that are exceptions to the hearsay rule:
and
So, when Obama’s sister says he was born in Hawaii, when his grandmother says he was born in Hawaii, that’s admissible evidence.
Also, any statement by Obama, such as the entire book he wrote, or his 2004 DNC Keynote Speech, are admissible evidence.
Speaking of dubious documents … if Barry visited France as a student, where’s the birth certificate he used to obtain a passport?? His alleged COLB is dated June 2007 so he had to have used something else to travel or obtain a passport prior to 2007. Where is that certificate and why not show it??
Here’s Okubo’s recant:
“Still, she acknowledges: “I don’t know that it’s possible for us to even say beyond a doubt what the image on the site represents.”
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/
So she goes from the highly scientific document-authentification technique of ‘it looks like mine’ to ‘I don’t know.’
Have you ever had a passport? You don’t need to reshow your documents to renew it, you just send in the old passport and new photos. Obama hasn’t needed to show that BC to get a passport since his first over-age-16 one.
Did you miss that the election is over? These “issues” have irrelevant been for over a year. Try to keep up.
I’m not concerened about perceived credibility from people who justify the un necessary hiding of one of the most basic identification forms. When you focus on personality rather than the facts, it shows you lack a strong foundation and confidence in your own argument. There were no COLBs posted prior to my observation that contained that typo. Within a few days, Polarik suddenly had three that were not posted anywhere else.
We don’t have ‘known facts,’ just some jpgs from a guy trying to prove his own theories based on pixellation and halos, etc.
How about if we find an authentic COLB first that comes from an independent source and not from someone who overanalyzes pixels and halos. If you’re certain about the facts, tell me the names of the people these COLBs belong to.
Instead of snarky belittlement, how about using a little common sense and seeking truth?? Raise your game.
Young Obama had his first passport when he was about 6, since he needed one to leave Hawaii and move to Indonesia….Since he traveled he renewed his passport when it became due so he never had to reshow his documents…Nice try though…
KDSB addresses the President as Barry Soetero, which shows she is a birther. Because anyone that is not a birther would never address someone by a name where there has been no legally admissible evidence that the person ever went by that name. Besides when Leo and Miss Tickly contacted the state of HI, they verified that there was never a Barry Soetero but there was a Barack Obama II that was born in HI…
“I personally know people who used the name of a step parent and were never legally adapted.”
President Ford was born Leslie Lynch King Jr. Mitt Romney’s full name is Willard Mitt Romney. His father, who ran for president, was born in Mexico at a Mormon polygamist compound.
http://newyorkleftist.blogspot.com/2009/06/famous-willards.html
Ed, and you have some sort of proof that happened, right? You guys come up with the most ridiculous theories and think that anyone with any common sense would believe in that nonsense. Which is more plausible…That Obama was born in HI as his COLB states, which was filed 4 days after his birth (so it cannot be a delayed filing) and the newspaper report supports it. And the director of vital statistics states that her records show he was born in HI. Or that somehow Barack Obama’s mother was in Kenya near the time of his birth, even though there is no evidence to support that, had a baby, was able to somehow make it from Kenya to HI even though there were no direct flights no jet travel, snuck the baby past immigration, and was able to force the state of HI to file his birth as a birth in Honolulu….Really? And that makes sense to you?
“I personally know people who used the name of a step parent and were never legally adapted.”
When my mother re-married, I legally took my step-father’s last name, but he never adopted me.
The official white house transcript is here:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the_press_office/transcript-of-the-interview-of-the-president-by-laura-haim-canal-plus-6-1-09/
The relevant graph is:
Q What do you love about France, if I may ask?
THE PRESIDENT: Well, let’s see. We got the food. We’ve got the — we’ve got Paris. We’ve got the south of France — Provence — the wine.
Q The wine? Did you go to Provence?
THE PRESIDENT: You know, I have traveled through the south of France when I was in college. I haven’t been back for a long time. And so I need to — I need to get back there.
—
And right he is. He should come back for a second visit.
“He should come back for a second visit.”
Would he be admitted with a misdemeanor conviction?
You are not interested in the truth. You have shown you will do anything, including the torture of logic, to avoid addressing the facts.
You made an important observation of a missing space and now we have independent data that shows that instead of this being evidence of a forgery, it strengthens the authenticity of the document.
That you now desperately are moving the goalposts is fascinating but it’s too late.
As I have pointed out, the truth and facts show that President Obama was born on US soil.
Let the moving of goalposts begin…
I do appreciate your contribution to establishing the veracity of these facts, even when you were aiming for the opposite. That by itself makes the evidence so powerful.
remember you are writing to a birther, you have to write more slowly!
It doesn’t matter when he last needed his birth certificate to get a birth certificate … at some point he had one before June 2007, so why didn’t he show the earlier document??
Remember the argument of our friend ksdb? (2008/07/15)
I have shown that:
1. There is a reason for the missing space, when the template changed to printing date filed instead of date accepted.
2. There is in fact a known birth certificate which does show a missing space.
This of course not only totally undermines your argument but also establishes the authenticity of Obama’s COLB. Which combined with the statements from DOH, shows him indeed born on US soil.
You then observed
And indeed such photographs exist.
Bummer…
This is very misleading since Obama could have been traveling on his mother’s passport and not his own. Plus when traveled BACK to the United States, evidence shows he may have been an Indonesian citizen. To get his own U.S. passport … regardless of when he did and how old he was, he had to have one prior to June 2007 … plus he says in one of his own books that he had an older birth certificate. It’s time to stop making lazy excuses.
Show me a photograph that shows the full back of the birth certificate so that you can see if Obama’s name bleeds through on the same document that contains the seal and signature. I’ll wait … and wait … and wait.
back
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_7.jpg
seal
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_1.jpg
stamp
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_9.jpg
full
http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_2.jpg
view more photos here (high res)
but you won’t accept them, so why bothher!
Because he submitted it with his application? Again, your torture logic and reason.
And what is wrong with showing the latest COLB? Nothing….
I have addressed all alleged facts and explained when there are no facts. Most of what you consider to be ‘facts’ are just careless assumptions and wishful thinking.
You haven’t shown any independent data. I’ve directly challenged your Polarik COLBs as being unverifiable and you’ve FAILED to prove that they are.
I haven’t moved goalposts. Please focus.
There are no facts showing that Obama was born on U.S. soil. We have an alleged COLB, a few ignorant claims and a statement that was not based on an original birth certificate. Sorry, but even bigfoot is better documented than this.
As soon as we establish any facts, I’ll let you know. So far we have undocumented claims and a few photoshopped jpgs.
There is no such evidence, but there is evidence that when he returned to the US, he used his own passport.
You are still denying the simple fact that he provided his latest COLB which shows him born on US soil, that you thus are now torturing the meaning of natural born or moving to the ‘he was an indonesian citizen’ shows that you have no interest in the truth, just an interest in one outcome only.
And yet rather than showing evidence of Obama’s COLB being a forgery, we now have evidence to the contrary and it is up to you to show how Obama’s COLB with the ‘missing space’ is unique, as the evidence so far suggests that COLB’s from the same period, show the same missing space.
The single, most reliable record for proving a claim of birth is an original, doctor-signed birth certificate. Fukino says her state holds one for Obama. She has not cited that document as the source for her statement that Obama was born in Hawaii … and she has not in any capacity confirmed that the alleged COLB is authentic. Statements based on secondary documentation, that isn’t even identified, has diminished legal capacity. Why accept a second-best claim when it should be able to verified with an original, doctor-signed birth certificate??
And thus the denial continues…
In other words when these documents supported your argument, you accepted them without any problem but now that they undermine your claims, they are suddenly ‘unverifiable’.
You do a great job at further undermining your own argument and credibility.
As to the facts of Obama’s birth on US soil:
1. The COLB provided by Obama shows him born on US soil.
2. The DOH of Hawaii has verified his birth in Honolulu.
3. The COLB is a prima facie, legally admissible document with a signature and seal.
As to careless assumptions may I remind you that it is you who are the guilty party… Such as your claims about Natural Born, the Indonesian citizenship claims, and so on.
As I observed, you are not interested in the truth, you are interested in being right and up to now you did not even know of the existence of the 2007 COLB which shows a similar missing space.
Fail…
There’s nothing in Hawaiian law that says a delayed certificate would prevent a birth announcement from being included on the list of births published in the paper. I don’t think Obama’s certificate fit the ‘delayed’ category, but it may have required supplementary information, thus a possibility for whatever ‘vital records’ were used by Fukino to make her Hawaiian birth claim … except that such records would be protected from public disclosure by law, just like the original birth certificate.
It’s as reliable as the its shortform version which is prima facie legally admissible evidence.
The Courts would accept the COLB, why won’t you.
Fukino is on the record as saying that based on her data Obama was born on US soil. That is far more credible than your tortured claims.
Maybe he lost it? I’ve had to write to the State of Kansas at least twice to replace lost birth certificates.
The COLB, if it is submitted to the court as it appears online, with seal and signature, would suffice to prove his birthplace.
You would then have to produce real evidence that called that birthplace into question. Not speculation, not supposition based on “vital records” versus “vital record.” You’ve got nothing.
Will you concede that the birth certificate is a vital record?
So, if Fukino checked the birth certificate and one other document, then she checked the vital records (plural), right?
You cannot claim, then, that she didn’t check the birth certificate.
Finally, someone with integrity … better be careful or you’ll be accused of being a birther too.
Yes, the COLB is the default certificate that is issued when requests come in. This is sensible and expedient … BUT, if you want copies of your original documents you are legally entitled to get copies and the state must comply with such requests, at reasonable expense to the requestor. Such documents are requested frequently by people doing genealogical and/or adoption research, in the latter case to help track down birth parents or other types of family information.
I’m not trying to make anything ‘go away.’ The so-called published birth certificate has not been confirmed as an authentic legal document by the very agency that would have been responsible for issuing it. There’s no compelling practical or even legal reason not to do so. Sorry, but I expect better proof than ‘it looks real’ or ‘the state says that other vital records say Obama was born there.’ If your kid wanted to play in the Little League, a jpg on a Web site isn’t going to do it. And the State Department doesn’t accept jpgs as proof for securing a passport.
Except we don’t know what original records these are and what legal weight said records carry. We do know she’s not talking about a birth certificate.
She didn’t show any documents to the public to backup her statements.
This isn’t true. Reporters had been asking for the birth certificate for several months and were never invited to inspect the birth certificate. Factcheck inexplicably posted photographs, but only AFTER the DOH made public statements indicating that the previously redacted certificate number was harmless and that they were prevent from disclosing any information about birth records. IOW, once it was clear the DOH wasn’t going to verify the COLB, they could release a false certificate number without fear of being exposed.
Was she lying? A Republican appointee?
Your posted is filled with inaccuracies. A) I am a male, B) I’m a proofer, not a birther, whatever the hell that is, C) Obama evidently went by the name Barry Soetoro and Obama has not disputed this fact, D) Leo and MT did not verify that Obama never went by the name Soetoro, only that the state denied having any vital records under that name, E) they also did not verify that Obama was born in Hawaii … nobody has … all requests for such specific information have been denied.
Learn the facts. Accept them.
Citation please?
She’s talking about vital records. A birth certificate is a vital record. If she checked that and one other document, she’s checked vital records (plural). If she’s checked the birth certificate and confirmed there are no other documents (fetal death certificate, for example) then she’s checked the vital records (plural).
ksdb: Permit me to cut to the chase here. Obama is the President until January 2013, whether you like it or not and you shouldn’t delude yourself that any of your “questions” will change that. There are plenty of serious problems in the US and the world. Obama’s birth documents are not one. Grow up and try to use your time on earth wisely.
No, they made two CLAIMS: one claim is not contained in ANY vital record for which the DOH has official capacity and the other claim was not sourced from a verifiable document. This means whatever ‘accuracy’ you have faith in is legally infirm.
Yes, you’re real good at trying to argue by intimidation with namecalling and belittling, but I’ve challenged you on every point you’ve brought up. If logic was really on your side, you wouldn’t resort to such childishness.
All you’ve shown is some unverified jpgs and unverified claims … none of which could be admitted in a court or accepted by the state department or even the Little League.
I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai’i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen.
He was born in Hawaii. So sayeth Fukino. So sayeth the COLB.
You’re right that a jpeg isn’t admissible in court, but we’re not in court. The jpeg was considered acceptable to the majority of Americans – he was elected to the Presidency. You guys missed your opportunity to sue to disqualify Obama from the primary elections or from the state ballots. That was your only chance. Now you’ve missed your shot. You’re not going to get a personalized copy of OBama birth certificate.
If you don’t like it, convince like-minded Americans in 2012 that he’s not a loyal American.
Of course, never said it wasn’t.
The key word is ‘IF,’ because she refused to say what vital records she’s referring to. IF it was the birth certificate, that one vital record would be sufficient for the claim, so there’s no need talk about any other vital records, unless the original birth certificate does not contain that information. If not, the question is why not and what information is on it??
She obviously checked if the state has one, but we don’t know if she checked to see what information is on it. There should be no need to settle for an ambiguous statement.
Using anything but your legal name on official paperwork would constitute fraud. And if you aren’t ‘adapted’ then you would still need to legally change your name.
As I pointed out, there’s not a single legal authority out there, other than Taitz, Donofrio and Apuzzo, that thinks Obama’s citizenship is in doubt if he was born in Hawaii. If you think his father’s citizenship disqualifies Obama, the BC is irrelevant to that argument.
You’re not familiar with the law, are you? Her statement has legal significance and if she testified the same way in court, it would be admissible.
Why aren’t you offering this advice to the host of this Web site. I’m responding to its posts that are trying to support the veracity of Obama’s alleged birth documents. Why are you here?? Couldn’t your time be used more wisely??
Wrong and wrong the way you think.
1. It cannot be fraud unless it was done with the intent to defraud.
2. You don’t have to do anything other than use a name to legally change it.
Google “common law name change.”
Would the one vital record really be sufficient? Maybe she wanted to make sure there were no supplemental documents that dispute the birth certificate.
What’s her motive to lie?
No document maintained by the DOH contains any statements about persons being a ‘natural born American citizen.’ This statement on its face is an outright lie. Therefore I can’t place full value on the claim that Obama was born in Hawaii, especially when Fukino refuses to verify that the alleged COLB is authentic. Neither should you.
Right. Obama didn’t release his alleged COLB until after he’d won the primaries. We had no reason to sue because we thought Mr. Transparency would do the right thing. Lawsuits, as you’re probably well aware, did eventually get filed, but unsuccessfully. As of this week, at least one legislator (in Arizona) is pushing to add a requirement on their state ballots for presidential candidates to prove they are Constitutional eligible to hold the office of POTUS.
I don’t want a ‘personalized’ copy, just a copy that can be corroborated as authentic by an appropriate authority. Amateur factchecking Web sites are not an appropriate authority.
I don’t like to speak for others, but I suspect Dr C would be happy to shut his web site down if you guys would accept simple reality and move on. And what caused you to show up all of a sudden? You certainly aren’t bringing any new information.
Rather than talking about what you intend to investigate, you would be wiser to do the investigation first and then report the findings (if any).
@ksdb:
My cat was born in Philadelphia, but I don’t have his original birth certificate.
I want to register him to vote. So do you think I could get an absentee ballot for him?
He’s waiting for your advice.
Any state document such as a COLB would suffice. The “Full faith and credit” clause requires any state to accept birth documents from any other state in whatever form they are furnished. Any attempt to oppose some “two citizen parent” standard or some other such nonsense would be overturned.
Baloney! He released the COLB in July 2008. You guys waited until the election was over to sue. You snoozed, you lose…
Really … ??
No document maintained by the DOH asserts that Obama was born on earth either. But, since it is universally accepted that Hawaii is on Earth, it’s not a lie that she can confirm he was born on Earth.
Your (Taitz/Donofrio/Apuzzo’s) legal theory is accepted by zero legal authorities. It is as accepted in the legal community as much as the theory that Hawaii is on the moon is accepted in the astronomical community.
If you seriously thought that Obama’s father’s citizenship could make Obama a non-citizen, you knew all the relevant facts as soon as Obama left the stage in 2004. Actually, you knew the relevant facts when his first book was published.
Your group was circulating rumors before the primaries were over. Why didn’t you file a lawsuit then?
The law doesn’t reward those who sit on their rights.
Except, not a jpg of an alleged COLB.
Not so much, especially not a jpg. If the state department requires an original certified copy of the birth document, then there’s no reason the same expectation would not apply to any state requesting same.
Or not. We won’t know until it actually goes to court.
He released the alleged COLB on June 12, 2008, AFTER Hillary had conceded. No one knew Obama was going to be so defiant about producing an original document or that it would necessitate legal action for something so basic. What a pathetic creep.
You’ve waited much too long already. Next Wednesday completes one year of Obama’s Presidency.
You can see nine high-resolution photographs of Obama’s Hawaiian certification of live birth at http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html. If the particular view you want is not among them, cry hard.
Certainly as long as it doesn’t have any red flags on it, such as unnecessarily redacted information or inexplicable typos.
We shouldn’t have to guess what else she would have looked at. That’s what transparency is all about. Show it all. He’s a public figure. He does not have a legal expectation of privacy.
My guess is to protect Obama, but again, we shouldn’t have to guess because these documents should have been released outright.
You don’t actually link to the source. What you cite doesn’t contradict what I wrote:
Anyway, I’m sure you’ve gone to the Hawaii newspapers and found the publication of Obama’s name change to Soetoro, right?
In order for Hawaii to recognize a change, it must be published in a newspaper of general circulation. So, if Obama did, in fact, change his name to Soetoro, you should be able to find that publication.
So you’re thinking Obama submitted an original birth certificate and didn’t get it back?? Talk about tortured logic. There would be nothing wrong with the ‘latest’ COLB as long as it can be properly authenticated.
The State of Hawaii has its own laws. It has read those laws to forbid it to release more information than they have released so far. His lack of an expectation of privacy (he can still have sex in private, right? so your assertion that he has no expectation of privacy is obviously false) doesn’t override Hawaiian privacy laws.
Of course Obama and all other candidates would provide an original. But it will be whatever form of document their birth state currently issues. And just how would you like a candidate to make documents available to the voters? Order 150 million official copies?
Just out of curiosity can you provide me the original birth documents for all previous Presidents and major candidates for the Presidency? And please no b.s. None of them provided it so they are all usurpers. That’s what the term “equal under the law means”, my friend.
This post about the Nordyke twins birth announcement. It fortifies the suspicion that the certificate number on the Factcheck COLB is fraudulent.
I’ve simply been responding to old criticisms that are flawed. Blame the faithers who illogically justify the hiding of a basic birth document.
First, I don’t think you or any of the other faithers would accept my report. Most responses here have been various types of personal attacks. Second, I would like to see an independent third party do the research … someone who would be credible to proofers or to faithers.
We’re not in court. He wasn’t submitting the document to a court. The appropriate authority was the voting public. They took a look at the document and found it sufficient to confirm Obama’s citizenship.
Nordyke has said that her labor was very long.
Occam’s razor still says that we take the simple explanation – she got her certificate when she checked in – over the much more complicated explanation. (Someone forged Obama’s birth certificate, Obama forged his COLB, the DOH conspired to cover up this forgery, and no one noticed this in a billion dollar Presidential campaign.)
Make him a jpg. It worked for Obama.
He told that his father was a foreign student in his book which was published in 1995. He reiterated this in his DNC Keynote Address in 2004.
If his father’s citizenship could call his citizenship into question, nothing in the birth certificate could change that, and you’ve known about it for 22 years!
The reality is nobody other than the birthers cares. There is nothing one could do with the information.
And really, suppose you came up with some discrepancy in the numbers, so what would that prove? There is no one alive who could testify as to the specifics of how birth records in Hawaii were handled in 1961 and what possible errors could have been made.
Besides, I am a scientist and I require a control in any study to be believeable. In this case, the control would be to examine the birth records of a sampling of other Presidents and see if they stood up any better than Obama’s. Now stop wasting time here and get busy-you have a lot of work to do!
What an idiotic person ksdb is, his tortured posts prove that. He appears to be severely mentally challanged. He should just go back to WND ____ off Chuck Norris.
This Alice in Wonderland speak is tiresome. The fact that these certificate numbers are so close would be seen by any reasonable person as confirming evidence.
But not someone who is invested in not finding the truth…
There is no such thing as an original birth certificate. All are copies. The long form typically is a xerox-like copy while the short form is computer generated.
Stop sounding so foolish.
The latest COLB was properly authenticated through the seal and the signature.
But you already know this.
ksdb says:
plus he says in one of his own books that he had an older birth certificate.
Ah, one of the more enduring birther attempts at misdirection.
The operative word is he had an older birth certificate – when he was in high school, more than thirty years ago. It’s on page 26 (paperback edition) of DREAMS FROM MY FATHER. He mentions that he found a newpaper article about his father among his vaccination records and his birth certificate. These obviously were things which were being kept by Obama’s mother.
Like Obama, I saw my birth certificate when I was in high school. I used it to apply for a Social Security Number, and later I used it when I enlisted in the Navy. Then I gave it back to my parents. Years later, when I decided to apply for a passport, my mother had moved and she couldn’t find my birth certificate, so I applied for and received another. When my mother died 13 years ago, my sister found my birth certificate while going through my mother’s papers. However, it is torn and the signature of the registrar has been obliterated by a water stain, so it probably would not be accepted in its current condition.
The fact that Obama saw his birth certificate more than thirty years ago in no way establishes (or even suggests) that he still has that copy. The greater likelihood is that since he has held a U.S. passport continuously since he was a child, over the ensuing years he had no need to produce his birth certificate until his political opponents started circulating rumors that he was not born in the United States. His older birth certificate likely was lost or damaged, just as mine was. So he applied for a new copy from the State of Hawaii, which in turn issued the COLB which he posted on his website.
For the record, I am not a “faither”. I am firmly in the “I don’t care because the election is over” camp.
You can see the seal bleed through to the front on the documents.
I am surprised you are unfamiliar with these facts.
See this
By all accounts it would appear that Obama has held a U.S. passport continuously since he was a child. His “older” birth certificate would have been submitted with his very first passport application. That certificate likely is the same one which he refers to in his book, which he observed among some other papers when he was in high school. He likely had no occasion to need his birth certificate in the ensuing 30+ years, since it isn’t required to produce one again when renewing a passport.
What happened to that particular birth certificate is anyone’s guess, but I know that my original one was missing for three decades until it was found among my mother’s papers after she died. I probably wouldn’t have been able to use it anyway, because it is tattered and water-stained.
That’s somewhat ironic… However, the veracity of Obama’s documentation is beyond a reasonable doubt. All that remains is rebutting some persistent rumors and myths.
64 lawsuits, 18 appeals and 10 Supreme Court cases later and all were decided in favor of the Constitution.
How do you link to an adoption that was contested by the birth father and voided by a State of Hawai’i Family Court?
For that matter, when Dr. Fukino views Obama’s Vital Records (plural) and then refuses to provided index data for an amendment, wouldn’t that be indicative of a record ordered sealed by the Court.
We shouldn’t be left to wonder if it’s lost or not. When Tommy Vietor sent out the jpg of the allgeged June 2007 COLB he offered no explanations that the original certificate was lost or why a recent COLB was being used in place of a copy of the 1961 doctor-signed certificate. The Fight the Smears site even called this ‘original,’ which would suggest Obama didn’t have a birth certificate prior to June 2007.
By showing the documents of the adoption or the case where Obama’s father contested the adoptions.
Again fully speculative and lacking any reasonable foundation. The suggestion that Fukino refused to provide index data for an amendment that may or may not exist ignores the privacy laws involved.
Even if Obama had been adopted, this does not make him lose his natural born citizenship status.
I appreciate you admitting that you have no evidence.
So, stop wondering. Is someone else’s birth certificate really your greatest worry in life? If so, rejoice in your good fortune.
The only foolishness is for people like yourself to carry water for someone who chooses to hide the truth despite his hypocritical claim to demand transparency from everyone else. Plus you seriously ducked the question. Do you believe an original copy of the long-form was submitted for a passport application and not returned??
This is an outright false and you already know this. The alleged seal and signature have not been authenticated by the issuing agency.
Oh boy, darn me for expecting proof of Constitutional eligibility for the highest office in our government.
See
See if you can answer this question-what proof have previous Presidents provided? Focus now. Come on…
Wrong. State law says the public’s right to know outweighs privacy interests. See the Uniform Information Practices Act. Second, who exactly is going to file a complaint if the state releases the original birth certificate, especially when they could do so by obtaining Obama’s permission??
Obama is a public figure by legal definition. In the eyes of the law, he has no right to privacy. And let’s keep focused, we’re talking about basic birth documentation, not his sex life (although that hasn’t stopped any Democrats from going after Republicans before).
You obviously don’t understand what a birth certificate is.
Births are registered with the public agency in the jurisdiction where the birth occured, which is charged with maintaining those records. In some jurisdictions it is simply an entry in a log or registration book.
For purposes of documentation of the time and place of birth, the agency will issue a certificate — or certification — attesting to its own records. This is what is commonly referred to as a “birth certificate” and it is written statement that attests to what is in the records of the public agency.
In Obama’s case, you have a statement issued directly to the press and posted on the web site of the public agency, made by its director. You do not need more “documentation” — the director’s statement IS the documentation. All a birth certificate would do is provide written evidence of what the Director of Public Health would be able to testify to, if called to testify in a court of law.
How many presidents claimed to be the sons of foreign nationals whose citizenships at birth were subsequently governed by another country?? The context makes a difference. Besides, have you forgotten that Obama with other Democrats created a resolution blessing John McCain to run for president? Are you forgetting that John McCain was also taken to court over his eligibility??
The Fight the Smears site even called this original,’ which would suggest Obama didn’t have a birth certificate prior to June 2007.
Wrong. The Fight the Smears site calls it “official,” not “original.”
http://www.fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate.html
Sorry. That doesn’t wash. Equality under the law means equality. If Rodriguez has to show papers, then Smith does too.
And for all I know half the Presidents were sons of foreign nationals and didn’t bother to mention it. Now there’s a wide-open field for your inquiries. But you would rather waste time here.
And yes, the fact that you are expending that much effort over the birth records of someone who has already been in office for a year IS strange, no matter how you slice it. Surely, when 2012 rolls around voters will be able to judge Obama on his record in office rather than events 50 years in the past?
I embedded a link but it doesn’t look like the code worked.
http://uslegal.com/namechange/
You said a person doesn’t have to do anything. What I quoted says you have to get consent from the parents involved. We’re talking about Obama/Soetoro when he was a minor.
No, actually I don’t have an expectation that name changes per adoptions would be listed. Do you??
Wait, you said you don’t have to do anything … now you’re saying a name change has to be published to be legal?? You’ve just undermined your own argument.
Unless there was an intent to defraud … and we can’t rule that out with the information that is currently available.
Hard to tell. As far as the ‘copy’, not the original birth certificate is concerned, an important distinction you seem to gloss over, which Obama described having found 30 years ago, I have no idea what happened to it. It may very well have been lost. Furthermore, for a passport the copy cannot be older than 1 year so Obama’s parents, when applying for the passport on which he traveled to and from Indonesia must have submitted the required evidence which is most likely a short or long form copy.
Once Obama had obtained his first passport, renewals are more straightforward.
It does not really matter, Obama submitted his COLB for inspection and with the raised seal and signature it is indeed prima facie and legally admissible evidence.
When putting side by side your case and Obama’s case, it is clear that there exists no support for your side other than a continued appeal to moving the goal posts, when in fact from Obama’s side we have the following corroborating evidence
1. Obama’s COLB, with seal and signature shows him born in Honolulu
2. Obama’s birth city was verified by the Department of State of Hawaii
3. Obama’s birth was reported in two newspapers
4. The missing space, once seen by you as evidence of doctoring now agrees with other 2007 COLB’s
There is just not really much out there now is there that supports your claim.
Which explains why you are now moving to “let an independent source verify the data”. I doubt that your definition of independent source would be reasonable.
Wong Kim Ark lays to rest any concerns about dual nationality and natural born status.
Next.
As to McCain, now there is some reasonable doubt which was patched by a non binding resolution of Congress. No such need exists for a child born on US soil.
None
I stand corrected, although calling it ‘official’ is pretty sketchy since the HI DOH won’t authenticate this alleged document.
this is not true
sounds like a consession
Of course it is true. But perhaps you can present an actual coherent argument as to why you disagree.
You do realize that the COLB as Hawaii’s official BC is the prima facie evidence, admissible in court and sufficient to obtain a passport?
“Make him a jpg.”
Thanks. I’ll start working on it. I have another dilemma: I’m in my car, traveling at the speed of light. If I turn on my headlights, do they glow?
To someone in a desperate position like yours, anything may sound like a concession.
How foolish….
The DOH cannot comment on this by law but in spite of this the DOH has verified the date and location of birth, the name of the child. Since the DOH applied the raised seal and signature to the COLB, it has in fact been authenticated by the DOH.
Bummer…
The only problem is that we don’t know whether the information submitted by Obama for his first passport matches the information contained on his alleged COLB. He doesn’t have to have been born in the United States to obtain a U.S. passport.
Posting a jpg is not the same as submitting a physical document for inspection. No legal authority has declared the document represented in the jpg as being legally admissable evidence … in fact, just the opposite … that they don’t know what it represents.
My so-called case is that Obama has failed to provide proof that can be recognized or corroborated by the official agency. They’ve said a few things, but nothing to support that the COLB is authentic or legal.
You mean alleged COLB. Still not authenticated more than 570 days later.
Haven’t seen this verified period and especially not with corroborating evidence.
Except that neither the child’s name was included nor the location of birth.
Said COLBs have not been corroborated as being authentic and were presented by a self-described photoshop expert.
Wrong, you’re actually proving that there is by absence of physical evidence.
Your doubt is misplaced and your comment is simply being dismissive because you can’t disprove my points.
hog wash, obama is hiding something, your denial is easily seen as a sign of ignorance
or why would obama have a BC czar. This all can be put to rest if you would see that the release of the records BHO sits on would answer all our questions. What he hides from me he also hides from you. you blindly follow.
No, they’ve made a claim but have not provided an official verification of any of these alleged facts, and especially not with any documentation to support the claim. Also, explain why they can apparently break their law to claim a location of birth but can’t straight out declare the COLB to be authentic. Weird.
We have no proof the DOH applied a seal or a signature to the alleged COLB. I’m still waiting for the photograph that shows the entire back side of Obama’s alleged COLB. It’s time to expose Obama’s backside to the world!!
As long as the parents are permanent immigrants. Barak Sr. was not. However, I’ll concede that Obama qualifies as an NBC if his marriage to SAD was voided by the previous marriage to Kezia, which it would be under British and U.S. law without formally dissolving the first marriage. This means Obama was illegitimate at birth and would be a citizen at birth no matter where he was born. So, yes, the little bastard might be a natural born citizen under those circumstances.
Except when that child might be a dual citizen with divided loyalties. The founders of the United States generally believed a child’s citizenship followed his father’s allegiance, despite being born on U.S. soil. Barak had no allegiance to the United States, thus his son, if legitimate, would be a natural born subject and not a natural born citizen. But as I said, if Barak was a bigamist, then his little bastard could indeed be a natural born citizen.
Since he however was born in the US, the question is somewhat moot.
Still ignoring the facts with moving the goalpost ‘objections’.
As I said before, you are not interested in the truth.
I have no interest in disproving your points as they have no foundation in fact or reason. What I present is the existing evidence which all show that President Obama was born in the US. You can be dismissive of all this but the facts are on my side, even if not presented under oath they are an infinite level more relevant than your musings which are based on a lack of evidence or contradicted by evidence.
Your ‘arguments’ are unraveling quickly and even your ‘best argument’ the ‘missing space’ has turned against your position.
I don’t disagree, however, I didn’t create the system. As a voter, I’m within my rights to point out flaws and to raise questions. If you believe Obama is legit, then you should have no objection that he present verifiable proof.
It’s a free country, no??
It’s only strange because Obama continues to hide a basic birth document.
Scientist:
Surely, when 2012 rolls around voters will be able to judge Obama on his record in office rather than events 50 years in the past?
I respect the Constitution and am doing my part to uphold it. Ignoring this part can only lead to further abuses. No thanks.
“As long as the parents are permanent immigrants.”
Wong Kim Ark limited its holding to the facts, which dealt with permanent resident parents. However, it based its decision on the fact that both “natural born citizen” and the 14th amendmnet sere based on the english common law rules which had no such limitation. Thus, there is no basis to read such a disctinction into th ruling.
“The founders of the United States generally believed a child’s citizenship followed his father’s allegiance, despite being born on U.S. soil.”
You simply have not done the research as there is simply no early authority to support such claim. I suggest you go to Doc’s or NBC’s quotation page to see the multitude of early authority contrary to such assertion.
Again, you are placing the burden of proof on the President who has in fact managed to convince the only Constitutionally relevant bodies of his eligibility, the voters, the electoral college, and Congress (most importantly per 12/20th Amendments).
I can point you to the evidence which you are rejecting out of hand as insufficient while claiming that there are inconsistencies where there are none.
You are of course free to make yourself look foolish and there is nothing I personally can do about it but as far as the facts are concerned, you have no case.
Hence the moving of the goalposts to now require us to prove President Obama’s eligibility to your liking.
That of course would be a foolish venture as you have shown yourself to be impervious to fact and reason.
Well, then we agree, and since it was properly authenticated through a seal and signature, what do you now intend to argue?
You are of course familiar with the concept of self authentication?
You fool… It’s not a lie, it’s a fact that the seal and signature are the official authentication of the data on the COLB.
This claim has yet to be proven. I choose not to go on blind faith over unsupported and undocumented statements.
Not in the least.
False.
All you’ve presented are unsubstantiated jpgs and undocumented statements. Bernie Madoff would be proud.
Your level of evidence is nothing more than hearsay. I’m asking for very basic documentation and you act like I kicked your puppy. And let’s not talk about dismissiveness unless you’re prepared to do some apologizing.
Not at all. I questioned Polarik when he posted those jpgs last year and he promptly ignored the questions and has since disappeared from Algore’s Internets. Nobody is around to vouch for those alleged COLBs. Nobody even knows who they belong to.
Or that they just requested a recent one to avoid the ‘well this is an old one’. However original merely means that this was a real copy of the document not a scan…
Logic my friend, pure logic.
Constitutional Eligibility is guided by the Constitutional amendments which require Congress to find the President to be qualified.
The Constitution does not state that KSDB shall be convinced beyond an unreasonable doubt before a president shall be elected and sworn in…
Ridiculous…
That is an incorrect reading of the Wong Kim Ark case which does not focus on the status of the parents and in fact reject that the status of the parents makes any impact.
Your claim about what the founders believed has no foundation in evidence.
Barack by virtue of being born on US soil, had allegiance to the United States, and in fact a stronger one than to the country of his parent’s citizenship which was by statute only.
Your dislike of Obama shines through marvelously (his little bastard) and let’s spell his name correctly.
You’re quite a fool my friend and your own words betray you.
Mission Failed
There is evidence that Obama was claimed to be an Indonesian citizen. I’m sure you know what I’m talking about … and where praytell is your evidence he returned to the U.S. on his own passport??
Wrong. Wrong. And Wrong. I don’t deny that Obama show an alleged COLB. I only deny that anyone has authenticated it. I’ve said nothing about Obama’s Indonesia citizenship having an impact on being a natural born citizen. Maybe you have a guilty conscience. Like everything else in Obama’s life, there is a dearth of documentation, in this case to show what passport he traveled on and what birth certificate he used to obtain one … or if he even used a birth certificate to obtain a passport.
The state of Hawaii has not admitted they have made any format errors on their COLBs. No COLBs have been presented that can be vouched for in authenticity to show that the error is definitely a mistake by the vital records office.
It is supported by his COLB which was authenticated by the DOH through the seal and signature and it is supported by the DOH which has stated that Obama was born on US soil.
You fool
In his own words. After all you believe him when he stated that he saw his birth certificate 30 years or so ago. The same book outlines his description of when he returned.
And thus you are wrong since it was authenticated through seal and signature, making it by law a self authenticating document. Which is why courts and the Department of State accept such forms as prima facie evidence.
It’s also fascinating how you accept the unconfirmed form where his name is mentioned with nationality Indonesian when you reject officially certified documents.
Furthermore, per Indonesian law, Obama could not have become a citizen of its country until reaching the age of 18. And per US law and legal precedent a child cannot denounce his citizenship.
Raising questions about one but not another is hypocrisy. But you do have a right to be a hypocrite.
No more than every other President and candidate. Once again you are a hypocrite.
The entire document or 3 words? Can you show me other Constitutional issues where you’ve been active? Once again you are a hypocrite.
Can you please cite the law that says public figures have no right to privacy? Please???
Read the decision. There’s no reason to mention that the parents were permanent immigrants except if it has relevance and it obviously does.
As you can see, permanence was a key factor in the decision.
It absolutely does. Read Shanks v. Dupont.
Vattel says that a child’s natural allegiance follows that of his father and the place of his birth does not change that. To be a natural born American citizen, Obama’s parents (plural) would both need to be citizens.
Bastard is the correct term for an illegitimate child and his father’s name was spelled as ‘Barak’ in his 1965 article, “Problems facing our society.”
http://www.politico.com/static/PPM41_eastafrica.html
Nonsense. All you have is insults and derision. Facts?? Not so much.
Total nonsense. The right of privacy may be reduced to a public figure but the same laws that protect you and me, protect such public figures.
That’s just plain wrong. Guess we will never see any further backing of this claim…
The success of a lie does not improve its truthfulness. The current system puts a burden of proof on candidates when filing to have their names placed on ballots … it just happens to be limited proof … a signature and self-declaration. As a voter, I, and others whom are dismissively labeled as birthers, simply ask for a slightly stronger burden of proof, but one which is within the same reasonable bounds as having your child play Little League baseball, so spare me the whining.
Knock yourself out.
So your M.O. so far is to try to intimidate me instead of back up your claims??
Little league, man, Little League. This shouldn’t be like pulling teeth out of crocodile.
Not at all. I’ve backed up my points every step of the way and am met with very little logic, but instead a great deal of baseless derision.
Then lobby your state legislature or the federal legislature for stricter laws.
Obama provided his COLB which is also sufficient for playing in the little league.
You have done nothing of the kind you fool. Do you really believe that the reader cannot see through this baseless claim?
You merely summarily dismiss any fact, reason or logic.
B
Like that public figures have no right to privacy?
Of course he cannot
It’s not self-authenticating at all. The Obama jpg barely shows one and not the other. The Fact Check photos do not show enough of the back of the alleged COLB to conclusively prove the seal and signature are on the same document as photographed from the front. Obama, expose your back side to America!
And again, the state of Hawaii REFUSES to authenticate any alleged COLBs … period. IOW, you got nothing.
Again, a COLB is self authenticating and the raised seal is clearly visible from the front, however the signature is not but can be seen from the back. If you imply some falsification of evidence then it would be helpful to provide some coherent argument. In this case, nothing but a miracle would convince you of the truth.
DOH has in fact authenticated the document and validated his birth in the US.
Nothing you say has disproven this.
The DOH is prohibited by law. However, in spite of this they have validated all the information but the hour of birth.
It was photographed and written about by legitimate members of the press. This has not happened with Obama’s alleged COLB. One is obviously much more compelling than the other.
Wrong. If adopted under age 5, Obama would have automatically become an Indonesian citizen. According to a story written about Obama when he was at Harvard, his mother remarried sometime when he was between the ages of 2 and 4 years old. I realize the more recent version of the story is age 6 … but, like everything else in Obama’s childhood … the stories are not consistent … so it is easily within the realm of possiblity that Obama was adopted and became an Indonesian citizen.
Answers.com and ye shall receive:
“Public figures, such as politicians lose most of their rights to privacy. In the United States, their finances are usually public. When they are away from private time with their families, their lives are closely examined. The difference concerns their family members. Their non campaigning family members have a right to privacy. Other than that, politicians, and other celebrities, have lost their right to privacy. If they are going to use the press and be presented by the press, the press has the right to present them in situations other than their own choosing.”
Sorry, but the same statement making this claim and so-called validation included a claim that falls outside the authority of Fukino’s office. That statement qualifies as hearsay only.
The COLB was fotographed and written about, however unlike your ‘evidence’ the COLB is self authenticating and there is no way to authenticate the photo of the page.
Indeed, you are right, reason would dictate that one is more compelling than the other. But I am not convinced that you are guided by reason.
If you can’t tell whether your own headlights are on or not, I’ll take a cab.
Nope, even under age 5 he would not have become an Indonesian citizen automatically, but there is just no evidence that Obama ever was adopted or naturalized in Indonesia.
Of course, in your world devoid of reason, anything is possible, just not plausible.
You guessed wrong:
[Note to readers: the preceding citation out of context is misleading. Read further comments for a more complete context. Dr. C.]
As Dr C explained
ksdb is a complete idiot, do not respond to him please, that allows him to take over this thread (his real goal)
Responding to him makes no sense at all, his brain is locked on “stupid”, being stuck with an idiotic troll is not fun, don’t respond(especially you nbc, no response is the best response)!
You make it so easy to prove you wrong:
You claimed ‘automatically’ when in fact the code shows that it requires approval.
I told you to read and use reason before making your claims. Now you have to make up your usual excuses,
I refuse to let his nonsense remain unrebutted. It serves as a good example for those who believe his nonsense.
You have dishonestly quoted out of context. Here is the entire paragraph:
“It is clear that the Constitution protects newspapers that publish truthful information, however “private,” about “public figures”—including candidates for office. Whether or not such figures entirely surrender any “right to privacy” they might otherwise have, as a practical matter newspapers and other media need not worry that they will face legal sanctions if they reveal indelicate truths. No Supreme Court decision supports privacy claims of public figures seeking political office who object to the disclosure of information that some voter might find relevant to their fitness to serve in office. Recognition of any such privacy rights would disserve the democratic process itself by depriving the public of salient information. “[T]he candidate who vaunts his spotless record and sterling integrity,” Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist has reiterated, “cannot convincingly cry Foul’ when an opponent or an industrious reporter attempts to demonstrate the contrary,” even if the demonstration involves scrutiny of what might be regarded as one’s “private” life (Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, 1988, pp. 46, 51, quoting from Monitor Patriot Co. v. Roy, 1971).”
What that means is that if you do your famous “investigation” and publish the truthful results, Obama can’t sue you for libel. It doesn’t require him to help you in your digging though, nor does it require him to release anything beyond what the law requires (Financial disclosure forms for example).
Quoting out of context shows your dishonesty.
You forgot
The citizenship part IS automatic. The child has no requirement to do anything. The authorities only check to see if the adoption is legal. If it weren’t automatic, it would require taking an oath which might also be accompanied by naturalization classes.
And
See HRS 338-18
Everything you’ve posted has been shot down like balloons at a carnival. And Obama’s birth certificate is still being held hostage … Day 582.
You are now misinterpreting or misrepresenting the actual law. Automatic means without any further action. In fact, the father has to apply for approval from the “Pengadilan Negeri at the residence of the person adopting the child”
As I pointed out before, you have no interest in the truth. Let alone the application of logic or reason.
Pwned…
Denial, the first step towards recovery, however you already show some signs of anger so you are making good progress and even some bargaining…
Good job my dear friend, there is hope
All ‘automatic’ citizenship is accompanied by further action … that’s what the filing of a birth certificate does, for example. No action is required on the part of the recipient. Sorry, but you’ve been shot down again. Don’t make it so easy.
What part of acquires Indonesian citizenship if… do you fail to comprehend?
Furthermore, Indonesian Constitution prohibits the acquisition of Indonesian nationality when the child retains his original birth right citizenship and since the child is unable to denounce his citizenship or have it denounced for him, Indonesia could never have naturalized Obama.
How do I hail a cab in outer space?
People like ksdb are not driven by facts (obvious!), they are driven by hate (hate for Obama), him and all the other birthers will not change course. They are actually unaware that Obama is president and has been for a year. They are pushing this birther nonsense in hopes of getting Obama out of office, though the chances of that are less than 0, poor birthers are nothing more than hateful, racist dipsh_s! They want the Ni__er out, but birthers are on a losing battle, the wrong side of history.
How can it be automatic when it involves the parent having to petition and the Pengadilan Negeri has to declare it legal…
That’s just plain illogical.
I do notice you have still got a tendency that prevents you from admitting to your errors. Which combined with your propensity to make errors is quite unfortunate.
Again, that applies to information someone digs up about a public figure. Nothing compels them to disclose information, other than legally required financial disclosures. Presidential candidates are not legally required to release medical records, school records or anything else. Some release a few selected bits of information and some don’t. None that I know of have released even 10% of what you birthers have “demanded” from Obama. And once in office previous sitting Presidents have released their tax returns and that’s it. Obama already released his 2008 return and I’m sure he will do the same with future ones.
It’s no different than filing a birth certificate. Once the adoption is declared legal (or a birth certificate is accepted as valid), citizenship is automatic. What action is required by the recipient for his or her citizenship??
I admitted that the Fight the Smears site says ‘official’ birth certificate, not “original.” Now are you going to admit to being wrong??
Feel free to cite the statute. I have a feeling your misunderstanding it.
So Obama was adopted in Indonesia? That would place him older than 5 years by most any credible account. So no go there. So perhaps you meant, adopted in Hawaii, but such an adoption would not lead to automatic citizenship.
If adopted and found that the adoption was legal by the local Pengadilan Negeri…
And citizenship could not be automatic if it would create a dual citizenship conflict.
Furthermore
So adoption can happen without automatic acquisition. You were wrong
Candidates release tax returns and medical records all the time. Obama posted an alleged COLB … why do you think he would he have a different right to privacy over the long-form certificate??
Now that is ironic given your misinterpretation of automatic citizenship after adoption… When in fact, a child can be adopted and the “declaration of legality by the Pengadilan Negeri shall be requested by the person adopting the child within 1 year after such an adoption or within 1 year after enforcement of this law.”
Within one year after such adoption… So adoption precedes the request for declaration of legality.
What??? Are you trying to say a child should be able to be declared as a citizen before it’s adopted?? Please … try again … and make sense this time.
Article 5(h)
h.have no nationality, or have lost his nationality if the petitioner acquires the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia or states at the time to have released another nationality according to the legal provisions of the country of origin or according to the legal provisions of the Agreement on the settlement of the bi-nationality between the Republic of Indonesia and the country concerned.
Article 4.
(1)Aliens born and domiciled in the territory of the Republic of Indonesia whose father or mother, in case they have no legal family relationship with the father, is also born in the territory of the Republic in Indonesia and is a resident of the Republic of Indonesia, may present a petition to the Minister of Justice in order to acquire the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia if they, after having acquired the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, have no other nationality or at the time that they present a petition they also make a statement as to having released another nationality which they may possibly possess, in accordance with the legal provisions prevailing in the country of their origin or according to the provisions of the Agreement on the settlement of the bi-nationality between the Republic of Indonesia and the country in question.
The statute cited by Dr.C applies when the mother is Indonesian and the father is a foreigner … SAD was not Indonesian and Lolo was not a foreigner.
NBC stop wasting your time!
Source: Here
OK. Let me summarize the conclusion of the discussion:
THE ELECTION IS OVER AND OBAMA WON
Articles four and five do not apply to adoptions of children under age 5.
Article 5: (2)In order to present a petition for naturalization, the petitioner shall: a.have reached the age of 21;
Article 4 refers to Aliens born and domiciled in the territory of the Republic of Indonesia …
Are you trying to say Obama was born in Indonesia to foreign parents??
US Department of State
No I am saying that Indonesia does not allow dual citizenship, only in 2006 was a law passed that allowed minors to hold a dual citizenship status. Since Obama could not renounce his citizenship, he could not become an Indonesian citizen.
Furthermore, there is no evidence that Obama was less than 5.
If Indonesia does not allow for a dual citizenship and if Obama as a minor could not reject his US citizenship then there is but one conclusion.
Right … under Indonesian law, Obama, if adopted under age 5, would have been considered an Indonesian citizen exclusively. IOW, if Lolo wanted to fight for Barry Soetoro’s custody, it would have been a very ugly international battle to see whose laws superceded the others. At the time Obama would have been adopted, U.S. nationality laws wouldn’t have protected Obama’s U.S. citizenship … certainly the SCOTUS would have then overturned those laws, but as written, the laws did not prevent the loss of citizenship through adoption.
A delayed birth certificate has a very defined meaning. It means a birth certificate that is filed over a year after the birth of the person.
Barack Obama’s birth certificate was filed 4 days after he was born, on August 8, 1961. By definition, this cannot be a delayed birth certificate.
Yes, there is evidence, thanks to the Honolulu Advertiser:
Obama, if born in 1961, would have been three or four years old in 1965 when Lolo married Stanley. I understand the ‘official’ story NOW is that they didn’t marry until 1967 … which would have made Obama 6 and ineligible for citizenship by adoption … weird. Admittedly we don’t have proof of adoption or if Lolo got the adoption approved, but we do see that Barry Soetoro was listed as an Indonesian citizen at school in Indonesia. It’s hard to explain that one away.
If Obama was adopted after 2006, this might mean something.
Most sites place the marriage at 66 or 67 so you need something better here to ‘prove’ your point.
So you rely on one discrepancy in reporting and consider that the fact.
As I stated before, you have no interest in the truth.
Not at all
1. The parents lied to get Obama into school
2. The school assumed
If you like the source however, you should also accept that it shows Obama born in Honolulu.
But I doubt you appreciate the logic of that
birthers on the “adoption” rumor!
no proof that Obama was adopted, but the rumor goes on.
Muslim’s require an adopted child to retain name of birth father(so no Barry Soetoro would exist)
Birhers are losers, the election concluded a year ago, an idiotic birther myth can’t change that!
go away Troll!
Yes, it means that before 2006 Obama could not have been adopted since Indonesia did not allow a minor to keep dual citizenship status and thus since Obama as a juvenile could not renounce his citizenship, Indonesia could not have granted him one.
That has no foundation in law as SCOTUS has accepted that a minor cannot renounce his US citizenship and thus Obama, in the eyes of US law, remained a US natural born citizen.
Simple really
you miss out on a a key word: ADOPTED … please provide documentation that Obama was adopted Soetoro.
Which would have been 1967…
First grade place Obama in the 5-6 year range
The registration at the Assisi schools shows 1/1/1968 again making it somewhat hard to continue the foolish claim that he was 2-4
And more and more evidence that renders your musings the fantasy they were from the start
Have you had enough already? Ready to admit defeat 🙂
I don’t under stand this “adoption” discussion. There is no proof that Obama was adopted, merely speculation, speculation that can’t past the smell test. So all these “what ifs” are useless. There is speculation only by birthers, but birthers being idiots, have no creditability. It would be wise to just dismiss ksdb, just ignore him, he has taken too much space already.
birfers are still waiting for the answer to “who’s stronger — tarzan or flash gordon?”
unfortunately, mr hood is dead.
@ksdb:
My cat licks his bottom. Do you think the bacteria can make him sick?
“we do see that Barry Soetoro was listed as an Indonesian citizen at school in Indonesia. It’s hard to explain that one away.”
No need to explain it away, in Muslim Indonesia, if adopted, he would have been Barry Obama, so that throws out your sick theory! Remember Indonesia is a Muslim country, and they follow Muslim ideas on adoptions, not your western view! There an adpopted child retains the name of the father, but an idiot like you would not know that. So if he was adopted that registration would say “Barry Obama”!
We fought a war so that other countries could not tell us what to do. Indonesian law does not supercede U.S.law.
“This post about the Nordyke twins birth announcement. It fortifies the suspicion that the certificate number on the Factcheck COLB is fraudulent.”
How so? sorry, but its quite the opposite. It proves that the Nordyke Twins, like Obama, were born in Hawaii, and that Hawaii’s Newspapers had announced their births.
How dos this prove that Fact Check’s COLB is fraudulent. NOW MIND YOU, I have a COLB from Hawaii, dated from 2006 (which is when I moved to CA) – It is the EXACT format as Obama’s, looks the same and uses the same template, along with the SEAL and the stamp and signature on the back.
Please show us your BC where it says on it “natural born”. None right? Mine certainly doesn’t say anything about being a Natural born citizen. It only says that I was born in Honolulu, HI.
Sorry, but by the CONSTITUTION, anyone born on US SOIL is an automatic Natural Born citizen.
No one needs more than a 4th grade education to know this.
correct. When I looked to changing my name (I didn’t however) this was the standard that I needed to follow. and of course notify the SS office of the name change.
that is a crazy demand. There are 10 major hospitals on Oahu alone;
Castle Medical Center
(3) Kaiser Medical Centers and Hospitals
Kapiolani Medical Center for Women and Children
Kuakini Hospital
Queens Hospital
Straub Hospital
Tripler Army Medical Center
Wahiawa General Hospital
each one getting pads of certificates that the hospital would tear out and fill out. How do we even know that the hospitals received consecutive numbered pads; that the ER or Neo Natal ward in each hospital received consecutive numbered pads. How would contacting those born, in those announcements, prove that the “numerical” order would be “off” if they were born at the hospitals above?
What if 1000 babies were born in one month in 1961 at one hospital, and the other hospital only had 10 babies born?
this comment is purely stupid
This is like the speculation that the long form birth certificate was being created on some sort of machine somewhere. I forget where. It will go on and on because these people cannot believe a person of Obama’s background could or would be elected. They never will. They are sad.
Absolute bollocks. The only form that Hawaii is required to give their residents is the SHORT FORM COLB. the LONG form is no longer accepted nor GIVEN. NOT even in hospitals.
YOU should stop commenting on what Hawaii does or does not do since YOU were never born in HAWAII, nor lived there.
I lived there for 30 years. I KNOW what they do and what is accepted.
ksdb: U.S. nationality laws wouldn’t have protected Obama’s U.S. citizenship
What you say is absurd on the face of it. You seem to be under some delusion that other countries decide who is and who is not a US citizen and the US is powerless to determine the status of its own citizens.
I mean, listen to yourself!
My BC was filed 6 days after I was born (the Monday following my Tuesday birth). I had no birth announcement in any of the newspapers.
You dwell in irrelevancies. Indonesian citizenship (if it existed) could not erase the natural born citizen status of Obama. See the US Supreme Court decision in Perkins v Elg.
He was under 6. Indonesian law could have said anything. He, as an American Citizen, could not lose his citizenship. Supposing my baby grandson went to live with his mom in Indonesia and she married there. Supposing the husband adapted him. He still could not lose his right to American Citizenship. He would still be a Natural Born Citizen of the United States. The law very wisely would not allow a foreign nation and a foreign step or adaptive parent to make that choice for him. Why? Laws are created to serve justice. Justice does not serve the law and the framers of the laws of this country knew that and wisely prevented this form of injustice to be perpetarated on young children. Got it.
Which means that if the Press found out (or reasonably believed) that Obama was born in Kenya, or that the COLB were forged, then they could freely publish it without fear of a libel suit.
Hmmm.
“absurd” is a birther characteristic! I think this troll has “absurted” enough. Beside proving his ignorance he is wasting space here.
ksdb: same statement making this claim and so-called validation included a claim that falls outside the authority of Fukino’s office.
To the extent I understand this statement, it is nonsense and false on its face.
Again, please listen. Under Islamic law and custom adapted children do not take the surname of the adaptive parent or parents. Family identity defined as the birth family, is of utmost importance. Again, children do not take the surname of an adaptive parent. When Soetero registered him as Barry Soetero, he was saying that Obama was his son when the President was not. This is an Islamic society not a western society. This society views adaption in the same way we view a close foster care situation. Families raise children they do not adpat for various reasons. Remember you have to go by Islamic custom and rule. A name change would not occur. And adaption would be regarded as a guadianship and duty not as a formal calling of a child into a family not his or her own. Get over it. He is a citizen and he is President. Get a life.
“adopt”
It seems to me that the easiest explanation for taking the Soretoro name would have been safety. Indonesia in the mid 1960s was a hotbed of anti-communist, anti-chinese, anti-Old Order violence. The September 30 (1965)Movement led to a bloody purge, with .5 to 1 million dead, 1 million imprisoned. 1967-68 was power change from the Old Order to the New Order. Hundreds of thousands were imprisioned or killed by military and religious groups. Lolo Soetoro had been conscripted to fight communest rebels. What mother would want to take a small child into that?
I can see Lolo Soetora saying, “Come on honey, we’ll be safe. We can call Barry by my last name. He even looks Polynesian/Indonesian. No one will question it, I work for the government. A bribe here, a bribe there, it’s how things are done. He’ll be safe as a Soetoro. There’s a fine Catholic school he can go to and blend in.”
I think the odds against adoption are huge.
See also Native Born Citizen website
The Honolulu Advertisers wrote
First grader would have put Obama at the age of 5-6 or 1966-1967. The overthrow of Sukarno happened in early 1967. So the 1965 is not the year they moved to Indonesia. Did they get married in 1965 or was it 1966-1967 as the other sources suggest?
Barack himself explains the timeline:
Source: Dreams from My Father, 2004 ed., p.20-21
This places Obama in Indonesia in middle to late 1967, close to his 6th birthday.
I agree but it was fun rebutting his claims, especially his typo argument which ended up authenticating Obama’s COLB.
Mission Failed….
As I’ve commented several times, this is a clear case of pathological belief.
In such cases, contradictory evidence actually reinforces the belief, because it’s totally unconnected to the truth, but finds its source in some deep rooted complex or trauma.
Assuming “ksdb” isn’t merely a troll out to get your goat, he is a disturbed individual, and the more you irrefutably try to show him the truth, the more you reinforce his delusion.
There’s been a lot of articles and studies on the subject.
Yeah, and he won’t answer my questions about space travel, or my cat voting in an election, or cat hygiene.
What a stick in the mud.
Yup. Passport agency approved my COLB when I applied for one in 1996. I used it to also get a copy of my SSN card. And used it to establish to get a Drivers License.
your wrong
Dingle Barry didn’t register for Selective Service in 1980 because he was an Indonesian citizen on a student visa at the time. He probably still is an Indonesian illegal alien.
Do you have a point?? Are you thinking Soetoro would have married SAD in 1965 but wait two years to adopt Obama??
Foolish is ignoring that the Soetoros are said to have been married three years earlier. Now you’re claiming they waited until Barry enrolled for school before adopting him??
When you marry an American, adopt her child and move both overseas to your home country, it would have the effect of severing the legal tie to the United States. The U.S. has no power over what an Indonesian citizen does with his family in Indonesia. Think!!
ignorsnce?? – You faithers make it so easy.
Mary, you’re making a remarkable claim, but you’ve shown nothing to support it … plus, you have a terrible time spelling the word ‘adopt.’ Sorry, but this is not a convincing argument in any respect.
It helps if you read what I wrote. I’ve already acknowledged that this detail is inconsistent … and that the later date for the marriage was convenient toward making Obama old enough not to have been adopted … as if someone were trying to misdirect curious voters. At this point, I see no reason to suspect the Honolulu Advertiser of lying about the 1965 marriage date.
No, I notice one discrepancy and consider neither date to be factual without proper documentation.
And as I stated before, this is absolutely wrong.
A) They could be lying about everything B) They could be truthful about everything or C) The person who provided the information had some of the facts and was misled about the other facts. All the more reason to demand original birth records, school records, passport records, etc.
But it doesn’t preclude an earlier visit in 1965 to get the proper authorities to recognize the adoption of Barry Soetoro had taken place.
You read the part I said about overturning the law?? It’s like you’re three or four points behind my arguments and you’re not comprehending all the details. The Soetoros filed for divorce in 1980 and it wasn’t finalized, I believe, until 1988. Unless a legal change had been made in Barry Soetoro’s status, he could have potentially remained an adopted Indonesia citizen until age 27, well over the age for renouncing his U.S. citizenship.
@ksdb:
George HW Bush vomited on the Japanese prime minister.
Do you think the white wine came up with the fish?
Maybe, maybe not.
IOW, you just ignore the accounts you don’t want to believe. Sorry, but you need to prove why the account in the Honolulu Advertiser is not a credible account. Obama would have been 3 or 4 years old.
Ummmm, wrong. Remember, the law says they have up to a year to get the adoption filed. At that point, citizenship is automatic.
That’s absolutely wrong. There is no dual citizenship conflict for adopted children. Indonesia simply refuses to recognize other citizenships. We’ve been over this several times and you’re ignoring the wording of the law and trying to apply sections that have nothing to do with how adoptions are handled.
We have a bona fide news photograph of a school document listing Barry Soetoro as an Indonesia citizen. Are you going to whine that the news photographer was ‘speculating’ or that he or she was a so-called ‘birther.’
This is false misha. I answered your silly questions. You just ignored my answers.
No, just the kitty’s owner.
Honestly, I think you guys should stop.
Either “ksdb” is making fun of you, or he is clearly deranged (not incompatible). If so, you are only reinforcing his delusion by engaging with him.
This reminds me of a tragedy which happened a few days ago at the University of Perpignan near where I live, where a Chinese foreign exchange student who’d been here since 2005 and had begun to exhibit clear symptoms of paranoid delusions (and was being treated for it) finally snapped and stabbed the dean’s secretary to death and wounded two more persons before he was disarmed and apprehended.
The testimonies of those who knew him are telling: the man had concocted a seemingly airtight fantasy about a university conspiracy directed against him, and no amount of evidence could convince him otherwise; on the contrary, it only reinforced his sense of alienation.
Obviously the health professionals seeing him severely underestimated how close he was to the breaking point, and it is tragic that he actually killed a person before he could be stopped.
What you’re dealing with here is either a “faker” or a deranged person, and I see no point in engaging him. We can only hope that he won’t harm anyone else.
I think having a illegal alien in the White House is exotic. Much better than the white bread occupants of the past. Or vapid children like Sarah Palin, whose base is white nationalists. I know that the descendants of slaves living in the White House is eating at you, but that’s progress.
I’ll vote for him again in ’12, just to give malcontents like you conniption fits.
Then in ’16, I’ll vote for Cory Booker. Better watch your blood pressure.
Here is a press conference you should watch:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-_cdbByTeNE
So what if the document shows Obama as an Indonesian citizen? So what if he was an Indonesian citizen?
It is clear that according to US law, Obama would not lose his citizenship because of adoption in another country. Perkins v. Elg.
You’re conceding, chufho? Good for you. There’s hope then.
you are 100% correct!
here’s confirmation of his ignorance:
We have a bona fide news photograph of a school document listing Barry Soetoro as an Indonesia citizen. Are you going to whine that the news photographer was ’speculating’ or that he or she was a so-called birther.’
how silly!
ksdb: But it doesn’t preclude an earlier visit in 1965 to get the proper authorities to recognize the adoption of Barry Soetoro had taken place.
The point being that you are asking folks here to prove the theoretical impossibility of highly implausible historical events. Why would anyone want to waste their time on such a mission, when you have already demonstrated that you will deny the proof, or try to wheedle out of sound arguments against you.
Because you haven’t contributed anything of a factual or evidential nature to the discussion and because you are posting so prolifically that you have basically taken over the discussion and made it difficult for others to follow anything else (this software has limited capability to manage discussions), I am treating you as a troll.
What I do with trolls is to moderate them, so that their comments do not appear immediately. I further edit all the comments into a single comment and post it once a day, thereby reducing disruption.
If you ever present some documented evidence of something or make a worthwhile argument, I’ll approve it as soon as I see it.
Dr. Conspiracy
ksdb: When you marry an American, adopt her child and move both overseas to your home country, it would have the effect of severing the legal tie to the United States.
Prove it.
“the kitty’s owner”
I am not his owner; I am his legal guardian. Don’t you support animal rights?
ksdb: Are you thinking Soetoro would have married SAD in 1965 but wait two years to adopt Obama??
Adoption? You have provided no evidence of an adoption apart from a surname on a school record, which is at best ambiguous. Prove it or move on.
ksdb wrote
“We have a bona fide news photograph of a school document listing Barry Soetoro as an Indonesia citizen. Are you going to whine that the news photographer was ’speculating’ or that he or she was a so-called birther'”
I said that was really silly and an example of the troll ksdb’s ignorance! OK!
Thank you Lupin. You are correct. There is nothing that will change this person. Please everyone stop engaging him.
Nope.
The actions of the husband in marrying an American, adopting her child and moving both overseas has no effect on the citizenship of either mom or child. Your citizenship cannot be taken away by any action of a third person.
You could argue that Mom’s actions are inconsistent with continued citizenship, but that’s not enough to lose citizenship. You would have to show that she had taken the actions with the intent to renounce her citizenship. Most people get married because they’re in love, not to lose their citizenship.
And if the evidence is equivocal, the court will find for citizenship.
The child here took no affirmative actions of his own that could even plausibly be argued were inconsistent with citizenship. He took no affirmative action on his own.
At the end of the day, we’re left with, “Maybe he convinced a consular official that he was able to renounce his citizenship.” Which is no better than, “Maybe he was put here by space aliens.”
That’s the problem with conspiracy theorists, they see any gap in the timeline and fill the gaps with conspiracy – like grout. Then they leave it up to everyone else to disprove their grout, I mean, theory.
Maybe we should just come up with counter-conspiracies.
Obama was born in Iowa to Ronald Reagan in his first marriage to an African-American woman. Since it was 1961, six years before Loving would make interracial marriage 100% legal across the land, their marriage broke up. Reagan, being a devout Catholic, wanted the marriage annulled so that he could marry again. Problem: the child. This was 1971. He created the fiction of Obama’s childhood, using his skills from Hollywood. The 4 years in Indonesia were convenient because Stanley Ann’s parents had had a car crash that left holes in their memory, specifically anything earlier than 1970. Stanley could claim that she had had Obama in 1967 and her parents wouldn’t be any wiser.
Reagan paid off Stanley Ann Dunham to claim that Obama was her child. She put the child with the grandparents, who only learned of the ruse a decade later. Reagan paid all of Obama’s school bills and hired someone to ghost-write his memoirs.
Obama bore a grudge against the man who had really fathered him. He swore that he would be more charismatic than Reagan, and would win the Presidency with less experience, but more skill. He would then dismantle the entire Reagan legacy. Obama’s final revenge, then, started to come to life when he was elected President.
Prove me wrong!
Ronald Reagan was a dual national, holding citizenship in the Netherlands as well as the US. That’s why they called him “Dutch Reagan” when he was in Hollywood.
Obama is also a Flying Dutchman, named after Dutch Reagan.
I asked ksdb: “George HW Bush vomited on the Japanese prime minister. Do you think the white wine came up with the fish?”
He never answered. It is traditional to serve white wine with fish. I think it is competely reasonable to ask if the corollary is true.
Ohhhh misha…LOL! That is sooo gross and yet I can’t stop laughing! Good one! Ba-da bing, ba-da zing!
Click on the red button: (bada-bing)
@Lupin: OT, but European progressives are dismayed at the States. Here: “Sterilized for Being Poor?”
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2010-01-16/sterilized-for-being-poor/
“When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and carrying a cross.” Sinclair Lewis
I can’t pretend to speak for “European progressives” (excluding the UK which is more than ever in the US orbit).
I would say that, so far, the European consensus across the board is that Obama has been somewhat of a disappointment. (My own opinion is more extreme, but I’m trying to genuinely report what I see or hear or read.)
The shorter version would be:
— Most Europeans aren’t aware of the finer points of your health care reform, but give him points for trying.
— Most Europeans don’t really follow the DOJ’s actions re civil rights, torture, Gitmo, etc. so in that area, he still gets a pass (wholly undeserved IMHO), if only by contrast with GWB.
— The biggest disappointment here is his perceived inability or unwillingness to come to grips with “Wall Street”, compared to steps taken by France, Germany and even the UK, or historically by FDR. Gethner’s management of the crisis has received no praises as far as I can tell.
— Obama still gets thumbs up on foreign policy (eg: the Nobel), but again the contrast with GWB is, I think, a powerful factor; his recent decision to go in deeper in Afghanistan has however tarnished this somewhat; our “frame” on “terror” remains substantially different from yours, so a huge gap remains. OTOH, Obama’s Haiti response has been widely praised.
We do get tidbits of the US’s general lunacy — from Pat Robertson’s insane Devil Pact claim to accusations of Obama being a socialist by the teabaggers to Sarah Palin’s or Glenn Beck’s latest rant — but I think this is discounted as colorful or freakish eccentricities, just as news of a Frenchman eating his weight in cheese or the latest pics of La Bruni in a bikini are perceived in America.
I don’t think most people here realize there IS a difference, and some (even many) Americans are dead serious about their craziness.
[Compilation of ksdb comments:]
Please show your proof.
Actually, there was nothing in the Immigration and Nationality Act at the time Obama was born that would have prevented it.
SAD married two foreign nationals, neither of whom showed any interest in being U.S. residents, and she moved away with one of them. At some point, there had to be some consideration over citizenship issues about whether to retain her own or apply for her husband’s. Being in love shouldn’t make a person that oblivious.
This is a strawman argument that doesn’t have particular bearing on the situation. We’re looking at what appears to be an intercountry adoption into a country that didn’t recognize dual citizenship and wasn’t party to any releveant international conventions. The only real saving grace for the child’s citizenship is moving back to the United States to be under the guardianship of the grandparents. What we don’t know is if Barry Soetoro was still legally Lolo’s child and if he affirmed adopted citizenship in some form as an adult, since the Soetoro divorce was not finalized until well into Barry’s adulthood.
This is false on two counts. No conspiracy is suggested by these cirucmstances. And nobody is leaving antyhing up to everyone else’ to disprove anything. There’s really only one person who is saddled with a burden of proof and so far, he’s provided very little.
Obamaphysics 101: For every criticism of the Messiah, there’s an opposite and unequal overreaction.
How would the name Obama not have been safe under this same scenario?? It doesn’t sound Chinese or communist, does it??
So why didn’t it say Barry Obama?? Why wasn’t he listed as an American citizen??
Perkins v. Elg (nor any other SCOTUS case I’m aware of) didn’t address a child who had been adopted by a foreign national, particularly in a country that does not recognize dual citizenship. Plus, if Barry Soetoro was still legally Lolo Soetoro’s adopted son up until the divorce to SAD was finalized in 1988 … then Barry was well past the age where his U.S. citizenship would have been protected. Like everything else, it’s just one more murky area that could be cleared up through the release of his personal records.
Like a divorce … of course. Looks mental abuse where this kitty is involved.
I’m not even sure that I’m the legal guardian of my cats. More like their housekeeper.
Sorry, but you need to prove why the account in the Honolulu Advertiser is not a credible account.
Would you care to provide a link to that story?
Obama would have been 3 or 4 years old.
Impossible. Obama’s mother graduated the University of Hawaii in 1967. Lolo Soetoro was called by to Indonesia after Sukarno was deposed in March, 1967. Obama’s mother stayed behind to finish her studies and make the preparations necessary to move her and Barack to Indonesia. So it almost certain that Obama had already reached his sixth birthday by the time he arrived in Indonesia.
That should be called BACK to Indonesia.
I think I’d disagree with the comment re the UK – while national opinion on the US has improved since the 2008 elections, the mood remains substantially skeptical with most people regarding American policy and so on.
The actions and beliefs of HM Gov are an entirely different matter, of course; while there is probably more impetus in Govt circles to preserve the “special relationship”, I think by and large public opinion in the UK favours the following optimal solutions, in this order: 1. Being left alone by everyone (people increasingly look to a more isolationist foreign policy); 2. Remaining part of the EU, begrudgingly; 3. maintaining special relations with the US.
I think the pervasive attitude of Euroskepticism has softened somewhat in recent years, albeit with the occasional resurgence around events like the constitutional treaty (deservedly so, IMO), and the pro-American attitude has withered a little in consequence.
I entirely agree with what you wrote; I was referring more to the official government position (Blair especially, then Brown).
I think seeing the pound reach parity with the euro was a powerful factor in convincing many ordinary Brits that maybe they should embrace Europe more. 🙂
Definitely, although patriotically, I must point out the current exchange rate :p
I think the very widespread and public dissatisfaction in the UK with the fact that we were misled into the Iraq war has strengthened pro-European tendencies.
As to the EU – I conceptually support it myself, but in practice, it needs some fundamental changes, particularly in the area of the democratic deficit.
Poor K, still void of any understanding of law, precedent legal cases relating to children being able to renounce their citizenship, or Wong Kim Ark which ruled that any child born on US soil, regardless of the status of its parents, is a natural born with minor exceptions.
And of course he is still licking his wounds after his missing space argument ended up strengthening the authenticity of Obama’s COLB
Mission Failed
Don’t be too hard on yourself…
You are facing the task of having to rebut a prima facie legal document that shows Obama, by any standard born on US soil.
I see you are unfamiliar with SCOTUS precedents in this area.
I am not surprised.
“”Dutch” Reagan
By Jane Runyon
Jack Reagan looked at his second son when he was born. He laughed and said that he looked like a “fat little Dutchman.” That was all that it took for a nickname to be attached to the boy. Ronald Wilson Reagan was known as Dutch throughout his growing years.
That’s about the extent of KSDB’s ‘proof’…
Hilarious
Nothing a person does at the age of 7 or 8 counts against them in adulthood, not even murder. So, ANYTHING that happened while Obama was in Indonesia before the age of 10 is simply irrelevant. Not even worth discussing.
We are a year into Obama’s Presidency now. Surely, we should be discussing actual policies rather than events that ocurred when he was a child?
If it actually were the case that a US Citizen, born in the United States, could lose their citizenship merely through the process of being adopted by a foreign national, then one would expect those promoting such a theory to produce an example or evidence, such as one of the following:
I’ve read extensively in these areas, and never seen any such thing.
It’s not so much the sound of the name as what goes along with it — like 8 aunts and uncles, a horde of cousins (some who lived next door), a Grandmother, a stepfather, a mother. As an Obama, Barry would be different. As a Soetoro, he’d be one of many. Which is more obvious?
Interesting article (from a Wikipedia link)
http://www.jawapos.com/halaman/index.php?act=detail&nid=34068
Pretty bad Google Translation, though. Interesting to note that the article refers to Barry Soetoro. It also says: “Although only a stepchild, aka Barry Soetoro Obama was treated like a son by Soetoro.” Interviews with other relatives.
That is a great conspiracy….It could be possible…Who knows? It is more plausible than the theory that somehow Stanley Ann flew 3 days to Kenya to have Barack in 1961…
Outgoing adoptions from the United States are evidently rare .. I saw an estimate of about 500, I assume per year. Check this out:
Here it suggests most countries would recognize dual citizenship … but nothing about those which are not Hague Convention countries, such as Indonesia that we know does not recognize dual citizenship. Notice too, that is says the child retains its citizenship if adopted to a Convention country … it doesn’t say ALL countries … which suggests that in an international court, U.S citizenship for an adopted minor may not be protected. The question isn’t just about Barry Soetoro being an Indonesian citizen as a child but whether he voluntarily acted as an Indonesian citizen as an adult, still being the legal child of Lolo Soetoro.
Thanks for engaging in an open, civil and logical discussion … when this story was written they may have been repeating the ‘official’ story about Obama being a stepchild. The publication date looks like it was right at the time Obama was elected — it’s not like this is being written as an investigative piece. What is unclear is if in reality, Barry was treated like Lolo’s son because he legally was.
If Barry was given the Soetoro surname for protection, one would think it would be an interesting side story for Obama to talk about somewhere, such as in one of his books. Instead, no mention of an alternate surname is ever brought up, leaving an unexplained footnote after the school registration was found by the press.
1. You’re right, no conspiracy, just an agreement to lie about his alleged adoption by his mother, step-father and grandparents.
2. The 0-67 record confirms that the person with the burden has consistently failed to meet it. Obama, on the other hand, has proved his bona fides to the satisfaction of 69 million Americans.
If it’s such good evidence, one would think Obama’s legal team would simply show it in a courtroom to get a quicker dismissal of any lawsuits. Instead, the best they do is to point to an unofficial Web site as if it has any legal authority to authenticate the COLB, when the amateur ‘investigators’ couldn take clear pictures of the alleged document nor even set the right date on a digital camera. Jpgs and digital photos are not prima facie evidence. Sorry, but you have nothing.
So, you’re saying that when the court said that no third party could take away the citizenship of a minor, they weren’t talking about adoptions?
Why don’t you actually read the case now. Tell me what the case says that leads you to believe that it should be limited only to its facts. You might also want to read Afroyim v. Rusk and Vance v. Terrazas. That last case said this:
How does Obama being adopted prove that he, personally, intended to renounce his US citizenship?
And before you get to the nonsense about how none of the cases have gotten to the merits, read Iqbal and Twombly. The birther cases wouldn’t survive the pleading standard set forth in those cases, even if you could prove standing.
Whoops, meant to reply to my post below.
Just an extra couple of notes: Why Obama didn’t lose his original birth certificate that was written about in his book. First, Obama was a Harvard lawyer … record keeping would be very important and routine. Second, he was a community organizer where record keeping would be very important and routine. Third, he was a state politician where record keeping would be very important routine. Fourth, he was a frequent international traveler, where keeping personal records would be very important and routine. Fifth, he kept his grandfather’s paspport as a personal memento(and used it??) and he apparently places great value on personal documents. Sixth, he’s an obvious metrosexual. So, we’re to think Obama might have lost his original copy of his birth certificate?? No way.
Next, the Nordyke twins newspaper announcement casts some doubt that Barry was born in the same hospital, and perhaps not in a hospital at all. Barry was born after the close of normal business hours on a Friday. The Nordyke twins were born Saturday from the same weekend. Logically, these two births would have been documented and registered with the state at the same time. Instead, Obama’s is registered the following Tuesday, while the Nordyke certificate isn’t registered until Friday. Why the delay?? Mother Nordyke signed the certificate Monday, but the doctor didn’t sign it till Friday. The reason might have been that doctors don’t sign the certificate until releasing the patients from the hospital. Nordyke’s doctor signed it on Aug. 11 and it was accepted that same day by the registrar. If similar procedures were followed for Obama, his certificate wouldn’t have been filed until Aug. 10, not Aug. 8. This leaves open the possibility that Obama wasn’t born in the hospital at all. Instead, the birth may have been unattended and was reported by persons unknown on Aug. 8 directly to the registrar. This scenario also helps explain why Obama has a higher certificate number than the Nordykes. The Nordyke number could have been issued when the mother signed the certificate on Aug. 7 and the Obama number could have been issued when the birth was registered with the state on Aug. 8. Having a birth certificate submitted and signed by the grandmother – with no attending physician – would create a lot of questions that Obama doesn’t want to answer — probably because he can’t, and maybe he doesn’t really know for sure where he was really born. Seeing a certified copy of the original birth record would help clear up any questions.
“I’ve read extensively in these areas, and never seen any such thing.”
Facts have never gotten in the way of denialists.
“Scientist” erroneously stated, “Nothing a person does at the age of 7 or 8 counts against them in adulthood, not even murder.”. That proves that he does not know or understand anything concerning the operation of law. In 1997, Michigan ruled a child, no matter how young, can be tried and sentenced as an adult (the law still stands and is regularly enforced) – and when a child of any age is tried as an adult in any state, the criminal record that is created is not sealed or expunged when the child reaches the age of majority. “Scientist” is a typical delusional Obama supporter, he, like all the rest, simply makes up imaginary laws to support the fables he posts and hopes that no one comes along and discovers that he is lying.
Who has PROVEN that Obama ever possessed U.S. Citizenship? Don’t give me the b/s about how “69 million” voted for him, that has absolutely NO bearing whatsoever on whether or not he is a “natural born Citizen” or whether or not he meets the required Constitutional qualifications to hold office. The U.S.A. is NOT a “democracy” (which equates to little more than mob rule), it is a “REPRESENTATIVE REPUBLIC”, which is governed by the rule of law. “Afroyim v. Rusk, 387 U.S. 253” is by no stretch of the imagination applicable to Obama’s situation and you should know better than to post such bold faced lies. If you are a licensed Attorney at Law, you will soon be disbarred for malpractice and misapplication of citations. Any client of yours will be robbed and ruined before his case ever gets to trial!
“Scientist” – The law must be upheld! You very foolishly stated, “Surely, we should be discussing actual policies rather than events that ocurred when he was a child?”. WRONG, WRONG, WRONG – your comment proves beyond all reasonable doubt you have no respect for the rule of law!
Excellent point. Those poor birthers have no understanding of Constitutional Law.
Suckers.
Now that Obama is in office, the burden falls on your side to prove that he is not. Since you have no evidence, your side is still born.
ksdb seems to think that a self-registration is quicker than a hospital registration. This is not the case.
ksdb: This has been discussed at length here before. Go back and read the history. The “short form” is that no birth certificate will satisfy those determined to maintain the smear campaign for political purposes.
So are you admitting that your “legal theory” of loss of citizenship through adoption has left no tracks in the law, the courts, government regulation or the news? If all this is the case, then where did YOU come up with it from?
Why would Indonesia being a Hague signatory or not have anything to do about whether the United States considered him a citizen?
Joseph, simply saying that Afroyim is not applicable is not an argument. It is a conclusory statement. Read the case and tell me how, exactly, it is not applicable. I’d wager you haven’t read the case, and are simply parroting the so-called analysis of “lawyers” like Taitz.
As for my skill as a lawyer, that’s rich coming from a group that is 0-67 in legal cases. If your clients were paying for their legal services, they’d be as monetarily bankrupt as they are morally bankrupt!
The quickest dismissal is one based on jurisdiction. If Obama were to dispute the facts, he could not get summary judgment. You guys are completely ignorant of the law.
Maybe you should learn something about the law before you start a debate about it!
Let’s apply Occam’s razor – which is more likely? Obama lost his birth certificate, or Obama forged a COLB?
And a much simpler possibility for the differing signature dates is that the physician delivering Obama was a weekday physician and the one delivering Nordyke was a weekender.
Iqbal and Twombly say that you cannot simply string together facts into a conspiracy tale. You have to give facts that, on their face, are more than just consistent with your tale, but suggest a violation of law.
As for Obama’s grandmother, even if Obama’s grandmother signed an affidavit to get the birth certificate, it would have the same legal effect. It would still be a legal document attested to by the State of Hawaii. Grandma’s signature would be admissible hearsay under FRE 803.19. In fact, you would now have two pieces of evidence of Obama’s birth you would have to disprove rather than one.
Actually the Constitution mentions Republican form of government only with regard to the states (Article 4) and not the Federal government. And I don’t think most Americans would like a Republic without democracy-see the Union of Soviet Socialist REPUBLICS or the Islamic REPUBLIC of Iran.
What you birthers neglect is that Article 2 lays out clearly that the President is required not just to be a naturally born citizen over 35 years of age. If that were the case, about 250 million people would be President. The President must also be elected. In fact, the manner of the election comes before natural born citizen in the Constitution. So whoever you wish to install in the Presidency in place of Obama would be illegitimate, since they would not have been elected.
Notice too, that is says the child retains its citizenship if adopted to a Convention country … it doesn’t say ALL countries … which suggests that in an international court, U.S citizenship for an adopted minor may not be protected.
Even in the unlikely event that your conclusion is true, it is irrelevant. For purposes of “natural born citizen” status, the only relevant law is United States law.
Of course, “suggests” and “may” are weasel words used when there are no actual facts to back up your theories. Show us one case where someone was born in the U.S., adopted by someone in a foreign country, and was subsequently ruled by an international court to no longer be a U.S. citizen. You can’t do it, because it has never happened.
The question isn’t just about Barry Soetoro being an Indonesian citizen as a child but whether he voluntarily acted as an Indonesian citizen as an adult, still being the legal child of Lolo Soetoro.
No, the question is – where is your evidence that Obama was EVER the legal child of Lolo Soetoro? Incidentally, I noticed that you never responded to an earlier note where I pointed out that Obama could not possibly have been “3 or 4 years old” when he moved to Indonesia, as you have claimed. Lolo was called back to Indonesia when Sukarno was deposed in March of 1967, and Obama and his mother stayed behind while she finished her studies at the University of Hawaii (Class of 1967). Obama was almost 6 years old when his mother received her degree.
I have also noticed that the birthers never mention this passage from Obama’s book, where he talks about his relationship with Lolo while the lived in Indonesia:
“So it was to Lolo that I turned for guidance and instruction. He didn’t talk much, but he was easy to be with. With is family and friends he introduced me as his son, but he never pressed things beyond matter-of-fact advice or pretended that our relationship was more than it was.”
That doesn’t sound like someone describing his adoptive father. In fact, it sounds like a fairly typical stepfather-stepson relationship.
I notice all uncertainties in your ‘argument’ combined with an appeal to international court rather than US Court.
What a fool.
Maybe he has his original BC and he simply can’t be bothered to look for it and release it. And frankly, why should he? There is no legal requirement to release anything, including the COLB. None. Zero. Most of his predecessors in the Oval Office released nothing at all in the way of personal info. They left their papers to be studied by scholars long after they left office.
Where required by state law, Obama cerified under penalty of perjury that he met the requirements to be President. And that oath by itself has presumptive standing that has to be overcome by some evidence. And what actual evidence (as opposed to speculation) do the birthers have to rebut the presumption that he was born in Hawaii? None. Zero. The depositions of Pastor McRae and the Kenyan “Reverend’ are valueless, since they were not present at the birth. When you have a sworn deposition from someone who actually claims to have been present at a birth in Kenya or anywhere else outside the US, let me know. The bottom line is that past and current laws do not require a presidential candidate to show a darned thing and few of them have. You want to change the law? Go ahead and try, but nothing can be applied ex post facto to the 2008 election.
So there is no legal reason for Obama to show his original BC (assuming he has it). There is no political reason either. Showing the COLB made zero impact on the campaign. Simply a non-factor in the polls. There are no votes to be won or lost over this birther stuff. You birthers wouldn’t support Obama if there was video of his being born in Times Square and proof from DNA testing that his Dad was Wilt Chamberlain (not out of the question given his reported sexual exploits).
Nope. Obama has already released more than the law requires. If I were he, I probably wouldn’t have even done that much. He is 100% justified in ignoring the issue from that point forward. You may not like it, but that is the reality, both legally and politically.
My understanding is that the Obama campaign ordered a number of copies of the COLB to meet state filing requirements. Even if Obama still has the certificate mentioned in his autobiography, it may be a hospital souvenir and not a certified copy. If it is a real state-certified copy, it is what one might call “obsolete”. Obama published the current version.
I see no evidence to suggest that whatever document Obama came across when he was in high school is either lost or not.
What a wierd bunch of assumptions. I want to comment on just this one:
“Fourth, he was a frequent international traveler, where keeping personal records would be very important and routine”
I started travelling internationally 30 years ago and am on I think my third passport. I have no ‘personal records’ kept regarding my travel and have no idea where my BC is.
And that ‘metrosexual’ thing is just bizarre.
The only “personal records” that frequent international travelers need to have readily available are their current passport and their vaccination records. In some cases they may also need other information for travel to some countries, such as proof of medical insurance — but these requirements tend to be focused on current information, not historical personal data.
Sorry, but you’re making excuses based on a strawman argument so you don’t have to admit there are several holes in Obama’s ‘official’ story and that there are legitimate questions that can’t be answered by the presentation of an unauthenticated jpg.
This is referring to the Hague Convention on Adoption, which was written in 1993 and went into force in the US in 2008. The 1930 Hague Convention on Certain Questions of Nationality has this to say about citizenship:
I don’t see anything in the newer Hague Convention that suggests that Obama would have lost his citizenship in the United States. In fact, the Supreme Court has been clear that the Constitution trumps treaties, even the Hague Convention. The right to citizenship is a Constitutional Right, so no treaty can take it away without the consent of the person involved.
I’ve explained quite clearly where I came up with it and have cited the relevant laws. I don’t expect a United States court to rule that Obama lost his U.S. nationality unless a court case revealed records indicating that Obama maintained and acted with singular Indonesia citizenship into his adulthood. An absence of similar legal cases prior to this is irrelevant. It would be, as Obama likes to say, unprecedented.
It’s not about what the United States would recognize IN the United States, but what protection the State Department would be able to provide for an adopted former citizen in another country. For example, a former U.S. citizen might violate the law in his new country and want U.S. protection, but without dual citizenship being recognized in that country, the U.S. would be unable to provide much help. It might affect whether someone could travel on a U.S. passport after being adopted or whether the U.S. could legally issue a passport to such a person in another country. The Hague Convention gives more legal protections for member countries.
Nonsense. This isn’t about uncertainties, but where the dispute takes place and if another nation’s law have precedence and must be considered. Under a legal adoption with another country, there’s not really another way around it.
The section prior to what you quoted says:
This suggests that if Indonesian law made Barry Soetoro a singular Indonesian citizen, then the U.S. would recognize this under international law. Part 17 says:
Certainly someone would have recognized that an adoption to Indonesia would result in a potential loss of U.S. citizenship, which could have been prevented by simply disallowing such an adoption. Once formalized, then any dispute would technically need to be referred to an International court.
The only vaccination record people USED to keep was the old bright yellow UN vaccination booklet that was used particularly if you had to keep having the 6 monthly cholera jabs……Oh happy days…I haven’t seen those is 25 years
My God that’s it…..Birther proof that is all a UN/NWO plot……yippee
The quickest way is a motion to dismiss based on lack of standing my confused friend. Why should the legal team, which has only been involved in a handful of cases, present a document when there are much quicker ways to resolve these issues?
SO far it’s 64-0 and you claim I have nothing 🙂
You’re so funny. What I have is a certified COLB with raised seal and signature with all relevant items confirmed. Furthermore, the document is prima facie legal evidence.
You on the other hand, had an accusation of forgery based on a missing space, which turned out to strengthen the authenticity of the document.
Good job pal…
KSDB is not interested in facts, just insinuations. Ignorance is his weapon and denial his retreat.
Even if Obama still has the certificate mentioned in his autobiography, it may be a hospital souvenir and not a certified copy.
Good point. My “original” birth certificate, which was found in my mother’s records after she died, is signed by the local registrar but is not certified and has no raised seal. The copy which I obtained in 1988 is signed by the registrar and has a raised seal.
The “original” was universally accepted forty years ago, but likely would not be accepted today.
ksdb: I’ve explained quite clearly where I came up with it and have cited the relevant laws.
I suppose one might say finally you have explained your rationale. But I see your reading of the Hague Convention on Adoption as faulty. The main problem is that Indonesia is not a signatory to the Hague Convention, so however it is read is moot, and you still don’t have a scrap of law to back up your theory.
However, if the Hague Convention were in effect, your reading is still defective. For your contention to be valid based on the very treaty you cite, there would have to be some provision in US law that supports it. Until you cough up such US law, those provisions are not in effect, even if Indonesia were a signatory to the Hague Convention on Adoption, which it isn’t.
One cannot gloss over major defects like that.
man, that idiot ksdb has a vivid imagination, he continully makes up crap to support a silly idea. Is he aware that the election is over and Obama has been president for over a year.
They would recognize that he was an Indonesian citizen. That’s not the question. The question is whether they would recognize that Obama lost his United States citizenship.
They would not recognize that.
Article 1 would permit Indonesia to refuse to recognize Obama’s US Citizenship, but it does not require the United States to revoke Obama’s citizenship.
Which is good, because if it did, it would conflict with the Constitution (see cases cited above), and according to the Constitution’s Supremacy Clause, it is the Supreme Law of the land, trumping even multilateral treaties like the Hague Convention.
The United States does NOT recognize that its citizenship can be lost by adoption alone. Unless we’re talking about the adoption of an adult, there is no voluntary act on the part of the adoptee. There certainly isn’t inherent in the act of BEING adopted that evidences a clear intention to renounce one’s US Citizenship!
And, how would this dispute come up? Theoretically, Indonesia doesn’t recognize Obama’s US citizenship, but the US doesn’t believe he ever lost that citizenship. According to Article 2 of the Convention, you don’t go by Indonesian law to determine US citizenship, you use US LAW.
And do you have any evidence that Indonesia expressed any reservations to Article 2? As far as I can tell, no country has ever expressed any reservations about Article 2.
So, Obama shouldn’t rely on the State Department when he’s in Indonesia. He should rely on the Secret Service instead.
We’re not arguing about whether Obama is a citizen of Indonesia, but whether by dint of that citizenship he lost his US citizenship.
He could not, because US Constitutional law is SUPREME – it’s in the title of the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution!
The Constitution trumps international treaties.
Just like the Hulk can beat up Spiderman, the Constitution always wins in a fight against treaties.
Citizenship is a Constitutional right, which cannot be taken away without the actual consent of the person. Afroyim v. Rusk.
It can’t be taken away by the Congress.
It can’t be taken away by treaty.
It certainly can’t be taken away by Indonesia!
The adoption, then, without more, did nothing to Obama’s citizenship. It could not do anything to Obama’s citizenship.
As for an action later in Obama’s life, simply continuing to be Indonesian would not be enough. You’d have to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that Obama took an affirmative act with the intent to renounce his US Citizenship. Vance v. Terrazas.
In other words, you cannot simply prove an expatriating act, you have to separately and distinctly prove an intent to renounce US citizenship.
Let’s see.
Obama returned to the US at age 10, lived here continuously until the present day. He traveled briefly abroad in 1981 for, what, a couple of months? On this trip, he was identified in France as a US student. He then returned to the United States where he got a law degree, ran for office and then ran for the Presidency.
I’m not sure where you’re going to find the intent to expatriate there.
Do you understand what I’m talking about when I say “intent?”
Just to be clear, we’re talking specific intent here. You have to prove not that Obama intended to get an Indonesian passport (or whatever expatriating act you’re alleging) but that he intended to renounce his citizenship. Or, as the court put it, “the trier of fact must in the end conclude that the citizen not only voluntarily committed the expatriating act prescribed in the statute, but also intended to relinquish his citizenship.”
John Yoo of the Justice Department wrote a memo on how to prove denaturalization. Here’s what Yoo says about expatriation:
Hague CONVENTION ON PROTECTION OF CHILDREN AND CO-OPERATION IN RESPECT OF INTERCOUNTRY ADOPTION
Where’s the part there that deals with citizenship or nationality?
I’m a good example. I was born in NYC. In Israel, I was asked to serve in the IDF. So I went to the US Embassy in Tel Aviv, and talked with a legal affairs officer. I asked, if I served in a foreign army would I lose my US citizenship, because there is that proviso.
He told me “no.” I was told in order to lose my US citizenship, I would have to renounce it in writing. Which of course I would never do. So here is someone who served in a foreign army, and came back to the States on his US passport.
Sorry birthers.
If Barry does not have a Certificate of Loss of Nationality (CLN) on file with the U.S. State Department, then he never lost his U.S. Citizenship.
There should also be a Statement of Understanding with witness signatures, an Oath of Renunciation and a complete record of US State Department contacts with Barry because he was a minor when he renounced.
Let’s see the file.
John Walker Lindh not only fought in a foreign army, he fought against US forces. Not only did he retain his citizenship, but the US government agreed to feed and shelter him for the next 20 or 30 years
Exactly! And, of course there’s no evidence of any such Certificate.
Mr Whitman,
Let me see if I get this straight. You want, I assume the President, to prove that he did not renounce by showing you a file that does not exist. Yet if he, or the State Department, showed you this, the claim would be that the filed was sealed or scrubbed.
So, your results would be:
1. File with information on his renouncing US citizenship when a youth
or
2. Empty file, which will be claimed as sealed or scrubbed, thus, he still renounced.
What would be his motivation here?
Sven: please crawl back under your rock.
Thank you.
It’s not the case simply because YOU say so??
Since Obama never claimed to lose his birth certificate, then b is not too unlikely.
The so-called ‘weekender’ signed the Nordyke certificate on a Friday and Obama was born on a Friday. Look like both cases could have been handled by the same doctor … if Obama was attended by a doctor in a hospital.
No, you miss the point. If Granny Toot signed the certificate, the question goes to Obama … Why?? The next question would be the absence of a doctor’s signature … Why?? And if no doctor and not in a hospital, the question is … Where??
We shouldn’t have to speculate about whether it’s a hospital souvenir or an official, doctor-signed certificate filed in accordance with state regulations … Mr. Transparent should have no reason not to show it.
Lolo and SAD married in 1965, so the appropriate Hague Convention is probably this one.
http://www.hcch.net/index_en.php?act=conventions.text&cid=75&zoek=nationality
Good point about vaccination records. In Obama’s book, he says he found his birth certificate WITH his vaccination records. Wondered why people would keep vaccination records and the obvious answer is to travel … and those records were being kept with his birth certificate … obviously for his travel identification. As a minor, he may not have had his own passport. Good call.
What?
Barack’s passport file exists and can prove or disprove his eligibililty to be POTUS.
An extensive record will be availble if Barack renounced … witnesses, testimonials, contacts, applications, approvals, certificates, etc.
What is he afraid of? It would be a terrific way to silence his eligibility critics.
The U.S. signed on to the Hague Convention and is a member. Do you disagree?? Is that not a ‘scrap’ of law by your reckoning? Second, this Web site about this state department site says:
“A child being adopted from the United States to another Convention country retains his/her U.S. citizenship. ”
http://adoption.state.gov/hague/outgoing/citizenship.html
When you click through on the link of Convention countries, Indonesia is NOT on that list. If U.S. citizenship is retained through adoption to Convention countries, then the assumption is (as this is written) that it may NOT be retained when adopted by non-Convention countries. Otherwise, that passage should say retained through adoption to ALL countries. Is it wrong or poorly worded?? Maybe. Or maybe it’s simply jibes with my comment that the state department has less power to protect citizenship in non convention countries.
Umm…
If the President renounced, there will be records. If he did not, there will be none. Therefore, to prove the President did not renounce, he has to show you… nothing… an empty file… a blank piece of paper?
That would surely silence all critics…
You and your fellow critics would not be sileneced anyd because you really do not care if he is eligible. You dislike him greatly and want him out. Nothing he does will change that.
“Sven: please crawl back under your rock.”
that’s a ditto for his alter ego (Whitman)
Ever try to show a non-existing record, especially to a retarded birher?
Sven, you are getting more ridiculous each post. Although there is no evidence that the president ever renounced his citizenship, and you cannot find one example of a US minor ever renouncing, he is guilty until proven innocent. That makes no sense. You and your fellow birthers come up with these wild fantasy theories of what possibly could have happened without one iota of real evidence, and your response is that the President needs to prove that it didn’t happen. Fortunately for us here in the real world, the burden of proof is on you. You are kdsb are the ones that have come up with this wild fantasy, you need to come up with some sort of evidence to support it. How about a person that remembers the President renouncing his US citizenship? How about proof that the President was officially an Indonesian citizen? Proof would be official corresponsence from the government of Indonesia. How about proof that the president was adopted? If he had been I am sure someone would remember that. I mean you expect that there should be doctors that remember his birth in 1961, so this should be a piece of cake. However all you have is innuendo and rampant speculation. And somehow that is supposed to compel the President to release his private records? Are you kidding me? We all know that anyone that chooses to believe in an theory with not one piece of supporting documentation is not going to believe anything the President releases or says.
So you found a scrap of law that says US Citizenship is retained when adoption is made to a Hague Convention country, and no scrap of law that says that is is not otherwise. That equals no scrap. You can’t argue affirmatively from something that isn’t said. Law doesn’t work that way. Either there is a law that says citizenship is lost, or there is not. In fact, there is not, and you are just flailing about in groundless speculation.
Wierdly there are a bunch of comments I can see in the “Recent Comments” folder, but cannot see here- pretty much everything before Richcares last post to Scientists post about John Walker Lindh.
I don’t know the exact year that the US stopped issuing family passports, but they are only valid when the minor is traveling with the passport holder. We know that Obama was traveling alone on at least one such occasion, so he would have had his own passport.
Inclusion of the word “nationality” in the text does not mean that there is any relevant passage to the discussion here.
ksdb: It’s not the case simply because YOU say so??
I am what you call an “expert”.
But the regulation requires the parent to file in the case of an unattended birth.
ksdb: Mr. Transparent should have no reason not to show it.
And you have no reason to ask for it. That’s the point birthers, proofers, and denialists in general fail to understand.
The answer to your “problem” is obvious. Stop speculating and move on!! The matter is 100% MOOT.
Wow! That was easy…
Hit older posts at the bottom of the comments section. All the other comments are in previous sections.
That photograph also lists Obama’s birthplace as Honolulu, Hawaii, USA.
That’s all that matters, racosta.
Just as good a call as your ‘missing space’ other than that the missing space ended up authenticating rather than rebutting the COLB.
Too bad.
😉
He did show and it and you authenticated it through your ‘missing space’ argument. The COLB is all you need.
Mission Failed
Since Obama never claimed to have kept his BC, and since he has provided you his latest one… Well you know..
Failed.
No, they aren’t. I just went back through all the previous screens looking for the Doctor’s “scrap” comment. It’s not visible to my web-browser (Chrome) on any of the pages.
I haven’t tried it, yet, with the other posts or other browsers (there are a lot of pages).
Burden would still be on you. Regardless of the provenance of the information given to the state, the state has still vouched for it by embossing their seal on it and signing it.
Prove that the state should not have accepted Grandma’s signature. That’s the crucial step you’ll have to pass in order to even attempt to shift the burden onto Obama. Otherwise, any cases you bring will be stillborn in the merits phase as they fail to make a plausible claim. (Feel free to read Iqbal and Twombly, you might learn something – it could improve your pretend-lawyering.)
That’s not the Hague convention that was being referenced in your earlier comment from the State Department. When the State Department says that children who are adopted into convention countries, they are talking about the later convention.
However, thank you for linking that convention. It also has nothing that suggests that a nation must recognize the expatriation of an adoptee.
You need to think things out before you go and show yourself like this
None provide what I asked for … and for obvious reasons (fraud).
That’s absolutely false. HRS 338-6 says:
The law says from ANY PERSON. Sorry, Dr. C, but your claim of expertise is easily debunked.
Wrong. The state has not vouched for it because the alleged COLB has not been authenticated by the state as valid and not a forgery. Possessing an embossed seal and signature does not guarantee that it’s not a forgery and the state has refused to say it’s valid.
If you have something you think is meaningful to share with your citations of I&T, please post. I’m not going on a goose chase for your amusement. Further, I haven’t said Granny’s signature is not valid, just that it would raise questions if her signature was on the original certificate and not a doctor or either of the parents.
We have a Constitutional reason and right to ask for it. Mr. Transparent is born to a foreign national father and is not clearly a natural born citizen. The Constitution guarantees my right to ask for proof.
As soon as the issuing agency says it’s real and/or supports the claim with an original, doctor-signed certificate, then would it be authenticated. As is … not so much.
You’re a riot CHufho. Not much content but somewhat entertaining anyway.
All of the birthers are unintentionally hilarious.
ksdb: Mr. Transparent is born to a foreign national father and is not clearly a natural born citizen.
Well we all agree that the President had a foreign national father. So why are you asking for a obsolete birth certificate version if we are in agreement?
ksdb: The law says from ANY PERSON. Sorry, Dr. C, but your claim of expertise is easily debunked.
You read but you do not understand. The law, as you yourself cited it says “If neither parent of the newborn child whose birth is unattended as provided in section 338-5 is able to prepare a birth certificate….” In the case of Barack Obama there was no reason one of the parents were unable to prepared the the certificate (in the fictional born outside a hospital scenario) and therefore the “any person” does not go into effect. You think Obama’s grandmother sauntered in on Monday morning and said: “I want to register a birth last Friday night in Honolulu. My daughter and her husband can’t come in and register it because they are in Africa.” Duh. The questions immediately raised by the non-presence of one of the parents is why a simple declaration by the grandmother is simply not a viable theory.
In any case, the regulation you cited is the wrong one, not being the one in effect when President Obama was born. At that time registration of births was regulated by §57-8, which said:
You see, this whole “grandmother registered Obama” fantasy is based on incomplete research.
I am not only an expert, but I also have excellent reading comprehension.
Looks like the indexing between “Recent Comments” and the comments page is shot.
If you click on a recent comment it defaults to the last page of comments
It always goes to the last page of comments. If the comment in question is on that page, then it is located and if not it isn’t. The Recent Comment widget is not smart enough to figure out which page the comment is on. [Sigh]
It also guarantees your right to ask if God exists. It doesn’t require God or Obama to answer your questions.
Could is a whole different animal than would. Could is mere speculation that is consistent with the facts. We can spin out dozens of theories that could be true. That doesn’t cut it, not under Iqbal and Twombly.
Show that the doctor would have been the same, that he would have signed the Nordyke certificate on Friday morning, delivered Obama in the afternoon, then delivered the Nordyke children on Monday and that it would be unusual for the Nordyke certificate to have a lower number.
You’re in the situation that every attorney finds him/herself in in every case – having to prove a point without a piece of evidence, often the key piece of evidence. You look at what you can prove and can get access to and what you need to prove.
Here, you need to disprove the dozens of other consistent theories so that the notion that there were shenanigans in the filing of Obama’s certificate becomes the most likely.
HIPAA protects birth certificates? It doesn’t protect the names of the doctors who were working at the hospital at the time.
So, go figure out which doctors were working at the hospital in August 1961, and what their schedules were. Then you could disprove my alternate possibility, that the doctor who delivered the Nordyke children was different than the doctor who delivered Obama, and he didn’t return to the hospital to finalize the certificate until the next Friday.
The Federal Rules of Evidence disagree. A document that possesses an embossed seal and signature is self-authenticating therefore no one has to come into court to authenticate it.
See FRE 902(1) and (2)
And, no, I’m tired of giving college drop-outs a legal education so I’m not going to digest I & T into little tiny bite-sized pieces for you to ignore. They stand for a specific proposition, one that is obvious to anyone who has read about them on wikipedia, and one that I have stated before. To wit:
Iqbal and Twombly say that you cannot simply string together facts into a conspiracy tale. You have to give facts that, on their face, are more than just consistent with your tale, but suggest a violation of law.
I didn’t say you did say the signature was invalid. This is where reading comprehension comes into play.
I’m saying that no matter what “questions” her signature on the original BC “raise,” they don’t suffice to invalidate a document, like the COLB, which is self-authenticating under FRE 902 and is admissible as an exception to hearsay under FRE 803(9). Nor do the “questions” rise to the level required by Iqbal and Twombly – you still don’t have a case that can survive dismissal for failure to state a claim.
1. This refers to the 1993 Hague Convention on the Adoption of Children.
2. The Supreme Court is clear that children cannot lose their citizenship through the actions of their parents. It is clear that a person cannot lose their citizenship without clear proof that that person intended to revoke their citizenship. It is also clear that the Constitution trumps treaties – that the Supreme Court beats the State Department in the rock-paper-scissors game.
3. Given number 2, the only possible reading of that sentence is that the foreign country might not recognize the child’s US citizenship, but that convention countries would recognize that citizenship. That is not the same as saying that the US would consider the child’s citizenship lost.
Nonsense. It’s very self-explanatory and clear. ANY PERSON.
The problem is that you’re assuming to know the facts when none have ever been presented. I haven’t said that Granny absolutely filed the birth, just that it’s very possible under law, which it is, and would be a reasonable explanation as to why Obama continues to hide his original birth certificate.
No, if she was trying to fool the registrar, I doubt she would give herself away.
This is false. The law I cited has been in effect since 1949 and was revised in 1959 when Hawaii became a state.
What you’re citing became HRS 388-5 (which is cited by HRS 338-6), and was in effect concurrently which the latter statute at the time Obama was born. You seem to ignore anything that undermines your steadfast and unjustified faith in Obama. It’s time to stop carrying water for a hypocrite who preaches transparency, but doesn’t practice what he preaches.
Again ksdb, there is no proof that the President ever was adopted. No adoption papers were ever submitted nor has anyone ever admitted that it happened. So arguing this point makes no sense. You are making an argument for something that you cannot prove happened. And it is not up to the President to prove that he was not adopted, it is up to you to prove that he was. And the school form is not legally admissible proof of adoption. You may want to look up the FRE if you have a question about that.
This part isn’t inconsistent with the way earlier conventions worked, which recognize that the law of the country where a child is being adopted to is the law that takes precedence, except as protected under the convention. Kids adopted in member countries have Hague protections, but not in non-member countries … specifically through the recognition of dual citizenship. Indonesia has only recently started to recognize it, although I don’t believe they are a member country yet (certainly not according to the list).
For a child adopted in and residing in another country, the Supreme Court means diddly. If you review my posts, in No. 65 and 249, I’ve already acknowledged that Obama’s U.S. citizenship would still be recognized IN the United States … except if he retained singular Indonesia citizenship as the adult child of Lolo Soetoro. In that case, the SCOTUS can’t provide automatic protection because an adult, Obama would … should, understand the impact of holding foreign citizenship. As with every other facet of Barry Soetoro’s youth, we just don’t have physical documentation to show how he declared his citizenship, such as when traveling to Pakistan.
Sorry, but this is a meaningless distinction when the real question would be whether the U.S. would have any power to protect a child’s U.S. citizenship in another country where dual citizenship is not recognized. The claim here by faithers was that there was no way Barry Soetoro could have been an Indonesian citizen and as is now obvious, that is patently false. Until more of his background is documented, just about anything is possible.
Sorry, but that school form can’t be explained away with nanny-nanny boo boo. Second, the idea that he was adopted is also supported by the Soetoro divorce decree which declares an adult child as part of the proceedings. I admit, it’s not ironclad proof of adoption but 2 beats Zero.
The constitution guarantees ksdb’s right to remain ignorant and he is taking full advantage of that! He doesn’t need proof, hating Obama is all he needs. Is he aware that Obama was elected and has been president for over a year now?
I pointed out to KSDB the same but I guess he refuses to learn or he ignores facts that are contradicting his position.
Ignorance of law, ignorance of facts, ignorance of reason. What a combination and the outcome is well, quite enjoyable.
Since you have reading comprehension, you are at a distinct advantage over KSDB…
Of course, anyone who has to shape the ‘facts’ to match a “conclusion” is at a distinct disadvantage.
Have you noticed how KSDB is now avoiding discussing the “missing space” in the COLB which he believed, erroneously, to be evidence of a forgery? When it was pointed out that COLB’s matching the same template also lacked the space, he sputtered and went silent, realizing that he had single handedly authenticated the COLB.
Of course, being self authenticating, the document needs no further authentication for it to be legally admissible and since it is a prima facie document, it is up to the ‘doubters’ to show evidence of a forgery.
And there they continue to fail, instead insisting that the document is not legally sufficient… They are of course ignorant of the Federal Rules of Evidence, just like they are ignorant of law and history.
No self-authenticating document has been presented to a Federal authority or in even in a court of law. In the one case where Obama’s defense team mentioned the alleged COLB, they directed the court to not look at the document, but to look at a Web site or two. If said document was self-autheniticating, then there would be no reason to present anything else. Failing to produce an actual document is very telling.
Yikes. Greg, are you purposely falling on the sword?? You’re proving me right:
It’s not self-authenticating at all. You were 100 percent wrong and proved it for me. I’m going to spare you further embarrassment. Log off your computer immediately and go enroll in a remedial reading class at your local community college. Good luck.
Dr. Onaka was the officer with the seal. Sheesh.
You, clearly, do not understand the impact of holding foreign citizenship.
Holding foreign citizenship is not enough to denaturalize a US citizen. You must still prove an affirmative act taken with the intent to revoke US citizenship.
If Obama does nothing more than simply fail to renounce his Indonesian citizenship, then the SCOTUS precedents are automatic protection – in the United States. The United States is the only country in this equation that matters. We don’t care if Indonesia thinks Obama lost his United States citizenship!
The claim by birthers is that Indonesian citizenship had some bearing on Obama’s US citizenship.
Obama could be many things which have no relevance to his eligibility. He could be a Freemason.
The COLB has an embossed seal. On the back, it has the signature of Alvin Onaka. You claim that these are not sufficient to authenticate the document.
The FRE disagrees.
Extrinsic evidence of authenticity as a condition precedent to admissibility is not required with respect to the following:
(1) Domestic public documents under seal. A document bearing a seal purporting to be that of the United States, or of any State, district, Commonwealth, territory, or insular possession thereof, or the Panama Canal Zone, or the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, or of a political subdivision, department, officer, or agency thereof, and a signature purporting to be an attestation or execution.
The point, ksdb, is that if Obama came into court with the COLB as it had been presented to Factcheck.org – with an embossed seal and the signature of Alvin Onaka on the back – he would need present no more proof.
He doesn’t have to prove that the seal is genuine, he doesn’t have to prove that the document is not a forgery. He doesn’t even have to prove the signature is real – see the words “purporting” above.
If factcheck.org isn’t lying, then the document Obama possesses is self-authenticating.
… and has refused to authenticate the alleged COLB.
ksdb,
I can only guess that you are still referring to your position that President Obama only presented a jpg of his Birth Certificate to the public. But that is not true. The President provided the certified copy for public viewing, and at least two independent bodies reviewed the certificate and pronounced it authentic.
Did you go to his headquarters to look at the original? If not, why didn’t you? Since you didn’t when it was made publicly availible, why should the President respond to your individual inquiry now?
Especially since you are willing to consider any possible theory that might possibly result in the President being ineligible, why should he waste his energy debunking each one?
Also, please provide us copies of your requests for George Bush’s birth certificate and passport records. You did ask him to release those also didn’t you?
Stop arguing with ksdb, the babbling idiot, all you are doing is providing him a forum to babble. He has proved he is a babbling idiot, leave it at that,facts will not change his mind nor his hate for Obama. Stop giving him a forum to show his stupidity. Just let him go away.
KSDB, confronted with the facts of the Federal Rules of Evidence which classify the COLB as self authenticating is now resorting to plain denial.
902 states
You are once again left empty handed due to your inability to read and comprehend.
Mission Failed
Well stated. What difference an informed mind can make to this ‘debate’ where KSDB is running into many issues which contradict his positions
1. COLB’s missing space actually authenticates document
2. Citizenship is not automatically acquired with adoption under age 5
3. COLB is self authenticating
and more, much more…
Mission Failed… You are the weakest link 😉
Prove that President Obama went by the name Barry Soetero in the United States. Again the so called Indonesian school record is inadmissibe under the FRE as evidence since it was not authenticated by the Indonesian government. The vital records verified that they had the records of someone named Barack Obama II who was born in HI. And Dr. Fukino stated that Barack Obama was BORN in Honolulu, HI. And when they state that their are no records of anyone named Barry Soetero, that means that he never went by that name in the US. Now if you have some evidence that he did, lets see it…
Not plain, denial but supported denial. The notes on the cited statute says:
“Case law and statutes have, over the years, developed a substantial body of instances in which authenticity is taken as sufficiently established for purposes of admissibility without extrinsic evidence to that effect, sometimes for reasons of policy but perhaps more often because practical considerations reduce the possibility of unauthenticity to a very small dimension. The present rule collects and incorporates these situations, in some instances expanding them to occupy a larger area which their underlying considerations justify. In no instance is the opposite party foreclosed from disputing authenticity.”
At this point, no purported official document has been submitted to any court and those jpgs that are alleged to be scanned or photographed representations of the alleged COLB fail to show all required elements within one and the same document. Until it’s admitted in court or corroborated by the issuing agency, you have nothing of legal value.
Wrong. No other documents have been shown that ‘authenticate’ the typo.
Wrong again. I cited all applicable statutes.
Only true if a hard copy is actually submitted to a court, is not an obvious forgery and is not being contested.
Again, nanny nanny boo boo is not a rebuttal. Every reasonable objection that has been brought by faithers has been easily countered or debunked.
I believe the source of the school record was a school official and the story is published by a newspaper … so under those standards it is admissable on both counts.
Sorry, but this statement is tainted by being coupled with a statement of natural born citizenship that is not contained on any official Hawaiian vital records … and the statement of birth is not based on the original birth certificate, so it’s value cannot be ascertained.
Wrong. She said Hawaii, but not in Honolulu.
I’ve never claimed Barry Soetoro used this name in the United States. If it was his legal name, however, he should have used it.
ksdb: Every reasonable objection that has been brought by faithers has been easily countered or debunked.
Now that is a remarkable statement.
When I started this web site, I really had no way of knowing what the truth of things was. Gradually I came to the conclusion that the denialists were pretty much deluding themselves by listening to rumors and generally abandoning critical thinking. But as each new challenge presented itself, I had this little anxious feeling that MAY BE there is a valid objection. I never found anything. In fact the only piece of evidence the denialists have is the Indonesian school registration, and it in and of itself proves nothing.
ksdb claims things have been debunked just because he says so. The Director of the Hawaii Department of Health views Obama’s vital records and says Obama was born in Hawaii. ksdb “debunks” that by claiming the statement is “tainted” by an additional comment that Obama is a ” natural born citizen.” One may debate the appropriateness of the latter comment, but it in no way takes away from or taints the earlier part of the statement. Now if YOU (the reader) consider such things invalidate the statement, then you might agree with ksdb. I, however, find the contention ludicrous. The rest of ksdb’s so-called debunking involves misunderstanding (or misrepresentation) of his sources and the facts.
All of this ground has been plowed before; however, if anything NEW comes up, I’ll address it. Otherwise, read the existing articles on the site for my response.
No official Hawaiian documents exist that confirm that Honolulu is on the planet Earth. That’s a conclusion one can make from universally accepted principles. Ditto “natural born citizen.”
If you want to one day graduate from pretend lawyer to real lawyer, you’ll have to be more careful in your writing. What you wanted to say was:
and the statement of birth is not based solely on the original birth certificate…
A birther, a lawyer and a mathematician are walking in Scotland and they see a brown cow. The birther says, “Look, all cows in Scotland are brown!” The lawyer says, “No, at least some cows in Scotland are brown.” The mathematician says, “No, at least some cows in Scotland have at least one side that is brown.”
It’s an easy thing to assess its value. Do you believe that the Republican-appointed Director of Health would lie about something so important? Would she lie about the birthplace of the President-elect?
Actually, you’d be wrong on both grounds. Just because someone published something about the document in a newspaper does not make the document admissable. Additionally, just because someone considers the document “official” does not make it admissable. Since this is not a US document, under a state seal, it would have to be authenticated. The document is without question inadmissable.
You’re confused. We don’t have to have anything of legal value. We aren’t in court. We have something of political value. We have shown the American people the COLB. It has been corroborated by Factcheck.org. The American people have agreed that the COLB is sufficient to allay their doubts.
If you ever got past the issues of standing, your case would fail because it cannot present a plausible claim under the Iqbal and Twombly standard.
Assuming you could get past the issues of standing AND pleading, THEN we could talk about the COLB. Here’s where you get into your conspiracy theories, ksdb. In your fantasy world, Obama, factcheck, the Hawaii DOH and Hawaii’s Republican governor are all lying to cover up a forged COLB.
Let’s recap:
1. Your case fails because you have no party with a direct, rather than speculative, interest in the outcome.
2. Your case fails because you have no concrete injury.
3. Your case fails because you have no injury the court can fix through the litigation process.
4. Your case fails because the issue is a political question best addressed in Congress.
5. Your case fails because the issue is not justiciable.
6. Your case fails because you cannot put together a theory that is more than merely consistent with the facts – no wrong-doing is suggested by the facts.
7. And if Obama presented the court with the same COLB it gave to factcheck.org, your case would fail because you cannot plausibly call into question the legitimacy of the document or the facts presented.
The only way that Obama’s alleged Indonesian citizenship could be relevant is if he formally took some action to renounce his US citizenship. Are you saying that no former President ever traveled abroad when they could have renounced their citizenship?
IIRC, President Clinton traveled to Russia during the cold war. Have you asked for proof that he didn’t renounce his citizenship?
“Which independent’ bodies are you referring to and what expertise to these so-called bodies have in authenticating alleged legal documents??”
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
A non-profit, non-partisan “consumer advocate for voters” entirely by the Annenberg Foundation, which was founded by Walter Annengburg.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/
Expertise? I guess the normal expertise of factchecking organizations. Read the articles. In particular note where Hawaii confirmed that the Birth Certificate they had was a valid Hawaii BC.
Now I know you will come back and say that this isn’t enough- but if it isn’t- what would be? Nobody else even bothered to look at what the Obama campaign made availible to anyone who asked.
“The original’ is not at his headquarters.”
It may not be now, but it was in August 2008 when Factcheck went there and examined it. Did you ever ask to examine it?
“For the same reason he asks for transparency from everyone else.”
Transparency? He released the official document- the certified copy- the only official document Hawaii releases that authenticates a persons birth. Why would he go further than that? That goes beyond transparency to humoring the fringe.
“Why would I need to? He doesn’t have a foreign national for a father who was already married before marrying his mother, nor does he have large holes in his nativity story”
How do you know that? What proof do you have that his ‘real’ father was not a foreign national? What do you really know about George Walkers nativity story? We know more about President Obama’s than we do George Bush’s.
“I’m sure if he was asked for a birth certificate, he wouldn’t try to hide the way Obama does”
Obama hasn’t hidden anything- he has produced his birth certificate. What I am asking you is why you never required any proof whatsoever from George Bush that he was eligible. You just blindly assumed that he was. As did I. You, I, and the American public knew less about the ‘nativity’ of George Bush, Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan than we know about Barrack Obama.
So humor me- what was the event that started you questioning whether Barrack Obama was eligible to be a President?
And how many theories do you believe might be true that would disqualify him?
greg, writing slowly so everyone can read:
you present a interesting argument but …
LALALALALALAICANTHEARYOOOOOUUUUUU
see? i win again!
</birfoon>
A newspaper article or news photgraph would be admissable according to rule No. 6 on Rule 902 for self-authenticating evidence:
The newspaper articles have quoted teachers and former classmates. There’s no reason to assume testimony and/or authentication for the school record could not be gathered for a court case.
Sad. You’re really stretching to make a point, but failing badly. Ridiculous analogies don’t support an infirm conclusion. The DOH babe cited unspecified vital records as the source of her statement. The DOH has finite vital records that it adminsters with specified types of information on said records. Natural born American citizen is not a piece of information officially gathered by her or her department. Second, the universally accepted principle of natural born citizen is reliant on who the parents are, not just the place of birth (and this time plural matters). Unless Fukino is saying that Obama really has an American citizen for a father, her comments are inconclusive.
Wrong. I said exactly what I meant and I’ve explained in very specific terms why she’s not citing the original birth certificate. It alone has the power to make her claim. There’s no reason to cite other, unknown records, especially when you’re not going to identify those records. A statement in the plural based on unidentified records does not add additional credibility or legal weight to her statement.
My personal beliefs aren’t the gauge for whether she would decide to lie or not, and her choice of words can be adjudged to be truthful without being factual. There may be vital records that support her claims, but it doesn’t mean these records are factually accurate. Also, she was careful not to cite the original birth certificate (the accepted document for one of those claims) as her source.
Legal value? Legal value? Surely you are aware that all cases have been dismissed? No legal body gives a rodent’s hindquarters about your concerns, sir.
You have the right to “ask” for any documents you would like, but the rest of the world has a legal right to ignore you. My suggestion to this board is that we as a group exercise that right.
Obama has been reported to have ties to the Anneberg Foundation, so there can be no claim of ‘independence.’ Second, FactCheck are self-appointed and have no certification (pun intended) in examing legal documents.
Politifact never saw a hard copy of the document. They looked at some jpgs and failed to do any real investigative work on the certificate. The funniest part is when they quote the DOH spokesbabe saying they can’t be sure what Obama’s jpgs represent and insist on taking its authenticity on blind faith.
No, the spokesbabe said it looked her own. Can you imagine how easy she would fall prey to counterfeiters?? Later she said she couldn’t tell whether it was real or not.
Americans have been asking left and right for the original birth certificate for about 580 days. The Obama campaign has not made anything available.
That’s not the original. It’s an abstract of the original, except we have no proof that it’s authentic.
Indirectly. I push Amy Hollyfield at Politifact to ask very specific questions and she declined. I’ve also sent requests to the DOH and was given similar misinformation.
It’s not certified.
The Nordyke family (of whom this thread talks about) had no problem showing copies of their original long form certificates.
Hey, if you have problems with the Bush family, go knock yourself out. Their official story is much different than Obama’s ‘official’ story, the latter of which raises significant questions. I don’t have to chase phantom complaints that are only designed to deflect from legitimate questions about Obama (pun intended).
He’s produced something that looks like a birth abstract except that it can’t and won’t be authenticated by the issuing agency. John McCain had one of his staffers show his birth certificate to a bona fide reporter. Why won’t Obama, at the very least, do the same??
Find another deflection. Questions were raised about McCain and he stepped up to the plate. Not Obama/Soetoro.
The event that made me question Obama was his release of an obviously unofficial COLB. It was doctored, contained evidence of photoshop manipulation and unexplained typo. A press conference would have been real easy to hold and show the hard copy of the alleged COLB, but instead Obama uses a jpg with a redacted certificate number. The immediate question was why so secretive??
Of course, I’m aware. I predicted before any cases were filed that no court in America would touch this because of the potential inflammatory reactions it would get. Nobody wants to be the guy that overturned the overwhelming popular vote that Obama received. The law gives a lot of latitude for avoiding this issue without dealing with the merits behind the issue.
So why don’t you??
No one’s stopping you.
Enough with the childish deflections. Obama’s Indonesian citizenship is an issue, not because of basic U.S. citizenship, but because it’s inconsistent with the concept of citizenship as our founders exercised it. John Jay distinguished natural born citizens from aliens. IOW, you’re one or the other. Shanks v. Dupont said “All those, whether natives or otherwise, who then adhered to the American states were virtually absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown. All those who then adhered to the British Crown were deemed and held subjects of that Crown.” If Obama adhered to any of his citizenships as an adult, whether British, Kenyan or Indonsian, he would be, as the founders considered it, an alien and subject of those other countries. The 14th amendment created citizenship by birth and dual citizenship, but the latter, at any time by virtue of said circumstances understood by the Founders, could not be a citizen, much less a natural born citizen. I’d grant that the 14th amendment might make Obama an automatic citizen, but his foreign national father and multiple allegiances prevent him from being a natural born citizen. The only way around this is if he was a bastard at birth and was never adopted.
Do you fools even realize that findings by “factcheck” amount to nothing more than speculation and they carry absolutely no legal weight whatsoever? Any conclusions arrived at by Annenberg’s group of self-proclaimed “experts”, none of whom are credentialed forensic document examiners, equals nothing more than speculation and gossip – their opinions are not admissible in any court. An F.B.I. agent (who is also a licensed attorney) with more than forty years experience was the first to investigate Obama’s background (before Obama and George Soros hid most of Obama’s background documentation) and the agent discovered that Obama ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT QUALIFY as a “natural born Citizen”. ONLY Obama’s PAID LIARS are still trying to convince the voters that Obama is qualified to hold office – sorry, but you’re just wasting your time, the voters know you’re lying and they also know the truth about Obama, hence the Democratic party has foolishly destroyed itself (as proven by yesterdays election results in Massachusetts). Whether or not the courts or Congress remove Obama from office is irrelevant, he no longer has any credibility with anyone, thus he has absolutely no power – in other words, after only one year, it’s already over for you far left “progressive” liberals and you insane fools have literally lost everything – EVERY LAST OUNCE OF YOUR CREDIBILITY and POWER HAS NOW EVAPORATED.
To follow up with my Bush/Obama Comparison:
Evidence we have that President Obama was born in the United States:
a) Birth Certificate provided to public
b) 2 contemporary newspaper announcements
c) Statements by Hawaiin authorities that President Obama’s BOC is a valid BOC, and that he is a natural born citizen.
Evidence we have that President Bush was born in the United States
a) Birth Certificate- no
b) Contemporary newspaper announcements- no
c) Confirmation by state authorities of Bush’s birth- no
As Greg and the others pointed out to you, the Indonesian school record is not admissible. So it is irrelevant. Only in your mind is the comment tainted. According to the ruling in Wong Kim Ark, anyone born in the US is a natural born citizen. Everyone with a brain knows that. Only the birthers make some sort of circular argument to try and dispute what has been over 100 years of established jurisprudence. Dr. Fukino stated that the President was born in HI. Period. You can’t dispute that. Barry Soetero is not his legal name. OK. Then don’t use it. Again there is no legally admissible evidence that the President ever went by that name. So lets move on.
I believe there is evidence that GWB was born in Saudi Arabia. He has never denied it. And he never released any documents proving he was born in CT, as he alone has claimed.
What is he hiding? And look who supports him: Glenn Beck, an alcoholic and heroin addict, and Rush Limbaugh, another junkie. Ann Coulter supports him, and she is an anti-Semite.
And again the Indonesian form is not legally admissible in the United States. So you lost one. And the divorce decree says nothing about an adoption…It says that there were 2 children. Nothing about an adoption. That is a birther myth. Show me the words adoption in the divorce decree. If not then you have nothing….I have the SCOTUS ruling in Perkins v. Elg. The President cannot lose his US citizenship by actions of his parents. And you have no proof that he ever renounced his citizenship…so again you have nothing time two…
What? the same doctor? Unless Im wrong, but don’t most ready to deliver mothers (in non ER situations), have their babies delivered by the Obstetrician they choose (and have been seeing), and the hospital in which they work in?
Can you prove that the Nordykes had the same obstetrician? That the twins birth wasn’t the result of an EMERGENY room delivery?
No you dont. Obama’s responsibility was to the Democratic and Rebpulican National committees of each state and to Congress to prove his eligibility.
He did that.
They approved.
He was elected.
End of story
yes it can be explained. Soetoro LIED. wow. so simple.
then lets get authenticated and everything else thats the whole point
The COLB is authenticated by the seal and the signature.
That’s the whole point.
Anything else is just foolish…
Joker…
its been authenticated by the Department Of Health of HAWAII. NO COLB produced by the DoH of Hawaii is valid unless it has the embossed seal and the stamped signature on the back; of which BOTH are on Obama’s COLB.
YOU fail.
The way it worked in my wife’s case was that she chose her OB Group and her doctor. When she delivered, if her doctor was on-call, she would get her doctor. If not, she would have gotten another doctor from her OB Group. In the case of our son, she got a doctor from the group.
I’m pretty sure the Nordyke delivery wasn’t an emergency, she checked in on Friday and delivered on Monday. IIRC, she’s said, in fact, that she roomed with Ms. Obama.
Anyway, I’m not speculating about who delivered which baby. I’m saying that if you want to make out a case that there’s something untoward about the numbers being wrong, you’d have to put forward more information than is currently out there, and you’d have to do the same sort of grunt work that real attorneys do every day. Figure out what you need to disprove and find the evidence that is available and support your story. The birthers are just speculating and hoping that they can convince someone to shift the burden of proof.
BHO II was adopted in the U.S. and name was legally changed to Barry Soetoro through a Hawaii Family Court order in 1966-1968.
Islamic law wouldn’t require a U.S. adopted baby to change his name after he moved to Indonesia.
Barry Soetoro, Indonesian National, had his adoption voided in 1971-1972 after his birth father, BO Sr., appeared before a Hawaii Family Court and complained he objected to the adoption and demanded his parental rights be reinstated.
After the Court ordered Barry’s adoption voided, his records were sealed and his name changed back to Barack Obama. Unfortunately, the voided adoption did not undo Barry’s Certificate of Loss of Nationality (CLN) issued by the U.S. State Department.
Barry would have to present a CLN to Indonesian officals to obtain his Indonesian Nationality. Madelyn Dunham, Barry’s legal guardian before and after the voided adoption, assumed Barry’s CLN was voided when his adoption was voided.
Federal Law is clear. An oath of renunciation can only be rescinded and U.S. citizenship restored after an oath of allegiance is administered by a sworn Federal Officer of the Executive Branch. A judge represents the Judical Branch.
BO is stateless.
Evidence can be in the form of positive evidence and negative evidence.
If I point to a yard of snow that has no footprints, I can safely conclude that no one has walked in that yard since the snow fell.
If I can point to a totally calm lake, I can conclude that a rock was not just thrown into it – there are no ripples.
There was no mention in any of Obama’s books or speeches or other writings about having been adopted by Soetoro. This, despite having written about other material (cocaine use) that at the time was seen as entirely disqualifying for the Presidency. Also, since it’s entirely clear that mere adoption cannot make someone lose their citizenship, there was no eligibility reason to hide the info.
There has been no mention of adoption by any family members who would, presumably, know of it.
There has been no better proof of it than this one bit of school paperwork, despite the efforts of a committed set of bloggers and the entire resources of Fox News. They uncovered that Obama wrote about being President in kindergarten, but couldn’t find that Obama had been adopted?
The lawyer for the State Department, after a diligent investigation as required by Rule 11, was able to deny that Obama was ever adopted.
So, you’ve got 2 pieces of evidence and we’ve got a large number of pieces of evidence – every time the fact of an adoption would have made a ripple, but didn’t. That’s evidence that Obama wasn’t adopted.
You only need to look at a few of the kooky conspiracies to realize that with enough time and the right inclination, you can find a few documents to support just about any cockamamie story. And, by the very nature of conspiracy stories, it is always easier to string together two documents to hint that Obama was adopted than to prove the negative that he wasn’t adopted. Or that Oswald wasn’t a KGB spy, or Cuban spy, or mafia plant, or etc.
John O. Brennan, former CIA agent and State Department contractor during the campaign, “cauterized” BO’s State Department file.
That’s sufficient to warrant an investigation.
Proof? Oh, right, unnamed “sources” at Newsmax, the political equivalent of the National Enquirer – no, wait, The Globe or whatever paper it is that keeps running the bat-boy story.
Obama hid the proof of the existence of Bat-Boy! That’s sufficient to warrant an investigation!
The adoption was voided when BO Sr. contested it for non-consent. Yes, the State Department lawyer can legally say BO has never been adopted.
What the State Department Lawyer won’t say:
What was the application date(s) Barack Obama II passports? Did Barack Obama II have a valid US passport in 1961 to 1979 (as a minor) and 1980 through present (as an adult)? Was Barry Soetoro issued a passport in 1967-68? Was a Certificate of Loss of Nationality issued in the name of Barry Soetoro? If so, did Barry Soetoro rescind his Oath of Renunciation and take an oath of allegiance to recover his U.S. Citizenship?
And finally, does a native-born citizen lose his Natural-born citizenship status when he renounces his citizenship.\?
Currently, the State of Hawaii requires that official name-changes be published in the newspaper within 60 days of it happening.
You can point to the newspaper where this name change is published, right?
Proof? Oh, yeah, this is one of those patented Dick Whitman wet-dreams that you come here and post every so often.
The IRS publishes the names quarterly of everyone who has renounced their US citizenship since 1996. Why don’t you go there and find us the name of one six-year old who has renounced his citizenship?
No, the adoption never happened because space aliens went back in time and stopped it from going into effect.
I have more proof of my theory than you have of yours. I’m just not going to show it to anyone, just like you!
You can never lose natural born citizen status. It is bestowed upon you by the Baby Jesus and George Washington and only they (with God’s approval) can take it away.
In the year plus we have been posting on this site not once has Sven/Dick ever produced one piece of eveidence to support his theories. Sven/Dick likes to play the game of “what if”. As in what if this happened or what if that happened. Unfortunately for him, the game of what if in real life requires something called proof. You like to claim that somehow Barack Obama could have renounced as a child. Then show us one piece of evidence that this happened. Or better yet show us one example of a child under 10 renouncing their US citizenship and the US accepting that renunciation. You then claim that he could have been adopted and his name changed. OK. Proof. Show us some piece of evidence that Barack Obama went by the name Barry Soetero here in the US. Show us some evidence that there was an adoption. Or someone that remembers an adoption. Better yet show us a piece of evidence from the Indonesian government that indicates that the President was adopted or went by the name Barry Soetero. All you have is a unverifiable school record that is inadmissible in court that says Barry Soetero. But even given you the benefit of the doubt with that document you could not find anything other supporting documentation or proof that Barry Soetero ever existed or that Lolo ever adopted Barack. All you have is some ridiculous possibilities that would be better serverd in a Dan Brown book rather than evidence of anything other than your active imagination.
What Greg says is true. It was published in the Galactic Federation newspaper. I’m surprised
SvenDick Whitman didn’t see it.If my grandmother had wheels, she would have been a trolley car.
Greg …
Public Legal Notices for minor children are a description and the initials. For example, …
(Don’t look up the case number … I made it up..)
When the paternity is well established, public notice of pending adoption is not required. Only the paternal parent need to be notified at his last known address.
A minor can enter into a contract, but cannot be legally obligated to fulfill the contract. Consequently, public notice with the specific name change for a minor is not required when an adoption is voided.
As to a minor renouncing his citizenship, the Certificate of Loss of Nationality is issued with the proviso the minor may rescind his Oath of Renunciation without cause until he is aged 18 years and 6 months. Only a minor is provided this opportunity. The minor must appear before an FSO and affirmatively act to recover their U.S. Citizenship and state an Oath of Allegiance.
The opportunity for Barack to affirmatively act to recover his U.S. Citizenship by filling out a form and stating an oath of allegiance has closed. Barack is stateless.
I notice you didn’t do any citations in your post. Can’t? Didn’t think so.
Of course you made it up, like everything else.
Barack isn’t stateless, his adoption never happened and he never got a CLN because the space-aliens reversed time and stopped it from happening!
When you get around to giving evidence of your fantasy, I’ll prove mine.
Do you have evidence or it this just fan fiction?
See, Dick, real lawyers can look at the statutes and see that you’re talking out of your a$$!
HRS 574-5
When changing names, you have to do this:
Paternity doesn’t enter into the equation. The family court can, after a hearing, waive the notice requirement, but only on an explicit finding that it is necessary for the protection of the minor.
The name change is also recorded at the Bureau of Conveyances. This cannot be waived by the family court!
Why didn’t you quote paragraph 2(c)?
I wonder if Stanley Ann was worried BHO Sr. might kidnap BHO II and take him back to Kenya. Wouldn’t a court think the child is at risk for abduction if the paternal parent was a citizen of another country?
As to the Bureau of Conveyances … same story, different verse. In the interest of a minor at risk, the name change for the minor is not publicly noticed.
“The opportunity for Barack to affirmatively act to recover his U.S. Citizenship by filling out a form and stating an oath of allegiance has closed. Barack is stateless”
Why do you people reapond to this nonsense. His brain is damaged and he will never give up, all you do is give him a forum to continue his nonsense. Asking him for proof is a waste of time, he has none, all he has is a bad attitude.
Why wouldn’t an AP photograph be admissible in a U.S. court for a civil suit?
Because it’s hearsay
And the school record is an unauthenticated document
Amazing…You come up with the most ridiculous scenarios imaginable and throw it out there like it is a probable occurance. You don’t have evidence of an adoption. You don’t have evidence of any contention of an adoption. You don’t have any evidence of a renounciation by the President. Yet you somehow have contrived a ridiculous theory that borders on fantasy and think that somehow intelligent people would believe it to be probable….
JoZeppy, Sven believes in fantasy, not facts. Legal requirements and the Federal Rules of Evidence seem to be beyond him…
Essentially Sven’s theory is this:
If anything that could disqualify President Obama is at all possible, then it is the likely truth and President must disprove it.
SF Jeff-Actually, it is far from clear that even if Obama once had Indonesian citizenship (no evidence), that that would diaqualify him. I don’t even see any legal principle that would diaqualify someone with dual citizenship at the time he took office. Like most of this nonsense, it’s a matter for voters to weigh, and they have done so.
Why wouldn’t an AP photograph be admissible in a U.S. court for a civil suit?
For a document to admitted into evidence in a civil suit, it must either be certified or authenticated. For example, in a motor vehicle personal injury lawsuit, there are two ways to get the police report into evidence. One is to introduce a certified copy (in New York State, the certification is done by DMV). The other way is to get the police officer who wrote the report on the witness stand and have him or her authenticate it.
In the case of an AP photograph, the photographer could authenticate the photograph but not the document which was photographed, so the photo would be inadmissible.
I just talked to “Meg.” You’re fired!
John O. Brennan, former CIA agent and State Department contractor during the campaign, “cauterized” BO’s State Department file.
More Sven fantasy. Brennan was appointed interim director of the National Counterterrorism Center by George W. Bush in 2004. In 2007 he became Chairman of the Intelligence and National Security Alliance. The chairman of INSA is Frances Townsend, Bush’s Homeland Security advisor.
The only connection between Brennan and the State Department is that one of the people who illegally accessed the passport records of Obama, McCain and Hillary Clinton two years ago was employed by Brennan’s company, Analysis Corp. There is no evidence that any of the records were tampered with or altered.
And you have never explained why the Bush State Department, which obviously had no interest in helping to have Obama elected, would have been complicit in “cauterizing” his State Department file.
Oh I agree Scientist- but Sven and his fellow travelers cling to the idea that if there is any possibility of there being a legal reason, then that possibility must be refuted. I don’t think that foreign adoption is a real issue, but I think that their basic theory is if the Supreme Court has not issued a ruling saying that Foreign Adoption doesn’t invalidate NBC, then of course President Obama must prove that foreign adoption doesn’t invalidate NBC- and of course prove he wasn’t adopted overseas. Basically they take unproven, and unlikely circumstances and link it to an unproven and unlikely legal theory and present that as something the President should take time from his day and demand that the Supreme Court re-validate his Presidency.
Dig a little deeper, Rickey. Brennan donated to Obama’s campaign and was an unpaid adviser to Obama during his campaign. He had a vested interest in making sure his investment didn’t get ruined by a few inconvenient facts.
As to no evidence of tampering, Joe Biden reviewed the IG’s report on the break-in and redacted the good stuff when the report was made public. Oh, and Joe Biden was asked to be Obama’s VP.
Alas for Sven and Co. the US cleaves to the Anglo-Saxon and not Napoleonic model of the law.
At it’s simplest, broad brush stroke
The AS model is “If it is not explicitly illegal, it’s inherently legal”.
The Napoleonic model is “If it is not explicitly legal is is almost certainly to be held as illegal”
So we have all that tedious “presumption of innocence”, “The moving party has the burden of proof” etc etc.
So, unless you can SHOW (by meeting or exceeding the minima of proof documented and laid down) that an explicitly illegal act has occurred, then the person is inherently innocent.
Don’t like it, tough, it’s the only game in town
Because I paraphrased it. To wit: The family court can, after a hearing, waive the notice requirement, but only on an explicit finding that it is necessary for the protection of the minor. Of course, I assumed you had the reading skills of a sixth grader.
Where, Dick, does it say that the bureau of conveyances can be waived? A clue for those with sub-6th-grade reading skills: it doesn’t.
Do you ever have anything that is more than your idle speculation…anything…ever?
SF Jeff- Yes, but the arguments here have become completely repetitive.
It wouldn’t matter if there was a President born in Khazakstan to a Chinese mother and a Bolivian father and grew up in Mali. He would be no better or worse a President necessarily than the same dude born in New Jersey to parents who came on the Mayflower. Regardless, if his opponents didn’t challenge him and Congress certified the election he’d be as legitimate as George Washington and no court would touch him with a 10-foot pole. And I doubt the justices read this site, so the arguments here aren’t going to change that.
“Joe Biden reviewed the IG’s report on the break-in and redacted the good stuff when the report was made public.”
And your proof is…
Just in case anyone was wondering, the redacted Inspector General report about Obama’s passport breach isn’t about Obama’s passport. It’s about how to improve the security of passports. What is redacted is the particular recommendations – it’s stuff we don’t want hackers to know.
ksdb: If Obama adhered to any of his citizenships as an adult, whether British, Kenyan or Indonsian, he would be, as the founders considered it, an alien and subject of those other countries.
Putting aside the contextual issues raised by your citaton, by what overt act did the adult Obama “adhere” to any non-US citizenship. Did he take up domicile in any of those countries, vote in their elections, hold property there?
ksdb: Of course, I’m aware. I predicted before any cases were filed that no court in America would touch this because of the potential inflammatory reactions it would get.
This is standard conspiracy theory thinking, attributing hidden motives to straightforward actions. The federal courts will not touch the cases because they don’t have jurisdiction. State courts have jurisdiction at least only (Illinois appeals court) said your natural born citizen theory is wrong.
ksdb: I’ve explained in very specific terms why she’s not citing the original birth certificate.
But that’s definitely at odds with what she said. She said she looked at his “vital records”. What is a vital record?
“Vital records are records of life events kept under governmental authority, including birth certificates, marriage licenses, and death…”
Dr. Fukino examined the vital records and stated that these said he was born in Hawaii. What she said is plain, and you, like all the denialists, are trying to make white into black, and up into down.
You’re kidding me right? Have you heard of the Federal Rules of Evidence?
Joker..
“What she said is plain”
weasel words are the phrases of choice to an idiot birther like ksdb, she didn’t say the words he likes so……!
this birther nonsense was initally dreamed up to get Obama out of Office, It did not work, Obama has been in Office over a year and will contine till his term ends. Clinging to a position that failed is telling of their intelligence level. They are driven by hate and don’t know this issue is over. What is that Einstien said about repeating the same thing over and over yet expecting different answers. (fits birthers to a tea.)
Yes, Obama is a natural born citizen
What more does she have to say?
Once again, for stubborn faithers: None of the vital records you listed says that anyone is a natural born American citizen. For the vital records she’s responsible for – birth, marriage, divorce and death – only ONE would reliably list a place of birth … and to give information contained on that record is illegal by Hawaiian state law. If she got an exemption to give the LOB then she could apply the same exemption to identify the one record that contains this information … but she didn’t do that. What she did do, is say that see had nothing to add to her earlier statement, which was specifically about the state holding an original birth certificate. IOW, she was distinguishing her statement about vital records as being separate from her statement on the original birth certificate. This leaves us with a statement based on an unreliable set of vital records.
She also made a distinction in her two statements. The orignal birth certificate she said she ‘personally verified’ in accordance with state law. The vital records statement was not personally verified and not in accordance with the law. It has no real legal weight. It’s good doublespeak, but it’s not what you assume it is. The alleged COLB as well Obama’s LOB remained unauthenticated.
You’re arguing against a straw man. No one here says that the COLB has been authenticated by Fukino’s statement. However, the one fact on the COLB, that Obama was born in Hawaii, has been confirmed based on a review of the original birth certificate by the official in charge.
And you call us “stubborn.”
It’s not a strawman. Several newspaper stories do claim the COLB has been authenticated and several faithers in this thread have expressed the same baseless faith in it.
You claim Fukino’s making a statement from one of the vital records. There’s only one record that would contain the LOB. And pay attention: Fukino NEVER said she reviewed the original birth certificate. She checked to see that the state has it, but did not say she looked at it or reviewed it. If she can exempt herself for disclosing LOB information from an official vital record, she can also identify which vital record she’s referring to. Her failure to do so is very telling, except to faithers, of course.
she in noway verified anything and you know it
she has not said anything of the sort or she would have lost her job
cause mom says so,is that your argument.
no, she only confirmed what was already known, and provided by Obama (the only information that she could confirm, anything else is covered under HIPPA).
Publicly known as offered by Obama via his biography book and his release of his COLB which states he was born in Hawaii. Fukino was only able to confirm that information.
Anything else in vital records is protected information.
}The alleged COLB as well Obama’s LOB remained unauthenticated.{
and it will be repeated to you over and over again. the COLB contains the embossed SEAL and Stamped signature. THE COLB can only receive this ONLY when the information on the COLB MATCHES RECORDS that the Department Of Health has.
THE COLB gets its information from the information STORED in the DoH’s computer, of which was inputed and copied from the ORIGINAL documents (which they no longer offer copies of. HAVEN’t since the 90’s).
Sorry, but legally, Hawaii is protected. Fukino can be called upon as a witness to authenticate the information found on the COLB.
ksdb: Fukino NEVER said she reviewed the original birth certificate. She checked to see that the state has it, but did not say she looked at it or reviewed it.
Stuff like this is why ksdb is wasting our time, either from willful ignorance, or dishonesty.
Pay particular reference to the words “original vital records” (which means original birth certificate) and “seen” (means “looked at”).
The state is authorized by law to provide “index information”, including a name and place of birth.
There is no document in the vital records which says that Honolulu is in the United States. I can still conclude, based on universal knowledge, that it is.
The view that birth to one US citizen and one foreign student on US soil equals a natural born citizen is universally accepted*.
The vital records say he was born in the United States. By universally accepted* legal theory, he is a natural born citizen. It follows the same way that if the documents said only 2 + 2, you could conclude it equaled 4.
*You cannot find a single modern scholar to suggest the 2 citizen theory. The closest reputable theory is that the children of illegal aliens might not be natural-born. Even this view is a tiny minority – most recognize it would take a Constitutional amendment to change this. The 2-citizen theory belongs on the group of idiotlegal arguments like objecting to jurisdiction based on the fringe of the flag, or that taxes are voluntary or that the 16th Amendment was not properly adopted.
Absolutley wrong, Dr. C. You’re assuming something that is never specifically stated. It’s double speak intended to fool people, and it fooled you hook, line and sinker. There would be only ONE vital record that needs to be cited and she specifically separates this statement from her statement about the original birth certificate. IOW, she’s telling us point blank that the birth certificate is NOT the source that allegedly verifies the LOB. There’s no need to talk about vital records in the plural when all she has to do is cite the original birth certificate. On top of that, this ambiguous statement is tainted by including a claim that is contained by NO official vital records. Without identifying the records she’s referring to, this statement has no legal value.
The law only specifies name, gender and type of vital event … requests for Obama’s index data have not included a place of birth.
Sorry, but this is plain nonsense.
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai’i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen.”
She’s still got a job, Chufho.
Apparently, unlike the birthers, Dr. Fukino can consult Blacks’ Dictionary or a legal treatise and see there is no dispute as to the definition of the term.
Sorry, but the jpg at Fight the Smears does NOT contain either the seal or signature and the photos at Fact Check do not show that signature block is on the back of the alleged Obama COLB. There are good reasons why this has never been presented to a court of law.
I would love to have her called in as a witness and show the vital records she refers to. Let’s get it all out in the open.
You misunderstand what rule 902 permits. The newspaper story is admissable for the fact that the story was published, not for the truth of what the story contains. So yes, a newspaper article is admissable evidence of proof the acticle was published. However, it does not, by virtue of being a newpaper article, become evidence of the claims made in it.
And yes. It would be possible to have the school records authenticated. Funny how you point this out, but ignore the fact that the officials from the state of Hawaii have repeatedly made statements about the authenticity of President Obama’s birth certificate, which would be a self-authenticating document in court, and would not need outside authentication.
And finally even if you could authenticate the school records, it very well may still be inadmissable for the truth of what is on the document as it would still be hearsay. The school is not in the business of keeping track of naturalization and citizenship. Unless you have evidence that this information is somehow corroborated with the government or provided by the government, or some agency that is involved in naturalization, the information was simply provided. Thus the document would still be classic hearsay. An out of court statement offered for the truth of the matter. Inadmissable even if you can authenticate it.
The school records could probably get in as an ancient document. They’re more than 20 years old. Also, possibly, as a record of regularly conducted activity. It could probably be established that it was a regularly conducted activity to record what the parent told of the child’s citizenship.
“record what the parent told of the child’s citizenship”
That would be hearsay. Inadmissable as to the child’s citizenship since it is based on the parent’s hearsay statement.
You’re ignorning a couple of things. I mentioned that the Soetoro divorce records (also maintained in Hawaii) corroborate the adoption story. Barry is not listed as a step-child. The statements by the Hawaiian official have been ambiguous toward the purpose of proving Hawaiian birth. Her claims would be challenged in court and she would have to identify the specific records. The alleged COLB, as is, is not self-authenticating and would only be so if it’s not an obvious forgery when examined up close.
That’s why I said possibly. But, reading the notes of the FRE I think it would more than likely come in as an ancient document. Assuming it can be authenticated as an ancient document, both the document itself and the statements of the parents are ancient, so the hearsay within hearsay problem is addressed.
About Vital Records (Hawaii)
Vital records (birth, death, marriage, and divorce certificates) for events that occurred in Hawaii are received and preserved by the Office of Health Status Monitoring, a unit of the Department of Health. In Hawaii, access to vital records is restricted by statute (HRS §338-18).
here is the link is to “vital records”
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/vital-records/index.html
maybe ksdb can read!
Joseph- another of your posts filled full of wrong:
“Do you fools even realize that findings by “factcheck” amount to nothing more than speculation and they carry absolutely no legal weight whatsoever?”
I am no lawyer- but then again this isn’t a court- so I don’t have to prove anything. However, Factcheck’s review of the certified birth certificate is more ‘proof’ than anything Birthers have presented- the one thing that I believe can be ascertained by Factchecks article is that a) their staffers went to Obama’s campaign headquarters and saw a hard copy of what appeared to them to be certified copy of the certificate of live birth- and posted extensive photo’s of the document.
Anyone else could have done the same thing- you could have- I could have- Fox News could have- Rush Limbaugh could have- but none of us even asked because nobody but the fringe has any doubts about the document.
“An F.B.I. agent (who is also a licensed attorney) with more than forty years experience was the first to investigate Obama’s background (before Obama and George Soros hid most of Obama’s background documentation) and the agent discovered that Obama ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT QUALIFY as a “natural born Citizen”. ”
I notice you don’t name this ‘FBI’ agent or what evidence he discovered that disqualified President Obama. And why didn’t this so-called FBI agent step forward and publish this information openly before the election? Because it doesn’t exist.
“hence the Democratic party has foolishly destroyed itself (as proven by yesterdays election results in Massachusetts).”
Wow….last I checked the Democrats still had majorities in both houses of Congress. I think Massachusetts was a wake up call- I am looking forward to some efforts by Democrats and Obama to reach out. Considering how the Republican Party was considered dead less than a year ago, I would say declaring the death of the Democratic Party is premature.
“Whether or not the courts or Congress remove Obama from office is irrelevant, he no longer has any credibility with anyone”
President Obama still has higher approval ratings than President Reagan had at the end of his first year in office.
“it’s already over for you far left “progressive” liberals and you insane fools have literally lost everything”
I would only concede that we had lost everything if this Country plummetted into a deep Recession or some other disaster which resulted in the United States losing its position in the World.
Reality is, we are in better shape economically than we were a year ago. The stock market has recovered from a year ago, the auto companies and financial industry is not in the panic it was a year ago.
I do not approve of everything President Obama or the Democrats have done or tried to do, but they are trying, as opposed to the Republicans who have been reduced to the party of “No”. I look forward to seeing how 2010 plays out. But thats because I care more about America, than hoping American crashes as proof that Obama is evil incarnate.
KDSB
“Obama has been reported to have ties to the Anneberg Foundation”
If you believe that, then I don’t think you will accept any ‘authority’
“Politifact never saw a hard copy of the document”
According to their site, they received a copy, not a jpg.
“Americans have been asking left and right for the original birth certificate for about 580 days. The Obama campaign has not made anything available”
Let me change that for you: “A few Americans have been asking for the original birth certificate and havent’ accepted what the Obama campaign has provided. However American voters overwhelmingly felt that Obama had provided enough information to demonstrate to him that he was eligible.
Oh and by your standards, McCain never produced any birth certificate. Bush never did either.
“obviously unofficial COLB. It was doctored, contained evidence of photoshop manipulation and unexplained typo.”
Okay here you are going off into Birther fantasy world again- there is no real expert that agrees with you- even WND agrees there is no evidence it was doctored.
What exactly is it about Obama’s personal history that requires him to provide his birth certificate? His personal history says he was born in Hawaii. Heck I didn’t even know where George Bush was born when he was running for election.
Anyway- knock yourself out with your whacky theories- you have nothing but speculation, the President has already been sworn in, and the birthers have been laughed out of every court.
Sven Magnussen says:
Dig a little deeper, Rickey. Brennan donated to Obama’s campaign and was an unpaid adviser to Obama during his campaign. He had a vested interest in making sure his investment didn’t get ruined by a few inconvenient facts.
Sorry, Sven. The fact that Brennan was an adviser to Obama’s campaign didn’t give him the ability to alter records in the Bush State Department.
As to no evidence of tampering, Joe Biden reviewed the IG’s report on the break-in and redacted the good stuff when the report was made public.
Nonsense. The IG’s report was released while Condoleeza Rice was still Secretary of State. Biden was merely the Chairman of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee and he played no role in the preparation or redaction of the report. The IG found that unauthorized access of passport records of celebrities (more than 100 such records were breached, not including those of Obama, Clinton & McCain) was widespread, but there was no evidence of any attempt to alter any records.
It was reported by CNN.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/obama.ayers/
They were referencing a jpg that arrived by e-mail. It is not a hard copy.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/13/obamas-birth-certificate/
The DOH says they’ve had unprecedented numbers of requests:
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html
Bush doesn’t have eligiblity questions like McCain and definitely nothing like Obama. And sorry, but McCain’s staffers showed a copy of his birth certificate to a bona fide reporter … in person. Obama has never done this.
What I’ve mentioned is demonstrable and undeniable. Some may have convinced themselves, like faithers, to overlook these problems, which could only be resolved with an authentication by the issuing agency or the release of a bona fide, original, doctor-signed birth certificate. Hasn’t happened.
Just about everything in Obama’s history calls his nativity story into question. It’s like the “Perfect Storm” of eligibility questions. No proof his parents were married. Evidence his father was a bigamist. No proof his mother was ever pregnant. Evidence SAD wasn’t in Hawaii after the baby was born. No evidence she was there WHEN the baby was allegedly born. Evidence SAD didn’t know how to change the little bastard’s poopy diapers. No evidence that SAD and/or the alleged father lived at the address listed in the newspaper birth announcements. The DOH’s refusal to unambiguously prove the COLB is authentic. That’s just a small list of things that can’t be resolved short of an offical, long-form, doctor-signed birth certificate.
They’ve certainly been kept from going to trial, but not with regard to the merits of the case.
SFJeff: If you believe that [Obama has ties to the Annenberg Foundation], then I don’t think you will accept any authority’
There is a tenuous tie. Obama many years ago served on the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an education improvement grantee of the Annenberg Foundation. Annenberg Political Fact Check (FactCheck.org) is also funded by the Annenberg Foundation. Annenberg, of course, was a Republican contributor and good friend of Ronald Reagan.
To try to discredit FactCheck.org by asserting a connection to Obama is clearly an attempt to mislead. Of course, conspiracy theorists have a funny way of assigning significance to irrelevant connections. In fact, this error in judgment may be at the root of their behavior.
This is discussed in some detail in my article: http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/04/comment-at-american-grand-jury
Now that was a slam dunk point for you!
ksdb: I mentioned that the Soetoro divorce records (also maintained in Hawaii) corroborate the adoption story.
I think you are having a problem distinguishing between the information value of a blank standard form vs what is written on it.
ksdb:… the jpg at Fight the Smears does NOT contain either the seal or signature and the photos at Fact Check do not show that signature block is on the back of the alleged Obama COLB.
Precisely what do you mean by “signature block”?
Hawaiian index data is vital events that occur in Hawaii. Don’t be obtuse.
ksdb’s comments are to far out to be real, there is no way he belives what he is writing. He is “funning” with us and doesn’t believe a word of the crap he is writing. No one can be that stupid, it must be satire and ksdb is trying out for a job with “The Onion”!
kdsb- I love how you pick and choose what you believe in.
You correctly point out to me that Factcheck relied upon a emailed copy- giving me the link- but at the same time will not accept this:
“To verify we did indeed have the correct document, we contacted the Hawaii Department of Health, which maintains such records.
“It’s a valid Hawaii state birth certificate,” spokesman Janice Okubo said June 13, 2008, after we e-mailed her our copy.”
So the copy was verified by Hawaii- but that you don’t accept.
You cite the “unprecedented number of requests” posted by the Hawaiian State Department of Health but that number doesn’t really tell us whether 10 people asked or 1000 people- yet you give no credence to the same Department of Health which has verified
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai’i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital
records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen”
If you can’t believe that, then how can you believe that ‘unprecendented’ requests have been made?
“And sorry, but McCain’s staffers showed a copy of his birth certificate to a bona fide reporter … in person. Obama has never done this.”
By your standards- how can we accept this? The reporter is not a document expert, nor do we know what form of birth certificate the reporter looked at- was it a jpg copy? Since McCain never released a copy to the public- unlike President Obama- the birth certificate was never able to be verified.
By your standards, John McCain, if he had been elected would be an Ursurper.
“Bush doesn’t have eligiblity questions like McCain ”
So we only ask for evidence of eligibility when there are questions? What an intriguing standard to rely upon- how many people should have to ask that question before a candidate- or a sitting question should be required to disprove such questions.
There were no questions about Bush because he came from a well known political family and no one even thought to challenge such simple things as where he was born. I really think it is the height of hypocrisy to be calling for extraordinary proof for this President when you have never made any effort to ascertain the same thing for prior Presidents or candidates.
“What I’ve mentioned is demonstrable and undeniable”
If what you mean by undeniable is completely disproved- yes.
“which could only be resolved with an authentication by the issuing agency”
Which they have done.
“Just about everything in Obama’s history calls his nativity story into question. It’s like the “Perfect Storm” of eligibility questions”
You mean, like how everyone knows he was born in Hawaii? How there isn’t a shred of evidence he was borne elsewhere?
“No proof his parents were married.”
Relevant how? Really- what if they were not married? Since when do we ask President’s to prove their parents were married?
“Evidence his father was a bigamist.”
Other than by trying to smear Obama by association- how is this relevant to his eligibility? Really just a smear tactic.
“No proof his mother was ever pregnant”
Since when are a mother’s medical records relevant? I can tell you with great certainty that Lincoln would have been unable to prove his mother was ever pregnant when he was being elected.
“That’s just a small list of things that can’t be resolved short of an offical, long-form, doctor-signed birth certificate.”
How would a doctor signed birth certificate affect President Obama’s eligibility under any of those questions?
“They’ve certainly been kept from going to trial, but not with regard to the merits of the case”
I believe in the U.S. Constitution. I believe in the American system of Justice. I believe that the accuser has the obligation to provide actual evidence rather than lies and innuendo in order and that the accused has no obligation to refute anything.
I believe the American voters knew that President Obama was eligible when they voted him in- they knew as well as they knew that for any previous President- and that Birthers are attempting to Unconsitutionally dispose of a President that they fear, for political or racial reasons.
Show us the evidence. Evidence. Show us.
And of course, the long-form, doctor-signed birth certificate could have been forged. And then there’s the travel abroad. And the fact that the Galactic Federation has time-travel abilities. And the fact that Obama was in Indonesia from the ages of six to ten, the critical years in which the Founders thought that an individual’s loyalty to a nation was cemented – just look at the eminent, but never mentioned, Swiss philosopher De Mattel.
These are just a handful of things that cannot be addressed unless Obama allows a Vulcan mind meld and a search of the inter-galactic records of the Time Lords.
You’re a F-wit, ksdb, not a birther, or a truther, an F-wit.
Until Obama’s presidency, so was the notion that natural-born required more two citizen parents!
Your theories belong here, not in any court of law.
You’re among the idjits arguing that the court can’t try them because the fringe on the flag is wrong.
My name is ksdb and I’m retarded!
such double speak ksdb. love how you twist words to meet your own paranoia driven deluded rationalization.
Vital records contains everything that would be registered with the Department of Health, including medical records shared by a hospital, and that includes BIRTH Certificates and even MARRIAGE Licenses.
You can’t get around that. SHE confirmed that the COLB in question MATCHES the information in VITAL records. Unless you can prove that the VITAL records were altered, you have no case
that you know of…sorry, but you can’t lie your way out of this
“the little bastard’s poopy”
Hey, hey: my cat’s parents were never married, and I still don’t know who they were. And I don’t mind for one minute, cleaning his litter box.
And it doesn’t change my love for him. So there.
Try respecting yourself and make an argument. Calling names means I win.
There’s no evidence of medical records from a hospital. You’re inventing a justification for your beliefs instead of relying on available facts.
This confirmation is against disclosure laws, unless she made an exemption, upon which she could have simply produced the original birth certificate … which is the ONE and ONLY vital record that has legal authority regarding a place of birth. The only reason she would cite other vital records would be if the birth certificate does NOT prove the place of birth. Since it does not, then we need to see what vital records she is referring to instead. It’s a good trick, but it’s still a trick.
Like you don’t?? Please, enough with the personal comments. It undermines whatever credibility you think you have.
Politifact, not Fact Check.
Politifact’s follow-up article had the DOH spokesbabe recanting on her previous statement as she had to admit there was no seal or signature visible on the jpg. Politifact was too ignorant to ask about it earlier and they took the spokesbabe’s word for verifying Obama’s COLB because it looked like her own. That’s not an official way to authenticate any document.
We have a lot of supporting evidence from people all over the Internets saying they’ve sent requests to the DOH. Also, putting up a special page to deal with such requests is consistent with the claim. With Fukino’s statement, we don’t have supporting evidence of Obama being born in Hawaii.
You can read the story about McCain’s certificate and his mother’s supporting comments at the link below. Unfortunately, the only family member who can speak for Obama says he was born in a different hospital than what he claimed. The inconsistency points to dishonesty.
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/05/john_mccains_birthplace.html
Ummm, no.
This has already been explained earlier. Review the thread.
It’s time to stop carrying water for someone who promised transparency but fails to live up to his own expectations. If Obama’s COLB is legit, then the original, birth-certificate should vindicate him. Besides, this document should have immense historical value that should be able to be shared with everybody. What on God’s green Earth would require it to be guarded more heavily than the gold at Fort Knox??
@ksdb: “the little bastard”
Look in the mirror, pal.
I really like De Mattel. His treatise on doll-americans established by Ken and Barbie’s offspring was a natural-mold citizen.
Are we now clear that “kdsb” is either a practical joker (a troll, if you will) or mentally deranged?
I honestly can’t tell which, but either way, arguing with him is a waste of time. Worse if he’s deranged, because you’re only reinforcing his delusion.
Yes, exactly. And remember, Ken and Barbie are the epitome of anglo Americans, and they are NBC without question.
Ken and Barbie are normal names, too.
Also, I’m repeating this post:
@ksdb: “the little bastard”
Look in the mirror, pal.
ksdb: Calling names means I win.
Actually coming up with a rational fact-based argument is how one wins.
Hey KSDB, thanks again for authenticating President Obama’s COLB, as legit. Of course, we all know deep down that your doubts are just window dressing for a much deeper issue.
Remember that he is and will be our legitimate President for at least 3 more years.
And your contribution to debunking some of the myths about ‘missing spaces’ in the COLB is thus much appreciated.
“Remember that he is and will be our legitimate President for at least 3 more years.”
And I say he will be re-elected, and Cory Booker will follow.
Oh, ksdb, you’re a card. Of all the silly statements you’ve made here that takes the cake.
We have:
– the greatest financial crisis in almost 100 years
– 2 wars
– serious problems with the health care “system”
– terrorism
– the looming retirement of the baby boomers
– the rise of China and India as great powers
– the environment and energy issues
– and those are just a start
And somehow you would have us believe that a doctor’s note from 50 years ago has “immense historical value”. You bithers truly think you are the center of the universe. LOL, 1000x!
Thanks for getting my back. That’s exactly the point. Namecalling is NOT a rational fact-based argument nor is it a rebuttal to what I’ve posted. You guys make this so easy.
We’re not talking about a ‘doctor’s note’ … I’m sure you know better and choose simply to be obtuse.
You’re simply projecting your own insecurities because you can’t verify those other COLBs are legitimate. Sucks to be you.
ksdb: This confirmation is against disclosure laws
What disclosure law (warning, this is a trap)?
Hahaha, remember that it was you who was arguing that the COLB was proven a forgery because of the missing space. I provided the evidence that exposed your ignorance.
Sucks to be me indeed.
I am sure you wish you had never raised the claim…
“misha” is living in a delusional dream world.
Obtuse? Nope. It us you who are obtuse to the real problems of the real world. A doctor’s signature from 1961 won’t:
– Rescue a single person from the ruins of a collapsed building in Port-au-Prince
– Provide healthcare to anyone who lacks it
– Provide a job to anyone who is unemployed
– Bring stability to any war-torn area
– Make anyone’s life better
So what kind of sick person makes the focus of their lives? Try doing something about the real problems that beset our world…..
One fart in a major hurricane draws more attention than Dr. Conspiracy and his silly and contrived “facts”. Thanks so much for telling and repeating so many obvious lies time after time, thus helping to destroy the Democratic party for many years to come.
Scientist – Every comment you post is either totally irrelevant, completely off-topic, or just plain stupid.
You are once again misrepresenting the facts. In fact, the COLB is prima facie legal evidence and has the legal authority regarding the place of birth. Furthermore, since the COLB is the only certification the State of Hawaii presents, it is the only vital record that has any legal authority.
I am amazed how ignorant you are of legal principles.
[@#$%] you, Dr. QUEER Russian Conspiracy, you’re a below no life piece of [@#$%] old line Marxist and I have connections that can have your wrinkled old ass indicted and convicted for treason and deported from this country – REGARDLESS OF YOUR CITIZENSHIP STATUS or IMMIGRATION STATUS or YOUR “CONNECTIONS”. I know more about you than your own family does, you [@#$%]ing old fool.
Hey genius: A BIRTH CERTIFIATE IS A MEDICAL RECORD
You should not be commenting on disclosure laws IF You dont know what they do.
OBAMA admitted Publicly through his book and by the RELEASE of his COLB, that he was born in Hawaii. BY law, any information that is ALREADY in the public domain can be confirmed as being FACTUAL or NOT factual by officials.
Based on what fact? Absolute bullcrap claim on your part. You really should stop making things up
I see that you’re still arguing with the lunatics.
If you don’t have a pet already, I would suggest adopting a dog. Training him (or her) can be just as frustrating, at the onset at least, but if you apply the same energy, you will find it ultimately rewarding, as opposed to feeding someone’s delusional beliefs. And you’ll give a home to a good dog.
There might be some value to this discussion as a clinical study, I suppose, but the underlying racism that transpires through some of the posts is just too nauseating.
As a pertinent aside on the power of delusional beliefs, I recommend reading the wiki entry on this somewhat notorious Frenchman who believed in the existence of malicious goblins and wrote a book on it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexis-Vincent-Charles_Berbiguier_de_Terre-Neuve_du_Thym
I actually read his book (which has been reprinted since) and it is actually quite fascinating to see how Berbiguier will bend and twist every daily event to make it conform into his delusional worldview.
I recommend The Daily Coyote.
I am also adopting either a greyhound, or Afghan hound as a service companion. I just have to find one who will get along with Max, my Siamese.
Actually, ksdb et al provide great entertainment.
Oh, I also recommend “Ca Plane Pour Moi.”
French rock is wild.
Go pound your head against a brick wall.
It is interesting that you attempt to call out Dr. C without providing any sort of supporting information. You claim he is a Marxist? Why? Because he refutes the ridiculous racist claims of the birther idiots? He should be deported for telling the truth? Wow! Free speech, which you so called “patriots” claim is essential, seem to be only if the person is supporting your false claims. If they are against you then they are treasonous and anti American. I find that to be interesting.
At this point, anyone who still believes the nirther nonsense has a serious case of Obama Derangement Syndrome at the very least and is more than likely a racist. There are no logical arguments left as to why anyone would still be questioning Obama’s place of birth or saying that his foreign dad disqualifies him. Even if the former was true, it would require a conspiracy of literally millions of people domestic and foreign to keep the secret. With that many people, the secret would have been out by now. If it’s the latter, then you’re saying that the entire U.S. government, including Obama’s opponents in the primary and general election, was so incompetent (since his father’s foreign birth was common knowledge) that they completely missed it.
Face it, nirthers, nobody cares about your stupid conspiracy theories other than those of us who like to point and laugh. You belong to the category of people who deny the Holocaust and the moon landing and think 9/11 was an inside job. No one will ever believe you, so go burn your crosses elsewhere.
I think that may a pre-existing condition for Joseph.
I assume you are joking? (See http://www.petmedsonline.org/least-intelligent-dogs.html )
Afghans have cat like personalities, which is fine with me. I’m looking for a dog, not an accountant.
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Joseph the ‘successful black lawyer’.
What, Stupidity?
You said you wanted a “service companion”.
“Catlike” does not translate well into “service”, unless the goal is an animal that will keep your bed warm until you get in it.
I love dogs and once had an Afghan in my extended family. Lovely, quiet dog. “Companion”, yes. “Service”… not so much. If the idea is a dog that will do useful things on command, check this list:
http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Top-Ten-Most-Intelligent-Dog-Breeds&id=865229
What, no citations, no attempts to point out contrived facts or lies?
Pathetic Joseph, you have just validated Dr C’s relevance and why you guys are so afraid.
It’s just that anyone who says anything positive about Obama must be a Marxist. In fact I have a very low opinion of Marxism.
Something “1776 Style” is coming, something you fools cannot prevent or win. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrtrmeITQNk&feature=PlayList&p=597E6C6083F5E146&index=0&playnext=1
Wow, I’m trembling with fear.
Loser…
There’s a ‘sincerely, Tim McVeigh’ joke in here somewhere, but I’m not ghoulish enough to think of one.