Main Menu

Government investigation into Barack Obama’s citizenship

Shocking documents obtained under Freedom of Information Act disclose that questions were raised about Barack Obama’s citizenship status, and that an official government investigation was carried out. Here is the text of the FOIA document (see page 38):

Memo to file
A 14 128 294
Sept. 14, 1967

Pursuant to inquiry from Central office regarding the status of the applicants’ [Lolo Soetoro] spouses’ child by a former marriage.

The person in question is a united states citizen by virtue of his birth in Honolulu, Hawaii Aug. 4, 1961. He is living with the applicants’ spouse in Honolulu, Hawaii. He is considered the applicants step-child, within the meaning of Sec. 101(b)(1)(B), of the act, by virtue of the marriage of the applicant to the childs’ mother on March 15, 1965.

W. L. Mix

This also confirms the date of the Soetoro marriage.

Update:

The cover letter with Allen’s FOIA response indicates that there were some responsive documents that could not be released. One of the documents that was released was a copy of Stanley Ann Dunham’s birth certificate. There is little question in my mind that one of the documents that was found but not released is Barack Obama’s birth certificate.

309 Responses to Government investigation into Barack Obama’s citizenship

  1. avatar
    Estiveo August 1, 2010 at 11:06 pm #

    Bwahhhhh-hahahahahahaaaaaaaa!

    Wait for it…wait for it… ” but they didn’t say natural born citizen,” in 3…2…1…

  2. avatar
    Rickey August 1, 2010 at 11:13 pm #

    It’s been a busy Sunday, Doc.

    I guess that means that you should be receiving a response to your FOIA request any day now!

  3. avatar
    richCares August 1, 2010 at 11:16 pm #

    Birthers need this to be wrong, they need to have Obama born in Kenya, it’s the only way to get him out of the White House. They haven’t quite noticed that this has not worked out, the birther movement has been a complete failure, Obama is still in Office. Except for failing, I wonder what the birther’s objective is? Maybe james knows.

  4. avatar
    Reality Check August 1, 2010 at 11:27 pm #

    Rutroh, now we know the State Department was in on the fix as early as 1967. They knew even then that the young child was chosen by George Soros and Saul Alinsky to be the president some day.

  5. avatar
    James August 1, 2010 at 11:35 pm #

    I might be fruitful to access to that official government investigation to look at all associated documentation with it.

  6. avatar
    ObamaRelease YourRecords August 1, 2010 at 11:45 pm #

    How do you spin one application for a waiver from Soetoro to an investigation in to Obama’s citizenship!?

    Talk about spin!

    Do you really think they would say he was born in Kenya, or elsewhere, if they originally lied to get Obama the coveted U.S. Citizen status(which by the way would still not be “natural born Citizen” status)…

    Where are the documents in the FOIA that show an investigation other than one statement that could have been given by mommy… I don’t see any supporting docs that show which hospital he was conceived… Where does it even say an investigation was done on baby Obama…

    Come on, you must be smarter than that!?

    Talk about complete hypocrisy!

    It is pretty simple; OBAMA RELEASE THE HOSPITAL GENERATED LONG-FORM CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE!!!

    How you can continue to defend this clear fraud I will never understand!

    P.S; how long have you been waiting on simple FOIA requests now??? ENOUGH SAID!

  7. avatar
    Reality Check August 1, 2010 at 11:58 pm #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: Do you really think they would say he was born in Kenya, or elsewhere, if they originally lied to get Obama the coveted U.S. Citizen status(which by the way would still not be “natural born Citizen” status)…

    Not a good weekend for the birfers I see? Once again you are assuming Obama was born in Kenya and challenging everyone to prove you wrong. I doesn’t work that way except on forums where you control the delete button.

  8. avatar
    Dave August 2, 2010 at 12:00 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords:

    I notice obamareleaseyourrecords.com is now linked to an appeal to sign Chalice Jackson’s petition urging the President’s resignation, and her site says she expected 100 million signatures by July 23. I’d be interested to know how many signatures you have so far.

  9. avatar
    katahdin August 2, 2010 at 12:00 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: How do you spin one application for a waiver from Soetoro to an investigation in to Obama’s citizenship!?
    Talk about spin!

    The word you’re looking for is J-O-K-E.

  10. avatar
    Scott Brown August 2, 2010 at 12:06 am #

    Returning to the blog to get the latest on the FOIA requests, I see that Dr. C has allowed a return of the same ole name calling, insulting and demeaning of those considered to be ‘brithers’.

    I have always thought Obama was born in Hawaii and that Ann didn’t travel outside of the US until after his birth. It would appear that her passport was not issued until 1965 – well after Obama’s birth. Does this make me a ‘birther’ – who knows – who cares.

    I find the information fascinating – to finally know a little bit more about our President. It’s too bad we don’t know more – but that is the way he has chosen to play this – I have a feeling one day all the records will be released, but until then, Obama gets to be the illusive narcissist in the White House.

    I am still of the opinion that one cannot be a NBC if one has dual citizenship at birth, which Obama has freely admitted. Admittedly, it is JUST MY OPINION and is not stated as a fact. Just as it is this consensus OPINION of this blog that Obama is a NBC and cannot be stated as fact – although most do so.

    Repeating an opinion over and over as fact, does NOT make it a fact. And it still amazes me at the ire and defensive attitude of those supporting Obama when the man is clearly in the White House as the President and it doesn’t look like he is going anywhere any time soon. The way you people protest and carry-on on this blog would have some believe he is being ousted as I type.

    It’s sad to see the blog return to the Alinsky antics of belittling, insulting, and berating as a means of disagreeing. I’m both disappointed in Dr. C and disheartened that people would treat their fellow Americans with such disregard.

    And remember – you can flame away, but I would advise that you ignore me as always I won’t be returning to read your insults. 🙂 I just stopped by for the latest on the new information released.

    Ta-Ta and Take Care.

  11. avatar
    ObamaRelease YourRecords August 2, 2010 at 12:06 am #

    LOL… I’m having a great weekend, thanks.

    Nothing like spin from a bunch of spin doctors…

    Obama says jump and we obots jump!

  12. avatar
    misha August 2, 2010 at 12:08 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: It is pretty simple; OBAMA RELEASE THE HOSPITAL GENERATED LONG-FORM CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE!!!

    I agree with you. The proof you are looking for is right here!

  13. avatar
    ObamaRelease YourRecords August 2, 2010 at 12:11 am #

    Dave:
    I notice obamareleaseyourrecords.com is now linked to an appeal to sign Chalice Jackson’s petition urging the President’s resignation, and her site says she expected 100 million signatures by July 23. I’d be interested to know how many signatures you have so far.

    Contact her and find out, spin doctor!

  14. avatar
    gorefan August 2, 2010 at 12:12 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: I don’t see any supporting docs that show which hospital he was conceived

    Really, they did in a hospital. How kinky.

  15. avatar
    ObamaRelease YourRecords August 2, 2010 at 12:14 am #

    misha:
    I agree with you. The proof you are looking for is right here!

    I thought this was it; http://www.scribd.com/doc/30452433/The-Smoking-Gun-Obama-Megyn-Bill-Unknown-Hawaiian-COLB-FightTheSmears

  16. avatar
    Dave August 2, 2010 at 12:15 am #

    Scott Brown: I’m both disappointed in Dr. C and disheartened that people would treat their fellow Americans with such disregard.

    Americans? Are there people claiming to be Americans here? Not so fast, buddy, we’re going to need to see some birth certificates.

  17. avatar
    Dave August 2, 2010 at 12:18 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords:
    Contact her and find out, spin doctor!

    Honestly, you sound like you couldn’t care less how the petition is going. Seems to me that 100 million signatures asking for the President’s resignation would be worth a post on your blog.

  18. avatar
    Gregory August 2, 2010 at 12:19 am #

    Scott Brown:I am still of the opinion that one cannot be a NBC if one has dual citizenship at birth, which Obama has freely admitted.

    Then it must also be your opinion that, say, Presidents Buchanan and Arthur were not presidents – because their fathers were British citizens when they were born? Odd, that the history books claims that each of those Presidents was – in fact – a U.S. president.

  19. avatar
    misha August 2, 2010 at 12:24 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: which hospital he was conceived…

    Gawd, I wish there was a video.

  20. avatar
    misha August 2, 2010 at 12:29 am #

    Gregory: Then it must also be your opinion that, say, Presidents Buchanan and Arthur were not presidents – because their fathers were British citizens when they were born? Odd, that the history books claims that each of those Presidents was – in fact – a U.S. president.

    Same thing with Spiro Agnew. Agnew’s father was not a US citizen when he was born.

  21. avatar
    ObamaRelease YourRecords August 2, 2010 at 12:31 am #

    Gregory:
    Then it must also be your opinion that, say, Presidents Buchanan and Arthur were not presidents – because their fathers were British citizens when they were born? Odd, that the history books claims that each of those Presidents was – in fact – a U.S. president.

    Historically Presidents and VPs (including Joe Biden) born after the adoption of our Constitution (1787) have met the classical interpretation of a NBC (a citizen born on US territory to two (2) US citizens)….

    There have been 42 Americans that have served as President (not including Mr. Obama). 10 were born before 1787.

    ALL Presidents born after 1787, except for Chester Arthur*, met the NBC criteria.

    There have been 46 Americans that have served as Vice-President (not including Mr. Biden). 10 were born before 1787.

    ALL Vice-Presidents born after 1787, except for Chester Arthur*, met the NBC criteria. 14 VPs have gone on to be President.

    http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/07/irrefutable-proof-that-barack-obama-is.html

  22. avatar
    misha August 2, 2010 at 12:35 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: … have met the classical interpretation of a NBC (a citizen born on US territory to two (2) US citizens)….

    What planet do you live on?

  23. avatar
    ObamaRelease YourRecords August 2, 2010 at 12:47 am #

    misha:
    What planet do you live on?

    EARTH!

    The facts don’t lie…

    Aside form Chester, Obama is the only POTUS, other than the ones that qualified under the grandfather clause, that does not have “Citizen” parentS! That would be TWO.

    The citizenship status of all presidents including the parentS citizenship status of all presidents beyond the grandfather clause…

    http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/07/irrefutable-proof-that-barack-obama-is.html

    You can try and spin that all you want… THE FACTS DON’T LIE!

    Now we see why Doc gets 1,000 comments a week… a half dozen obots sit here and chat back and forth on the threads…

  24. avatar
    ObamaRelease YourRecords August 2, 2010 at 12:50 am #

    gorefan:
    Really, they did in a hospital.How kinky.

    excuse me, born… you never know though, maybe in the garbage room!?

  25. avatar
    Mary Brown August 2, 2010 at 12:52 am #

    Argument two. The two citizen parent argument. Or is it argument three. This will go on. Though it is interesting to see Scott Brown back off a bit.

  26. avatar
    Dave August 2, 2010 at 12:54 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords:
    Now we see why Doc gets 1,000 comments a week… a half dozen obots sit here and chat back and forth on the threads…

    Well, your post about Chalice Jackson’s petition got over 100 comments. That’s not so bad. And speaking of that petition, I’m starting to get the impression that maybe she didn’t get 100 million signatures, but 10 million signatures would certainly still be quite newsworthy. Will you be posting about that?

  27. avatar
    misha August 2, 2010 at 12:59 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: Aside form Chester, Obama is the only POTUS, other than the ones that qualified under the grandfather clause, that does not have “Citizen” parentS! That would be TWO.The citizenship status of all presidents including the parentS citizenship status of all presidents beyond the grandfather clause…

    Go back on Thorazine. And get help.

  28. avatar
    Sean August 2, 2010 at 1:04 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: EARTH!

    The facts don’t lie…

    Aside form Che

    Then how did Obama get elected? This grandfather clause as you understand it slipped through the fingers of Constitutional scholars and 50 State Attorney Generals? Not to mention a Republican Party that successfully impeached Clinton over a blowjob?

    Tell me you’re not serious.

  29. avatar
    richCares August 2, 2010 at 1:05 am #

    Though it is interesting to see Scott Brown back off a bit.
    .
    that’s just scott playing the “poor victim”, a common trait for people of his ilk.

  30. avatar
    Slartibartfast August 2, 2010 at 1:19 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords:
    Historically Presidents and VPs (including Joe Biden) born after the adoption of our Constitution (1787) have met the classical interpretation of a NBC (a citizen born on US territory to two (2) US citizens)….There have been 42 Americans that have served as President (not including Mr. Obama). 10 were born before 1787.ALL Presidents born after 1787, except for Chester Arthur*, met the NBC criteria.There have been 46 Americans that have served as Vice-President (not including Mr. Biden). 10 were born before 1787.ALL Vice-Presidents born after 1787, except for Chester Arthur*, met the NBC criteria. 14 VPs have gone on to be President.http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/07/irrefutable-proof-that-barack-obama-is.html

    Do you realize that you just said that someone born with dual citizenship after the grandfather clause expired was a natural born citizen and legitimate holder of high office?

  31. avatar
    Slartibartfast August 2, 2010 at 1:23 am #

    Sean:
    Then how did Obama get elected? This grandfather clause as you understand it slipped through the fingers of Constitutional scholars and 50 State Attorney Generals? Not to mention a Republican Party that successfully impeached Clinton over a blowjob?Tell me you’re not serious.

    Very funny. Unfortunately I think he is serious…

  32. avatar
    ObamaRelease YourRecords August 2, 2010 at 1:34 am #

    misha:
    Go back on Thorazine. And get help.

    I’ll stick with the facts, thanks!

  33. avatar
    Slartibartfast August 2, 2010 at 1:41 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords:
    I’ll stick with the facts, thanks!

    So you’re standing by your statement that dual citizenship at birth doesn’t invalidate natural born status?

  34. avatar
    Sean August 2, 2010 at 1:42 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords:
    EARTH!The facts don’t lie…Aside form Chester, Obama is the only POTUS, other than the ones that qualified under the grandfather clause, that does not have “Citizen” parentS! That would be TWO.The citizenship status of all presidents including the parentS citizenship status of all presidents beyond the grandfather clause…http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/07/irrefutable-proof-that-barack-obama-is.htmlYou can try and spin that all you want… THE FACTS DON’T LIE!Now we see why Doc gets 1,000 comments a week… a half dozen obots sit here and chat back and forth on the threads…

    Where did you get your definition of Natural Born Citizen? It’s not defined in the US Constitution.

  35. avatar
    AnotherBird August 2, 2010 at 1:53 am #

    I can see the sinking feeling that birthers must be feeling now as the last straws they are grasping disappear.

  36. avatar
    AnotherBird August 2, 2010 at 1:58 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords:
    I’ll stick with the facts, thanks!

    Facts … That is something that you have consistently ignored.

  37. avatar
    Lupin August 2, 2010 at 2:03 am #

    Two points:

    1) The citizen parentS (two parents) is rubbish and completely made up. Could anyone who uses it point to any evidence at all for it?

    And please don’t drag in Vattel; he actually states the opposite.

    2) If you believe that someone with potential dual citizenship at birth cannot be president, please explain why you’re disenfranchising millions of hyphenated americans.

    I’m talking about you, Delusional Scott Brown. Explain how that works on your planet.

    If you believe in any of these two arguments you’re an imbecile and/or a bigot.

  38. avatar
    Jules August 2, 2010 at 2:09 am #

    Scott Brown: I am still of the opinion that one cannot be a NBC if one has dual citizenship at birth, which Obama has freely admitted. Admittedly, it is JUST MY OPINION and is not stated as a fact. Just as it is this consensus OPINION of this blog that Obama is a NBC and cannot be stated as fact – although most do so.

    Just to clarify:

    Your opinion is that natural-born citizenship is not only a function of the laws of the United States, but also the laws of all other countries? You are of the opinion that any country could adopt a nationality law that imposes its citizenship at birth on all Americans and renders all future generations of US citizens ineligible to be President?

    Now, what is a valid country for the purpose of being able to render a US citizen ineligible to be President? Would Kovovo count? What about South Ossetia? What about Northern Cyprus?

  39. avatar
    Keith August 2, 2010 at 2:35 am #

    Estiveo: Bwahhhhh-hahahahahahaaaaaaaa!Wait for it…wait for it… ” but they didn’t say natural born citizen,” in 3…2…1…

    Less than 45 minutes… 🙂

  40. avatar
    Keith August 2, 2010 at 2:40 am #

    Sean:
    Then how did Obama get elected? This grandfather clause as you understand it slipped through the fingers of Constitutional scholars and 50 State Attorney Generals? Not to mention a Republican Party that successfully impeached Clinton over a blowjob?Tell me you’re not serious.

    They impeached him true, but it wasn’t ‘successful’.

  41. avatar
    Sean August 2, 2010 at 2:49 am #

    The spinning of these documents is amazing!

  42. avatar
    misha August 2, 2010 at 2:52 am #

    Sean: The spinning of these documents is amazing!

    I fully expected it.

  43. avatar
    Bovril August 2, 2010 at 6:01 am #

    Dear all.

    Whenever Scottia, ORYE et al turn uo with the same tired old BS, do not bother to engage in troill feeding, simply post

    Wong Kim Ark
    Perkins v Elg

    Go on Birfers show us your (legal) briefs……

  44. avatar
    ellid August 2, 2010 at 7:35 am #

    Scott Brown: Returning to the blog to get the latest on the FOIA requests, I see that Dr. C has allowed a return of the same ole name calling, insulting and demeaning of those considered to be brithers’.
    I have always thought Obama was born in Hawaii and that Ann didn’t travel outside of the US until after his birth.It would appear that her passport was not issued until 1965 – well after Obama’s birth.Does this make me a birther’ – who knows – who cares.
    I find the information fascinating – to finally know a little bit more about our President.It’s too bad we don’t know more – but that is the way he has chosen to play this – I have a feeling one day all the records will be released, but until then, Obama gets to be the illusive narcissist in the White House.I am still of the opinion that one cannot be a NBC if one has dual citizenship at birth, which Obama has freely admitted. Admittedly, it is JUST MY OPINION and is not stated as a fact.Just as it is this consensus OPINION of this blog that Obama is a NBC and cannot be stated as fact – although most do so.Repeating an opinion over and over as fact, does NOT make it a fact.And it still amazes me at the ire and defensive attitude of those supporting Obama when the man is clearly in the White House as the President and it doesn’t look like he is going anywhere any time soon.The way you people protest and carry-on on this blog would have some believe he is being ousted as I type.It’s sad to see the blog return to the Alinsky antics of belittling, insulting, and berating as a means of disagreeing. I’m both disappointed in Dr. C and disheartened that people would treat their fellow Americans with such disregard.And remember – you can flame away, but I would advise that you ignore me as always I won’t be returning to read your insults. I just stopped by for the latest on the new information released.
    Ta-Ta and Take Care.

    Yo! Senator! When are you going to answer my e-mails? Your constituent service SUCKS! What’s wrong, won’t that fancy truck you bought to haul your spoiled brat’s horse around work anymore?

    I didn’t vote for you this year and I sure won’t vote for you in two years if you don’t straighten up and fly right! You should be ashamed of yourself!

  45. avatar
    ellid August 2, 2010 at 7:35 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: LOL… I’m having a great weekend, thanks.Nothing like spin from a bunch of spin doctors…Obama says jump and we obots jump!

    Have you taken your meds yet? You certainly seem to need them.

  46. avatar
    ellid August 2, 2010 at 7:38 am #

    Dave:
    Americans? Are there people claiming to be Americans here? Not so fast, buddy, we’re going to need to see some birth certificates.

    nc1 aka Naturalizedcitizen is a Serbian by birth, and has consistently refused to provide any documentation proving that she is not either a war criminal or Orly Taitz.

    The rest of the birthers seem to be “patriots” who think that calling for a military coup against the legally elected and duly sworn President demonstrates their love for America. I think they should be prosecuted for fomenting treason, but that’s just me….

  47. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 2, 2010 at 7:39 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: Now we see why Doc gets 1,000 comments a week… a half dozen obots sit here and chat back and forth on the threads…

    The comment volume shoots up when we have trolls show up making irrational or insulting statements that gets everybody stirred up.

    By the way, in your little historical summary, you rather glossed over the citizenship of the father of James Buchanan.

  48. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny August 2, 2010 at 7:44 am #

    Bovril: Dear all.Whenever Scottia, ORYE et al turn uo with the same tired old BS, do not bother to engage in troill feeding, simply postWong Kim ArkPerkins v ElgGo on Birfers show us your (legal) briefs……

    You forgot

    Ankeny v Indiana

    which did go the merits, but assuming that Obama was born in Hawaii (exactly what has now been proven).

    (And Chester Arthur was not the only dual citizen at birth!)

  49. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 2, 2010 at 7:48 am #

    Scott Brown: I am still of the opinion that one cannot be a NBC if one has dual citizenship at birth

    No surprise there. However, until you can turn your opinion into an evidence-based argument it’s just your opinion and it will never be anything more than that.

    Scott Brown: Returning to the blog to get the latest on the FOIA requests, I see that Dr. C has allowed a return of the same ole name calling, insulting and demeaning of those considered to be brithers’.

    Yes, it proved to be unworkable to enforce civility, but it would be a mistake to say that only the birthers are the recipients of name-calling and insults.

  50. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 2, 2010 at 7:52 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: How do you spin one application for a waiver from Soetoro to an investigation in to Obama’s citizenship!?

    Look it up.

  51. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 2, 2010 at 7:55 am #

    Rickey: I guess that means that you should be receiving a response to your FOIA request any day now!

    One hopes so. Hmmm. I think I will go by my house on the way to the airport to see if it’s in the mail today.

  52. avatar
    DCH August 2, 2010 at 8:24 am #

    Ok, so the new birther meme will be about the mysterious W.L. Mix whose name is afixed to the report.

    Of course W.L. Mix is a new evidence of the scale of the cover up!

    How do we know was he was not really a Kenyan under cover agent recruited by Kenyan Intelligence to protect the future “sleeper POTUS” from discovery by yet unborn Birthers by constructing an elaborate cover up all trails back Kenya?

  53. avatar
    Sef August 2, 2010 at 8:57 am #

    Gregory:
    Then it must also be your opinion that, say, Presidents Buchanan and Arthur were not presidents – because their fathers were British citizens when they were born? Odd, that the history books claims that each of those Presidents was – in fact – a U.S. president.

    If someone has nothing else to do it might be fun to examine the laws that were passed under these Presidents & if any tie-breaking votes were cast by Agnew in the Senate. Under the birthers’ “arguments” all their actions are null & void.

  54. avatar
    misha August 2, 2010 at 9:01 am #

    Sef: If someone has nothing else to do it might be fun to examine the laws that were passed under these Presidents & if any tie-breaking votes were cast by Agnew in the Senate. Under the birthers’ “arguments” all their actions are null & void.

    Spiro Agnew’s father was a Greek citizen when he was born. His father naturalized, after Agnew was born.

  55. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) August 2, 2010 at 9:09 am #

    Scott Brown: blah blah blah I’m not a birther but

    Give it a rest already Fake Scott Brown/Sally Hill. You were exposed a few months ago as a rabid birther who has been going around the internet for over a year now using your ridiculous tactics. You constantly claim you’re not a birther but then use the same discredited talking points. It has been explained to you how other presidents and vice presidents and even candidates had dual citizenship at birth but you continue making a fool of yourself with the same comments. Then you cry about being the victim when your dishonesty is called out.
    Dishonest fools deserve to be called out and ridiculed, especially after they’ve been given what the truth is and they continue spouting the same lie. Go back to your hideout

  56. avatar
    heron August 2, 2010 at 9:14 am #

    If I have to see a birfoon write ‘misprision of felony’ or ‘Alinsky tactics’ again I’m going to …….ugh…nevermind……serioulsy these howler monkees have no critical thinking ability…thank f’ing god that NONE OF THEM HAVE ANY POSITION OF AUTHORITY IN THE REAL WORLD AND ARE JUST ROLE PLAYING FROM THEIR BASEMENTS.

  57. avatar
    Sef August 2, 2010 at 9:19 am #

    misha:
    Spiro Agnew’s father was a Greek citizen when he was born. His father naturalized, after Agnew was born.

    Yes, that’s the point. Agnew did not have 2 citizen parents at birth.

  58. avatar
    Greg August 2, 2010 at 9:23 am #

    misha: Spiro Agnew’s father was a Greek citizen when he was born. His father naturalized, after Agnew was born.

    Even if Spiro’s father had naturalized before his birth, he would have had dual citizenship. That would have made him ineligible under Scott Brown’s definition:

    I am still of the opinion that one cannot be a NBC if one has dual citizenship at birth, which Obama has freely admitted.

    The dual-citizenship is the most stringent of the definitions of NBC, and gives veto power to other countries, since they may or may not care if their nationals revoke their citizenship in granting dual-citizenship status to the children of nationals.

    Michael Dukakis would also be ineligible under this definition, even though both of his parents were citizens.

  59. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) August 2, 2010 at 9:34 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: LOL… I’m having a great weekend, thanks.Nothing like spin from a bunch of spin doctors…Obama says jump and we obots jump!

    heron: If I have to see a birfoon write misprision of felony’ or Alinsky tactics’ again I’m going to …….ugh…nevermind……serioulsy these howler monkees have no critical thinking ability…thank f’ing god that NONE OF THEM HAVE ANY POSITION OF AUTHORITY IN THE REAL WORLD AND ARE JUST ROLE PLAYING FROM THEIR BASEMENTS.

    Extremists always need a jew they can make out to be evil. Chances are Sally Hill has never read Alinsky and has no idea what his theories consisted of.

  60. avatar
    Sef August 2, 2010 at 9:37 am #

    Greg: The dual-citizenship is the most stringent of the definitions of NBC, and gives veto power to other countries, since they may or may not care if their nationals revoke their citizenship in granting dual-citizenship status to the children of nationals.

    Though not in the Constitution the rest of us use wouldn’t the argument of divided loyalties be valid for anyone in a position of power in our Government? For instance, Congressmen, Senators, etc. Ya just can’t trust them folks.

  61. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) August 2, 2010 at 9:41 am #

    Lupin: Two points:1) The citizen parentS (two parents) is rubbish and completely made up. Could anyone who uses it point to any evidence at all for it?
    And please don’t drag in Vattel; he actually states the opposite.2) If you believe that someone with potential dual citizenship at birth cannot be president, please explain why you’re disenfranchising millions of hyphenated americans.
    I’m talking about you, Delusional Scott Brown. Explain how that works on your planet.If you believe in any of these two arguments you’re an imbecile and/or a bigot.

    Sally Hill/Scott Brown has already stated elsewhere that Obama isnt black but rather white she also prefaced her statement with I’m not a racist. This sounds similar to her I’m not a birther but…

  62. avatar
    Lupin August 2, 2010 at 9:48 am #

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Sally Hill/Scott Brown has already stated elsewhere that Obama isnt black but rather white she also prefaced her statement with I’m not a racist. This sounds similar to her I’m not a birther but…

    I am one of those people who remain unconvinced that rank & file birthers (as opposed to their puppet masters) aren’t simply motivated, at least in major part, by old fashioned racism.

    I have repeatedly challenged birthers here to show me links to any previous political statements by them opposing “socialism” or advocating exotic constitutional theories, before a black man was elected to the WH and I’m still waiting.

  63. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny August 2, 2010 at 10:11 am #

    Greg: Even if Spiro’s father had naturalized before his birth, he would have had dual citizenship. That would have made him ineligible under Scott Brown’s definition:The dual-citizenship is the most stringent of the definitions of NBC, and gives veto power to other countries, since they may or may not care if their nationals revoke their citizenship in granting dual-citizenship status to the children of nationals. Michael Dukakis would also be ineligible under this definition, even though both of his parents were citizens.

    Do not forget Eisenhower. German and USA at birth because of his father, who was German and USA too. And VP Curtis, whose mother was a native Indian “not taxed” and thus not a US citizen at the time of his birth.

  64. avatar
    BatGuano August 2, 2010 at 10:28 am #

    Scott Brown: I am still of the opinion that one cannot be a NBC if one has dual citizenship at birth, which Obama has freely admitted.

    hey scott. welcome back.

    i find it interesting that your contention is “dual citizenship at birth”. most of the birthers contend that the reason a dual-citizen can not be president is “divided alliances”. i’ve heard ( and would love to find verification ) that thomas jefferson received french citizenship before he became president and did nothing to renounce it. if this were true would you, scott brown, think that jefferson wasn’t eligible to be president ? or is it just for dual-citizens at birth ?

  65. avatar
    Mary Brown August 2, 2010 at 10:32 am #

    The Governor of Louisiana, Mr. Jindahl, was born six months or so after his parents arrived here on student visas. Yet, I still hear him mentioned as a possible Presidental candidate. What’s wrong here. Then there is Governor Richardson of New Mexico who was born in California because his American father sent his Mexican mother to California for the birth. I am willing to bet that some in the birther crowd will claim that the Governor Jindahl’s parents had the intention of becoming citizens and that makes his situation different.How do you measure intent or decide when that intent was formed? Oh, and if some in this crowd have their way folks like Governor Jindahl would no longer be citizens as all. They want to do away with what they term “anchor babies” through a change in the constitution. Funny, that argument was rather subdued until the demographics of the American population began to change.

  66. avatar
    Rickey August 2, 2010 at 10:33 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: I don’t see any supporting docs that show which hospital he was conceived…

    The records clearly show that in the course of the appeal Stanley Ann was required to produce her marriage license, her divorce decree, and her birth certificate from Kansas. Since the government also inquired about the citizenship of her son, it stands to reason that she also produced his birth certificate. However, it is not included in the records because Obama is alive, therefore his birth certificate is exempt from disclosure under FOIA. There is, however, a memo in the records which state that his birth in Honolulu on August 4, 1961 was verified and that he was a U.S. citizen. It’s not all that complicated.

    OBAMA RELEASE THE HOSPITAL GENERATED LONG-FORM CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE!!!

    I’ll ask you the same question I repeatedly asked of Mario Apuzzo, a question to which he never responded. If your definition of Natural Born Citizen is correct, why do you care where Obama was born? According to you, he could have been born in Times Square on New Year’s Eve in front of a million witnesses and he still wouldn’t be a NBC.

  67. avatar
    BatGuano August 2, 2010 at 10:39 am #

    Paul Pieniezny:
    Do not forget Eisenhower. German and USA at birth because of his father…..

    least we forget that ike also wasn’t a US resident the previous consecutive 14 years. was that unconstitutional ? not sure. the constitution doesn’t define what a 14 year resident is. same as a NBC.

  68. avatar
    gorefan August 2, 2010 at 10:58 am #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: Historically Presidents and VPs (including Joe Biden) born after the adoption of our Constitution (1787) have met the classical interpretation of a NBC (a citizen born on US territory to two (2) US citizens)….

    I know this has been covered in depth here before, but it is worth repeating:

    “The language of the Constitution cannot be interpreted safely except by reference to the common law and to [267 U.S. 87, 109] British institutions as they were when the instrument was framed and adopted. The statemen and lawyers of the Convention who submitted it to the ratification of the Convention of the Thirteen States, were born and brought up in the atmosphere of the common law, and thought and spoke in its vocabulary. They were familiar with other forms of government, recent and ancient, and indicated in their discussions earnest study and consideration of many of them, but when they came to put their conclusions into the form of fundamental law in a compact draft, they expressed them in terms of the common law, confident that they could be shortly and easily understood. ” Chief Justice (former President of the United States) William Howard Taft

    http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=267&invol=87

    And the Common Law definition of “natural born” is jus soli. And therefore there is no requirement for “two US citizen”.

    Of course we don’t to take Justice Taft’s word for it. You can always listen to James Madison (Father of the Constitution):

    “It is an established maxim, that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth, however, derives its force sometimes from place, and sometimes from parentage; but, in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States.”

    As you said the facts speak for themselves. Now how about providing a statement from a Founder or Framer that backs up your assertion

  69. avatar
    DaveH August 2, 2010 at 11:20 am #

    All very entertaining to read the comments here. There’s nothing like the smell of burning birther in the morning… 🙂

    As far as the dual citizenship theory – which is so important in the life of a birther – it always amuses me to think or try to think the way they do. Let’s break it down and say I was born here in the United States but my father was a British citizen. Is the ‘blood’ that is coursing through my veins so strong that I now owe allegience to Britain even though I was born in the United States?

    There are other facts by commenters stated here that are so logical but it’s like the birther mind can’t absorb them. And when you go to a birther blog like Obama Release Your Records, you will never get a comment through that isn’t in full agreement with the birther mind.

  70. avatar
    Lupin August 2, 2010 at 11:38 am #

    Mary Brown: The Governor of Louisiana, Mr. Jindahl, was born six months or so after his parents arrived here on student visas.Yet, I still hear him mentioned as a possible Presidental candidate.What’s wrong here.Then there is Governor Richardson of New Mexico who was born in California because his American father sent his Mexican mother to California for the birth.I am willing to bet that some in the birther crowd will claim that the Governor Jindahl’s parents had the intention of becoming citizens and that makes his situation different.How do you measure intent or decide when that intent was formed?Oh, and if some in this crowd have their way folks like Governor Jindahl would no longer be citizens as all.They want to do away with what they term “anchor babies” through a change in the constitution.Funny, that argument was rather subdued until the demographics of the American population began to change.

    Quite right. That is indeed the “agenda” — not so hidden lately.

    If the hood fits….

  71. avatar
    G August 2, 2010 at 11:38 am #

    DaveH: All very entertaining to read the comments here. There’s nothing like the smell of burning birther in the morning…
    As far as the dual citizenship theory – which is so important in the life of a birther – it always amuses me to think or try to think the way they do. Let’s break it down and say I was born here in the United States but my father was a British citizen. Is the blood’ that is coursing through my veins so strong that I now owe allegience to Britain even though I was born in the United States?There are other facts by commenters stated here that are so logical but it’s like the birther mind can’t absorb them. And when you go to a birther blog like Obama Release Your Records, you will never get a comment through that isn’t in full agreement with the birther mind.

    Well said!

  72. avatar
    Lupin August 2, 2010 at 11:42 am #

    BatGuano: i’ve heard ( and would love to find verification ) that thomas jefferson received french citizenship before he became president and did nothing to renounce it.

    I don’t believe that is true.

  73. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 2, 2010 at 11:46 am #

    DaveH: Is the blood’ that is coursing through my veins so strong that I now owe allegience to Britain even though I was born in the United States?

    Birthers have a Lamarkian view of the inheritance of acquired characteristics. But on the two Citizen thing, do the persons have to be citizens before the child is conceived, or just at the time the child is born?

  74. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 2, 2010 at 12:05 pm #

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Extremists always need a jew they can make out to be evil. Chances are Sally Hill has never read Alinsky and has no idea what his theories consisted of.

    I most certainly have never read Alinsky, nor even heard of him before the birthers brought it up.

  75. avatar
    Lupin August 2, 2010 at 12:07 pm #

    Top GOP Senator wants to repeal 14th Amendment:

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/08/01/ftn/main6733905.shtml?tag=contentBody;featuredPost-PE

    I hope they don’t forget Mario in their list of thanks.

  76. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) August 2, 2010 at 12:07 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: I most certainly have never read Alinsky, nor even heard of him before the birthers brought it up.

    I’ve heard of him. Its not just birthers but right wingers in general. They think somehow that Alinsky is the left wing equivelent of Lee Atwater

  77. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 2, 2010 at 12:08 pm #

    misha: Spiro Agnew’s father was a Greek citizen when he was born. His father naturalized, after Agnew was born.

    The preceding text is the personal view of the commenter and its appearance here does not necessarily imply the endorsement of Obama Conspiracy Theories.

  78. avatar
    Majority Will August 2, 2010 at 12:24 pm #

    BatGuano:
    hey scott. welcome back.
    i find it interesting that your contention is “dual citizenship at birth”. most of the birthers contend that the reason a dual-citizen can not be president is “divided alliances”. i’ve heard ( and would love to find verification ) that thomas jefferson receivedfrench citizenship before he became president and did nothing to renounce it. if this were true would you, scott brown, think that jefferson wasn’t eligible to be president ? or is it just for dual-citizens at birth ?

    And Aaron Burr was a duel citizen.

  79. avatar
    misha August 2, 2010 at 12:34 pm #

    Majority Will: And Aaron Burr was a duel citizen.

    (bada-bing)

  80. avatar
    Bovril August 2, 2010 at 12:55 pm #

    Whilst we’re here lets list the “classic” trigger words/phrases for “I’m not a Birfer BUT…” (in no particular order)

    Commie (and variants thereof)
    Socialist
    Nazi
    Alinsky
    Marxist
    De Vattel
    Both parents
    Natural is not Native
    Scrubbing the Internet
    Long form
    Just show the Long Form (minor variant)
    Sweating bullets
    (I’ll avoid the traditional race baiting ones here)
    Cognitive dissonance
    Unconstitutional (usually tagged on with seditious demands)
    OUR WHITE HOUSE
    Anchor Baby
    Barry Soetoro
    Moslem
    Islamist
    Discovery
    Any all IN CAPS
    Soros

    Etc

    Notb an exhaustive list, but basically if any poster submits more than any 2 of these in one post they are a probably a hard core Birfer…..8-)

    (ooooh how congnitivy dissonancy of me….where my stipend Soros….)

  81. avatar
    Califlander August 2, 2010 at 12:58 pm #

    Scott Brown: … a return of the same ole name calling, insulting and demeaning of those considered to be brithers’.

    B’nai Brith was part of the conspiracy, too?

  82. avatar
    misha August 2, 2010 at 1:00 pm #

    Califlander: B’nai Brith was part of the conspiracy, too?

    Oy vey! (bada-bing)

  83. avatar
    Rickey August 2, 2010 at 1:05 pm #

    Bovril: Whilst we’re here lets list the “classic” trigger words/phrases for “I’m not a Birfer BUT…” (in no particular order)Commie (and variants thereof)
    Socialist
    Nazi
    Alinsky
    Marxist
    De Vattel
    Both parents
    Natural is not Native
    Scrubbing the Internet
    Long form
    Just show the Long Form (minor variant)
    Sweating bullets
    (I’ll avoid the traditional race baiting ones here)
    Cognitive dissonance
    Unconstitutional (usually tagged on with seditious demands)
    OUR WHITE HOUSE
    Anchor Baby
    Barry Soetoro
    Moslem
    Islamist
    Discovery
    Any all IN CAPS
    SorosEtcNotb an exhaustive list, but basically if any poster submits more than any 2 of these in one post they are a probably a hard core Birfer…..8-)(ooooh how congnitivy dissonancy of me….where my stipend Soros….)

    Don’t forget “We the People.”

  84. avatar
    NbC August 2, 2010 at 1:11 pm #

    . There is little question in my mind that one of the documents that was found but not released is Barack Obama’s birth certificate.

    So close and yet soooo far away. But yes, your observation is logical, reasonable.

  85. avatar
    misha August 2, 2010 at 1:11 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: The preceding text is the personal view of the commenter and its appearance here does not necessarily imply the endorsement of Obama Conspiracy Theories.

    No offense intended. My source:
    http://barackryphal.blogspot.com/2010/01/spiro-agnew.html

    “And like Barack Obama, Agnew’s father was not a U.S. citizen when Agnew was born.”

  86. avatar
    NbC August 2, 2010 at 1:12 pm #

    Majority Will: And Aaron Burr was a duel citizen.

    ROTFL

  87. avatar
    Sef August 2, 2010 at 1:30 pm #

    DaveH: Let’s break it down and say I was born here in the United States but my father was a British citizen. Is the blood’ that is coursing through my veins so strong that I now owe allegience to Britain even though I was born in the United States?

    How about if a U.S. citizen woman becomes pregnant by a non-U.S. citizen father, they do not marry, but the woman marries a U.S. citizen man before the child is born on U.S. soil. Does the “blood coursing through the veins” from the foreign father negate the years of nurturing & growth in the U.S.?

  88. avatar
    NbC August 2, 2010 at 1:35 pm #

    Declaration in new filing Strunk v DOS for summary judgment, with details as to the destruction of the 1965 passport application has been released

    Declaration of Alex Galovich

    See also my blog for the full records of this filing.

    Soon another lawsuit will ‘bite the dust’

  89. avatar
    NbC August 2, 2010 at 1:39 pm #

    Declaration in new filing Strunk v DOS for summary judgment, with details as to the destruction of the 1965 passport application has been released

    Declaration of Alex Galovich

    Soon another lawsuit will ‘bite the dust’

  90. avatar
    NbC August 2, 2010 at 1:39 pm #

    See also my blog for the full records of this filing.

  91. avatar
    Epectitus August 2, 2010 at 1:40 pm #

    In another document in the Allen trove (dated October 6, 1967) State Department representative John F. O’Shea writes:

    “The applicant’s United States citizen wife resides at 2234(?) University Avenue, Honolulu, Hawaii with her 6-year old United States citizen son by a prior marriage.”

  92. avatar
    Epectitus August 2, 2010 at 1:44 pm #

    Note that by asserting he is Lolo’s “step son” they are also laying the lie to any adoption by Soetoro.

  93. avatar
    sfjeff August 2, 2010 at 1:44 pm #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords said :
    “Historically Presidents and VPs (including Joe Biden) born after the adoption of our Constitution (1787) have met the classical interpretation of a NBC (a citizen born on US territory to two (2) US citizens)…”

    Oddly enough, the majority of U.S. voters disagree with your “classical interpretation of NBC”, nor did they care about what hospital he was born in. Tough.

  94. avatar
    kimba August 2, 2010 at 2:03 pm #

    “Dr. Conspiracy wrote:
    One hopes so. Hmmm. I think I will go by my house on the way to the airport to see if it’s in the mail today.”

    I bet they were all given final approval at the same time! You might get yours today!

  95. avatar
    SvenMagnussen August 2, 2010 at 2:13 pm #

    Epectitus: In another document in the Allen trove (dated October 6, 1967) State Department representative John F. O’Shea writes:“The applicant’s United States citizen wife resides at 2234(?) University Avenue, Honolulu, Hawaii with her 6-year old United States citizen son by a prior marriage.”

    Barack became Lolo’s stepson the moment his marriage to Barack’s mother was consummated on the March 15, 1965. Barry Soetoro’s 2nd grade school record indicates he was born in Honolulu, HI, his father is Lolo Soetoro and he is an Indonesian National.

    Adoptions are not instantaneous.An Oath of Renunciation and a Statement of Understanding are requests for a Certificate of Loss of Nationality. Several weeks or months or years may pass before US Citizenship is lost and citizenship with another country is obtained.

    An examination of Barack’s Form SS-5, Application for Soc Sec Number, in the mid-70s would go along way to identify whether Barack was a US Citizen or Legal Alien residing in the US.

  96. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 2, 2010 at 2:13 pm #

    No FOIA for me today. :sigh:

  97. avatar
    Gorefan August 2, 2010 at 2:37 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: No FOIA for me today. :sigh:

    Maybe because you’ve been to nice and didn’t sue them.

  98. avatar
    Gorefan August 2, 2010 at 2:43 pm #

    SvenMagnussen: Several weeks or months or years may pass before US Citizenship is lost and citizenship with another country is obtained.

    Since the President’s mother continued to obtain passports up into the late 1970’s and early 1980’s when exactly did she give up her citizenship? Or are you saying she only gave up his citizenship after she sent him back to Hawaii in 1971?

  99. avatar
    Rickey August 2, 2010 at 2:48 pm #

    NbC: Declaration in new filing Strunk v DOS for summary judgment, with details as to the destruction of the 1965 passport application has been released
    Declaration of Alex GalovichSoon another lawsuit will bite the dust’

    Good catch! And it’s worth pointing out that the last three pages is a copy of a February, 1985 message from the Secretary of State advising all diplomatic and consular posts that pursuant to a GSA request, all “routine passport applications for native born citizens” were being destroyed. This included all such applications from the years 1965 and earlier.

  100. avatar
    NbC August 2, 2010 at 2:51 pm #

    It also specifies excepted documents.

  101. avatar
    Ellid August 2, 2010 at 3:06 pm #

    SvenMagnussen:
    Barack became Lolo’s stepson the moment his marriage to Barack’s mother was consummated on the March 15, 1965. Barry Soetoro’s 2nd grade school record indicates he was born in Honolulu, HI, his father is Lolo Soetoro and he is an Indonesian National.Adoptions are not instantaneous.An Oath of Renunciation and a Statement of Understanding are requests for a Certificate of Loss of Nationality. Several weeks or months or years may pass before US Citizenship is lost and citizenship with another country is obtained.
    An examination of Barack’s Form SS-5, Application for Soc Sec Number, in the mid-70s would go along way to identify whether Barack was a US Citizen or Legal Alien residing in the US.

    And nowhere is there any evidence that Lolo Soetoro ADOPTED his wife’s son. Not only that, Stanley Ann Dunham stated in the document just released that she had not renounced her citizenship or attempted to naturalize in Indonesia.

    So once again, wrong.

  102. avatar
    Rickey August 2, 2010 at 3:09 pm #

    Ellid:
    And nowhere is there any evidence that Lolo Soetoro ADOPTED his wife’s son.Not only that, Stanley Ann Dunham stated in the document just released that she had not renounced her citizenship or attempted to naturalize in Indonesia.So once again, wrong.

    Sven has been beating that same tired drum for as long as he has been posting here, and that includes his numerous sock puppets. He is incapable of being swayed by actual evidence.

  103. avatar
    jamese777 August 2, 2010 at 3:31 pm #

    In all the Obama eligibility lawsuits that have been adjudicated, no Court has ruled that two American parents are required in order to be President and that includes eight appeals that have reached the Supreme Court of the United States: Berg v Obama, Beverly v FEC, Craig v US, Donofrio v Wells, Herbert v Obama, Lightfoot v Bowen, Schneller v Cortes, and Wrotnowski v. Bysiewicz.

    One Court has ruled that “jus soli,” being born in the United States is the only requirement to qualify as a natural born citizen and that Court applied its decision specifically to Barack Hussein Obama’s eligibility to receive Indiana’s Electoral College votes.

    “Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by [the Supreme Court of the United States in their 1898 decision in the case of U.S. v.] Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States natural-born citizens.”—Indiana Court of Appeals, “Ankeny et. al. v The Governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels,” Nov. 12, 2009

  104. avatar
    SluggoJD August 2, 2010 at 4:05 pm #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords:
    EARTH!The facts don’t lie…Aside form Chester, Obama is the only POTUS, other than the ones that qualified under the grandfather clause, that does not have “Citizen” parentS! That would be TWO.The citizenship status of all presidents including the parentS citizenship status of all presidents beyond the grandfather clause…http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/07/irrefutable-proof-that-barack-obama-is.htmlYou can try and spin that all you want… THE FACTS DON’T LIE!Now we see why Doc gets 1,000 comments a week… a half dozen obots sit here and chat back and forth on the threads…

    For almost 5 seconds, I almost felt sorry for you and your fellow inmates.

    President Obama. Such a nice sound to that, don’t you think?

    And he will be my President next year, and in 2012, and if he runs for re-election, for four more years after that.

    Life is wonderful. There’s still an incredible amount of damage that needs to repaired to America, so that she becomes America again…but we’re on the right track, and life is wonderful.

  105. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 2, 2010 at 4:10 pm #

    NbC: Declaration of Alex Galovich

    Soon another lawsuit will bite the dust’

    Hmmm. That doesn’t look promising for my FOIA to turn up something new. They do not say that “passports issued” is part of the “passport records”, nor are they on the list of documents retained. I guess I will just have to wait.

  106. avatar
    Rickey August 2, 2010 at 4:30 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Hmmm. That doesn’t look promising for my FOIA to turn up something new. They do not say that “passports issued” is part of the “passport records”, nor are they on the list of documents retained. I guess I will just have to wait.

    No specifically, but it does say that they would be retaining “those records of permanent significance including those containing information on, and documentation of, citizenship.” That should include passports, although not the passport applications.

    So I would think that there is a good chance that you will get records of the 1965 passport, as well as any prior passports (if any ever existed).

  107. avatar
    The Sheriff's A Ni- August 2, 2010 at 7:06 pm #

    Ellid: So once again, wrong.

    I think we’re up to Barry and the Pirates vol 149 now: Barry Loves Chachi.

  108. avatar
    richCares August 2, 2010 at 7:08 pm #

    Reading” ObamaRelease your records” and other birther posts makes me wonder what their goal is. They can’t remove Obama, they have totally failed there. It appears that all they are doing is fueling their hate for Obama, nothing else. I strongly suggest that they take their hate elsewhere, we don’t need it.

  109. avatar
    PetJake August 2, 2010 at 7:11 pm #

    Memo to file
    A 14 128 294
    Sept. 14, 1967
    .
    Pursuant to inquiry from Central office regarding the status of the applicants’ [Lolo Soetoro] spouses’ child by a former marriage.
    .
    The person in question is a united states citizen by virtue of his birth in Honolulu, Hawaii Aug. 4, 1961. He is living with the applicants’ spouse in Honolulu, Hawaii. He is considered the applicants step-child, within the meaning of Sec. 101(b)(1)(B), of the act, by virtue of the marriage of the applicant to the childs’ mother on March 15, 1965.
    .
    W. L. Mix
    .
    This also confirms the date of the Soetoro marriage.

    .
    This also confirms that if you found a balled-up piece of toilet paper in a gas station bathroom with this written on it, you would present it just as nicely as this.
    .
    A blank piece of paper with no headers, footers, date stamp, case stamp, signature, and using what appears to be 30-yr old old typewriter with its lower case “l” that is bumped up an entire 1/2 line everywhere it appears.
    .
    And I thought Birthers were grabbing at straws.

  110. avatar
    Sef August 2, 2010 at 7:15 pm #

    The Sheriff’s A Ni-:
    I think we’re up to Barry and the Pirates vol 149 now: Barry Loves Chachi.

    And they “jumped the shark” in vol 1.

  111. avatar
    PetJake August 2, 2010 at 7:18 pm #

    The other question I want to ask is which part of his temporary nonrenewable exchange student visa did Lolo and LuLu not understand when they started asking for an extension?

    If they were married, then why not apply for LPR as a spouse of a citizen?

    Seems easier than having to follow him to Indonesia – oh, but then she conveniently got a gig over there.

  112. avatar
    Slartibartfast August 2, 2010 at 7:19 pm #

    The Sheriff’s A Ni-:
    I think we’re up to Barry and the Pirates vol 149 now: Barry Loves Chachi.

    I’m can’t wait for the ‘2012 Election: Birthergeddon’ episode!

  113. avatar
    The Sheriff's A Ni- August 2, 2010 at 7:21 pm #

    PetJake: This also confirms that if you found a balled-up piece of toilet paper in a gas station bathroom with this written on it, you would present it just as nicely as this.

    Sorry Ron, its official, authentic, and legitimate.

    Maybe Mario has some DUI warrants for you to verify, that may be more to your skill level.

  114. avatar
    sfjeff August 2, 2010 at 7:35 pm #

    “A blank piece of paper with no headers, footers, date stamp, case stamp, signature, and using what appears to be 30-yr old old typewriter with its lower case “l” that is bumped up an entire 1/2 line everywhere it appears.”

    A blank piece of paper with the words Obama was born in Kenya posted anonymously on WND would be hailed as the smoking gun.
    .
    Notes from a file released as part of a FOIA request?- clearly suspect.

  115. avatar
    Majority Will August 2, 2010 at 7:37 pm #

    PetJake: The other question I want to ask is which part of his temporary nonrenewable exchange student visa did Lolo and LuLu not understand when they started asking for an extension?If they were married, then why not apply for LPR as a spouse of a citizen?
    Seems easier than having to follow him to Indonesia – oh, but then she conveniently got a gig over there.

    So, where’s your training and credentials in forensic science and forensic document examination?

  116. avatar
    Majority Will August 2, 2010 at 7:40 pm #

    PetJake: A blank piece of paper with no headers, footers, date stamp, case stamp, signature, and using what appears to be 30-yr old old typewriter with its lower case “l” that is bumped up an entire 1/2 line everywhere it appears.

    So, where’s your training and credentials in forensic science and forensic document examination?

  117. avatar
    nbc August 2, 2010 at 7:48 pm #

    If they were married, then why not apply for LPR as a spouse of a citizen?

    The problem was that Lolo came to the US on a J visa which requires him to return to his home country for at least 2 years.

    Hope this helps

  118. avatar
    Rickey August 2, 2010 at 7:54 pm #

    PetJake:

    A blank piece of paper with no headers, footers, date stamp, case stamp, signature, and using what appears to be 30-yr old old typewriter with its lower case “l” that is bumped up an entire 1/2 line everywhere it appears.

    If you had experience actually using a government typewriter in 1967 (experience which I have), you would not be at all surprised. Typewriters often developed problems, and typewriter repairmen were always busy.

    Memos to files, as opposed to memos addressed to specific individuals, often were prepared on blank paper. I typed thousands of them myself.

    A cursory examination of the documents shows that the person who prepared the memo, W.I. Mix, was a clerk to the District Director, John F. O’Shea. Several of the memos and letters prepared by O’Shea were typed by “WIM.”

    And you call yourself a documents expert?

  119. avatar
    sfjeff August 2, 2010 at 8:39 pm #

    I just want to point out what ObamaRelease YourRecords is promoting:

    http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2010/08/new-york-congressional-candidate.html

    In this article Congressional candidate Tolda is not only advocating removal of President Obama from office, he also:
    a) he advocates an ‘anulment’ of the election- oddly enough never mentioned in the Constitution
    b) That every action taken by the administration would be null and void- including every bill passed, and all the debt the government has assumed.
    c) That the 08 ticket would be null and void- and if Biden or Pelosi became interim President any actions taken by them would be void once- wait for it- the special election is held
    d) Yes, thats right- the special election clause of the Constitution
    e) and I give you this quote:
    “and of course the military would have strict oversight of the temporary lame duck administration”

    Yes, Tolda is advocating military control over our civilian government- and our friend Obama Release your Records is promoting Tolda.

    Where do these people get their copies of the Constitution anyway?

  120. avatar
    sfjeff August 2, 2010 at 8:43 pm #

    Oh and Tolda would like your $10.00 also please.

  121. avatar
    AnotherBird August 2, 2010 at 8:50 pm #

    PetJake: The other question I want to ask is which part of his temporary nonrenewable exchange student visa did Lolo and LuLu not understand when they started asking for an extension?If they were married, then why not apply for LPR as a spouse of a citizen?
    Seems easier than having to follow him to Indonesia – oh, but then she conveniently got a gig over there.

    90 plus pages and you didn’t even bother reading the most of it. You would make a horrible movie critic. It is obvious that you would your assessment on watching one trailer.

  122. avatar
    AnotherBird August 2, 2010 at 9:10 pm #

    SvenMagnussen:
    Barack became Lolo’s stepson the moment his marriage to Barack’s mother was consummated on the March 15, 1965. Barry Soetoro’s 2nd grade school record indicates he was born in Honolulu, HI, his father is Lolo Soetoro and he is an Indonesian National.

    Adoptions are not instantaneous. An Oath of Renunciation and a Statement of Understanding are requests for a Certificate of Loss of Nationality. Several weeks or months or years may pass before US Citizenship is lost and citizenship with another country is obtained.

    An examination of Barack’s Form SS-5, Application for Soc Sec Number, in the mid-70s would go along way to identify whether Barack was a US Citizen or Legal Alien residing in the US.

    People don’t lose their citizenship through an act of adoption.

    You need to read American law before typing nonsense.

    B. ELEMENTS OF RENUNCIATION

    A person wishing to renounce his or her U.S. citizenship must voluntarily and with intent to relinquish U.S. citizenship:

    1. appear in person before a U.S. consular or diplomatic officer,
    2. in a foreign country (normally at a U.S. Embassy or Consulate); and
    3. sign an oath of renunciation

    Renunciations that do not meet the conditions described above have no legal effect. Because of the provisions of section 349(a)(5), Americans cannot effectively renounce their citizenship by mail, through an agent, or while in the United States. In fact, U.S. courts have held certain attempts to renounce U.S. citizenship to be ineffective on a variety of grounds, as discussed below.

    F. RENUNCIATION FOR MINOR CHILDREN

    Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.

    So stop type nonsense, as you are only diminishing your own intelligence.

  123. avatar
    Greg August 2, 2010 at 9:31 pm #

    PetJake: A blank piece of paper with no headers, footers, date stamp, case stamp, signature, and using what appears to be 30-yr old old typewriter with its lower case “l” that is bumped up an entire 1/2 line everywhere it appears.

    Federal Rules of Evidence 901 – Authentication:

    (8) Ancient documents or data compilation. Evidence that a document or data compilation, in any form, (A) is in such condition as to create no suspicion concerning its authenticity, (B) was in a place where it, if authentic, would likely be, and (C) has been in existence 20 years or more at the time it is offered.

    Let’s see, the document was found in the State Department archives, there is no suspicion concerning its authenticity (other than birther inanity) and it is more than 20 years old.

    Yep, it’s a self-authenticating document. I’ve now shown how the document would be admissible in any federal court. I can probably also authenticate it as a public record (same rule) or a self-authenticating government document not under seal (rule 902).

    I would also point you specifically to the number stamped on the lower right hand corner of the document. It is stamped 000046. This is called a “Bates Stamp.” It allows the government to say, we produced 112 pages of documents from 000001-000111 and we withheld certain documents with these numbers. What this Bates Stamp tells us is that 000046 comes from the government files and was copied by the government in response to this FOIA. Further proof that the document was found in a place where you’d expect to find ancient documents of this type.

    I guess if birthers had a clue about the basics of the law, they wouldn’t be birthers.

  124. avatar
    SluggoJD August 2, 2010 at 10:06 pm #

    Majority Will:
    So, where’s your training and credentials in forensic science and forensic document examination?

    LOL, Poor PooPooPolarik, just too many lies and BS to overcome.

  125. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) August 2, 2010 at 10:09 pm #

    “A blank piece of paper with no headers, footers, date stamp, case stamp, signature, and using what appears to be 30-yr old old typewriter with its lower case “l” that is bumped up an entire 1/2 line everywhere it appears.”

    No that would be your forensics degree “Polarik”

  126. avatar
    sarina August 2, 2010 at 10:35 pm #

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: Did you know that a child born here of 2 illegal immigrants are also natural born citizen or citizen by birth? Read about Elg, Julia Lynch and Wong Kim, ( born here of Chinese immigrants)

  127. avatar
    AnotherBird August 2, 2010 at 10:45 pm #

    sarina: ObamaRelease YourRecords: Did you know that a child born here of 2 illegal immigrants are also natural born citizen or citizen by birth? Read about Elg, Julia Lynch and Wong Kim, ( born here of Chinese immigrants)

    It is not possible to know anything when you refuse to read. That is ObamaRelease YourRecords’s problem.

  128. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny August 3, 2010 at 7:32 am #

    Rickey: A cursory examination of the documents shows that the person who prepared the memo, W.I. Mix, was a clerk to the District Director, John F. O’Shea. Several of the memos and letters prepared by O’Shea were typed by “WIM.”

    Ah, interesting. Obviously the scheming Dutch are involved (meaning Dutch citizenship laws obtain, ask Apuzzo – who once clai;ed on this forum that American citizenship laws are based on the Dutch ones, the only problem being that there was no such thing as Dutch citizenship before 1815). Since the Bilderberg group first met in the Netherlands, they are behind this Dutch plot to make an Indonesian Kenyan British ni***r into the President of the United States.

    The evidence is overwhelming. One of the reasons quoted by the Soetoro family to keep Lolo in Hawaii was his acting as an interpreter to a Dutch lady living in Hawaii – translating Bahasa Indonesia into Dutch and vice versa obviously – double Dutching.

    And who is this mysterious Wim who turns up on all these pages? Wim is short for Willem, the Dutch version of William. Bill of course means both Bill Clinton and the Billderberg group.

    All this has been planned years ago and do not count on the Puzz, Paul-Henri from Bulgaria or Svetlana Averbukha to be able to stop it.

  129. avatar
    ellid August 3, 2010 at 7:51 am #

    Paul Pieniezny:
    Ah, interesting. Obviously the scheming Dutch are involved (meaning Dutch citizenship laws obtain, ask Apuzzo – who once clai;ed on this forum that American citizenship laws are based on the Dutch ones, the only problem being that there was no such thing as Dutch citizenship before 1815).

    Wait, what? Apuzzo was THAT stupid? How did he pass the bar?

  130. avatar
    kimba August 3, 2010 at 9:25 am #

    “Dr. Conspiracy wrote:

    Hmmm. That doesn’t look promising for my FOIA to turn up something new. They do not say that “passports issued” is part of the “passport records”, nor are they on the list of documents retained. I guess I will just have to wait.”

    It seems to me if what you requested was not in their records, they would have answered you long ago. I think the results of your request, Strunk’s and Allen’s all went to the same place in the food chain for review before release.

  131. avatar
    kimba August 3, 2010 at 9:28 am #

    “Mary Brown: Governor Jindahl’s parents had the intention of becoming citizens and that makes his situation different.How do you measure intent or decide when that intent was formed?.”

    Oh, that’s an easy one. It;s OK if you are a Republican.

  132. avatar
    DCH August 3, 2010 at 9:31 am #

    Oh noes! More evidence for birth in Honolulu!

    Birthers please explain this:

    “The person in question is a united states citizen by virtue of his birth in Honolulu, Hawaii Aug. 4, 1961. He is living with the applicants’ spouse in Honolulu, Hawaii.”

    The birther FOIA simply turned up ANOTHER document confirmation of facts supported by the Hawaii DoH, COLB, and the two newspapers. Face reality: The dude was born in HI.

    The Birthers rolled a donut on this one. 0 x 0 = 0

    Birthers: what say you?

  133. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny August 3, 2010 at 9:34 am #

    ellid: Wait, what? Apuzzo was THAT stupid? How did he pass the bar?

    It wasn’t the Puzz’s greatest moment. Against all the basic rules of Anglo-Saxon common law, he argued that many terms in the laws of the Colonies and therefore also in the constitution were copied from the Dutch.

    He probably found some history book that described how the Dutch treated citizenship issues in the 17th century. But at the time, the Dutch Provincies were part of the (German) Holy Roman Empire and whatever he found, was the Dutch interpretation of who was a German. It must have been very close to the Prussian interpretation of ius sanguinis. Though (like Vattel, if I interpret a number of passages correctly) the Dutch made clear exceptions for religious refugees. In 1815, of course, the first Dutch citizenship law, in reaction to both Napoleon and Prussia, became 100% ius soli. Later, democratization stopped all that: suddenly, the Dutch realized that they would not be able to deny political rights to citizens born in Indonesia…

  134. avatar
    Sean August 3, 2010 at 9:58 am #

    PetJake writes:

    “A blank piece of paper with no headers, footers, date stamp, case stamp, signature, and using what appears to be 30-yr old old typewriter with its lower case “l” that is bumped up an entire 1/2 line everywhere it appears.”

    This was the basis of the Brady Bunch episode “Lost Locket, Found Locket.”

  135. avatar
    Sef August 3, 2010 at 10:10 am #

    Paul Pieniezny:
    It wasn’t the Puzz’s greatest moment. Against all the basic rules of Anglo-Saxon common law, he argued that many terms in the laws of the Colonies and therefore also in the constitution were copied from the Dutch.
    He probably found some history book that described how the Dutch treated citizenship issues in the 17th century. But at the time, the Dutch Provincies were part of the (German) Holy Roman Empire and whatever he found, was the Dutch interpretation of who was a German. It must have been very close to the Prussian interpretation of ius sanguinis. Though (like Vattel, if I interpret a number of passages correctly) the Dutch made clear exceptions for religious refugees. In 1815, of course, the first Dutch citizenship law, in reaction to both Napoleon and Prussia,became 100% ius soli. Later, democratization stopped all that: suddenly, the Dutch realized that they would not be able to deny political rights to citizens born in Indonesia…

    Mario’s name does not imply Anglo-Saxon heritage, so he probably thinks that all of Europe outside of Italy is all muddled together in their laws & traditions. Which probably accounts for his adherence to de Vattel.

  136. avatar
    Ellid August 3, 2010 at 10:14 am #

    Paul Pieniezny:
    It wasn’t the Puzz’s greatest moment. Against all the basic rules of Anglo-Saxon common law, he argued that many terms in the laws of the Colonies and therefore also in the constitution were copied from the Dutch.

    The DUTCH????? That’s ludicrous. There was ONE Dutch colony in North America, and it was swapped out for Suriname and a couple of Spice Islands by 1674. Besides, the main drafters of the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were from Pennsylvania, Virginia, and Massachusetts, none of which had any Dutch population to speak of. Was Apuzzo stoned, or just dumb?

  137. avatar
    G August 3, 2010 at 10:47 am #

    Paul Pieniezny: It wasn’t the Puzz’s greatest moment.

    Yeah, considering that his “greatest moment” so far seems to be merely avoiding monetary sanctions on an appeal that is still ruled as frivolous…

    …Everything else he’s done on these cases seems to fall completely in the bumbling FAIL bucket.

  138. avatar
    HORUS August 3, 2010 at 10:48 am #

    03093220000015108389

    ObamaRelease YourRecords: Historically Presidents and VPs (including Joe Biden) born after the adoption of our Constitution (1787) have met the classical interpretation of a NBC (a citizen born on US territory to two (2) US citizens)….

    I want you to show us WHERE in the Constitution, or ANY other official document that states BOTH parents must be US Citizens in order to produce an NBC child????

    ONLY one parent must be a citizen.

  139. avatar
    Sef August 3, 2010 at 10:53 am #

    HORUS: 03093220000015108389
    I want you to show us WHERE in the Constitution, or ANY other official document that states BOTH parents must be US Citizens in order to produce an NBC child????ONLY one parent must be a citizen.

    Sorry, you got it wrong. No citizen parents are necessary. The only necessary & sufficient condition is birth on U.S. soil. One or more citizen parents are just “icing on the cake”.

  140. avatar
    Black Lion August 3, 2010 at 10:58 am #

    Interesting wrap up by ConWebWatch, showing the right, especially WND’s almost single minded focus on the hate of President Obama….Even the infamous Wayne Allen Root, who claimed that Obama did not attend Columbia is engaging in Obama hate. The profit margin must be huge for this type of focused hate to still continue….

    Farah Incompletely Quotes Klein
    Topic: WorldNetDaily

    Joseph Farah’s July 31 WorldNetDaily column repeats the contention, as reported in an earlier WND article, that according to Aaron Klein’s anti-Obama book, that it “doesn’t matter” where President Obama was born because he’s not a “natural born citizen.”

    Like the earlier article, Farah doesn’t mention Klein’s contention that Obama was, in fact, born in Hawaii. Nor does Farah, like Klein, mention the existence of arguments in favor of Obama being a “natural born citizen.”

    This is part of Farah’s efforts to shift the argument away from Obama’s citizenship to his eligibility, while pretending that citizenship was never an issue.

    Obama Derangement Syndrome Watch
    Topic: WorldNetDaily

    Right now, a year and a half after Barack Obama’s election as president, many Americans are experiencing what I experienced a second and a half after being confronted by an armed robber. Maybe in the broad sweep of history, years are like seconds. Or, perhaps we’ve all just been so indoctrinated and confused by leftist education, media and culture that it takes a while to recognize a smiling revolutionary for what he really is. In any event, for millions of us, the two seconds of denial and wishful thinking are ending as we approach the November midterms, while finally coming to grips with the outrageous reality staring us in the face:

    We’re being robbed. Though we’ve tried in vain to view what’s happening as something other than what it is, the truth is, our wealth, our liberty, our lives, our happiness – and our country itself – are being stolen. If you think that’s even a slight exaggeration, you really haven’t been paying attention.

    Obama and the far-left leaders of Congress are standing before us, not with ski masks, but with the masks of arrogant deceivers. They smile, they reassure, they act as though they care about us – but it’s all one big cynical pretense. Virtually everything they do, and want to do, is irrational and destructive, violating the laws of the land, of economics and of common sense.

    — David Kupelian, July 29 WorldNetDaily column

    I think I’ve finally figured out who Obama really is. Not his identity and citizenship, which – unlike any other president in history – remains a mystery. No, I mean who he is. Here’s a very brief biography:

    “Smeagol’s original name was Trahald, the Anglicized equivalent of which is Smeagol. … In the day of his … coming of age, he went fishing with his cousin Deagol. While fishing, Deagol saw something glittering under the surface of the water, dove in after it, and came up with a glittering gold ring. Before even knowing the qualities of the beautiful ring, Smeagol’s desire to own it overtook him. … He soon developed many undesirable qualities, like stealing, eavesdropping, and being sneaky whenever he had the opportunity. …” (TheOneRing.net)

    Smeagol, of course, is Gollum, the pathetic creature in “The Lord of the Rings” who lived underground with the one ring that held the power over all the others. The ring consumed him, and in the end destroyed him. (Even if you disagree with this analogy, you must admit to the physical similarities between Gollum and Obama, no?)

    — Craige McMillan, July 29 WorldNetDaily column

    And now that we have the Kenyan Kid in the White House – a Marxist who has set back race relations in the U.S. 40 years – today’s stupid-tubish topic of choice is racism. Listening to all the make-believe racism silliness is like being in a time machine and going back to the 1960s. It’s enough to make one yawn with excitement.

    — Robert Ringer, July 30 WorldNetDaily column

    Following the continuum from the ancient cult of Gnosticism, to humanism and secular liberalism formed during the Enlightenment, to the 20th-century Progressive Movement, to post-modern times under President Barack Obama, we are faced with the fact that Obama is the embodiment of the Gnostic heresy.

    — Ellis Washington, July 31 WorldNetDaily column

    Ellis Washington, Dishonest Hack
    Topic: WorldNetDaily

    Ed Brayton picks up on something we neglected to mention when pointing out Ellis Washington’s Obama Derangement Syndrome in his July 24 WorldNetDaily column.

    Washington begins his column with something purporting to be a quote from Obama: “I found solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother’s race.” Of course, Obama has never said any such thing. When Brayton asked Washington to correct it, Washington refused, replying, “Remember a quote can be a paraphrase of one’s ideas and sentiments.”

    Well, no, it can’t. A paraphrase is not a quote.

    Earlier this year, Brayton caught Washington in another lie. Washington’s end-of-column bio at WND states that he is “former editor of the Michigan Law Review.” Not so much, Brayton writes: “e was never even a student at the U of M Law School. As an undergrad, he was chosen from three students to take a temporary job with the law review (replacing someone who had health problems, I believe) where he did mostly cite-checking and footnote checking. And it looks like it only lasted for one issue. ‘Former editor’ makes it sound as though he was the actual editor; he was not.”

    With such prevarication, it’s no wonder Washington can’t hold a full-time job.

    Obama Derangement Syndrome Watch
    Topic: Newsmax

    Remember Seinfeld? It was one of the most successful TV series in the history of American television. The show revolved around Jerry Seinfeld and his buddy George Costanza.

    George was the ultimate loser. Everything he did was a colossal failure.

    One day that all changed. George was hired by George Steinbrenner and the world champion New York Yankees. He had hit the lottery — important job, big money, and beautiful women. Seinfeld was in shock. “George how did you do it?”

    “Simple,” George said. “One day I woke up and realized I was the world’s most pathetic loser. So I decided to do the opposite of everything I’ve ever done. Every thought, opinion, decision — I now do the opposite. And suddenly, I’m a winner!”

    As one of America’s strongest critics of President Obama, I am constantly asked “What would you do differently if you were president?”

    The answer is simple: EVERYTHING! It’s the Seinfeld solution.

    Obama is George Costanza. Every decision he makes poisons America. Obama is killing the American dream. To save America, we have to do the opposite of everything Obama is doing.

    […]

    Yes, Obama is our very own George Costanza. Except that Obama is a Marxist, and he’s not lovable. Obama is leading America towards tragedy, insolvency and bankruptcy.

    — Wayne Allyn Root, Aug. 2 Newsmax column

  141. avatar
    Majority Will August 3, 2010 at 11:05 am #

    ellid:
    Wait, what?Apuzzo was THAT stupid?How did he pass the bar?

    Those pub crawls in Jamesburg, NJ probably get real confusing.

  142. avatar
    HORUS August 3, 2010 at 11:40 am #

    Scott Brown: I am still of the opinion that one cannot be a NBC if one has dual citizenship at birth, which Obama has freely admitted. Admittedly, it is JUST MY OPINION and is not stated as a fact. Just as it is this consensus OPINION of this blog that Obama is a NBC and cannot be stated as fact – although most do so.

    Repeating an opinion over and over as fact, does NOT make it a fact. And it still amazes me at the ire and defensive attitude of those supporting Obama when the man is clearly in the White House as the President and it doesn’t look like he is going anywhere any time soon. The way you people protest and carry-on on this blog would have some believe he is being ousted as I type.

    It’s sad to see the blog return to the Alinsky antics of belittling, insulting, and berating as a means of disagreeing. I’m both disappointed in Dr. C and disheartened that people would treat their fellow Americans with such disregard.

    No, it is fact that President Obama is an NBC, NOT opinion!

    And just like ALL Conservitards, you must be the perpetual victim.

  143. avatar
    DaveH August 3, 2010 at 12:01 pm #

    HORUS: 03093220000015108389I want you to show us WHERE in the Constitution, or ANY other official document that states BOTH parents must be US Citizens in order to produce an NBC child????ONLY one parent must be a citizen.

    According to Sentator Hatch – based on a video posted by Sharon Meroni (Moroni) on YouTube – as long as a person is born in the USA, they are qualified to be president. That’s not the main reason they want to change the 14th amendment but it is possible it is one reason. Of course, Sharon claims that Senator Hatch is confused but she’s wrong.

    The only instance where one parent must be a citizen is if the child is not born on US soil.

  144. avatar
    Mary Brown August 3, 2010 at 12:05 pm #

    Scott, do you listen to that great Alinsky follower Sarah Palin? Let’s see: belittling, berating and insulting. I was raised to believe that when you spoke in that manner it showed your lack of a cohesive argument. What we have in this society, Scott, is two political opposites who want to destroy each other. Both are willing to belittle, berate and insult and spread lies. I give you Shirley Sherrod and the use of the name Betrayus for Petraeus. I would also give you the much talked about plan to rule by investigation and subpoena bandied about by the tea party movement in the House. As Michelle Bachman stated “that’s all we should do.” Neither can ever win. They remind me of a character in an early Star Trek episode who was locked in an eternal and non-ending personal conflict with his opposite. Using Obama’s rather unique parentage and birth has helped neo- cons label him as “not one of us.” Making sure that folks who want to shout at town meetings are spread throughout the audience for maximum attention is a Marxist tactic as well. Both sides use it. As far as your belief is concerned, I would remind you that every member of Congress knew about the President’s father and ratified his election. Do you think they ratified this election believing that two citizen parents are needed? Or what? And I give this President great credit for his dignity and calm.

  145. avatar
    Mary Brown August 3, 2010 at 12:08 pm #

    Oh, I forgot. I use my given name. I was also raised to believe that if I wrote something I should stand by it personally. So Scott what is your name and where were you born. I was born in Schenectady, NY and live in Nebraska. How about you, Scott?

  146. avatar
    Lupin August 3, 2010 at 12:08 pm #

    Black Lion: Even if you disagree with this analogy, you must admit to the physical similarities between Gollum and Obama, no?

    No racism, nope, none at all, nothing to see here.

  147. avatar
    AnotherBird August 3, 2010 at 12:09 pm #

    Scott Brown: I am still of the opinion that one cannot be a NBC if one has dual citizenship at birth, which Obama has freely admitted.

    Ignoring facts are your short coming Scott Brown. American law recognizes the way a person can become a dual citizen, but discourages it as a matter of course. American law explicitly states that the country that a dual citizen resides in “has a stronger claim to that person’s allegiance.” From what is understood is Obama has never been to England, nor has he resided in Kenya. However, he lost his Kenyan citizen because of Kenyan law.

    The U.S. Government acknowledges that dual nationality exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. citizens may conflict with U.S. law, and dual nationality may limit U.S. Government efforts to assist citizens abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person’s allegiance.

    However, dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country. They are required to obey the laws of both countries. Either country has the right to enforce its laws, particularly if the person later travels there. Most U.S. citizens, including dual nationals, must use a U.S. passport to enter the United States. Dual nationals may also be required by the foreign country to use its passport to enter that country. Use of the foreign passport does not put into jeopardy your U.S. citizenship. Most countries permit a person to renounce or otherwise lose citizenship.

    A U.S. citizen may acquire foreign citizenship by marriage, or a person naturalized as a U.S. citizen may not lose the citizenship of the country of birth. U.S. law does not mention dual nationality or require a person to choose one citizenship over another. Also, a person who is automatically granted another citizenship does not risk losing U.S. citizenship.

    Obama wasn’t a dual citizen for over 14 years. the 14 years doesn’t really matter, but perfectly pairs with the residency requirement to become president.

  148. avatar
    Lupin August 3, 2010 at 12:09 pm #

    Belated apologies to Black Lion: I understood you were quoting from the bigots, not actually authoring the words.

  149. avatar
    Black Lion August 3, 2010 at 12:26 pm #

    Lupin: Belated apologies to Black Lion: I understood you were quoting from the bigots, not actually authoring the words.

    Lupin, I know. You and I have conversed long enough here for me to know what you were trying to say. And of course I agree with you 100%. It seems like the longer Obama is President the more acceptable it has become to make these sort of comments…I mean Glenn Beck, Savage, Limbaugh, and Hannity have all called the President a racist and there has been no sort of backlash….Instead you have other right wing publications actually debating the merits of their comments….While giving a wink and a nod to the increased overt racism being displayed at teh tea parties as well as on the sites like FOX news online among others…

  150. avatar
    Black Lion August 3, 2010 at 12:33 pm #

    Mary Brown: Scott, do you listen to that great Alinsky follower Sarah Palin? Let’s see: belittling, berating and insulting. I was raised to believe that when you spoke in that manner it showed your lack of a cohesive argument. What we have in this society, Scott, is two political opposites who want to destroy each other. Both are willing to belittle, berate and insult and spread lies. I give you Shirley Sherrod and the use of the name Betrayus for Petraeus. I would also give you the much talked about plan to rule by investigation and subpoena bandied about by the tea party movement in the House. As Michelle Bachman stated “that’s all we should do.” Neither can ever win. They remind me of a character in an early Star Trek episode who was locked in an eternal and non-ending personal conflict with his opposite. Using Obama’s rather unique parentage and birth has helped neo- cons label him as “not one of us.” Making sure that folks who want to shout at town meetings are spread throughout the audience for maximum attention is a Marxist tactic as well. Both sides use it. As far as your belief is concerned, I would remind you that every member of Congress knew about the President’s father and ratified his election. Do you think they ratified this election believing that two citizen parents are needed? Or what? And I give this President great credit for his dignity and calm.

    Mary, another great Star Trek reference….Amazing that a show that is almost 50 years old could still be so topical…Especially in our current climate…

  151. avatar
    Ellid August 3, 2010 at 1:04 pm #

    HORUS: 03093220000015108389
    I want you to show us WHERE in the Constitution, or ANY other official document that states BOTH parents must be US Citizens in order to produce an NBC child????ONLY one parent must be a citizen.

    Nope. Birth on American soil is all that’s required.

  152. avatar
    Ellid August 3, 2010 at 1:10 pm #

    Mary – where in Nebraska? I visited the International Quilt Study Center in Lincoln last year.

    Also, can anyone tell me how this Wayne Allen Root person could possibly think that either Andy Serkis or Gollum looks even vaguely like President Obama????

  153. avatar
    Mary Brown August 3, 2010 at 1:37 pm #

    I live in the Omaha metro area. I think the President rather looks like his maternal grandfather especially his WW11 photo. But then the President has a half brother whose mother is British and not related to the Dunhams and they resemble one anothe.r But you know I am one of six kids and one of our sisters does not resemble us at all. And yes she is my sister. I have never seen a picture of the other men because I think this resemblance thing is nothing. The President has a very mixed heritage as do many of us in one way or another. Just look at the Nigerian immigrants who had a blond blue eyed girl who is not albino.

  154. avatar
    AnotherBird August 3, 2010 at 2:09 pm #

    Ellid:
    Nope.Birth on American soil is all that’s required.

    Ellid I would like to add, that there are only two ways of becoming an American citizen by birth; by birth in the United States or its territories; or by birth outside the United States to a US parent.

    The laws are very clear on the issue, and by referring to INA: ACT 301 or (Sec. 301. [8 U.S.C. 1401] ) we see that birther arguments is just “noise.”

    INA: ACT 301 – NATIONALS AND CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AT BIRTH.

    (a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;

    (b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property;

    (c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person;

    (d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States;

    (e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person;

    (f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States;

    (g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years: Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act (59 Stat. 669; 22 U.S.C. 288) by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person (A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or (B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 1 of the International Organizations Immunities Act, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and

    (h) a person born before noon (Eastern Standard Time) May 24, 1934, outside the limits and jurisdiction of the United States of an alien father and a mother who is a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, had resided in the United States.

    302 persons born in Puerto Rico on or after April 11, 1899

    http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-9696.html

    INA; ACT 305 deals with person born in Hawaii, even though 301 does include those people. And INA: ACT 303 mutes those McCain birthers.

  155. avatar
    NbC August 3, 2010 at 2:15 pm #

    AnotherBird: Ellid I would like to add, that there are only two ways of becoming an American citizen by birth; by birth in the United States or its territories; or by birth outside the United States to a US parent.

    By birth on soil makes one certainly a US natural born citizen, however the case is far less clear for children born abroad to US citizens.

    In fact, the Supreme Court has ruled that such citizens are not covered by the 14th Amendment and that thus the Government can in fact place requirements on such citizens. In fact, for a few decades such children did not even have a US citizenship status. In other words, since their status is statutory and Congress can only provide rules for naturalization, the argument is that such citizens may be similar to those who naturalized in the US, with one major difference, they are not covered by the 14th Amendment.

    Confusing…

  156. avatar
    Sef August 3, 2010 at 2:23 pm #

    AnotherBird:
    Ellid I would like to add, that there are only two ways of becoming an American citizen by birth; by birth in the United States or its territories; or by birth outside the United States to a US parent.The laws are very clearon the issue, and by referring to INA: ACT 301 or (Sec. 301. [8 U.S.C. 1401] ) we see that birther arguments is just “noise.”INA; ACT 305 deals with person born in Hawaii, even though 301 does include those people. And INA: ACT 303 mutes those McCain birthers.

    Of the 2 ways you mention “birth on U.S. soil => NBC. Birth outside of U.S. soil of a citizen parent by the statute, while conferring citizenship, only confers “naturalization at birth”. Congress cannot change the definition of “natural born citizen” by legislation.

  157. avatar
    AnotherBird August 3, 2010 at 3:52 pm #

    Sef:
    Of the 2 ways you mention “birth on U.S. soil => NBC. Birth outside of U.S. soil of a citizen parent by the statute, while conferring citizenship, only confers “naturalization at birth”.Congress cannot change the definition of “natural born citizen” by legislation.

    There is no definition of natural born citizen in legislation. There are only two type of American citizens. Those who are born citizens, and those who become citizens after birth. Congress can do what ever they want to, the Amendments to the constitutions are proof of this.

    The title of the law that was presented read “NA: ACT 301 – NATIONALS AND CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AT BIRTH.” Not a really hard concept to follow.

  158. avatar
    Sef August 3, 2010 at 4:01 pm #

    AnotherBird:
    There is no definition of natural born citizen in legislation. There are only two type of American citizens. Those who are born citizens, and those who become citizens after birth. Congress can do what ever they want to, the Amendments to the constitutions are proof of this.
    The title of the law that was presented read “NA: ACT 301 – NATIONALS AND CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AT BIRTH.” Not a really hard concept to follow.

    Sorry, this has been discussed & discussed & discussed, so I have no desire to add to it, except to say that NBC is defined in English common law as jus soli. People who become citizens by any other means than jus soli, whether it be at birth or later are naturalized. Congress cannot add to or detract from the jus soli definition of NBC, except by Constitutional Amendment.

  159. avatar
    AnotherBird August 3, 2010 at 4:46 pm #

    NbC:
    By birth on soil makes one certainly a US natural born citizen, however the case is far less clear for children born abroad to US citizens.In fact, the Supreme Court has ruled that such citizens are not covered by the 14th Amendment and that thus the Government can in fact place requirements on such citizens. In fact, for a few decades such children did not even have a US citizenship status. In other words, since their status is statutory and Congress can only provide rules for naturalization, the argument is that such citizens may be similar to those who naturalized in the US, with one major difference, they are not covered by the 14th Amendment.Confusing…

    Naturalized is an entirely different process that citizenship by birth. Even though the 14 Amendment makes no mention of children born to a citizen parent, through an act of congress they are considered citizens at birth as recognized by the US government.

    I seem to understand the confusion. Like with a child being born in America citizenship by birth isn’t automatic. Citizenship by birth must be applied for.

    As with the text provided about there is a limit of 21.

    Referring to two cases “Miller v. Albright” and “Nguyen v. INS” there is a time limit. Remember just because a person is born citizenship isn’t automatically bestowed on them.

    http://www.aca.ch/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=112&Itemid=44

    “Miller v. Albright, 523 U.S. 420 (1998): A child born overseas to an American father and a foreign mother (not married) is not a U.S. citizen unless paternity is established before an established age (in this case 21). This case challenged the law on the grounds that U.S. law requires no explicit acknowledgment of parenthood in the case of a foreign-born child to an American mother and a foreign father (not married). ”

    “Nguyen v. INS, 533 U.S. 53 (2001): As in the Miller v. Albright case, the Court holds that a child born overseas to an American father and a foreign mother (not married) is not a U.S. citizen unless paternity is established before an established age (in this case 18). The child was brought to the U.S. before his sixth birthday and raised by his father; however, after a criminal conviction, deportation was ordered but the child claimed U.S. citizenship. His citizenship was denied because paternity had not been established prior to his 18th birthday. The Court upheld the law, once again affirming that Congress has the power to define citizenship outside the citizenship dictated by the 14th Amendment (citizenship by birth).

    There are other exemptions to those who are born in America who are denied citizenship, such as being born to a foreign diplomat. It seems that you currently need a Original Certificate of Citizenship or FS-240, DS-1350 if you were born outside of America.

    Yes it is confusing.

    Any ways in my continued research I learned that

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

    If a birther had one leg to stand on it would be made out of jello.

  160. avatar
    AnotherBird August 3, 2010 at 4:53 pm #

    Sef:
    Sorry, this has been discussed & discussed & discussed, so I have no desire to add to it, except to say that NBC is defined in English common law as jus soli.People who become citizens by any other means than jus soli, whether it be at birth or later are naturalized.Congress cannot add to or detract from the jus soli definition of NBC, except by Constitutional Amendment.

    Then why add to it?

  161. avatar
    misha August 3, 2010 at 5:04 pm #

    PetJake: The other question I want to ask is which part of his temporary nonrenewable exchange student visa did Lolo and LuLu not understand when they started asking for an extension?

    PetJake: I keep asking you one question, and you keep dancing and dancing around it. Just answer one question, and I’ll leave you alone. You still have not discussed with me the possibiltiy and consequences if Obama was born on Mars.

  162. avatar
    Gregory August 3, 2010 at 8:30 pm #

    The alleged dual citizen parent requirement for Presidential eligibility simply makes no sense.

    Logically, there are only two types of U.S. citizens. Those who are citizens at birth – and those who acquire citizenship at a later point in their lives. (In theory, there could be a third type: those who become U.S. citizens after they die, but I don’t believe it is possible to become a U.S. citizen posthumously).

    Now, the U.S. Constitution states that the President and Vice President must be the first type of citizen, and not the second (nor the hypothetical third type – for obvious reasons).

    So, as birthers often claim (and pardon the caps):

    IT’S THAT SIMPLE

  163. avatar
    Reality Check August 3, 2010 at 8:49 pm #

    Gregory: IT’S THAT SIMPLE

    One would think that unless one has read birther doo doo for two years.

  164. avatar
    Sef August 3, 2010 at 9:31 pm #

    Gregory: IT’S THAT SIMPLE

    Except it isn’t. You have put citizens into 2 classes, those who obtain citizenship at birth & those who obtain it later. Citizens can also be put into 2 classes another way: those born on U.S. soil & those who weren’t. The former are also called “natural born citizens”. The latter are either aliens who become naturalized citizens or naturalized at birth citizens due to their parentage. There is a question about whether the last are NBC. McCain fits in this group.

  165. avatar
    Lawrence August 3, 2010 at 11:17 pm #

    Here’s a new approach from a comment on one of the birther sites:

    bwWilcox
    Before you can speculate on the ins and outs of Obama’s history, you need to answer the most fundamental question: Is Stanley Dunham actually Obama’s mother? Everything about this specter’s past is a carefully manufactured lie, why not his mother as well?

    ROTFLMAO

  166. avatar
    Lawrence August 3, 2010 at 11:19 pm #

    Stanley Dunham is not Obama’s mother but he was Obama’s grandfather.

  167. avatar
    Sef August 3, 2010 at 11:34 pm #

    Lawrence: Stanley Dunham is not Obama’s mother but he was Obama’s grandfather.

    There’s Stanley Ann & Stanley Armour. Which one do you think might be Obama’s mother? Ya can’t tell the players without a scorecard.

  168. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 3, 2010 at 11:55 pm #

    Lawrence: Stanley Dunham is not Obama’s mother but he was Obama’s grandfather.

    I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make. The President’s mother is usually referred to by her maiden name, Stanley Ann Dunham.

  169. avatar
    obsolete August 4, 2010 at 12:35 am #

    Sef: naturalized at birth

    You cannot be “naturalized at birth”. Naturalization is a very well-defined legal process that requires application and other paperwork. Or do you think the hospital checks the passports of the parents and issues naturalization papers along with birth certificates? The very thought of going through naturalization at birth is ridiculous.

    You are either a citizen at the moment of birth (natural born), or you apply for citizenship at some point in your life (naturalized).

    It really is that simple.

  170. avatar
    Sef August 4, 2010 at 1:29 am #

    obsolete:
    You cannot be “naturalized at birth”. Naturalization is a very well-defined legal process that requires application and other paperwork. Or do you think the hospital checks the passports of the parents and issues naturalization papers along with birth certificates? The very thought of going through naturalization at birth is ridiculous.You are either a citizen at the moment of birth (natural born), or you apply for citizenship at some point in your life (naturalized).It really is that simple.

    You need to take a look at http://supreme.justia.com/constitution/article-1/35-naturalization-and-citizenship.html

  171. avatar
    BatGuano August 4, 2010 at 1:51 am #

    Sef: You need to take a look at http://supreme.justia.com/constitution/article-1/35-naturalization-and-citizenship.html

    from the link:
    “The first sentence of � 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment contemplates two sources of citizenship and two only: birth and naturalization.1230 This contemplation is given statutory expression in � 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952,1231 which itemizes those categories of persons who are citizens of the United States at birth; all other persons in order to become citizens must pass through the naturalization process.”

  172. avatar
    Sef August 4, 2010 at 1:55 am #

    BatGuano:
    from the link:
    “The first sentence of � 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment contemplates two sources of citizenship and two only: birth and naturalization.1230 This contemplation is given statutory expression in � 301 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952,1231 which itemizes those categories of persons who are citizens of the United States at birth; all other persons in order to become citizens must pass through the naturalization process.”

    You need to go down to 1259. (Crtl-F is your friend)

  173. avatar
    LCDR USN RET August 4, 2010 at 4:02 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Lawrence: Stanley Dunham is not Obama’s mother but he was Obama’s grandfather.

    I’m not sure what point you’re trying to make. The President’s mother is usually referred to by her maiden name, Stanley Ann Dunham.

    Commenting on my previous comment with the quote from the birther website as an after thoought. Never mind!

  174. avatar
    Lawrence August 4, 2010 at 6:21 am #

    Sef: There’s Stanley Ann & Stanley Armour. Which one do you think might be Obama’s mother? Ya can’t tell the players without a scorecard.

    Stanley Armour Dunham is President Obama’s grandfather. If you were not aware of that fact you need to get off the birther train.

  175. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 4, 2010 at 7:30 am #

    <strong>Paul Pieniezny: [Apuzzp] probably found some history book that described how the Dutch treated citizenship issues in the 17th century. But at the time, the Dutch Provinces were part of the (German) Holy Roman Empire and whatever he found, was the Dutch interpretation of who was a German. It must have been very close to the Prussian interpretation of ius sanguinis. Though (like Vattel, if I interpret a number of passages correctly) the Dutch made clear exceptions for religious refugees.

    The Law of Nations is a translation and a commentary by de Vattel on a German work of the same name.

  176. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 4, 2010 at 7:33 am #

    kimba: I think the results of your [FOIA] request, Strunk’s and Allen’s all went to the same place in the food chain for review before release.

    I have no doubts that they went to the same place. What eludes me is why mine wasn’t shipped out with the rest.

  177. avatar
    Reality Check August 4, 2010 at 8:29 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: I have no doubts that they went to the same place. What eludes me is why mine wasn’t shipped out with the rest.

    Should we start a pool on when Doc gets the package? I will take Friday. I won’t say which Friday though.

  178. avatar
    jay August 4, 2010 at 8:46 am #

    IANAL but Rogers v. Bellei make interesting reading.

    SCOTUS notes there are two types of citizens, natural born (jus soli) and naturalized. Regarding naturalized they state that there are at least two types — those naturalized in the United States and those naturalized at birth by statute (eg., born aboard to at least one US citizen).

    The ruling clearly states they child who are born aboard and derive their citizenship from their parents are “naturalized at birth” by statute — therefore not NBC. This is why they decided that Congress was allowed to make a child who was born aboard retaining their citizenship contingent on certain acts. Specifically that the person born abroad must reside in the US for 5 years between the age of 14 and and 28. The Court even goes so far as to state that the child born above does not fall under the 14th amendment because they were naturalized outside the US.

    So, unless this ruling has been overturned, it is quite clear that citizenship derived from one’s parents is not equal to NBC. A child born aboard and granted citizenship at birth lives with a constraint until the age of 29 that a child born in the US does not.

    * A child born in the US can be taken from the US a few days old and not return until they are 29 without risking their citizenship.

    * A child born abroad to US parents(s) can be brought into the US immediately after birth and continuously reside here until the age of 17 but if they leave and don’t move back to the US for at least 2 years before the turn 29 they can lose their citizenship.

    Below is a quote from the decision that refers to two prior cases they decided.

    Briefly Mrs. Schnieder was born aboard and was a citizen by virtual of her mother’s US citizenship. Mr Afroyim was naturalized in the US after immigrating here at the age of 19. Note they refer to both of them as naturalized citizens.

    It is to be observed that both Mrs. Schneider and Mr. Afroyim had resided in this country for years. Each had acquired United States citizenship here by the naturalization process (in one case, derivative, and in the other, direct) prescribed by the National Legislature. Each, in short, was covered explicitly by the Fourteenth Amendment’s very first sentence:

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

  179. avatar
    NbC August 4, 2010 at 11:52 am #

    AnotherBird: There is no definition of natural born citizen in legislation. There are only two type of American citizens. Those who are born citizens, and those who become citizens after birth. Congress can do what ever they want to, the Amendments to the constitutions are proof of this.

    Let’s not confuse Amendments with statutory law now shall we? Instead lets apply logic and reason. There are two kinds of citizens: born and naturalized. Hence, the only logical conclusion is that these citizens were ‘naturalized’ at birth.
    We already know that such children are not 14th Amendment children.

  180. avatar
    NbC August 4, 2010 at 11:55 am #

    AnotherBird: Sef:
    Sorry, this has been discussed & discussed & discussed, so I have no desire to add to it, except to say that NBC is defined in English common law as jus soli.People who become citizens by any other means than jus soli, whether it be at birth or later are naturalized.Congress cannot add to or detract from the jus soli definition of NBC, except by Constitutional Amendment.

    Then why add to it?

    To help you understand the facts?

  181. avatar
    NbC August 4, 2010 at 11:57 am #

    obsolete: You are either a citizen at the moment of birth (natural born), or you apply for citizenship at some point in your life (naturalized).

    Natural born is not the same as citizen at birth.

  182. avatar
    NbC August 4, 2010 at 11:59 am #

    jay: IANAL but Rogers v. Bellei make interesting reading.

    Exactly and no it was not overturned.

  183. avatar
    Sef August 4, 2010 at 12:40 pm #

    NbC:
    Exactly and no it was not overturned.

    To help further understand NBC I would propose this the following test. Ask these questions:

    A) Can a statute be cited which grants (or granted) the person citizenship?
    and
    B) May Congress create a statute which removes the person’s citizenship without their consent?

    If the answer to either of these questions is positive then the person is a statutory citizen, otherwise a NBC.

  184. avatar
    Greg August 4, 2010 at 1:38 pm #

    I’ve noted before that NBC and I disagree on this point. Charles Gordon made a good argument in his 1960s article about who could be President. The changes in phraseology in the early naturalization laws can just as easily imply that Natural Born Citizen was a broader term than similar terms like Native Born Citizen.

    While there are British statutes defining NBS as including those born abroad to citizens, which could, in theory take them out of the definition of British Common Law, they were old enough that it seems clear that the definition of NBS had subsumed those born abroad by the time the Constitution was written.

    The fact that more than a few candidates have considered running (George Romney) or run (McCain) with little more than academic controversy suggests that the definition has always been broad enough to include them.

  185. avatar
    Sef August 4, 2010 at 1:52 pm #

    Greg, I totally agree that there is room for discussion about this topic. However, there is no disagreement among the legal community that matters whether this has relevance to the eligibility of our current President. He is NBC by virtue of his birth on U.S. soil, independent of his parentage.

  186. avatar
    Slartibartfast August 4, 2010 at 2:00 pm #

    Greg: I’ve noted before that NBC and I disagree on this point. Charles Gordon made a good argument in his 1960s article about who could be President. The changes in phraseology in the early naturalization laws can just as easily imply that Natural Born Citizen was a broader term than similar terms like Native Born Citizen.
    While there are British statutes defining NBS as including those born abroad to citizens, which could, in theory take them out of the definition of British Common Law, they were old enough that it seems clear that the definition of NBS had subsumed those born abroad by the time the Constitution was written.
    The fact that more than a few candidates have considered running (George Romney) or run (McCain) with little more than academic controversy suggests that the definition has always been broad enough to include them.

    Excellent point. I think it’s also worth considering if there is any chance of the courts or congress ruling a president (or candidate) ineligible if they were born a citizen outside of the country. Honestly, I can’ imagine McCain being ousted by the courts or congress if he had won. NBC makes an excellent case for what the law says, but does that really matter if the law can’t be enforced?

  187. avatar
    Slartibartfast August 4, 2010 at 2:01 pm #

    D’oh!

    That should be “…I can’t imagine McCain…”

    Sorry.

  188. avatar
    Sef August 4, 2010 at 2:18 pm #

    Slartibartfast:
    Excellent point.I think it’s also worth considering if there is any chance of the courts or congress ruling a president (or candidate) ineligible if they were born a citizen outside of the country.Honestly, I can’ imagine McCain being ousted by the courts or congress if he had won.NBC makes an excellent case for what the law says, but does that really matter if the law can’t be enforced?

    The way I see a challenge to McCain is that it would have had to have been between the time of his choice by the Rep Convention & the Election by one of the other Rep candidates. They would be the only ones with a particularized harm which the court could address. Congress could also bring a challenge during the Electoral College vote count if he had won. Failing these he would be President. I doubt QW would work. I don’t think there would even be grounds for impeachment.

  189. avatar
    JoZeppy August 4, 2010 at 2:18 pm #

    I’d like to point out back in 2008, I believe the it was one of the law journals University of Michigan’s school of law devoted an entire volume to the question of McCain’s citizenship, and qualifications to be president. There were pretty strong arugments for both sides (and one of the arguments was that the statutes creating citizens by virtue of their parents citizenship was a matter of “naturalization at birth” and thus natural born…which that didn’t apply to McCain either, because the law was passed two years after his birth, so he wasn’t even naturalized at birth). Dr. C. even cited one of the articles in his daily quote that went to the effect of “the one thing that is not a subject of debate is that those born on US soil, with few narrow exceptions, are natural born citizens.”

  190. avatar
    Slartibartfast August 4, 2010 at 4:13 pm #

    Sef:
    The way I see a challenge to McCain is that it would have had to have been between the time of his choice by the Rep Convention & the Election by one of the other Rep candidates.They would be the only ones with a particularized harm which the court could address. Congress could also bring a challenge during the Electoral College vote count if he had won.Failing these he would be President.I doubt QW would work. I don’t think there would even be grounds for impeachment.

    History has shown us that there are always grounds for impeachment if Congress wants them… I agree that the only another candidate or Congress (via certification of the Electoral College vote or impeachment) would be the only ways to challenge McCain’s eligibility, but I don’t think that either the SCOTUS or Congress would rule him to be ineligible (I also think that in this case the moonbats on the left would be far less virulent than the wingnut birthers). And Quo Warranto is right out. 😉

  191. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 4, 2010 at 4:56 pm #

    Reality Check: Should we start a pool on when Doc gets the [FOIA] package?

    I called. They said that it was being processed by passport services, where it was sent in April of 2009. It also went to legal services twice, December 22, 2009 and May 26, 2010. They were unable to give me any target date for when I might expect a response.

    Based on other conversations, it appears that the request went to passport services and the results were returned from passport services. Then it went to legal and then back to passport services (presumably to look for something else). In any case, the check is not in the mail.

  192. avatar
    Paul Pieniezny August 4, 2010 at 5:58 pm #

    Slartibartfast: I agree that the only another candidate or Congress (via certification of the Electoral College vote or impeachment) would be the only ways to challenge McCain’s eligibility, but I don’t think that either the SCOTUS or Congress would rule him to be ineligible (I also think that in this case the moonbats on the left would be far less virulent than the wingnut birthers).

    Who on the left would be so moonbatty as to give the presidency to Palin? (Since that would be the result of an impeachment after the EC vote was ratified) Come on, the beauty of a McCain presidency was that the left in Congress would not even dare to rock the boat too much, for fear the guy would get a heart attack.

  193. avatar
    Slartibartfast August 4, 2010 at 6:06 pm #

    Paul Pieniezny:
    Who on the left would be so moonbatty as to give the presidency to Palin? (Since that would be the result of an impeachment after the EC vote was ratified) Come on, the beauty of a McCain presidency was that the left in Congress would not even dare to rock the boat too much, for fear the guy would get a heart attack.

    Good point.

  194. avatar
    Sef August 4, 2010 at 6:18 pm #

    Paul Pieniezny:
    Who on the left would be so moonbatty as to give the presidency to Palin? (Since that would be the result of an impeachment after the EC vote was ratified) Come on, the beauty of a McCain presidency was that the left in Congress would not even dare to rock the boat too much, for fear the guy would get a heart attack.

    It’s called “impeachment insurance”. Same as Cheney.

  195. avatar
    Keith August 4, 2010 at 6:52 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I have no doubts that they went to the same place. What eludes me is why mine wasn’t shipped out with the rest.

    Yours potentially covers more ground both physically and time-scale. Passport records go back to 1925, right? Non-essential records only go to 1965? So, more stuff to sort through and more warehouses to check.

  196. avatar
    Keith August 4, 2010 at 7:03 pm #

    Sef:
    It’s called “impeachment insurance”.Same as Cheney.

    And ‘potatoe’-boy.

    And Spiro Agnew when it comes down to that. (for those who came in late, ‘they’ had to ensure that Agnew was out of the picture before ‘they’ could even contemplate going after Nixon).

  197. avatar
    misha August 4, 2010 at 8:01 pm #

    Keith: And Spiro Agnew when it comes down to that. (for those who came in late, they’ had to ensure that Agnew was out of the picture before they’ could even contemplate going after Nixon).

    For those who came in late, Agnew was shaking down contractors for cash bribes starting when he was Baltimore County Executive.

    One contractor testified he drove to DC from Baltimore, and gave Agnew $5K cash in his chambers at the Executive Office Building.

    The plea deal was Agnew pleaded nolo contendre to one count of income tax evasion, and resign. He did not spend one day in jail. The Senate then confirmed Gerald Ford as VP. When Nixon resigned, the Senate confirmed Nelson Rockefeller as VP.

    Fun fact: my best friend was working in DC as a Congressional Aide at the time. He told me four hours before Nixon resigned, the DC telephone system stopped working. He could not get a dial tone, until two hours after the transition.

  198. avatar
    aarrgghh August 4, 2010 at 10:52 pm #

    Sef:
    It’s called “impeachment insurance”.Same as Cheney.

    it’s a time-honored strategy, though not normally used preemptively. see: “tiberius gambit”.

  199. avatar
    kimba August 5, 2010 at 7:52 am #

    “Keith wrote:

    Yours potentially covers more ground both physically and time-scale. Passport records go back to 1925, right? Non-essential records only go to 1965? So, more stuff to sort through and more warehouses to check.”

    I think the document searches for Allen’s, Strunk’s and Doc’s FOIA requests were all completed and the three reports went up the state dept chain together for redacting and approval. Since Strunk’s and Allen’s were released the same day, I think there’s something in Doc’s that has made it go further up the food chain for approval to release. I’m going to go out on a limb and guess it’s something on the original 1965 passport related to the President.

  200. avatar
    Joey August 5, 2010 at 3:47 pm #

    NbC: Let’s not confuse Amendments with statutory law now shall we? Instead lets apply logic and reason. There are two kinds of citizens: born and naturalized. Hence, the only logical conclusion is that these citizens were naturalized’ at birth.We already know that such children are not 14th Amendment children.

    Does a citizen who is “naturalized at birth” receive a Certificate of Naturalization?

  201. avatar
    nc1 August 5, 2010 at 9:45 pm #

    Keith: Yours potentially covers more ground both physically and time-scale. Passport records go back to 1925, right? Non-essential records only go to 1965? So, more stuff to sort through and more warehouses to check.

    They purged non-essential records from passport files covering the time period from 1925 to 1968. The same files examined for other FOIA requests should have been sufficient for Dr. C’s request as well.

  202. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 6, 2010 at 8:24 am #

    nc1: They purged non-essential records from passport files covering the time period from 1925 to 1968. The same files examined for other FOIA requests should have been sufficient for Dr. C’s request as well.

    Strunk asked for “passport applications” and “travel records.” I asked for “passports issued.” I frankly do not know if there are separate issuance records and what their retention period is. The fact that the request went to the passport section two times, and that it went to “legal” two times, suggests that a search was performed, and based on what was found, a decision was made to look for something else. An analyst I talked to once was fully aware that my case was similar to those under litigation, suggesting that my case is not being evaluated in a vacuum. That leads me to think that my results will be different from Strunk’s, otherwise I would have gotten the same documents Strunk did at around the same time.

    What confounds me, though, is that “passports issued” is such a harmless concept. What could the legal question be, and what additional material could be searched for? The only legally interesting thing could be that Barack Obama was listed on his mother’s passport, an entirely plausible possibility consistent with the crossed out entry on his mother’s documents. (Perhaps “Soebarkah” is the name of the person who told Stanley Ann to cross off the name.)

  203. avatar
    Sef August 6, 2010 at 8:31 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: (Perhaps “Soebarkah” is the name of the person who told Stanley Ann to cross off the name.)

    Subarkah (the current spelling of S“barkah) does appear to be a common Indonesian name

  204. avatar
    Black Lion August 6, 2010 at 11:18 am #

    Well it didn’t take long for the Post and Fail to manufacture a scenario to fit the FOIA documents that were released….By detailing an interview with an “unnamed” individual that claims to be Indonesian….It’s pure comedy….They want to push the Obama was adopted theory by the way Rondeau asked her ridiculous questions….Some excerpts….

    Aug. 5, 2010) – The Post & Email has made contact with a highly credible individual who was born and raised in Indonesia. Here he explains the significance of the term “Soebarkah,” which first appeared to the American public on July 29, 2010 on passport application forms released by the Bureau of Customs and Border Control to Mr. Christopher Strunk, who had filed a lawsuit in November 2008 after his FOIA request was denied.

    SHARON: Thank you for making time to speak with The Post & Email on very short notice. My first question is what I think everyone wants to know: what does the word “Soebarkah” mean?

    SAM: The word “Soebarkah” as it was presented in the article that you wrote in brackets under the name “Barack Hussein Obama” signifies to me a different name for Barack, so it’s his other name. Now that is an Indonesian name, and the majority of Indonesians have only one name. When I first saw it, knowing or having read about some people’s contentions that he was adopted by his Indonesian stepfather, I thought it might be his given name when he was adopted: Soebarkah.

    SHARON: Do they usually change the name when there’s an adoption by an Indonesian man?

    SAM: Sometimes they do; sometimes they don’t. But I believe most of the time they probably do. So based on what I have heard or read that he might have been adopted, I think that must be the name given to him at the time of adoption. Now that is just one name, because Indonesian Muslims don’t usually have a surname; they only go by one name. However, these days, there is a trend among the younger generation to give their children more than one name. So they might have two names, but both of them are “given” names; they’re not family names.

    SHARON: So on that form that we’ve all seen where it says “Barack Hussein Obama” then “(Soebarkah),” you believe Soebarkah is a given name.

    SAM: The only reason he would be given a name which would go on an official form is if the name was given to him officially. And then the only reason, in my mind, for him to be given an official Indonesian name would have been during his adoption.

    SHARON: We’ve discussed the passport application with Obama’s name. Do you think there is any significance in any of the other pages, specifically the one which stated, and she affirmed:

    I have been informed that my passport is not valid and that a valid passport is required by law to enter the United States. I request that an exception be granted to me, as provided in Section 53.2(h), Title 22 of the Code of Federal Regulations. I understand that a fee of $25 is required under Section 53.2(h) and I will remit such fee to the Passport Office, Department of State, Washington, D.C., 20524, within 30 days.

    I know it’s hard to guess about what might have happened at that time, but do you have any thoughts?

    SAM: The laws have changed recently, but what we had always understood at that time is that, especially with a woman (because in the Muslim world, men have more rights than women; they’re above women), if you married, if a spouse is of a different nationality or citizenship, and if the Indonesian spouse returns to Indonesia to live, then the alien spouse had to change citizenship in order to be able to live there. I haven’t been able to find the laws from those days because the Indonesian government isn’t as digitized as the U.S. government is; so one would have to be a lawyer to be able to look back and to have law books from 30 or 40 years ago. But that was the general understanding in those days. And a person could not have dual nationality. In fact, when I became an American citizen, I had to let go of my Indonesian citizenship. I could only have one. I understand now that they will accept both, and also now, as a spouse, there are two or three different kinds of visas that would allow an alien spouse to live in Indonesia, or the Indonesian spouse could sponsor the alien spouse to live with him or her. So there are several ways for getting the spouse to live in Indonesia without having to go out of the country every two months or so.

    SHARON: So is it conceivable that Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro did not have to change her citizenship to Indonesian?

    SAM: I would have to say something in the affirmative because, as I said, I’m not an attorney and I haven’t seen the laws from those days. It was just everybody’s understanding in those days, in the 1960s.

    SHARON: To your knowledge of that time, if a child was adopted by an Indonesian man, would the child have had to become a citizen of Indonesia?

    SAM: Yes, definitely. And again, the school registration does say that he was a Muslim.

    SHARON: Why do you think at the top of the school registration form it says “Barry Soetoro” but on the passport application it says “Soebarkah”?

    SAM: I have no idea. There are so many inconsistencies in so many things, as you pointed out in your article, and two different application forms for her passport and two different dates for her wedding date. I don’t know if the mother was just sloppy; it seems to me that she was.

    SHARON: Could it be that in the beginning they called him “Barry Soetoro” and then they came up with the new name “Soebarkah” after the adoption was complete?

    SAM: Well, this is just my opinion, but knowing how things are over there, his nickname might have been “Barry,” so that’s the name that everybody is comfortable with. So that’s why he was still called “Barry” instead of “Soebarkah,” which is a different name and kind-of heavy for a child. It would be good to have his adoption papers because if that was true and correct, then the name “Soebarkah” would show up on the adoption papers. To me, the only way he would be given an Indonesian name is when he was officially adopted.

    SHARON: It was included in a passport application which said that her original passport “was not valid.”

    SAM: It makes you wonder why it’s not valid, doesn’t it? There’s a big question mark knowing that in those days, somebody in her position who married an Indonesian would have had to have take up Indonesian citizenship in order to be able to live there indefinitely.

    SHARON: She always seemed to apply for a U.S. passport every five years, however. Could she have done that even if she had become an Indonesian citizen?

    SAM: Yes, definitely, because I have friends here who say that they kept their old passport, so when they travel outside of the United States, they use their American passport, but when they enter Indonesia, they use an Indonesian passport. It is illegal, but yes, it’s done. There are people who have done it. Ann Soetoro could have done that, too. I’m not saying she did, but even now, some people are still doing it. Some of them who are here legally with their American husbands (usually it’s someone who has an American husband) want the convenience of having American citizenship so they don’t have to maintain or renew permits every so many years, but they don’t want to lose their Indonesian passport for whatever reason. One of the reasons is that they can’t inherit property if they lose that citizenship.

    SHARON: If Stanley Ann Dunham Soetoro had become an Indonesian citizen because she married Lolo Soetoro and Obama was adopted and she was flying back and forth between Indonesia and Honolulu, when going to the U.S. embassy to apply for a U.S. passport to make her trips, would they have asked her any questions?

    SAM: Well, they would have seen that she had a valid passport, which is all you have to have to renew your passport: a valid passport, photograph, and it used to be $25; now maybe it’s $35 or less in some places. But that’s all she would have needed.

    SHARON: I think it was $10.00 back in the 1960s. But would they have said to her, “You’ve been living in Indonesia so you must have become an Indonesian citizen?”

    SAM: No. You can’t really do that, especially if you are an official; you can’t really accuse someone of anything.

    SHARON: She always checked off “U.S. Citizen” on the passport applications.

    SAM: Not only that, but it’s not done just with an American passport. I know somebody who did it with a British passport, although Great Britain allows dual citizenship. But when they came here, Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship. So the Indonesian passport was kept illegally.

    SHARON: Do you know if in 1971, Obama would have to have had his own passport to travel to Hawaii?

    SAM: If he had kept his American passport, then he would have had his own American passport. But on an Indonesian passport, he would have been on his mother’s passport. There might be exceptions, but that’s generally been the rule. As I said, in those days they were much stricter than they are now. Now, they are opening up more, so now they have passed measures which allow a foreign spouse to live in Indonesia, whereas before, I don’t think they had such an opportunity. There are several exceptions now: with one, you have to renew every six months, and another one, if the wife or husband sponsors you, it takes a little longer to get it, but you don’t have to renew it every year or after so many months.

    SHARON: If Obama had had his own Indonesian passport when he was a child, do you think he used that to enter the United States?

    SAM: Well, before his mother married Soetoro, I would imagine that when they left the U.S., they had separate passports for him and for her, and then probably when they were in Indonesia and she had to change her citizenship, then he would have been on her passport. She was only required to use it when they were leaving Indonesia. Once outside of Indonesia, she could have used their own individual American passports.

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/05/native-indonesian-soebarkah-most-likely-name-given-to-obama-upon-adoption-by-indonesian-stepfather/

  205. avatar
    nc1 August 6, 2010 at 4:56 pm #

    We know that a school document identified Obama as an Indonesian citizen. But he was a child at the time. If he chose foreign citizenship as an adult he would not be eligible for US presidency even if he was born in Hawaii.

    It is very important to examine his US passport records to see whether he had a US passport at the time when he travelled to Pakistan (1981).

  206. avatar
    Rickey August 6, 2010 at 4:59 pm #

    nc1:It is very important to examine his US passport records to see whether he had a US passport at the time when he travelled to Pakistan (1981).

    No, it’s not. And you are never going to see his passport records, at least not while he is alive.

  207. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) August 6, 2010 at 5:00 pm #

    nc1: We know that a school document identified Obama as an Indonesian citizen. But he was a child at the time. If he chose foreign citizenship as an adult he would not be eligible for US presidency even if he was born in Hawaii.It is very important to examine his US passport records to see whether he had a US passport at the time when he travelled to Pakistan (1981).

    So. Its a single school document. He never chose foreign citizenship as an adult so what example do you have NC? Anything or just more speculation?

  208. avatar
    misha August 6, 2010 at 5:02 pm #

    nc1: It is very important to examine his US passport records to see whether he had a US passport at the time when he travelled to Pakistan (1981).

    nc1: I found the exact passport you are looking for.

    Hope this helps.

  209. avatar
    bob August 6, 2010 at 5:04 pm #

    nc1: If he chose foreign citizenship as an adult he would not be eligible for US presidency even if he was born in Hawaii.

    So sometime since 1979 onwards, Obama became a citizen of Indonesia, a country that he left several years prior to that? Let me guess: This secret and unexplainable naturalization took place when Obama (wasn’t) writing Dreams.

  210. avatar
    dunstvangeet August 6, 2010 at 5:16 pm #

    nc1: We know that a school document identified Obama as an Indonesian citizen. But he was a child at the time.If he chose foreign citizenship as an adult he would not be eligible for US presidency even if he was born in Hawaii.It is very important to examine his US passport records to see whether he had a US passport at the time when he travelled to Pakistan (1981).

    You’re saying that someone born in the United States, who continued to live in the United States, and had every intention of returning to the United States would willingly give up his U.S. Citizenship? That’s one of the most idiotic statements that you’ve said in quite a while.

  211. avatar
    Majority Will August 6, 2010 at 5:19 pm #

    dunstvangeet:
    You’re saying that someone born in the United States, who continued to live in the United States, and had every intention of returning to the United States would willingly give up his U.S. Citizenship?That’s one of the most idiotic statements that you’ve said in quite a while.

    And there are SO many. Most of them are just re-statements of the same b.s. but worded slightly differently. (Shhhhh. It’s so we won’t notice.)

  212. avatar
    BatGuano August 6, 2010 at 5:24 pm #

    nc1: We know that a school document identified Obama as an Indonesian citizen.

    yes we do. we also know that the only way to renounce US citizenship is to convince a representative of the state department that you are completely aware of the concept of citizenship and the ramifications of renouncing it without being pressured from outside influences.

    that’s one freakin’ brilliant 6year old !!!!!!!

    ……… or someone just took the liberty to bs a little on an elementary school application to skip some hassle.

    not sure which way this one could go.

  213. avatar
    BatGuano August 6, 2010 at 5:29 pm #

    nc1: If he chose foreign citizenship as an adult he would not be eligible for US presidency even if he was born in Hawaii.

    where does it say that ? changing citizenship doesn’t change your place of birth. lee harvey oswald was able to get his citizenship back.

    ……… do you think obama is involved in a plot to assassinate the president ?

  214. avatar
    Majority Will August 6, 2010 at 5:38 pm #

    BatGuano:
    where does it say that ? changing citizenship doesn’t change your place of birth. lee harvey oswald was able to get his citizenship back.……… do you think obama is involved in a plot to assassinate thepresident ?

    Hmmm. I hope he has or will quit smoking.

  215. avatar
    BatGuano August 6, 2010 at 5:48 pm #

    Majority Will:
    Hmmm. I hope he has or will quit smoking.

    ( as a secret service agent throws himself onto a pack of lucky strikes )

  216. avatar
    Gorefan August 6, 2010 at 5:52 pm #

    nc1: It is very important to examine his US passport records to see whether he had a US passport at the time when he travelled to Pakistan (1981).

    NC1 – I have some questions for you.

    First let me see if I got things straight: On August 8, 1961, the President’s grandmother went to the DOH to register his birth. So that he would get all the benefits of being an American citizen. And then 5 or 6 years later his mother gave up his US Citizenship, so he could be an Indonesian citizen!

    We know for a fact that the President’s mother never gave up her US citizenship (she continued to renew her US passport continously from 1965 through the 1986). So what did she do, keep her US citzenship but give up her son’s? Give me a logical reason
    why she would do that.

    As to the Indonesian school document, here in the US is not uncommon for parents to use the address of a relative or friend to register their child for school. The reasons vary but usually the parent wants to make sure their child goes to a good school and in Texas, it is often done to get their sons into schools with good football programs.

    So would it be surprising if Lolo Soetoro fudged alittle on the application, rather then try to go through all the explainations and paperwork?

  217. avatar
    Majority Will August 6, 2010 at 5:56 pm #

    BatGuano:
    ( as a secret service agent throws himself onto a pack of lucky strikes )

    That’s funny! That is stand up material. The President getting progressively more peeved as an agent keeps swatting lit cigarettes from his mouth, squirting his lighter with a water pistol and Michelle and the daughters encouraging the Secret Service (secretly, of course).

  218. avatar
    obsolete August 6, 2010 at 6:02 pm #

    nc1: t is very important to examine his US passport records to see whether he had a US passport at the time when he travelled to Pakistan (1981).

    Considering the fact that a U.S. citizen was free to travel to Pakistan in 1981 on a U.S. passport, remind me again why we should huff the same brand of spray paint you do?

  219. avatar
    Majority Will August 6, 2010 at 7:02 pm #

    obsolete:
    Considering the fact that a U.S. citizen was free to travel to Pakistan in 1981 on a U.S. passport, remind me again why we should huff the same brand of spray paint you do?

    There’s another explanation. She’s a spy from eastern Europe paid to smear the President. Since every post is a regurgitation of her previous posts without regard to logic or rational replies, the same birther talking points are just being recycled. And she probably thinks we’re too stupid to notice.

    NO. 81-33A

    Travel Advisory
    Passport Services/Bureau of Consular Affa[irs]
    Department of State/Wahington. D.C. 205__

    AUGUST 17, 1981

    TRAVEL TO PAKISTAN

    BEFORE TRAVELING TO PAKISTAN, AMERICAN CITIZENS SHOULD BE AWARE OF THE FOLLO[WING] UPDATED VISA REQUIREMENTS: 30 DAY VISAS ARE AVAILABLE AT PAKISTANI AIRPORTS [FOR] TOURISTS ONLY. AS THESE VISAS ARE RARELY EXTENDED BEYOND THE 30 DAY TIME PER[IOD,] TOURISTS PLANNING TO STAY LONGER SHOULD SECURE VISAS BEFORE COMING TO PAKIS[TAN.] ANY TRAVELER COMING INTO PAKISTAN OVERLAND FROM INDIA MUST REPEAT MUST HA[VE A] VALID VISA, AS 30 DAY VISAS ARE NOT REPEAT NOT ISSUED AT THE OVERLAND BOR[DER] CROSSING POINT AT WAGHA.

    ANY NON-OFFICIAL AMERICAN WHO IS IN PAKISTAN FOR MORE THAN 30 DAYS MUST REGIS[TER] WITH THE GOVERNMENT’S FOREIGNER REGISTRATION OFFICE. EXIT PERMITS ARE REQUI[RED] FOR THOSE WHO HAVE STAYED LONGER THAN 30 DAYS BEFORE THEY ARE ALLOWED TO LE[AVE T]HE COUNTRY. ALL AMERICANS TRAVELING TO PAKISTAN ON OFFICIAL BUSINESS OR [FOR] PRIVATE EMPLOYMENT ARE REQUIRED TO HAVE A VISA BEFORE ARRIVAL, AND, AS [THE] GOVERNMENT OF PAKISTAN’S CLEARANCE PROCESS IS OFTEN QUITE LENGTHY, WE WOULD URGE TH[OSE] COMING TO APPLY AT THE NEAREST PAKISTANI EMBASSY OR CONSULATE AS FAR IN ADVA[NCE] OF THEIR SCHEDULED ARRIVAL AS POSSIBLE.

    THIS SUPERSEDED REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN DEPARTMENT PUBLICATION M-264, [“VISA] REQUIREMENTS OF FOREIGN GOVERNMENTS.[“]

    EXPIRATION DATE: INDEFINITE.

  220. avatar
    BatGuano August 6, 2010 at 7:29 pm #

    nc1, do you believe there was a travel ban of pakistan for US citizens in the 1980’s ?

  221. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 6, 2010 at 8:24 pm #

    nc1: We know that a school document identified Obama as an Indonesian citizen.

    Actually, Obama was identified as having Indonesian nationality.

    [The preceding comment was wrong. Doc.]

  222. avatar
    obsolete August 6, 2010 at 8:35 pm #

    nc1: We know that a school document identified Obama as an Indonesian citizen.

    The same document also says he was born in Hawaii.

  223. avatar
    nc1 August 6, 2010 at 9:22 pm #

    BatGuano: nc1, do you believe there was a travel ban of pakistan for US citizens in the 1980′s ?

    I don’t think there was a ban, however it was not very wise to travel there using a US passport.

    We know that his passport records are sealed. The main witness in the passport breach case (2008) has been killed.

    If Obama used a foreign passport as an adult – that would mean that he had a foreign citizenship. Therefore even if he was born in Hawaii he would not be eligible for presidency.

    If that is the case, somebody in the US government knows about it – and has the power to blackmail him.

    I don’t understand why Obama supporters aren’t the ones asking for clarification of his background information.

  224. avatar
    Majority Will August 6, 2010 at 9:31 pm #

    “If that is the case, somebody in the US government knows about it – and has the power to blackmail him.”

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
    ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

    Holy crap. So she IS a foreign spy! Quick! Call Oliver Stone!

    “I don’t understand . . .”

    She got the first three words right.

    If – If – If – If – If – If – If – If – If – If – If – If – If – If – If

    The hardcore birther mantra. Whew! That was sad and funny.

  225. avatar
    misha August 6, 2010 at 9:34 pm #

    nc1: We know that his passport records are sealed. The main witness in the passport breach case (2008) has been killed.

    Actually, it was the Mossad. I know, but can’t reveal anything more.

    I don’t understand why Obama supporters aren’t the ones asking for clarification of his background information.

    I’ve simply been told to keep it under my hat.

  226. avatar
    nc1 August 6, 2010 at 9:35 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Actually, Obama was identified as having Indonesian nationality.

    According to the Post and Email translation, the school document says that Obama was an Indonesian citizen.

    Quote: “… No. 3 asks “Nationality” and “a” is “citizenship,” and it says “Indonesia,” and then “b” says “of Asian descent,” and it’s blank there. Then “c” asks “tribe” or “ethnicity,” which is also blank…”

    http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/05/native-indonesian-soebarkah-most-likely-name-given-to-obama-upon-adoption-by-indonesian-stepfather/

    The use of passport in 1981 would tell us whether Barry, as an adult, chose a US or Indonesian citizenship.

  227. avatar
    bob August 6, 2010 at 9:39 pm #

    nc1: The use of passport in 1981 would tell us whether Barry, as an adult, chose a US or Indonesian citizenship.

    Birferistan 101: 1981 use of a U.S. Passport would not rule out the possible possession of Indonesian, Kenyan, British, etc. passports.

  228. avatar
    BatGuano August 6, 2010 at 9:42 pm #

    nc1:
    According to the Post and Email translation,the school document says that Obama was an Indonesian citizen

    you’ve kind of skipped over the part that a 6year old would have to be a super-genius to relinquish citizenship.

  229. avatar
    misha August 6, 2010 at 9:44 pm #

    BatGuano: you’ve kind of skipped over the part that a 6year old would have to be a super-genius to relinquish citizenship.

    He was a child prodigy, I tell you.

  230. avatar
    Majority Will August 6, 2010 at 9:44 pm #

    She’s citing the Pest and eFail now? THAT is the ultimate in birther desperation!

    It just keeps getting more sad and more funny.

    I need to start citing the Weekly World News just to keep up.

    Bat Boy has Obama’s passport! It’s true!

    Breaking news! Space aliens control America!
    http://weeklyworldnews.com/headlines/19314/top-secret-america-controlled-by-aliens/

  231. avatar
    AnotherBird August 6, 2010 at 9:55 pm #

    nc1: I don’t think there was a ban, however it was not very wise to travel there using a US passport.

    This is getting sillier by the moment.

  232. avatar
    nc1 August 6, 2010 at 10:03 pm #

    Gorefan: NC1 – I have some questions for you.First let me see if I got things straight: On August 8, 1961, the President’s grandmother went to the DOH to register his birth. So that he would get all the benefits of being an American citizen. And then 5 or 6 years later his mother gave up his US Citizenship, so he could be an Indonesian citizen!We know for a fact that the President’s mother never gave up her US citizenship (she continued to renew her US passport continously from 1965 through the 1986). So what did she do, keep her US citzenship but give up her son’s? Give me a logical reasonwhy she would do that.As to the Indonesian school document, here in the US is not uncommon for parents to use the address of a relative or friend to register their child for school. The reasons vary but usually the parent wants to make sure their child goes to a good school and in Texas, it is often done to get their sons into schools with good football programs.So would it be surprising if Lolo Soetoro fudged alittle on the application, rather then try to go through all the explainations and paperwork?

    We don’t know whether the school application required any documents to be submitted for verification. We don’t know how strict the Indonesian government was at that time when it came to admission of foreign born children to their elementary schools.

    If we assume that Indonesian citizenship was just a fudge to get him into the school it would be nice to get a confirmation from US government that Obama had a US passport in 1981.

    It would be good to have a reassurance that Obama did not choose Indonesian citizenship as an adult.

    The original birth certificate and passport information should be released to the public. It is a small price to pay to alleviate concerns that an ineligible person has been issuing orders to send troops to war.

  233. avatar
    AnotherBird August 6, 2010 at 10:04 pm #

    nc1: According to the Post and Email translation, the school document says that Obama was an Indonesian citizen.

    So, the Post and Email is holding on this information for what reason? You are a sucker. You fail to see what is wrong with your latest statement.

  234. avatar
    misha August 6, 2010 at 10:05 pm #

    Majority Will: Breaking news! Space aliens control America!http://weeklyworldnews.com/headlines/19314/top-secret-america-controlled-by-aliens/

    I am an official with the International Jewish Conspiracy.™

    We irradiate products in order to produce mutants, whom we can control from our subterranean command centers in New York and Jerusalem.

  235. avatar
    nc1 August 6, 2010 at 10:08 pm #

    BatGuano: you’ve kind of skipped over the part that a 6year old would have to be a super-genius to relinquish citizenship.

    That is why it would be important to know whether Barry, as an adult (not a 6 year old child), used Indonesian passport. If that were the case he would have relinquished the US citizenship as an adult.

  236. avatar
    nc1 August 6, 2010 at 10:15 pm #

    AnotherBird: So, the Post and Email is holding on this information for what reason? You are a sucker. You fail to see what is wrong with your latest statement.

    Where did you get an idea that this is new information? The school document has been around for a long time.
    If you had any doubts about accuracy of the translation provided by the Post and Email could you provide a link to an article claiming a different translation?

  237. avatar
    AnotherBird August 6, 2010 at 10:24 pm #

    nc1: If we assume that Indonesian citizenship was just a fudge to get him into the school it would be nice to get a confirmation from US government that Obama had a US passport in 1981.

    “If we assume …” translates in I have nothing to support the argument that follows, but let us just suppose that this is true.

    nc1: We don’t know whether the school application required any documents to be submitted for verification. We don’t know how strict the Indonesian government was at that time when it came to admission of foreign born children to their elementary schools.

    Do you honest take time to think about what you are going to type, and then review it to ensure that it makes sense. Let me translate what you wrote.

    “nc1: We don’t know how he was admitted in the school. Nor, do we know how the process words. We just don’t know anything.”

    nc1: It would be good to have a reassurance that Obama did not choose Indonesian citizenship as an adult.

    That makes no sense. So, after not living Indonesian since returning to America at the age of 10 is allowed to get Indonesian citizenship as an adult. Yeah, right that makes sense.

    nc1: The blah birth certificate and passport information should be released to blah blah. Blah is a blah blah to blah to blah blah that blah blah blah has blah blah blah to blah blah to blah.

    Just more birther noise. Nothing about nothing. All the while denying that the State of Hawaii has vouched for the president. That is Hawaii has placed it reputation on the line for all American citizens born in Hawaii and all people born citizens. However, this simple fact you just don’t understand.

  238. avatar
    Majority Will August 6, 2010 at 10:26 pm #

    misha:
    I am an official with the International Jewish Conspiracy.™Weirradiate productsin order to produce mutants, whom we can control from our subterranean command centers in New York and Jerusalem.

    I had a hunch! Your posts have hidden codes.

    See. Anyone can make baseless, ludicrous speculation.

  239. avatar
    AnotherBird August 6, 2010 at 10:27 pm #

    nc1: Where did you get an idea that this is new information? The school document has been around for a long time.

    If the information was valid it would have been released to the public. Barack Obama wouldn’t be president, and their would be a grand jury to determine what happened.

    Obama is still president, and people like you are considered crazy.

  240. avatar
    AnotherBird August 6, 2010 at 10:32 pm #

    nc1:
    That is why it would be important to know whether Barry, as an adult (not a 6 year old child), used Indonesian passport.If that were the case he would have relinquished the US citizenship as an adult.

    You are making absolutely no sense. Absolutely none. Your comment is a kin to a person living in China for 10 years coming to America, and given citizenship after getting off the plane. No country gives citizenship to people who aren’t residents for at least 5 years, and that doesn’t include the country’s other conditions. This doesn’t include you lack of understand what dual citizenship is.

  241. avatar
    nc1 August 6, 2010 at 10:33 pm #

    bob: Birferistan 101: 1981 use of a U.S. Passport would not rule out the possible possession of Indonesian, Kenyan, British, etc. passports.

    I am aware of that possibility. Given the difficulty of verifying documents created by our own government it is very unlikely that ordinary US citizens will be able to examine foreign government records.

    The only information that mentions his foreign citizenship is the school document from Indonesia. If he had no US passport in 1981, that would make him ineligible for US presidency.
    If he had US passport in 1981, absent any other information, we would have to assume that this was the only passport in his possession.

  242. avatar
    dunstvangeet August 6, 2010 at 10:33 pm #

    nc1: If we assume that Indonesian citizenship was just a fudge to get him into the school it would be nice to get a confirmation from US government that Obama had a US passport in 1981.

    If you’re basing this off of the school record, then I should point you again to Perkins v. Elg which states that no action of a parent (no matter who the parent is) can renounce the citizenship of a minor. Your personal pet theory goes directly against Supreme Court Precedent. Furthermore, in order for Obama to renounce citizenship, he’d have to go into the consulate, and convince the authorities there of a few things.

    1. He wanted to give up his U.S. Citizenship.

    2. He knew exactly what he was doing, and understood the full consequences of these actions.

    3. He was making this request under no pressure from anybody else (including his Parents).

    If you believe that a 6-year-old could convince the American Consulate of these three things, then you’re an idiot.

    Baring this, there is no way that Barack Obama did not give up his U.S. Citizenship when he was living in Indonesia.

    Other than that, you have to believe that someone who is on vacation from the United States, current lives in the United States, and has every intention of returning to the United States, would give up his U.S. Citizenship, by on a whim, going into an American Consulate and going, “I want to renounce my citizenship.” There is absolutely no indication that it happened, and you have absolutely no evidence that it did.

    It would be good to have a reassurance that Obama did not choose Indonesian citizenship as an adult.

    It would also be reassuring to find out that the birthers haven’t been taken over by an alien slug that crawls up into your brain and controls all your actions. That’s much more likely to happen than your scenario which violates Supreme Court Precedent that is over 80 years old.

    The original birth certificate and passport information should be released to the public. It is a small price to pay to alleviate concerns that an ineligible person has been issuing orders to send troops to war.

    You have an official document from the State of Hawaii that says that Obama was born in Hawaii. At this point, you’re basically going into the state of people that continually ask for assurances that our President wasn’t replaced by a robotic alien.

    Oh, and simple use of a passport isn’t enough to relinquish U.S. Citizenship. In order to renounce U.S. Citizenship (especially U.S. Citizenship that is protected by the Constitution), you have to go into a U.S. Consulate and formally renounce that citizenship.

  243. avatar
    Rickey August 6, 2010 at 10:38 pm #

    nc1:
    I don’t think there was a ban, however it was not very wise to travel there using a US passport.

    It was so unwise that on June 14, 1981 the New York Times published a glowing article on traveling to Pakistan, with tips on places to visit and advice on what Americans needed to do regarding visas, etc.

    We know that his passport records are sealed.

    Every living American’s passport records are sealed.

    If Obama used a foreign passport as an adult – that would mean that he had a foreign citizenship. Therefore even if he was born in Hawaii he would not be eligible for presidency. If that is the case, somebody in the US government knows about it – and has the power to blackmail him.

    Assuming that Obama had a foreign passport as an adult, why would anyone in the U.S. government know about it? I tell you what – why don’t you go to Indonesia and ask the Indonesian government for records of Obama’s Indonesian passport?

    I don’t understand why Obama supporters aren’t the ones asking for clarification of his background information.

    Because we’re not delusional?

  244. avatar
    Majority Will August 6, 2010 at 10:42 pm #

    dunstvangeet: If you believe that a 6-year-old could convince the American Consulate of these three things, then you’re an idiot.

    I think we have a winner.

  245. avatar
    nc1 August 6, 2010 at 10:43 pm #

    AnotherBird: If the information was valid it would have been released to the public. Barack Obama wouldn’t be president, and their would be a grand jury to determine what happened.Obama is still president, and people like you are considered crazy.

    Ask Dr. C or other Obama supporters about the timing of the release of this document. This is nothing new. The trouble is, there are journOlists in this country making sure that public is not informed about Obama’s background/past.

    The same school document lists him as a Muslim. Yet he has publicly claimed that he was never a Muslim. We know that his half-sister is on record saying that they were a Muslim family. What are the chances that Lolo Soetoro did not raise him as a Muslim?

  246. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) August 6, 2010 at 10:49 pm #

    nc1:
    Ask Dr. C or other Obama supporters about the timing of the release of this document. This is nothing new.The trouble is, there are journOlists in this country making sure that public is not informed about Obama’s background/past.The same school document lists him as a Muslim. Yet he has publicly claimed that he was never a Muslim.We know that his half-sister is on record saying that they were a Muslim family. What are the chances that Lolo Soetoro did not raise him as a Muslim?

    Where did his sister say they were a muslim family? Give me a quote with a mainstream source. Journalists jumped on almost any rumor during the campaign against Obama so enough with the crap about them not informing the public about his past as they did air almost every rumor out there. It was common for them to list the step father’s faith on the school documents. Again you haven’t proved anything. Even so what does the document saying he was listed as a muslim have anything to do with him being eligible for president?

  247. avatar
    misha August 6, 2010 at 10:51 pm #

    nc1: We know that his half-sister is on record saying that they were a Muslim family. What are the chances that Lolo Soetoro did not raise him as a Muslim?

    So what if he’s a Muslim? It’s the same charge leveled at us: dual loyalty.

    Nice to see you’re hanging wih the anti-semites.

  248. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) August 6, 2010 at 10:53 pm #

    nc1:
    According to the Post and Email translation,the school document says that Obama was an Indonesian citizen.Quote: “… No. 3 asks “Nationality” and “a” is “citizenship,” and it says “Indonesia,” and then “b” says “of Asian descent,” and it’s blank there.Then “c” asks “tribe” or “ethnicity,” which is also blank…”
    http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/08/05/native-indonesian-soebarkah-most-likely-name-given-to-obama-upon-adoption-by-indonesian-stepfather/The use of passport in 1981 would tell us whether Barry, as an adult, chose a US or Indonesian citizenship.

    I find it funny that you take the “translation” done by some fringe internet website as the truth and ignore various public officials who have said that he was born in Hawaii.

  249. avatar
    AnotherBird August 6, 2010 at 10:59 pm #

    nc1: If he had no US passport in 1981, that would make him ineligible for US presidency.

    So that would explain why Sarah Palin in 2007 she knew that John McCain would choose her as VP. Just stop now.

    nc1: The trouble is, there are journOlists in this country making sure that public is not informed about Obama’s background/past.

    No, the problem is people like you who continue to distort the truth and present them in ways that are factually false.

    You just don’t understand the context in what was written. You attempt to present a deception or information that suggest something that it is impossible to come to the conclusion that you attempt to make.

    You are not making any sense. There are many atheist who come from Christian families, There are many people raised in Muslim families who become Christian. There are people who leave their Catholic faith to become a born again Christian. There are Christians that become Muslim. There are Christians that become Buddhist. A persons religious conviction is their religious conviction. However, you just don’t understand this.

    There are many Christians marrying Jews, with neither person changing their religion. There are families where the children follow the religion of one parent or neither. This is something that you just don’t understand.

    So you fall both on the religion that Obama was raised by, and the religion that he practices.

    You continue to portray yourself as a skeptic, but you don’t even understand logical reasoning.

  250. avatar
    dunstvangeet August 6, 2010 at 11:03 pm #

    Oh, NC1, I suggest that you take a look at this little ditty from 8 USC 1481(b):

    Whenever the loss of United States nationality is put in issue in any action or proceeding commenced on or after September 26, 1961 under, or by virtue of, the provisions of this chapter or any other Act, the burden shall be upon the person or party claiming that such loss occurred, to establish such claim by a preponderance of the evidence.

    So, guess what. That means that you, since you’re claiming that a loss of Nationality occurred, you must establish such a claim by a preponderance of the Evidence.

    That means that Obama doesn’t have to give you didly squat.

  251. avatar
    sfjeff August 6, 2010 at 11:03 pm #

    “It is a small price to pay to alleviate concerns that an ineligible person has been issuing orders to send troops to war.”

    I have no such concerns. So my lack of concern cancels out your concern.

    I mean really- this whole ‘what if’ thing of yours NC.

    “what if he renounced his U.S. citizenship as an adult?

    So I ask you- you of so many questions and no answers- since there is absolutely no evidence that President Obama ever renounced his citizenship as an adult nor any evidence that he ever possessed a foreign passport- why are you asking this of President Obama but never asked this of President Bush or Clinton?

    Because of some rumors on the internet?

    Do you really think that a President should be in the business of refuting every internet rumor? Because I really don’t.

    I give you my prediction- when a Sarah Palin or Romney or Jeb Bush or some future GOP candidate in the future is elected in the future, no birthers will be asking them to prove they never had a foreign passport. They will not be asking them to provide kindergarten records. They will happily accept whatever the candidates provide.

  252. avatar
    sfjeff August 6, 2010 at 11:06 pm #

    “Yet he has publicly claimed that he was never a Muslim. We know that his half-sister is on record saying that they were a Muslim family. What are the chances that Lolo Soetoro did not raise him as a Muslim?”

    ooooh scary black man with the Muslim name again!

  253. avatar
    Majority Will August 6, 2010 at 11:18 pm #

    AnotherBird:
    So that would explain why Sarah Palin in 2007 she knew that John McCain would choose her as VP. Just stop now.
    No, the problem is people like you who continue to distort the truth and present them in ways that are factually false.You just don’t understand the context in what was written. You attempt to present a deception or information that suggest something that it is impossible to come to the conclusion that you attempt to make.You are not making any sense. There are many atheist who come from Christian families, There are many people raised in Muslim families who become Christian. There are people who leave their Catholic faith to become a born again Christian. There are Christians that become Muslim. There are Christians that become Buddhist. A persons religious conviction is their religious conviction. However, you just don’t understand this.There are many Christians marrying Jews, with neither person changing their religion. There are families where the children follow the religion of one parent or neither. This is something that you just don’t understand.So you fall both on the religion that Obama was raised by, and the religion that he practices.You continue to portray yourself as a skeptic, but you don’t even understand logical reasoning.

    There’s also no eligibility requirement in the Constitution that specifies religion but I do remember a very clear stance on religion in the First Amendment:

    “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . .”

    It was just another cheap, vile FUD tactic from an intolerant birther bigot who is on a mission to smear the President. Pathetic.

  254. avatar
    Majority Will August 6, 2010 at 11:30 pm #

    sfjeff: “It is a small price to pay to alleviate concerns that an ineligible person has been issuing orders to send troops to war.”I have no such concerns. So my lack of concern cancels out your concern.

    And since birthers are a fringe minority with a tenuous grasp of reality, the will of the majority who knows that our President is the lawfully elected Chief Executive of the United States of America cancels out all irrational, hate driven lunatics.

  255. avatar
    AnotherBird August 6, 2010 at 11:44 pm #

    Majority Will, birthers can place the most amount of misinformation is one sentence. This is all about the validity of one document, and they have produced nothing to invalidate it. They always distract form the issue, and as demonstrated show how intolerant they really are.

  256. avatar
    BatGuano August 7, 2010 at 12:19 am #

    nc1:
    That is why it would be important to know whether Barry, as an adult (not a 6 year old child), used Indonesian passport.If that were the case he would have relinquished the US citizenship as an adult.

    shut the front door. you just put forward the indonesian elementary school registration as proof of indonesian citizenship then, when it was put forward that it was basically impossible, moved on to an equally improbable scenario that obama became an indonesian citizen as an adult. when? why? how ?

    seriously .

  257. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 7, 2010 at 12:21 am #

    nc1: Quote: “… No. 3 asks “Nationality” and “a” is “citizenship,” and it says “Indonesia,” and then “b” says “of Asian descent,” and it’s blank there. Then “c” asks “tribe” or “ethnicity,” which is also blank…”

    I got this one wrong (must be getting old). You are correct that the line is properly translated “citizen[ship]”.

    And I believe that other one is Birth Location: Honolulu, Hawaii. Or will you say that the line that suits you is true and the one that doesn’t suit you is a lie?

  258. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 7, 2010 at 12:24 am #

    nc1: Ask Dr. C or other Obama supporters about the timing of the release of this document. This is nothing new

    I personally find the document of little significance, so the timing hardly matters.

  259. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 7, 2010 at 12:51 am #

    nc1: I don’t think there was a ban, however it was not very wise to travel there using a US passport.

    That is totally and completely false as shown by the State Dept. Travel advisory and contemporary travel articles in the NY Times.

  260. avatar
    Gorefan August 7, 2010 at 12:56 am #

    nc1: It would be good to have a reassurance that Obama did not choose Indonesian citizenship as an adult.

    You still haven’t explained why his mother kept her US Citizenship, but give up her sons.
    Also, we know for a fact that he was not using the name Soetoro but Obama when he entered Occidental College in 1979/1980. Before going to Pakistan.

    Would he have needed a passport to return to the US in 1971?

    If he entered Occidental as a foreign student, wouldn’t he need to use his step-father’s name to get a scholarship?

  261. avatar
    G August 7, 2010 at 3:38 am #

    Gorefan:
    You still haven’t explained why his mother kept her US Citizenship, but give up her sons.
    Also, we know for a fact that he was not using the name Soetoro but Obama when he entered Occidental College in 1979/1980. Before going to Pakistan.Would he have needed a passport to return to the US in 1971?If he entered Occidental as a foreign student, wouldn’t he need to use his step-father’s name to get a scholarship?

    All this crazy adoption and Indonesian citizen ship bunk by birthers like NC1 and Sven is just laughable at this stage of the game in terms of the information we’ve all learned after 2 years of looking into it. Anyone who still holds these positions is completely delusional, dishonest or in denial.

    Patrick over at BadFiction has a good article on the topic busting this myth:

    http://badfiction.typepad.com/badfiction/the-indonesian-citizenship-myth.html

    It is lengthy but well written. Here is just the summary portion at the end:

    So to recap:

    Under US law as shown in Sections 317(b), 401, and 407 of the Nationality Act of 1940, and Sections 349 (a) and 355 of the 1952 Immigration and Nationality Act, Title III, Chapter 3, neither Stanley Ann Dunham or Barack Obama would have lost US citizenship upon marriage to Lolo Soetoro. Neither could Barack Obama have lost US citizenship due to actions taken by his mother.

    Under Indonesian Law 62/1958, Article 2, there was no way to grant Indonesian citizenship to Barack Obama due to being over the age limit as defined by Indonesian law. In addition, the inability to renounce Barack Obama’s US citizenship would have rendered him unable to be granted Indonesian citizenship until the age of 21, and he would have had to returned to Indonesia to live AFTER his mother divorced Lolo Soetoro to meet the guidelines in Article 5 of that law.

    In short, there is no possible way under either United States OR Indonesian law that Barack Obama could have lost his US citizenship and been granted Indonesian citizenship as a child.

    This myth is busted.

  262. avatar
    nc1 August 7, 2010 at 8:54 am #

    dunstvangeet: If you’re basing this off of the school record, then I should point you again to Perkins v. Elg which states that no action of a parent (no matter who the parent is) can renounce the citizenship of a minor. Your personal pet theory goes directly against Supreme Court Precedent. Furthermore, in order for Obama to renounce citizenship, he’d have to go into the consulate, and convince the authorities there of a few things.1. He wanted to give up his U.S. Citizenship.2. He knew exactly what he was doing, and understood the full consequences of these actions.3. He was making this request under no pressure from anybody else (including his Parents).If you believe that a 6-year-old could convince the American Consulate of these three things, then you’re an idiot.Baring this, there is no way that Barack Obama did not give up his U.S. Citizenship when he was living in Indonesia.Other than that, you have to believe that someone who is on vacation from the United States, current lives in the United States, and has every intention of returning to the United States, would give up his U.S. Citizenship, by on a whim, going into an American Consulate and going, “I want to renounce my citizenship.” There is absolutely no indication that it happened, and you have absolutely no evidence that it did.It would also be reassuring to find out that the birthers haven’t been taken over by an alien slug that crawls up into your brain and controls all your actions. That’s much more likely to happen than your scenario which violates Supreme Court Precedent that is over 80 years old.You have an official document from the State of Hawaii that says that Obama was born in Hawaii. At this point, you’re basically going into the state of people that continually ask for assurances that our President wasn’t replaced by a robotic alien.Oh, and simple use of a passport isn’t enough to relinquish U.S. Citizenship. In order to renounce U.S. Citizenship (especially U.S. Citizenship that is protected by the Constitution), you have to go into a U.S. Consulate and formally renounce that citizenship.

    A use of foreign passport for a travel to a third country as an ADULT would indicate that he accepted a foreign citizenship. It could not have been considered as parents’ action forced upon a minor child.

    Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship 30 years ago. Even if they did, could a dual citizen be considered eligible for US presidency?

  263. avatar
    Majority Will August 7, 2010 at 8:59 am #

    The Serbian spy is back on the clock.

  264. avatar
    nc1 August 7, 2010 at 9:06 am #

    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross): Where did his sister say they were a muslim family? Give me a quote with a mainstream source. Journalists jumped on almost any rumor during the campaign against Obama so enough with the crap about them not informing the public about his past as they did air almost every rumor out there. It was common for them to list the step father’s faith on the school documents. Again you haven’t proved anything. Even so what does the document saying he was listed as a muslim have anything to do with him being eligible for president?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/us/politics/30obama.html?pagewanted=all

  265. avatar
    Majority Will August 7, 2010 at 9:20 am #

    “My whole family was Muslim, and most of the people I knew were Muslim,” said Maya Soetoro-Ng, Mr. Obama’s younger half sister. But Mr. Obama attended a Catholic school and then a Muslim public school where the religious education was cursory. When he was 10, he returned to his birthplace of Hawaii to live with his grandparents and attended a preparatory school with a Christian affiliation but little religious instruction.

    And yet a person can choose his or her own religion. Or no religion at all.

    Naturalized Citizen (nc1) has proven once again that she’s a bigot and just a troll spreading her hatred.

    Ignore this intolerant troll.

  266. avatar
    nc1 August 7, 2010 at 9:22 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: I got this one wrong (must be getting old). You are correct that the line is properly translated “citizen[ship]“.And I believe that other one is Birth Location: Honolulu, Hawaii. Or will you say that the line that suits you is true and the one that doesn’t suit you is a lie?

    We wouldn’t have expected anything other than Honolulu to be mentioned on that document as his birthplace, would we?

    It does not tell us anything about the source used for birth registration – remember the phrase “unattended birth registration”. Until we see the original birth certificate we have to trust Obama’s word about his birthplace.

  267. avatar
    Majority Will August 7, 2010 at 9:31 am #

    How is someone’s religion relevant to Presidential eligibility?

    This is a disgusting fear tactic.

  268. avatar
    Majority Will August 7, 2010 at 9:32 am #

    “Until we see the original birth certificate we have to trust Obama’s word about his birthplace.”

    No. I trust the state of Hawaii.

    Troll.

  269. avatar
    Sef August 7, 2010 at 9:34 am #

    nc1: Until we see the original birth certificate we have to trust Obama’s word about his birthplace.

    All the evidence we have seen so far indicates that you would not accept the original BC either.

  270. avatar
    Majority Will August 7, 2010 at 9:37 am #

    How many times must it be said that birthers don’t care about the law but just want dirt to smear the President?

  271. avatar
    Northland10 August 7, 2010 at 9:53 am #

    nc1:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/us/politics/30obama.html?pagewanted=all

    Someday, wouldn’t it be such a pleasant surprise if the “birthers” would read an entire article before using it to prove their point. Much of this article was telling the story of how, using an evangelical term, Obama “came to Christ.” NC1 is using this as proof the President is a Muslim? Apparently we forgot the read the parts about his baptism and the reason he became, by choice (his and God’s, of course), a Christian.

  272. avatar
    nc1 August 7, 2010 at 9:58 am #

    Gorefan: You still haven’t explained why his mother kept her US Citizenship, but give up her sons.Also, we know for a fact that he was not using the name Soetoro but Obama when he entered Occidental College in 1979/1980. Before going to Pakistan.Would he have needed a passport to return to the US in 1971?If he entered Occidental as a foreign student, wouldn’t he need to use his step-father’s name to get a scholarship?

    One possible reason would be a strict policy in Indonesia (in 1960’s) that only citizens were eligible to attend public elementary schools.

    I have already told you that even in case that the mentioning of the Indonesian citizenship on the school document was just a fudge to get him into the school, it would be wise to check whether he had US passport in 1981.

    It would also be nice to know about passport used for his return to USA from Indonesia in 1971.

    I’d like to read more about his Occidental College records. I thought that this information was hidden from public. We know that several people are being prosecuted for looking into his college loan records, but we don’t know what is in those records (which name and citizenship did he use).

  273. avatar
    Northland10 August 7, 2010 at 9:59 am #

    Northland10:
    Someday, wouldn’t it be such a pleasant surprise if the “birthers” would read an entire article before using it to prove their point. Much of this article was telling the story of how, using an evangelical term, Obama “came to Christ.”NC1 is using this as proof the President is a Muslim?Apparently we forgot the read the parts about his baptism and the reason he became, by choice (his and God’s, of course), a Christian.

    Of course, the Constitution forbids any religious test anyway, so whatever religion he chose to follow (or none at all) does not affect his eligibility.

  274. avatar
    nc1 August 7, 2010 at 10:33 am #

    Northland10: Someday, wouldn’t it be such a pleasant surprise if the “birthers” would read an entire article before using it to prove their point. Much of this article was telling the story of how, using an evangelical term, Obama “came to Christ.” NC1 is using this as proof the President is a Muslim? Apparently we forgot the read the parts about his baptism and the reason he became, by choice (his and God’s, of course), a Christian.

    It would be even better if you bothered to read the whole tread and understand the context of the discussion (read nc1 06. Aug, 2010 at 10:43 pm)

    The discussion is about the Indonesian school document where Barry was listed as Indonesian citizen and Muslim. This information was provided to the school by his parents – not by birthers.

    I mentioned the NYT article because one Obot claimed that no MSM quoted Obama’s half-sister mentioning that the family was Muslim.

    I was NOT involved in a debate what Obama’s faith as an adult is, nor have I ever linked his religion with eligibility for presidency.

  275. avatar
    Slartibartfast August 7, 2010 at 10:35 am #

    nc1: Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship 30 years ago. Even if they did, could a dual citizen be considered eligible for US presidency?

    If they were a natural born US citizen then they would certainly be considered eligible for the presidency and you can’t find any law or court case which says differently.

    nc1: One possible reason would be a strict policy in Indonesia (in 1960′s) that only citizens were eligible to attend public elementary schools.

    Please give reference to the Indonesian law that says this. It is my understanding that public education is the right of Indonesian citizens but I’ve never seen any law stating that non-citizens weren’t allowed in public schools (and rationally this doesn’t pass the smell test – why would there even be such a law?)

  276. avatar
    Majority Will August 7, 2010 at 10:39 am #

    nc1:
    It would be even better if you bothered to read the whole tread and understand the context of the discussion (read nc1 06. Aug, 2010 at 10:43 pm)The discussion is about the Indonesian school document where Barry was listed as Indonesian citizen and Muslim. This information was provided to the school by his parents – not by birthers.I mentioned the NYT article because one Obot claimed that no MSM quoted Obama’s half-sister mentioning that the family was Muslim.I was NOT involved in a debate what Obama’s faith as an adult is, nor have I ever linked his religion with eligibility for presidency.

    The whole tread?

    You’re a racist jerk. Your dancing is like Elaine’s on Seinfeld.

  277. avatar
    BatGuano August 7, 2010 at 11:11 am #

    nc1:
    One possible reason would be a strict policy in Indonesia (in 1960′s) that only citizens were eligible to attend public elementary schools.

    do you have memory problems ??? we just went over, in this thread, how NOTHING stanley ann could do would affect obama’s US citizenship and it would have been virtually impossible for him to renounce his own citizenship.

    yet you just tossed it back in there as if it was a potential option.

  278. avatar
    BatGuano August 7, 2010 at 11:28 am #

    nc1:
    It would also be nice to know about passport used for his return to USA from Indonesia in 1971.

    again !!!!!!……. so you know he couldn’t get indonesian citizenship as a child but you believe there was a way that obama could get an indonesian passport.

    exactly how does that work ?

  279. avatar
    dunstvangeet August 7, 2010 at 11:35 am #

    nc1: A use of foreign passport for a travel to a third country as an ADULT would indicate that he accepted a foreign citizenship. It could not have been considered as parents’ action forced upon a minor child.

    So, basically, it’s the second group. This isn’t about him “accepting” foreign citizenship. This is about him losing U.S. Citizenship.

    What you’re stating is that the simple use of a foreign passport is enough to renounce U.S. Citizenship. Mind showing me where in U.S. Law that supports this? Because the U.S. Supreme Court has directly said that this isn’t allowed. And according to U.S. Law, you have to do very specific acts, with the intent of giving up U.S. Citizenship. Traveling on a foreign passport is not one of those acts.

    This is the law on relinquishing U.S. Citizenship. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1481.html

    Mind showing me exactly where Obama falls under to have his U.S. Citizenship renounced.

    Remember, the proof is on you that this actually happened. Obama doesn’t have to prove that this didn’t happen. You have to prove that it did.

  280. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 7, 2010 at 11:40 am #

    nc1: One possible reason would be a strict policy in Indonesia (in 1960′s) that only citizens were eligible to attend public elementary schools.

    This is one of Berg’s little ideas. The Indonesian Constitution says that all Indonesians have a right to a public education. Berg, using the fallacy of denying the antecedent, turned that into only Indonesians may have a public education. I’ve never seen anything real that says non-Indonesians couldn’t attend public school. It’s possible, but I’ve never seen it. Berg also claims that one had to have a national identity card to go to school–another non-fact. See: http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/02/hollister-v-indonesian-citizenship-law/.

  281. avatar
    BatGuano August 7, 2010 at 11:43 am #

    nc1:
    ….., it would be wise to check whether he had US passport in 1981.

    when could he have become an indonesian citizen ? as mentioned above he would have had to have maintained residency in indonesia to be eligible for citizenship. he was in los angeles from 79 to mid 81 ( when he traveled to indonesia ).

    you contend that he was able to instantly receive indonesian citizenship and a passport on arrival or that he was able to apply, and obtained, indonesian citizenship and a passport while living in los angeles within 2 years.

    correct ?

  282. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater (Bob Ross) August 7, 2010 at 11:43 am #

    nc1:
    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/us/politics/30obama.html?pagewanted=all

    Remember thats his half sister. What her family did isn’t the same as what Obama’s did. You’re trying to conflate the two. Even so Obama isn’t a muslim and even if he was what does this have to do with the current subject?

  283. avatar
    Passerby August 7, 2010 at 11:44 am #

    Greg: I’ve noted before that NBC and I disagree on this point.

    ……

    The fact that more than a few candidates have considered running (George Romney) or run (McCain) with little more than academic controversy suggests that the definition has always been broad enough to include them.

    I snipped it a bit just for brevity, sorry. There’s a reason I keep coming back to this blog, even though I get bored and frustrated with the same things being repeated all the time. Sometimes I learn something.

    Y’all must have discussed this a lot, but I guess I wasn’t paying attention. My bad. I’ve always assumed (but without really checking into it, and IANAL), that “natural born”, “native born”, and “citizen by birth” all meant the same thing–just that the person acquired their citizenship at birth, as opposed to acquiring it by naturalization sometime after their birth. But apparently this was wrong.

    You guys check me on this, to see if I have it right. It seems there are two different ways of looking at this, both somewhat supported by legal opinion:

    1. Natural born and native born mean the same thing–born in the US. But citizen at birth includes, in addition to that, people who were born abroad and got their citizenship at birth through their parents.

    2. Natural born is the same as citizen at birth, so it includes people born abroad to US citizen parents, while native born is the more restrictive term, including only those born in the US.

    (And yes, I do realize this has nothing to do with President Obama’s status. I’m just curious.)

  284. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 7, 2010 at 11:47 am #

    nc1: It does not tell us anything about the source used for birth registration – remember the phrase “unattended birth registration”. Until we see the original birth certificate we have to trust Obama’s word about his birthplace.

    Don’t be dense. The Indonesian school record came from Obama’s mother, either directly, or second hand through Lolo Soetoro (more likely). President Obama is not the source for the Indonesian school registration. President Obama has never been a source of information about his birthplace since he is not a witness to it. The word we have to trust is whoever signed the birth certificate in 1961. While we do not know the name on the certificate, we do know that it is not President Obama.

    Your comment is nonsense.

  285. avatar
    dunstvangeet August 7, 2010 at 11:52 am #

    Passerby:
    I snipped it a bit just for brevity, sorry. There’s a reason I keep coming back to this blog, even though I get bored and frustrated with the same things being repeated all the time. Sometimes I learn something.Y’all must have discussed this a lot, but I guess I wasn’t paying attention. My bad. I’ve always assumed (but without really checking into it, and IANAL), that “natural born”, “native born”, and “citizen by birth” all meant the same thing–just that the person acquired their citizenship at birth, as opposed to acquiring it by naturalization sometime after their birth. But apparently this was wrong.You guys check me on this, to see if I have it right. It seems there are two different ways of looking at this, both somewhat supported by legal opinion:1. Natural born and native born mean the same thing–born in the US. But citizen at birth includes, in addition to that, people who were born abroad and got their citizenship at birth through their parents.2. Natural born is the same as citizen at birth, so it includes people born abroad to US citizen parents, while native born is the more restrictive term, including only those born in the US.(And yes, I do realize this has nothing to do with President Obama’s status. I’m just curious.)

    Actually, you’re not wrong. Natural Born, Native Born, and Citizen at Birth mean all the same thing, and I believe that the Supreme Court would rule that as well.

    What I think you’re talking about is Rogers v. Bellei. This basically said that only those who are born in the United States (and subject to the jurisdiction thereof) have their citizenship protected by the definition in the Constitution. It doesn’t mean that the definition is more expansive than the constitution definition, but it does mean that the definition can change with a simple act of law, versus a constitutional amendment.

  286. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 7, 2010 at 11:52 am #

    nc1: A use of foreign passport for a travel to a third country as an ADULT would indicate that he accepted a foreign citizenship. It could not have been considered as parents’ action forced upon a minor child.

    If President Obama were not a US Citizen, or had accepted foreign citizenship, this could not have escaped widespread notice at the State Department. We would have seen a smoking gun long before now.

  287. avatar
    The Sheriff's A Ni- August 7, 2010 at 11:54 am #

    ’round and ’round in circles nc1 goes…

    dunstvangeet: Remember, the proof is on you that this actually happened. Obama doesn’t have to prove that this didn’t happen. You have to prove that it did.

    And thus we get to 0 for 72. Not that it matters. In Birther America, its guilty until proven American!

  288. avatar
    dunstvangeet August 7, 2010 at 12:00 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    If President Obama were not a US Citizen, or had accepted foreign citizenship, this could not have escaped widespread notice at the State Department. We would have seen a smoking gun long before now.

    1. You’re make a valid point.

    2. It doesn’t matter. The law says that he must be “Naturalized” in a foreign country with the intent of giving up U.S. Citizenship, all after his 18th Birthday. It doesn’t actually matter how many passports he travels with. He could travel with 10, if he felt so inclined, but he must have had the intent of giving up U.S. Citizenship. I doubt you could prove that someone who was born in the United States, who returned to the United States, would in a 1-month trip around the world have the intent of giving up U.S. Citizenship necessary to make it an issue.

    Furthermore, I know of no country that would generally Naturalize (the legal requirement to give up U.S. Citizenship) someone who spent a week in the country, after not living there for 10 years.

  289. avatar
    richCares August 7, 2010 at 12:34 pm #

    comment on nc1:”You’re a racist jerk.”
    that is 100 % correct.

  290. avatar
    Lupin August 7, 2010 at 12:37 pm #

    richCares: comment on nc1:”You’re a racist jerk.”
    that is 100 % correct.

    I entirely agree.

  291. avatar
    BatGuano August 7, 2010 at 12:43 pm #

    from wikipedia:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indonesian_nationality_law#Obtaining_Indonesian_citizen

    Obtaining Indonesian citizen

    – already 18 years old or married.

    – when applying, already stay in Indonesian territory minimum 5 consecutive year or 10 non consecutive year.

    sorry nc1. best case scenario obama couldn’t have even applied for indonesian citizenship till 1984 at the absolute earliest.

    do you still believe he could have obtained an indonesian passport in 1981 ?

  292. avatar
    misha August 7, 2010 at 2:23 pm #

    nc1: I was NOT involved in a debate what Obama’s faith as an adult is, nor have I ever linked his religion with eligibility for presidency.

    Your sanity is so far off the chart, my irony meter exploded and the pieces went into orbit.

  293. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 7, 2010 at 3:17 pm #

    Passerby: Y’all must have discussed this a lot, but I guess I wasn’t paying attention. My bad. I’ve always assumed (but without really checking into it, and IANAL), that “natural born”, “native born”, and “citizen by birth” all meant the same thing–just that the person acquired their citizenship at birth, as opposed to acquiring it by naturalization sometime after their birth. But apparently this was wrong.

    This is an open question. The majority of legal scholars hold that anyone who acquires US citizenship at birth is a “natural born citizen;” however, there is a significant dissent to that view by qualified individuals. There is no disagreement that those born citizens of the United States IN the United States are natural born citizens,regardless of the status of their parents. I personally take one position on even numbered days, and the other position on odd numbered days except for the first Tuesday of each month with 31 days or when it is raining.

  294. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 7, 2010 at 3:24 pm #

    nc1: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/30/us/politics/30obama.html?pagewanted=all

    I have a strenuous objection for using this article in any way to characterize the religious environment of President Obama’s family, and in particular the citation:

    “My whole family was Muslim, and most of the people I knew were Muslim,” said Maya Soetoro-Ng, Mr. Obama’s younger half sister.

    The first objection is context because that quote is immediately preceded by:

    His mother’s tutelage took place mostly in Indonesia, in the household of Mr. Obama’s stepfather, Lolo Soetoro, a nominal Muslim who hung prayer beads over his bed but enjoyed bacon, which Islam forbids.

    My more basic objection is based on whether Maya Soetoro-Ng is a competent witness. The fact of the matter is that Maya was born in 1970, and she still a baby when Barack Obama left for the United States at age 10.

  295. avatar
    Sef August 7, 2010 at 3:36 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    This is an open question. The majority of legal scholars hold that anyone who acquires US citizenship at birth is a “natural born citizen;” however, there is a significant dissent to that view by qualified individuals. There is no disagreement that those born citizens of the United States IN the United States are natural born citizens,regardless of the status of their parents. I personally take one position on even numbered days, and the other position on odd numbered days except for the first Tuesday of each month with 31 days or when it is raining.

    The question becomes even more murky when Congress attempts to define the meaning of “United States” as Wikipedia says they did for the 1952 INA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_nationality_law). This would allow a Puerto Rican to make it to the Oval Office. Note that this definition does not include U.S. military bases in foreign countries. Has SCOTUS made any ruling on this legal fiction?

  296. avatar
    Sef August 7, 2010 at 4:17 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: or when it is raining.

    But it’s always raining somewhere.

  297. avatar
    dunstvangeet August 7, 2010 at 6:39 pm #

    Sef:
    The question becomes even more murky when Congress attempts to define the meaning of “United States” as Wikipedia says they did for the 1952 INA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_nationality_law).This would allow a Puerto Rican to make it to the Oval Office. Note that this definition does not include U.S. military bases in foreign countries.Has SCOTUS made any ruling on this legal fiction?

    I believe the Supreme Court actually defined “in the United States” as far as the 14th Amendment is concernedT. I could be wrong here, but it is any state in the Union, and the District of Columbia. It does not include Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, or any other “minor outlying possession”. This is noted because if these were “in the United States”, then 8 USC 1402 (Puerto Rico), 1403 (Canal Zone/Republic of Panama), 1404 (Alaska before admittance), 1405 (Hawaii before admittance), 1406 (Virgin Islands), and 1407 (Guam) would be redundant, as they would be covered in 1401 (Born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof).

    However, we have a distinct precedent that people born in Puerto Rico would be eligible for the Presidency: Charles Curtis. He was born outside this definition of the United States (he was born in Kansas before Kansas was a state), and he was considered eligible to be President.

  298. avatar
    Sef August 7, 2010 at 7:11 pm #

    dunstvangeet:
    I believe the Supreme Court actually defined “in the United States” as far as the 14th Amendment is concernedT.I could be wrong here, but it is any state in the Union, and the District of Columbia.It does not include Puerto Rico, U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Northern Mariana Islands, or any other “minor outlying possession”.This is noted because if these were “in the United States”, then 8 USC 1402 (Puerto Rico), 1403 (Canal Zone/Republic of Panama), 1404 (Alaska before admittance), 1405 (Hawaii before admittance), 1406 (Virgin Islands), and 1407 (Guam) would be redundant, as they would be covered in 1401 (Born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof).However, we have a distinct precedent that people born in Puerto Rico would be eligible for the Presidency: Charles Curtis.He was born outside this definition of the United States (he was born in Kansas before Kansas was a state), and he was considered eligible to be President.

    In the same page on Wikipedia there is the following:

    Congressional Research Service Report number RL30527 of April 17, 2000, titled “Presidential Elections in the United States: A Primer” asserts that citizens born in Guam, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands are legally defined as natural born citizens, and are, therefore, also eligible to be elected President.

    Note that I am not asserting that this is right, just reporting the info. Maybe one of these days SCOTUS or an Amendment will clear things up.

  299. avatar
    dunstvangeet August 7, 2010 at 10:44 pm #

    I agree with that definition. I’d also agree with the definition that Ruth Bader Ginsburg seems willing to adopt, that anybody born with citizenship is a Natural Born Citizen. There are many arguments going towards this, the least of which is the entemology of the verb “Naturalize”, which means, if you break it down, “Natural”, “ize”. It basically means “to make Natural”. So, you have people that are born Natural (aka the Natural Born), and you have people that are made Natural (aka Naturalized).

    I’d say that anybody who is born a citizen is a Natural Born Citizen.

  300. avatar
    Majority Will August 8, 2010 at 12:05 am #

    dunstvangeet: I agree with that definition.I’d also agree with the definition that Ruth Bader Ginsburg seems willing to adopt, that anybody born with citizenship is a Natural Born Citizen.There are many arguments going towards this, the least of which is the entemology of the verb “Naturalize”, which means, if you break it down, “Natural”, “ize”.It basically means “to make Natural”.So, you have people that are born Natural (aka the Natural Born), and you have people that are made Natural (aka Naturalized).I’d say that anybody who is born a citizen is a Natural Born Citizen.

    And a taxpayer.

  301. avatar
    Keith August 8, 2010 at 5:11 am #

    dunstvangeet: However, we have a distinct precedent that people born in Puerto Rico would be eligible for the Presidency: Charles Curtis. He was born outside this definition of the United States (he was born in Kansas before Kansas was a state), and he was considered eligible to be President.

    Also Barry Goldwater.

    Majority Will: And a taxpayer.

    Now you are bringing “Sovereignists” into the thread and that could go into cosmic la-la land.

  302. avatar
    Keith August 8, 2010 at 5:11 am #

    Opps, forgot to note: Goldwater was born in Arizona Territory before statehood.

  303. avatar
    Passerby August 8, 2010 at 9:03 am #

    Okay. I’m still just trying to get this straight in my own mind. Are “native born” and “natural born” distinct terms, or simple synonyms?

    If you were born in the US, regardless of your parentage, you’re definitely a citizen at birth, definitely natural born, and definitely native born.

    If you were born outside the US to citizen parents, you’re definitely a citizen at birth (by statutes in force at the time you were born.) You might be a natural born citizen–some (most) authorities say yes, some say no.

    Right so far, right?

    If you were born outside the US to citizen parents, are you a native born citizen? Is it the same as natural born (maybe yes, maybe no) because they’re synonymous terms, or is it a different question?

    This is all just totally academic nitpicking. I want you to know I do realize that. Just trying to get it clear in my mind, like I said. Sorry if I’m being slow.

  304. avatar
    Reality Check August 8, 2010 at 2:39 pm #

    Passerby: Are “native born” and “natural born” distinct terms, or simple synonyms?

    Dictionary.com seems to think they are synonyms:

    natural born
    – 2 dictionary results
    natural-born
       /ˈn¦tʃərəlˈb”rn, ˈn¦tʃrəl-/ Show Spelled[nach-er-uhl-bawrn, nach-ruhl-] Show IPA
    –adjective
    1.
    native-born.
    2.
    by virtue of one’s nature, qualities, or innate talent: a natural-born musician.

    By the Vattelite definition a “natural born athlete” or a “natural born killer” must have been born to parents who are both athletes or killers respectively.

  305. avatar
    Sef August 8, 2010 at 2:42 pm #

    Reality Check:
    Dictionary.com seems to think they are synonyms:natural born
    – 2 dictionary results
    natural-born/ˈn¦tʃərəlˈb”rn, ˈn¦tʃrəl-/ Show Spelled[nach-er-uhl-bawrn, nach-ruhl-] Show IPA
    –adjective
    1.
    native-born.
    2.
    by virtue of one’s nature, qualities, or innate talent: a natural-born musician.

    By the Vattelite definition a “natural born athlete” or a “natural born killer” must have been born to parents who are both athletes or killers respectively.

    And the parents’ parents, and the parents’ parents’ parents, ad infinitum.

  306. avatar
    Majority Will August 8, 2010 at 3:10 pm #

    Sef:
    And the parents’ parents, and the parents’ parents’ parents, ad infinitum.

    And Jason Bourne is not natural.

  307. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy August 8, 2010 at 4:34 pm #

    Passerby: Okay. I’m still just trying to get this straight in my own mind. Are “native born” and “natural born” distinct terms, or simple synonyms?

    Keep in mind that except for the mention in Article II of the Constitution and the Naturalization Act of 1790, the term “natural born citizen” doesn’t appear in federal law. What I can say is that on occasion, the terms are used interchangeably, for example:

    We start from the premise that the rights of citizenship of the native born and of the naturalized person are of the same dignity and are coextensive. The only difference drawn by the Constitution is that only the ‘natural born’ citizen is eligible to be President. Art. II, s 1.

    Schneider v Rusk (1964)

    and

    Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.

    Minor v Happersett (1874)

    and

    Citizenship is membership in a political society, and implies a duty of allegiance on the part of the member and a duty of protection on the part of the society. These are reciprocal obligations, one being a compensation for the other. Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects save that of eligibility to the Presidency. 88 U. S. 165; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U. S. 94, 112 U. S. 101; 22 U. S. 827

    Luria v. United States, 231 U. S. 9 (1913)

    and

    The term citizen, was used in the constitution as a word, the meaning of which was already established and well understood. And the constitution itself contains a direct recognition of the subsisting common law principle, in the section which defines the qualification of the President. “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President,” … The only standard which then existed, of a natural born citizen, was the rule of the common law, and no different standard has been adopted since. Suppose a person should be elected President who was native born, but of alien parents, could there be any reasonable doubt that he was eligible under the constitution? I think not.

    Lynch v Clarke (NY – 1844)

    Links at http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/01/the-great-mother-of-all-natural-born-citizen-quotation-pages/

  308. avatar
    Reality Check August 8, 2010 at 4:47 pm #

    Majority Will: And Jason Bourne is not natural.

    Some question whether Sara Palin is natural also. 🙂

  309. avatar
    Majority Will August 8, 2010 at 5:20 pm #

    Reality Check:
    Some question whether Sara Palin is natural also.

    Failin’, Wailin’, Bailin’ Palin?