Main Menu

Birth certificate: Florida congressman not sure

Cameras are everywhere these days, and when US Representative Cliff Stearns (pictured below) answered a question at a February 25 town hall meeting in Belleview, Florida, about Barack Obama, it naturally turned up on YouTube. Stearns (the chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations for the House Energy and Commerce Committee) said:

Congressman Cliff Stearns photoAll I can tell you is that the general consensus is that he has produced a birth certificate. The question is, is it legitimate? That’s where we stand now.

I’ve seen a copy of it on television. But you know the governor of Hawaii couldn’t get what he felt was an original of the birth certificate. He tried to do it and gave up on it.

So I think what Obama’s showing is a facsimile, but I think that debate probably is not enough, shall we say, just to impeach him. We’re going to have an election in five or six months so we can change the course of history by electing someone other than Obama. That’s what elections are all about.

The remark about Governor Abercrombie is apocryphal (but widely quoted by birthers online). All I can say is that I hope Stearns knows more about Energy and Commerce than he knows about birth certificates.

The video was shot by someone on behalf of the Florida Political Action Cooperative, a coalition of progressive organizations including the Florida AFL-CIO, Florida Wildlife Federation, the National Organization for Women, MoveOn.org and other usual suspects. They filmed Stearns as he spoke at town hall meetings in his district and published his remarks in a series of videos.

The town hall statement (made before the Arizona Cold Case Posse report on March 1) is in contrast to a 2009 statement quoted by the Ocala Florida Star-Banner newspaper in which he said:

Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, has verified that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born citizen and it is reported that a birth announcement was printed in the local newspaper the following day. Given the statement by Dr. Fukino and the reported birth announcement, I see no reason to question the President’s citizenship.

What had changed? Perhaps he was just playing to the crowd. A spokesperson for Congressman Stearns declined to comment on the issue.

Read more:

, ,

108 Responses to Birth certificate: Florida congressman not sure

  1. avatar
    misha March 17, 2012 at 7:51 pm #

    I would like to invite everyone to see my comment to Stearns and Foster.

    http://www.ocala.com/article/20120315/ARTICLES/120319798/1001/NEWS01

  2. avatar
    Scientist March 17, 2012 at 7:56 pm #

    This fine public servant was a member of the House in January 2009, when the Constitution and the law gave him the means and duty to object if he believed Mr Obama was not qualified to be President. Since the record shows he failed to do so at the approproate time and place, frankly his comments 3 years after the fact are laughable. He is like a manager filing a protest of an umpire’s call in a game from 3 years ago. Who cares?

  3. avatar
    john March 17, 2012 at 8:14 pm #

    Cliff Stearns is my Congressman. I stopped by his office in Ocala, Florida last week and talked with his staff. I gave him information on Sheriff Arpaio’s investigation results and asked that Cliff Stearns work with his colleagues to start a Congressional Investigation. I explained that Obama is currently on our Florida Ballot and the state is allowing to run with this kind of black cloud over him. I explained that Obama is likely to be reelected and that at the Joint Session of Congress, 1 Senator and 1 Congressman have the ability to file a written objection over this issue. I explained that one Congressman could be Cliff Stearns. I explained that if Stearns takes this matter up he will be attacked. I told his staff that it will take COURAGE and if Cliff Stearn’s takes this matter up, he will have one hell of a fan club; and will be one of the most revered Congressman; a true patriot with virtues of courage and integrity.

  4. avatar
    misha March 17, 2012 at 8:17 pm #

    Scientist: Since the record shows he failed to do so at the approproate time and place, frankly his comments 3 years after the fact are laughable.

    From what Lupin has said, this BC nonsense is making the USA the laughingstock of the world.

  5. avatar
    Scientist March 17, 2012 at 8:26 pm #

    Yoo, hoo, Mr Al Halbert, my pal and good buddy. This is the man you need to contact, isn’t it? He’s chairman of an investigative subcommitte, with subpoena power. Why piddle around with Sheriff’s rent-a-cops and WND reporters who don’t know their behinds froom their elbows? The good Congressman can subpoena the physical paper documents, have them analyzed by the real experts from the FBI, Bureau of Engraving and Printing, etc. No wasting time on pdfs. He can also get the folks from Hawaii to show up and explain how they generated the documents straight from their records.

    Now why wouldn’t this fine public servant want to do that and make you happy Al (as if anything could make a sourpuss like you happy)? Very simply, Al, Because then the good Congressman would have to stop birfin’ for his constituents. Oh, you would go right on birfin’, I”m sure, but the Congressman would have a hard time once the real experts told the world that the paper document came straight from Honolulu, so forget all this pdf crappola.

  6. avatar
    Rambo Ike March 17, 2012 at 8:46 pm #

    Stearns is like so many rubber-spined republicans that are either cower in a corner or straddling the fence.

    He’s afraid to take a stand on principles and tell the 0b0ts they’ve been conned by their dear leader.

    Just look at what the 0b0ts have swallowed and are trying to push on the sane world:

    “We believe that a piece of paper that was certified by an official and claimed by some other officials that that paper is a genuine copy of 0bumm0’s original birth certificate alleged to be on file at the HDOH. It’s the gospel truth, nothing else is necessary – case closed, end of story.”

    Respectfully yours,
    0b0ts for 0bumm0

  7. avatar
    G March 17, 2012 at 9:05 pm #

    http://sadtrombone.com/

    Face it, all these folks are doing is pandering to you ODS-sufferers. Of course they aren’t going to ever act on this nonsense. The most you ever get is lip-service by those that try to flirt and con you. Yet you are so desperate to fall for that con every time…

    Irrational anger is simply a trap for gullible fools and you seem to fall for it every time.

    Rambo Ike: Stearns is like so many rubber-spined republicans that are either cower in a corner or straddling the fence.

  8. avatar
    nbc March 17, 2012 at 9:10 pm #

    john: I told his staff that it will take COURAGE and if Cliff Stearn’s takes this matter up, he will have one hell of a fan club; and will be one of the most revered Congressman; a true patriot with virtues of courage and integrity.

    Why is it patriotic to spread lies about our President?… What I find so fascinating is how self proclaimed patriots hide behind ignorance and hatred.

    A true patriot would have better things to do.

    Thank God Stearns is not that dumb to listen to the follies of the disillusioned.

  9. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 17, 2012 at 9:18 pm #

    If you changed “an official” to “the responsible official,”changed “claimed” to “vouched for”, and fixed the spelling, I think what you wrote is really pretty accurate.

    Rambo Ike: Just look at what the 0b0ts have swallowed and are trying to push on the sane world:

    “We believe that a piece of paper that was certified by an official and claimed by some other officials that that paper is a genuine copy of 0bumm0′s original birth certificate alleged to be on file at the HDOH. It’s the gospel truth, nothing else is necessary – case closed, end of story.”

  10. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 17, 2012 at 9:25 pm #

    So to what do you attribute the universal lack of integrity of Congressional Republicans?

    Rambo Ike: Stearns is like so many rubber-spined republicans that are either cower in a corner or straddling the fence.

  11. avatar
    Thomas Brown March 17, 2012 at 9:39 pm #

    Yeah, John… You just march right on into Stearns’ office Monday morning and DEMAND that he start an official investigation! (This destroys your previous claims that we Obots are AFRAID of an investigation into the authenticity of the BC and other documents. We WANT you to have someone like Stearns look into it!)

    A real, honest-to-God Congressional investigation would be to Birferstan what sunlight is to Dracula.

    Bring it on, pally, or admit you’ve got nothing.

  12. avatar
    Rambo Ike March 17, 2012 at 10:29 pm #

    Scientist: “[Stearns] He’s chairman of an investigative subcommitte, with subpoena power……………………………The good Congressman can subpoena the physical paper documents, have them analyzed by the real experts from the FBI, Bureau of Engraving and Printing, etc. No wasting time on pdfs. He can also get the folks from Hawaii to show up and explain how they generated the documents straight from their records.”

    Exactly. That’s what I’ve been saying for 3 1/2 years. Documents [plural]. I said previously I thought 5 would be enough, but some others want more.

    Dr. Conspiracy: “So to what do you attribute the universal lack of integrity of Congressional Republicans?”

    A very well orchestrated propaganda campaign that has been going on for a long time by the many “factions” that make up the political Left; painting the Republicans as the party of “white special interest” with revisonist history thrown in for good measure. You can see it in how this present bunch of republican candidates are addressing issues.

    Because of their positions, power & money they believe feeding the crocodile now will make them last on the list to be eaten.

    It’s similiar to what I wanted to address to you below in a thread. You claimed 0b0ts came about because of Birthers. That’s not exactly the truth. 0b0ts might be getting the 15 minutes of fame due to the Birthers, but unless you all are a bunch of teenagers you’ve been around long before 0bumm0’s stock rose to be a candidate. Ideologically speaking, based now on multiple hundreds of comments I’ve read in your archives, I’d say almost all of yas fall in Left to close to the far-Left on the political spectrum. In other words, 0b0ts are a fit for the “factions” I described above.

  13. avatar
    Jayne March 17, 2012 at 10:45 pm #

    john:
    Cliff Stearns is my Congressman.I stopped by his office in Ocala, Florida last week and talked with his staff.I gave him information on Sheriff Arpaio’s investigation results and asked that Cliff Stearns work with his colleagues to start a Congressional Investigation.I explained that Obama is currently on our Florida Ballot and the state is allowing to run with this kind of black cloud over him. I explained that Obama is likely to be reelected and that at the Joint Session of Congress, 1 Senator and 1 Congressman have the ability to file a written objection over this issue.I explained that one Congressman could be Cliff Stearns. I explained that if Stearns takes this matter up he will be attacked. I told his staff that it will take COURAGE and if Cliff Stearn’s takes this matter up, he will have one hell of a fan club; and will be one of the most revered Congressman; a true patriot with virtues of courage and integrity.

    What’d they say….?

  14. avatar
    jayHG March 17, 2012 at 10:49 pm #

    Test

  15. avatar
    Stanislaw March 17, 2012 at 10:54 pm #

    Rambo Ike:
    Delusional nonsense.

    Or, it could be that the Republican Party knows that Barack Obama is a natural-born citizen and the duly-elected President of the United States of America. But what do I know? I’m not delusional.

  16. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 17, 2012 at 10:55 pm #

    Only a tiny fraction of site visitors are responsible for the blog’s 132,480 comments. The last reader poll I did, which was in October of 2009, gave the following breakdown from 104 participants:

    Politically, I identify myself as:
    52% Progressive
    32% Moderate
    10% Conservative
    6% Radical Left
    0% Radical Right

    http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2009/10/reader-survey/#more-5212

    It appears that you define “0b0ts” differently from how I do (see: http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/glossary/)

    I don’t think that there are many teenagers here. I’m 61. I go back to the time before Nixon’s “Southern Strategy” triggered the big turn to the right in the Republican Party.

    In any case you won’t see much pro-Obama writing here because I discourage it as off-topic. This is one reason that we have significant participation by people who don’t particularly like Obama and wouldn’t vote for him, but nevertheless think birthers are nuts.

    Rambo Ike: You claimed 0b0ts came about because of Birthers. That’s not exactly the truth. 0b0ts might be getting the 15 minutes of fame due to the Birthers, but unless you all are a bunch of teenagers you’ve been around long before 0bumm0′s stock rose to be a candidate. Ideologically speaking, based now on multiple hundreds of comments I’ve read in your archives, I’d say almost all of yas fall in Left to close to the far-Left on the political spectrum. In other words, 0b0ts are a fit for the “factions” I described above.

  17. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 17, 2012 at 10:59 pm #

    Best comment from John to date.

    john: Cliff Stearns is my Congressman. I stopped by his office in Ocala, Florida last week and talked with his staff….

  18. avatar
    Joey March 17, 2012 at 11:08 pm #

    nbc: Why is it patriotic to spread lies about our President?… What I find so fascinating is how self proclaimed patriots hide behind ignorance and hatred.

    A true patriot would have better things to do.

    Thank God Stearns is not that dumb to listen to the follies of the disillusioned.

    “Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels.”–Samuel Johnson

  19. avatar
    Rambo Ike March 17, 2012 at 11:29 pm #

    Joey: “Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels.”–Samuel Johnson

    In 1774 Samuel Johnson printed The Patriot, a critique of what he viewed as false patriotism. On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made the famous statement, “Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.” This line was not, as widely believed, about patriotism in general, but the false use of the term “patriotism” by John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute (the patriot-minister) and his supporters; Johnson opposed “self-professed Patriots” in general, but valued what he considered “true” patriotism.

  20. avatar
    Tomtech March 17, 2012 at 11:35 pm #

    Rambo Ike:
    Obot:“We believe that a piece of paper that was certified by an official and claimed by some other officials that that paper is a genuine copy of (President Obama′s) original birth certificate alleged to be on file at the HDOH.”

    I am a Constitutionalist and, as such. I am required to respect the Full Faith and Credit Clause of the Constitution and consider a stamped document which was photographed and handled by members of the White House Press Corp as an actual physical object which was certified and declared as a true copy of the document on the official website’s from multiple Hawai’ian officials.

    Anyone who believes the report which didn’t even consider the fact or investigate whether an actual document existed is sadly deceived.

  21. avatar
    misha March 17, 2012 at 11:42 pm #

    Joey: “Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels.”–Samuel Johnson

    “You’ll adore Professor Eddy and his wife. They’re very entertaining, with a kind of a theme to their marriage. He specialises in Dr. Johnson, and she teaches Boswell.” – Woody Allen, A Midsummer Night’s Sex Comedy

  22. avatar
    Lupin March 18, 2012 at 3:54 am #

    misha: From what Lupin has said, this BC nonsense is making the USA the laughingstock of the world.

    The birther crap is mostly below the radar. Right now what makes people wonder about your collective sanity is Santorum. My wife talked to a French Apple tech rep (she bought the new ipad and needed help to connect the wifi) and while the computer was doing its stuff, they chatted about the US and the conversation quickly came to Santorum, and from there the conclusion you’re all crazy.

    BTW a recent poll found that nearly 40% of French people think Obama’s elo4ction is the most important even that happened in the world in the last decade, #2 just behind Fukishima.

  23. avatar
    Greenfinches March 18, 2012 at 5:36 am #

    Lupin: The birther crap is mostly below the radar. Right now what makes people wonder about your collective sanity is Santorum. My wife talked to a French Apple tech rep (she bought the new ipad and needed help to connect the wifi) and while the computer was doing its stuff, they chatted about the US and the conversation quickly came to Santorum, and from there the conclusion you’re all crazy.

    I can second that for the UK. Birther stuff hits the media occasionally. but the Presidential campaign of course is more common – and Santo’s obsession with sex is causing minds here to boggle. You are thought to be going backwards – and 2008’s election was just such a cause of dare I say it hope that this seems very sad indeed. Just make sure you don’t take anywhere else with you.

  24. avatar
    Scientist March 18, 2012 at 7:41 am #

    Rambo Ike: Exactly. That’s what I’ve been saying for 3 1/2 years. Documents [plural]. I said previously I thought 5 would be enough, but some others want more.

    Ike: This may shock you, but I’m going to sort of agree with you on the what, though you may not like my discussion of the why (see below).

    I’m not sure which 5 documents you mean, since only a birth certificate is relevant. Obama now has 2 (the COLB and the LFBC) though legally they are equivalent. Perhaps by 5, you are saying that the committee should also examine the documents of the Fab Four (Rmoney, Sanctorum, Gingrich and Paul) so they can be prepared on the remore chance that one of those clowns won the election? Excellent idea! Thinking ahead! And that way, the Democratic members of the committee can feel better.

    Once the b.c.s are presented and the Dept of Health officials from the various states testify (Gingrich and Paul both claim to have been born in Pennsylvania, so you get a two-fer), we can dispose of the idea that Rmoney was born across the Detroit River in Ontario, Canada (or maybe not? They can’t subpoena the Canucks, but one might volunteer to show up).

    Then, if you’d like they can have the Director of the Selective Service testify that yes, indeed. Obama registered in 1980 and they can have the Director of Social Security testify that he used his legitimate number his whole life until the birfers leaked it and they gave him a new one, which shall remain secret. The whole thing can be done in a morning.

    Now to the why, or, more precisely, the why not? Why has Congressman Stearns not faced up to his responsibility and held this hearing? Simple, because he is well aware of the fact that the birfer story of a young woman travelling halfway around the world to have a baby is absurd prima facie. He is well aware that when a state says someone was born there, that ends the matter. He is well aware that when the IRS accepts tax returns from someone for decades under a given SSN, then that is their legitimate #. He is well aware that when the Archives have a Selective Service registration on file for a person and that person received federal student aid, that means they registered as required. The Congressman is well aware of these facts, even if you aren’t. But the Congressman wants to have it both ways and retain the ability to pretend to birf for weak-minded types like you and john. And the Congressman is well aware that if he actually held the hearing, the results would be so clear that he could no longer do so with a straight face. And he is well aware that once the hearings were over and the birfers shown to be complete fools, you and john would call him a traitor and demand that he be hung at dawn.

  25. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 18, 2012 at 9:23 am #

    I don’t make an “appeal to patriotism” argument here. I deal with facts and rational inference. Some of the birther blogs make patriotic symbols their most prominent feature. These I don’t consider “true patriots” but rather persons with prejudiced ideas, crank theories, and an open disdain for pretty much all authority who try to hijack patriotism for their own purposes. I consider then generally anti-democratic in their outlook. Or from another direction, birthers have views of what it means to be patriotic as un-American and non-historical as their views of citizenship.

    Rambo Ike: Johnson opposed “self-professed Patriots” in general, but valued what he considered “true” patriotism.

  26. avatar
    Flavius Maximus March 18, 2012 at 10:45 am #

    [This is Al Halbert. Doc]
    History is one of my hobbies and a thoroughly entertaining experience awaits the reader from self defrocked lawyer, Leo Donfrio on the anomalies and somersaults that Justice Gray committed when he rendered the majority opinion in Wong Kim Ark the landmark SCOTUS case that Obama supporters rely upon for his claim to the office of POTUS. A taste of the entertainment value of this so called scholarly article is shown below;

    “Besides Justice Gray’s infamous misleading quote from Binney appearing on pg. 666 of the Wong Kim Ark opinion, spookier anomalies have popped up throughout my research of the natural-born citizen issue.”

    And;

    “Of course, JustiaGate takes the prize and sets the standard for this kind of freaky malevolence.”

    And;

    “Well, it’s a good thing I downloaded it then, because as of today, Google has Justiafied the text, so that pg. 170 has been clipped from both the preview, and the downloadable version. The part about Justice Gray having the Binney paper in his private library has been scrubbed by Google as of today”

    And;

    “And this development has taken place recently, since I downloaded the full copy from Google Books just a few weeks ago. What a freak show, America. Raise the lights, dim the Twilight Zone theme, and let’s get down to business.”

    The paranoia run deep in this article which is all to nourishing and is delicious to the soul of irony and obfuscation.

    The Mr. Binney Funeral Humiliates The Reputation Of The United States Supreme Court.
    http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/

  27. avatar
    misha March 18, 2012 at 11:02 am #

    Rambo Ike: On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made the famous statement, “Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.”

    No, that was his dictionary’s definition. Just like his definition of ‘oats': What they feed to the horses in England, and to the people in Scotland.

    Johnson: “Sir, a woman’s preaching is like a dog’s walking on his hind legs. It is not done well; but you are surprised to find it done at all.”

  28. avatar
    misha March 18, 2012 at 11:10 am #

    Lupin: Right now what makes people wonder about your collective sanity is Santorum.

    Russia produced Gorbachev; we produced Reagan. Now, the GOP candidates collectively are crackpots. I simply do not know what went wrong.

  29. avatar
    Al Halbert March 18, 2012 at 12:19 pm #

    Scientist:
    Yoo, hoo, Mr Al Halbert, my pal and good buddy.This is the man you need to contact, isn’t it?He’s chairman of an investigative subcommitte, with subpoena power.Why piddle around with Sheriff’s rent-a-cops and WND reporters who don’t know their behinds froom their elbows?The good Congressman can subpoena the physical paper documents, have them analyzed by the real experts from the FBI, Bureau of Engraving and Printing, etc.No wasting time on pdfs.He can also get the folks from Hawaii to show up and explain how they generated the documents straight from their records.

    Now why wouldn’t this fine public servant want to do that and make you happy Al (as if anything could make a sourpuss like you happy)?Very simply, Al,Because then the good Congressman would have to stop birfin’ for his constituents.Oh, you would go right on birfin’, I”m sure, but the Congressman would have a hard time once the real experts told the world that the paper document came straight from Honolulu, so forget all this pdf crappola.

    Of course, would you object to the Congressman doing the very same; why beat around the bush, lets have the airing of these documents and let the chips fall where they may. That is of course if you do not have any lingering doubts in your mind regarding the veracity and truthfulness of Obama’s assertion, then of course not. There are two possibilities, either the Obama LFBC placed on Whitehouse.gov is a fake or it is not. If it is a fake then it is a possible violation of federal statute under Title 18, United States Code, Section 1001;

    Link;
    http://library.findlaw.com/2004/May/11/147945.html

    If not; then Arpio has violated the Civil Rights of Obama and any aide tasked with placing the LFBC onto Whitehouse.gov of “fabrication of evidence”, under Color of Law” a serious charge under federal statute Title 42, U.S.C., Section 14141.

    Link;
    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights/color_of_law

    Don’t you want to see the guilty party prosecuted for these possible federal crimes, if not, why not? Especially Arpio and Mike Zullo.

  30. avatar
    Lupin March 18, 2012 at 12:24 pm #

    misha: Russia produced Gorbachev; we produced Reagan. Now, the GOP candidates collectively are crackpots. I simply do not know what went wrong.

    In France you need 500 signatures from mayors to run for president. We do have people like Santorum but they rarely get the number of signatures needed to file. We have ten candidates this time…
    http://www.presidentielle-2007.net/candidats.php
    Some of them are loony left trotskystes, polling at 1% if even, but they make Santorum sound like Socrates.

  31. avatar
    Joey March 18, 2012 at 12:54 pm #

    Rambo Ike:
    Joey: “Patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels.”–Samuel Johnson

    In 1774 Samuel Johnson printed The Patriot, a critique of what he viewed as false patriotism. On the evening of 7 April 1775, he made the famous statement, “Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel.” This line was not, as widely believed, about patriotism in general, but the false use of the term “patriotism” by John Stuart, 3rd Earl of Bute (the patriot-minister) and his supporters; Johnson opposed “self-professed Patriots” in general, but valued what he considered “true” patriotism.

    And here on ObamaConspiracyTheories, Rambo Ike is a “self-professed patriot” as none of us have any evidence of his patriotism other than his self-professions.

    A US Federal District Court Judge who was one of the first to rule birtherism to be bunk also happens to be a retired US Marine Corps Lieutenant who won the Silver Star at the Battle of Khe Sahn in Vietnam.

    Judge David O. Carter said of birthers: “Plaintiffs [birthers] have encouraged the Court to ignore the mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits on its power put in place by the Constitution; and to effectively overthrow a sitting president who was popularly elected by “We, the people”–over sixty-nine million of the people.
    Plaintiffs [birthers] have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claim, as UNPATRIOTIC and even TREASONOUS for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction.
    Respecting the Constitutional role and jurisdiction of this court is not UNPATRIOTIC,. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate reflection of PATRIOTISM.” {caps, mine}–US Federal District Judge David O. Carter in dismissing Captain Pamela Barnett, et. al v Barack H. Obama, et.al., October 29, 2009, US District Court for the Central District of California

  32. avatar
    Al Halbert March 18, 2012 at 1:25 pm #

    Flavius Maximus: Al

    Good job Doc.

    The guardians of the GATE are well paid and alert.

  33. avatar
    Majority Will March 18, 2012 at 1:34 pm #

    Al Halbert: Of course

    What is it with you creating sock puppets to pretend people agree with you?

    (http://www.topix.com/forum/city/nashville-tn/T3183JQ334FQN5HF2)

  34. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 18, 2012 at 1:36 pm #

    My own position is that I have no problem with a lawfully constituted body carrying out their legal responsibilities, and if that should involve Barack Obama and his documents, so be it.

    That said, there was Joe McCarthy conducting a witch hunt that ruined a lot of lives, and there were investigations such as Whitewater that went nowhere, but wasted a lot of resources. I have no doubt that any investigation of Obama’s birth would be a waste of time. And my only concern is that instead of a competent, professional investigation, one could have a repeat of Arizona, a bunch of birthers given free reign. However, if Congress wants to investigate, for the purpose of deciding whether some federal legislation is warranted — say to make birtherism a crime — that’s their prerogative.

    While I may criticize such an investigation for political motivation, and stupidity, it’s Congress’s right, just is it is their right to tell their birther constituents to stuff it.

    I technically object to your two citations of federal law, since you read them both wrong, but I could come up with other scenarios that don’t involve those inapplicable statutes.

    Al Halbert: Of course, would you object to the Congressman doing the very same; why beat around the bush, lets have the airing of these documents and let the chips fall where they may.

  35. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 18, 2012 at 1:40 pm #

    Alert anyway.

    Al Halbert: The guardians of the GATE are well paid and alert.

  36. avatar
    misha March 18, 2012 at 1:49 pm #

    Al Halbert: why beat around the bush,…and let the chips fall where they may

    Every dog has its day, and that’s the way the cookie crumbles.

  37. avatar
    Al Halbert March 18, 2012 at 2:02 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    My own position is that I have no problem with a lawfully constituted body carrying out their legal responsibilities, and if that should involve Barack Obama and his documents, so be it.

    That said, there was Joe McCarthy conducting a witch hunt that ruined a lot of lives, and there were investigations such as Whitewater that went nowhere, but wasted a lot of resources. I have no doubt that any investigation of Obama’s birth would be a waste of time. And my only concern is that instead of a competent, professional investigation, one could have a repeat of Arizona, a bunch of birthers given free reign. However, if Congress wants to investigate, for the purpose of deciding whether some federal legislation is warranted — say to make birtherism a crime — that’s their prerogative.

    While I may criticize such an investigation for political motivation, and stupidity, it’s Congress’s right, just is it is their right to tell their birther constituents to stuff it.

    I technically object to your two citations of federal law, since you read them both wrong, but I could come up with other scenarios that don’t involve those inapplicable statutes.

    A fair synopsis of the presentation, I will endeavor to find more specific federal statutes that could be applied to the FACTS, however whether they apply or not is a matter of opinion, as my attorney has cited to their applicability in this matter. Our system of government is only as good as the willingness of the parties to subject themselves to scrutiny, no matter what party affiliation or philosophy they profess to belong.

    I take exception to one of your points in contention, in that there is no basis to claim that Arpio and his Cold Case Posse are in fact “Birthers”, unless of course you are lumping anyone into this category that questions our presidents nativity and his documentation as a generic term. This is prejudicial and denies any credibility to any type of qualification of his statements and bona fides before the fact by any party, legally constituted or not.

  38. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 18, 2012 at 2:12 pm #

    Jerome Corsi, Mark Gillar and Mara Zebest are birthers by any definition of the term. Zullo remains a mystery. My point of calling them “birthers” is that they had already decided Obama’s eligibility in their own minds before the investigation started and are on record to that effect. That is no formula for an objective investigation. The fact that they never bothered to contact the State of Hawaii (nor the Selective Service apparently) and that they refused an offer of help by John Woodman suggests that they were ONLY looking for ways to impugn the birth certificate, not find out whether it was legitimate or not. Since the Posse investigation ignored a pile of evidence against their conclusions, they lied about other evidence, and large hunks of the report were copied verbatim from Jerome Corsi’s birther book, it is hard to escape the conclusion that Mike Zullo was a birther from the start as well and not an objective investigator who was convinced by the evidence the Posse developed.

    Note that I was not saying that Joe Arpaio is a birther, but rather that the birthers were given free reign by him. I have no idea whether Arpaio was a birther before the investigation started or not.

    Al Halbert: I take exception to one of your points in contention, in that there is no basis to claim that Arpio and his Cold Case Posse are in fact “Birthers”,

  39. avatar
    gorefan March 18, 2012 at 2:59 pm #

    Al Halbert: I take exception to one of your points in contention, in that there is no basis to claim that Arpio and his Cold Case Posse are in fact “Birthers”,

    Mara Zebest who wrote the Sheriff’s analysis of the PDF is a birther. Here you can read her comments for yourself:

    http://blog.pumapac.org/2008/07/25/cupcake-or-turnips/

    These are from July, 2008

    Look at posts #424, #353 and #503

    She posted at Leo Donofrio’s site and was a supporter of his lawsuit.

  40. avatar
    Jamese777 March 18, 2012 at 3:29 pm #

    Sheriff Arapio has enlisted Jerome Corsi as a consultant to his Cold Case Posse’. Most of the Posse’s “research” is taken directly from Corsi’s book. Corsi is a self-acknowledged “birther.”
    When you lie down with birther dogs, you’re going to catch birther fleas.

  41. avatar
    Rambo Ike March 18, 2012 at 3:49 pm #

    Looks like Joey was offended by the Conservative Curriculum for Truth to help further advance his education on famous historical statements. BTW, I forgot to list a source. There are many, that excerpt was from Wikipedia.

    Is this the case where Whitehouse counsel sent one of their clerks to assist Judge Carter with his ruling? If it is, enough said – end of story.
    ———————–

    Al Halbert: “………………….why beat around the bush, lets have the airing of these documents [0bumm0’s] and let the chips fall where they may. That is of course if you do not have any lingering doubts in your mind regarding the veracity and truthfulness of Obama’s assertion, then of course not. There are two possibilities, either the Obama LFBC placed on Whitehouse.gov is a fake or it is not…………………………….”

    How about that! Another 0b0t like Scientist. Yes, most definitely: “…let the chips fall where they may.”
    ———————-

    @ Dr. Conspiracy

    My statement: “Ideologically speaking, based now on multiple hundreds of comments I’ve read in your archives…..” is misleading. That should of been “…comments I’ve read in yours & a number of other archives you have listed at the bottom of the page as *The Good*”. Based on that I think it’s reasonable to say it averages out quite a distance to the Left from Center. Even that small polling you did points to that.

    I like your Glossary. Well done.

    We most likely have a different belief on Nixon’s “Southern Strategy”.

  42. avatar
    Scientist March 18, 2012 at 5:14 pm #

    Al Halbert: Of course, would you object to the Congressman doing the very same;

    Nope, not at all, as long as they are fair in demanding that all candidates present their documents. Let Obama present his Hawaiian b.c.s (both short and long). Let Rmoney present his Michigan and Ontario b.c.s. Let Sanctorum explain why he has no state form, only a baptismal certifcate issued by the Vatican. Let’s see Gingrich’s Martian certificate. Let’s see Ron Paul’s carved in stone. I hereby request that Cong Stearn subpoena all the documents for all the candidates. What say you Al? Are you fair and balanced?

    Al Halbert: Don’t you want to see the guilty party prosecuted for these possible federal crimes, if not, why not?

    No, I do not. As I pointed out yesterday, the US already has the largest population incarcerated in the world and a rate higher than any other coountry. No, I do not want to see more prosecutions, other than for serious violent crimes. No more prosecutions for drug possession, technical violations a la Martha Stewart and no criminalization of political disagreements.

    Now let’s be very clear. You are not a lawyer. In fact, you don’t know sh!t about the law. Enhancing the legibility of a scanned document is not a crime. Nor are private citiizens pretending to conduct a shoddy investigation. The Posse potentially committed a civil tort of slander, but US laws make such cases virrtually impossible for a public figure like the President to win, so he won’t sue.

    The White House committed neither a criminal violation nor a civil tort. They possibly chose a less than optimal software. End of story.

    Did you get that Al, or do you need me to repeat it?

  43. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 18, 2012 at 5:17 pm #

    No, it wouldn’t. This is one of the more ridiculous of the birther conspiracy theories.

    Rambo Ike: Is this the case where Whitehouse counsel sent one of their clerks to assist Judge Carter with his ruling? If it is, enough said – end of story.

  44. avatar
    Scientist March 18, 2012 at 5:41 pm #

    I really like how all of a sudden Al and Ike are the reincarnation of Eliott Ness. Silent were they when intelligence was being manipulated (cherry picked, if not faked) to start a war that resulted in 4,000 US dead several hundred thousand Iraqi deaths, countless life-changing injuries, not to mention a bill approaching a trillion dollars. I must have missed their calls for investiigations and prosecutions. But let someone use software X instead of Y to scan a paper document and that’s the crime of the century. No one died, no one was injured not even a paper cut) and the only cost to the taxpayyers hhas been filing a few briefs to get some junk lawsuits dismissed.

    So, Al, Ike, where were you in 2002-2008?

  45. avatar
    Al Halbert March 18, 2012 at 5:48 pm #

    Scientist: Nope, not at all, as long as they are fair in demanding that all candidates present their documents.Let Obama present his Hawaiian b.c.s (both short and long).Let Rmoney present his Michigan and Ontario b.c.s.Let Sanctorum explain why he has no state form, only a baptismal certifcate issued by the Vatican.Let’s see Gingrich’s Martian certificate.Let’s see Ron Paul’s carved in stone.I hereby request that Cong Stearn subpoena all the documents for all the candidates.What say you Al?Are you fair and balanced?

    No, I do not.As I pointed out yesterday, the US already has the largest population incarcerated in the world and a rate higher than any other coountry.No, I do not want to see more prosecutions, other than for serious violent crimes.No more prosecutions for drug possession, technical violations a la Martha Stewart and no criminalization of political disagreements.

    Now let’s be very clear.You are not a lawyer.In fact, you don’t know sh!t about the law.Enhancing the legibility of a scanned document is not a crime.Nor are private citiizens pretending to conduct a shoddy investigation. The Posse potentially committed a civil tort of slander, but US laws make such cases virrtually impossible for a public figure like the President to win, so he won’t sue.

    The White House committed neither a criminal violation nor a civil tort.They possibly chose a less than optimal software.End of story.

    Did you get that Al, or do you need me to repeat it?

    Please review the concept of abuse by Law Enforcement agencies known collectively as “Color of Law” violations of federal statutes subject to prosecution by the DOJ.

    “Fabricating evidence against or falsely arresting an individual also violates the color of law statute, taking away the person’s rights of due process and unreasonable seizure. In the case of deprivation of property, the color of law statute would be violated by unlawfully obtaining or maintaining a person’s property, which oversteps or misapplies the official’s authority.”

    Civil applications

    “Title 42, U.S.C., Section 14141 makes it unlawful for state or local law enforcement agencies to allow officers to engage in a pattern or practice of conduct that deprives persons of rights protected by the Constitution or U.S. laws. This law, commonly referred to as the Police Misconduct Statute, gives the Department of Justice authority to seek civil remedies in cases where law enforcement agencies have policies or practices that foster a pattern of misconduct by employees. This action is directed against an agency, not against individual officers. The types of issues which may initiate a pattern and practice investigation include:”

    Link;
    http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilrights/color_of_law

  46. avatar
    Al Halbert March 18, 2012 at 5:54 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Jerome Corsi, Mark Gillar and Mara Zebest are birthers by any definition of the term. Zullo remains a mystery. My point of calling them “birthers” is that they had already decided Obama’s eligibility in their own minds before the investigation started and are on record to that effect. That is no formula for an objective investigation. The fact that they never bothered to contact the State of Hawaii (nor the Selective Service apparently) and that they refused an offer of help by John Woodman suggests that they were ONLY looking for ways to impugn the birth certificate, not find out whether it was legitimate or not. Since the Posse investigation ignored a pile of evidence against their conclusions, they lied about other evidence, and large hunks of the report were copied verbatim from Jerome Corsi’s birther book, it is hard to escape the conclusion that Mike Zullo was a birther from the start as well and not an objective investigator who was convinced by the evidence the Posse developed.

    Note that I was not saying that Joe Arpaio is a birther, but rather that the birthers were given free reign by him. I have no idea whether Arpaio was a birther before the investigation started or not.

    Doc,

    I have searched for John Woodman on the internet and in fact he has written a book; “Is Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate a Fraud?”, so the investigation by Mike Zullo and the Cold Case Posse is somehow tainted because they did not use the services of Mr. Woodman?

    Part of your central argument traditionally has been that since the Cold Case Posse used the expertise of Jerome Corsi a well known reporter for WND as an unpaid consultant and that Mike Zullo has written an e-book that somehow abrogates any and all evidence that could or should be considered by them, because of a possible profit motive.

    Sounds to me that your objection is one of advocating for predetermined outcomes as well, since Woodman would stand to loose income or stature by advocating a position due to his book as well. So if I follow your objections to Zullo and company and substitute Woodman we have all 3 players in the same profit seeking boat. So then it becomes subjective given the profit motive you have interjected into the issue to cloud any facts, though not without merit.

    So who is to believed? This is the central question at issue and why this matter screams for investigation by a law enforcement source, which I believe Sheriff Arpio is elevating this issue to a full blown investigation within his department. He may not be the best person for the job, however no one else is coming forward in this matter. I believe Congress is derelict in their duties in this matter. I have brought the question forward that a violation of federal statutes has occurred by at last one of the parties involved in this issue and could result in serious repercussions to anyone found complicit in this matter.

    I also take exception to your statement, “ignored a pile of evidence against their conclusions” I am familiar with this case, the evidence they presented and I am not aware of what this evidence may be that was ignored. The presentation was a straight forward probable cause presentation, which is, has a crime happened and if so by whom. They have stated a person of interest has been identified and they are investigating this matter further, being reluctant to reveal this individual was proper at this time.

    Regarding the issue of corroboration of evidence with Jerome Corsi’s book brings two distinct possibilities to exist;

    1). is that you are correct and it is merely a duplication from Corsi’s book without any investigation on their part.

    2). is that they have independently corroborated Mr. Corsi’s conclusions.

    Both are within the realm of statistical certainty, though it must be either 1 or 2, since one possibility must exist since both cannot exist as they are mutually exclusive as polar opposites, barring any collusion between the parties. I reject the collusion possibility because they are duly authorized Law Enforcement Officers in the State of Arizona and serious jeopardy attaches for bringing false evidence forward in a criminal investigation to anyone that would do so. Being volunteers does not alleviate them of this consequence of dereliction of duty, or bearing false witness, evidence or testimony.

    They did mention, though they did not elaborate nor present any evidence regarding how Hawaii had been complicit in the question of the authenticity of Obama’s LFBC. This statement then is incomplete and we cannot substitute supposition for facts not in evidence. However we have discussed previously how a 3 year old child could get a LFBC by affidavit as a newborn in 1961 based on existing law in Hawaii at the time, it could even be done by mail, so their is a large chasm which could include the State of Hawaii in this question.

    As to the predetermined outcome by statements of Mike Zullo I believe is not accurate, as he had stated that he had wanted to clear this matter up and put it to bed as to the lingering doubts regarding the LFBC of Obama in the beginning of the investigation. The evidence in his words convinced him otherwise (I paraphrased his remarks).

    So we can debate the issue till the cows come home and we will both believe what our own understanding of the facts, or in this case lack thereof. So again a complete and deliberate investigation of this matter is imperative to definitively put this matter to rest and bring either a guilty party forward or remove the cloud over the legitimacy of Obama’s tenure in the Oval Office.

    Several nagging questions remain ever present in my mind, if these accusations are false and since Obama has released his true certified copy of his LFBC, why isn’t he or Carney shouting for the blood of Arpio and company. I have searched the internet and I could not find any denials made by Obama, Carney or other administration spokespersons regarding their accusations. I find their silence deafening and ominous, as politicians are usually the first to proclaim their innocence whether they are or not. The media ignoring this issue is another as it should be red meat for them.

  47. avatar
    Al Halbert March 18, 2012 at 6:03 pm #

    Scientist: Nope, not at all, as long as they are fair in demanding that all candidates present their documents.Let Obama present his Hawaiian b.c.s (both short and long).Let Rmoney present his Michigan and Ontario b.c.s.Let Sanctorum explain why he has no state form, only a baptismal certifcate issued by the Vatican.Let’s see Gingrich’s Martian certificate.Let’s see Ron Paul’s carved in stone.I hereby request that Cong Stearn subpoena all the documents for all the candidates.What say you Al?Are you fair and balanced?

    Sounds good to me I have heard some serious accusations about Romney’s Father being a Mexican National when he was born, so if true he is not a “Natural Born Citizen” and ineligible under Article II Sec. 1 of our Constitution.

  48. avatar
    misha March 18, 2012 at 6:13 pm #

    Scientist: So, Al, Ike, where were you in 2002-2008?

    Counting their Halliburton dividend checks.

    In his January 2003 State of the Union speech, President George W. Bush said, “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” No one shouted “you lie.” I wonder why?

    “Addison Graves Wilson, Sr., most commonly known as Joe Wilson, is the U.S. Representative for South Carolina’s 2nd congressional district, serving since 2001. On September 9, 2009, Wilson received international attention when he interrupted a speech by U.S. President Barack Obama to a joint session of Congress by shouting “You lie!”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Wilson_(U.S._politician)

  49. avatar
    Al Halbert March 18, 2012 at 6:32 pm #

    Scientist:
    I really like how all of a sudden Al and Ike are the reincarnation of Eliott Ness.Silent were they when intelligence was being manipulated (cherry picked, if not faked) to start a war that resulted in 4,000 US dead several hundred thousand Iraqi deaths, countless life-changing injuries, not to mention a bill approaching a trillion dollars.I must have missed their calls for investiigations and prosecutions.But let someone use software X instead of Y to scan a paper document and that’s the crime of the century.No one died, no one was injured not even a paper cut) and the only cost to the taxpayyers hhas been filing a fewbriefs to get some junk lawsuits dismissed.

    So, Al, Ike, where were you in 2002-2008?

    This is probably the worst example of a “Straw Man” argument I have ever seen.

    “A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position.[1] To “attack a straw man” is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2]”

    Link to definition;
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

    Let me rephrase, “argument”.

  50. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 18, 2012 at 6:58 pm #

    I personally wonder whether the people who are pushing this are serious or whether it’s a faux controversy created to make it seem like the birthers aren’t being racist by raising the same objection they raise against Romney that they raise against Obama.

    I think that might be the case because the claim that George Romney wasn’t a US Citizen is nonsense and based no made up history. It’s as if this faction desperately needed a white buy whose eligibility they could deny and made up stuff, just as they desperately needed some way to make Obama ineligible and made up stuff.

    On the other hand, they could be legitimately crazy, finding conspiracies and ineligibility under every rock and behind every tree.

    Al Halbert: Sounds good to me I have heard some serious accusations about Romney’s Father being a Mexican National when he was born, so if true he is not a “Natural Born Citizen” and ineligible under Article II Sec. 1 of our Constitution

  51. avatar
    misha March 18, 2012 at 7:05 pm #

    Al Halbert: Sounds good to me I have heard some serious accusations about Romney’s Father being a Mexican National when he was born, so if true he is not a “Natural Born Citizen” and ineligible under Article II Sec. 1 of our Constitution.

    I completely agree with you on this point. I have read that George Romney’s mother was a Mexican national. Remember, George Romney’s father was a polygamist, and we really don’t know who George’s mother actually was.

    Let’s get the word out. I’ll be glad to help.

  52. avatar
    Scientist March 18, 2012 at 7:13 pm #

    Al Halbert: Sounds good to me I have heard some serious accusations about Romney’s Father being a Mexican National when he was born, so if true he is not a “Natural Born Citizen” and ineligible under Article II Sec. 1 of our Constitution.

    Romney’s father’s citizenship is irrelevant under the law, as you well know. Even Mitt’s potential birth across the river in Canada would not make him ineligible, since the children of a US citizen parent are eligible even if born outside the US (or inside the US of course). And if Romney picks Rubio as his veep, he’s eligible too, since he was born here. Nevertheless, they should scan their b.c.’s and release a pdf, don’t you think? Aren’t you fair and balanced?

    Al Halbert: This is probably the worst example of a “Straw Man” argument I have ever seen.

    You are right. It was wrong to compare misinformation that lead to a hugely destructive war to a blip in a scanned image of a birth certificate. Obviously one is a million times more important than the other.

  53. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 18, 2012 at 7:17 pm #

    No, my argument is not based on a profit motive, even though Corsi and Zullo are benefiting from the sales of a book based on the investigation, a book that wouldn’t make sense to write had the outcome been different.

    No, the point is that the people who worked with the Posse had already committed themselves in writing to the position that the Birth Certificate was a fake before the investigation started. Corsi is a committed conspiracy theorist, and Zebest had already staked her reputation (such as it was) on the birth certificate being a fake before the investigation started. Zebest wrote the graphics analysis in the report.

    Woodman, who has the opposing view, offered to go to Arizona and spend a couple of days briefing the Posse on his own 3-month study, which concluded that the birther stuff was crap. The Posse refused to hear his side of the story.

    The fact that the only known inputs to the Posse investigation were from committed birthers, and that they refused even to listen to an opposing view, is overwhelming evidence that the cold case posse was formed for one purpose, and one purpose only: to legitimize and publicize already-formulated and mostly already-written birther conspiracy theories.

    Beyond what I have said, Woodman’s book proves that the Zebest report is false and Ivan Zatkovich, a credentialed expert in document forgery, studied the birth certificate for WorldNetDaily and concluded the same thing. Does the report mention Zatkovich? No, they lie and say that forensic document examiners support their conclusions, when in fact they do not.

    No one has my respect would claim that this posse was fair and unbiased or that their methodology was valid.

    Al Halbert: I have searched for John Woodman on the internet and in fact he has written a book; “Is Barack Obama’s Birth Certificate a Fraud?”, so the investigation by Mike Zullo and the Cold Case Posse is somehow tainted because they did not use the services of Mr. Woodman?

    Part of your central argument traditionally has been that since the Cold Case Posse used the expertise of Jerome Corsi a well known reporter for WND as an unpaid consultant and that Mike Zullo has written an e-book that somehow abrogates any and all evidence that could or should be considered by them, because of a possible profit motive.

    Sounds to me that your objection is one of advocating for predetermined outcomes as well, since Woodman would stand to loose income or stature by advocating a position due to his book as well. So if I follow your objections to Zullo and company and substitute Woodman we have all 3 players in the same profit seeking boat. So then it becomes subjective given the profit motive you have interjected into the issue to cloud any facts, though not without merit.

  54. avatar
    Al Halbert March 18, 2012 at 7:20 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I personally wonder whether the people who are pushing this are serious or whether it’s a faux controversy created to make it seem like the birthers aren’t being racist by raising the same objection they raise against Romney that they raise against Obama.

    I think that might be the case because the claim that George Romney wasn’t a US Citizen is nonsense and based no made up history. It’s as if this faction desperately needed a white buy whose eligibility they could deny and made up stuff, just as they desperately needed some way to make Obama ineligible and made up stuff.

    On the other hand, they could be legitimately crazy, finding conspiracies and ineligibility under every rock and behind every tree.

    I agree with you to a point but this whole issue has now come to fore and we need to understand it, or amend the Constitution to delete the Natural born Citizen issue, till then we are stuck with it. To reiterate the lineage of this requirement was the very real concern that a descendant of royal blood could become president and deliver the early Republic to a monarchy.

    We also have John Jay’s (first Chief Justice of SCOTUS) letter to Washington urging him to consider the Natural Born Citizen requirement for the Commander In Chief of the armed forces, having someone with divided loyalties could have been disastrous for us. As you have also mentioned this letter in another article.

  55. avatar
    Scientist March 18, 2012 at 7:25 pm #

    Al Halbert: Several nagging questions remain ever present in my mind,

    Assumes facts not in evidence.

    Al Halbert: , if these accusations are false and since Obama has released his true certified copy of his LFBC, why isn’t he or Carney shouting for the blood of Arpio and company.

    Because no one who matters cares and no one has asked any questions about it at Whiite House press briefings. Just because you pretend to care doesn’t make it a real issue. Besides, I don”t know if you are aware, but the Feds have been investigating Arpaio (why can’t you spell his name correctly?) for quite some time and many believe an indictment will be coming soon. Under Sullivan vs NY Times, it is virtually impossible for a public figure to win a libel or slander suit, so that avenue is fruitless.

    Obama is quite content to win re-election and if the grand jury in Phoenix indicts Arpaio (see how it’s spelled), fine. If they don’t also fine, since Obama is President and Joe is a lowly country sheriff. And Obama is better looking, richer and younger and could destroy Arpaio on the basketball court. If I had all those advantages on an opponent (I usually do), I would pity them.

  56. avatar
    Scientist March 18, 2012 at 7:34 pm #

    Al Halbert: this whole issue has now come to fore and we need to understand it,

    It has NOT come to the fore. Crank lawsuits do not make something a real issue. Judges, scholars, Secretaries of State, members of Congress all understand very well that anyone born in the US is a eligible to be President. You cannot point to a single one of them who has said differently and every court that has gotten the opportunity has ruled that Obama is eligible and by extension Romney, Rubio and Jindal. We don’t judge what are real issues by how many web sites propound crank theories.

    It is a non-issue. Phony baloney. Should I repeat that?

  57. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 18, 2012 at 7:38 pm #

    Like other birthers, you put words into the mouths of the founders. Specifically the word Jay used was “foreigner.” He didn’t use the word “loyalty,” divided or otherwise. Do you think Barack Obama is properly described as a “foreigner?”

    This is probably a good point to introduce what Secretary of the Navy Bancroft wrote about the presidential eligibility clause in his History of the United States. In the discussion of the debate in the Federal Convention that wrote the Constitution, Bancroft wrote (and notice that like John Jay, he used the word “foreigner”):

    One question on the qualifications of the president was among the last to be decided. On the twenty-second of August the committee of detail, fixing the requisite age of the president at thirty-five, on their own motion and for the first time required that the president should be a citizen of the United States, and should have been an inhabitant of them for twenty-one years.† The idea then arose that no number of years could properly prepare a foreigner for the office of president; but as men of other lands had spilled their blood in the cause of the United States, and had assisted at every stage of the formation of their institutions, the committee of states who were charged with all unfinished business proposed, on the fourth of September that “no person except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this constitution should be eligible to the office of president,” and for the foreign-born proposed a reduction of the requisite years of residence to fourteen. On the seventh of September the modification, with the restriction as to the age of the president, was unanimously adopted.

    The † refers to a footnote to Gilpin’s edition of Madison’s papers, p. 1398.

    Al Halbert: We also have John Jay’s (first Chief Justice of SCOTUS) letter to Washington urging him to consider the Natural Born Citizen requirement for the Commander In Chief of the armed forces, having someone with divided loyalties could have been disastrous for us. As you have also mentioned this letter in another article.

  58. avatar
    Al Halbert March 18, 2012 at 7:39 pm #

    misha: I completely agree with you on this point. I have read that George Romney’s mother was a Mexican national. Remember, George Romney’s father was a polygamist, and we really don’t know who George’s mother actually was.

    Let’s get the word out. I’ll be glad to help.

    This needs to be investigated as their are polygamist communities in Mexico just over the border from Arizona and New Mexico. Mormons have been ducking into Mexico since Utah made Polygamy illegal within their State Constitutions in 1896, so this definitely is a possibility for either parent of Romney.

    LDS Faith is a Patriarchal Religion and Society with their 2 priesthoods only being bestowed upon males, women are equal partners but subservient so it will be interesting to find out which one it is. The law always came came looking for the husband of the household and fled when they came their way, the country of choice, again Mexico.

  59. avatar
    Al Halbert March 18, 2012 at 8:01 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Like other birthers, you put words into the mouths of the founders. Specifically the word Jay used was “foreigner.” He didn’t use the word “loyalty,” divided or otherwise. Do you think Barack Obama is properly described as a “foreigner?”

    This is probably a good point to introduce what Secretary of the Navy Bancroft wrote about the presidential eligibility clause in his magisterial (word used by the Wikipedia) History of the United States. In the discussion of the debate in the Federal Convention that wrote the Constitution, Bancroft said:

    The refers to a footnote to Gilpin’s edition of Madison’s papers, p. 1398.

    I stand corrected; I did not mention Obama, nor refer to him as a foreigner. John Jay is not the only only to write about the divided loyalties, Madison, Hamilton and Jay exchanged letters and published them as they became known as the Federalist Papers and within them they discussed the concept and need for a president, advisers and electors to have undivided loyalties to our nation.

    “The Federalist Papers (Oct 1787-May 1788) are 85 essays written by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison. Professor Yinger explained that the main focus of essays 2-5, written by Jay, and titled “Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence” is on

    the need for a strong central government to protect a nation from foreign military action, they also suggest that a strong central government can help protect a nation from “foreign influence.” Concern about foreign influence also appears in essay number 20, written by Hamilton and Madison; essay number 43 by Madison; and essays number 66 and 75 by Hamilton. Moreover, the role of the presidential selection mechanism in limiting foreign influence is explicitly discussed by Hamilton in essay number 68.”

    And others;

    “St. George Tucker’s “Treatise on the Constitution

    A law professor in the University of William and Mary, a judge of The General Court in Virginia, St. George Tucker also served as a major in the Revolutionary War and was present at the Battle of Yorktown. Yinger cites Tucker’s “Treatise on the Constitution” (1803) as lending further evidence to the link between the natural-born citizen clause and foreign influence.

    The Federalist Papers do not mention the issue of presidential qualifications. However, a well-known treatise on the Constitution published in 1803, like Charles Pinckney’s statement in the U.S. Senate in 1800, explicitly discusses the linkage between the “natural born citizen” clause and the need to avoid foreign influence. In particular, this treatise says: ”

    Link;
    http://www.worldandi.com/subscribers/feature_detail.asp?num=26823

  60. avatar
    misha March 18, 2012 at 8:24 pm #

    Al Halbert: I agree with you to a point but this whole issue has now come to fore and we need to understand it, or amend the Constitution to delete the Natural born Citizen issue, till then we are stuck with it.

    I agree with you. In fact, I am going to change my affiliation to Republican, so I can vote for Santorum in the primary.

  61. avatar
    Al Halbert March 18, 2012 at 8:28 pm #

    Scientist: It has NOT come to the fore.Crank lawsuits do not make something a real issue.Judges, scholars, Secretaries of State, members of Congress all understand very well that anyone born in the US is a eligible to be President.You cannot point to a single one of them who has said differently and every court that has gotten the opportunity has ruled that Obama is eligible and by extension Romney, Rubio and Jindal.We don’t judge what are real issues by how many web sites propound crank theories.

    It is a non-issue.Phony baloney.Should I repeat that?

    This is what the FOUNDERS thought and believed and just some of the thoughts and opinion on the need for a Natural Born Citizen to be president;

    “The Federalist Papers

    The Federalist Papers (Oct 1787-May 1788) are 85 essays written by Alexander Hamilton, John Jay, and James Madison. Professor Yinger explained that the main focus of essays 2-5, written by Jay, and titled “Concerning Dangers from Foreign Force and Influence” is on

    the need for a strong central government to protect a nation from foreign military action, they also suggest that a strong central government can help protect a nation from “foreign influence.” Concern about foreign influence also appears in essay number 20, written by Hamilton and Madison; essay number 43 by Madison; and essays number 66 and 75 by Hamilton. Moreover, the role of the presidential selection mechanism in limiting foreign influence is explicitly discussed by Hamilton in essay number 68.

    Hamilton said:

    Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption. These most deadly adversaries of republican government might naturally have been expected to make their approaches from more than one quarter, but chiefly from the desire in foreign powers to gain an improper ascendant in our councils. How could they better gratify this, than by raising a creature of their own to the chief magistracy of the Union? But the convention have guarded against all danger of this sort, with the most provident and judicious attention. They have not made the appointment of the President to depend on any preexisting bodies of men, who might be tampered with beforehand to prostitute their votes; but they have referred it in the first instance to an immediate act of the people of America, to be exerted in the choice of persons for the temporary and sole purpose of making the appointment. And they have excluded from eligibility to this trust, all those who from situation might be suspected of too great devotion to the President in office. No senator, representative, or other person holding a place of trust or profit under the United States, can be of the numbers of the electors.

    St. George Tucker’s “Treatise on the Constitution”

    A law professor in the University of William and Mary, a judge of The General Court in Virginia, St. George Tucker also served as a major in the Revolutionary War and was present at the Battle of Yorktown. Yinger cites Tucker’s “Treatise on the Constitution” (1803) as lending further evidence to the link between the natural-born citizen clause and foreign influence.

    The Federalist Papers do not mention the issue of presidential qualifications. However, a well-known treatise on the Constitution published in 1803, like Charles Pinckney’s statement in the U.S. Senate in 1800, explicitly discusses the linkage between the “natural born citizen” clause and the need to avoid foreign influence. In particular, this treatise says:

    That provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen (unless he were a citizen of the United States when the constitution was adopted,) is a happy means of security against foreign influence, which, wherever it is capable of being exerted, is to be dreaded more than the plague. The admission of foreigners into our councils, consequently, cannot be too much guarded against; their total exclusion from a station to which foreign nations have been accustomed to, attach ideas of sovereign power, sacredness of character, and hereditary right, is a measure of the most consummate policy and wisdom. It was by means of foreign connections that the stadtholder of Holland, whose powers at first were probably not equal to those of a president of the United States, became a sovereign hereditary prince before the late revolution in that country. Nor is it with levity that I remark, that the very title of our first magistrate, in some measure exempts us from the danger of those calamities by which European nations are almost perpetually visited. The title of king, prince, emperor, or czar, without the smallest addition to his powers, would have rendered him a member of the fraternity of crowned heads: their common cause has more than once threatened the desolation of Europe. To have added a member to this sacred family in America, would have invited and perpetuated among us all the evils of Pandora’s Box.”

    http://www.worldandi.com/subscribers/feature_detail.asp?num=26823

    [Rather than writing a reply that would needs cite a large chunk of what precedes, I will insert my comment here.
    Does Mr. Halbert consider “Barack Obama” a foreigner? Second, does Mr. Halbert consider a person born in the United States and who has far-exceeded the constitutional requirement for a mere 14 years residence, a “foreign influence” as envisioned by Pinckney and Tucker, and of so, upon what does he base such an assertion? Doc.]

  62. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 18, 2012 at 8:36 pm #

    Apparently, you do not stand corrected, since you turn around and use the words “divided loyalty” again when the sources you cite do not.

    And I am still waiting for your answer to the question: “Do you consider Barack Obama a foreigner?” I think perhaps that you intentionally evade that question since no matter which way you answer it, you lose the argument.

    Al Halbert: I stand corrected; I did not mention Obama, nor refer to him as a foreigner. John Jay is not the only only to write about the divided loyalties,

  63. avatar
    Sef March 18, 2012 at 8:42 pm #

    misha: I agree with you. In fact, I am going to change my affiliation to Republican, so I can vote for Santorum in the primary.

    Not if you live in NY State.

  64. avatar
    CarlOrcas March 18, 2012 at 9:20 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy: On the other hand, they could be legitimately crazy, finding conspiracies and ineligibility under every rock and behind every tree.

    I think I’ll put my money on this one.

  65. avatar
    Al Halbert March 18, 2012 at 9:54 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Apparently, you do not stand corrected, since you turn around and use the words “divided loyalty” again when the sources you cite do not.

    And I am still waiting for your answer to the question: “Do you consider Barack Obama a foreigner?” I think perhaps that you intentionally evade that question since no matter which way you answer it, you lose the argument.

    Doc,

    I believe this is the offending statement you are taking exception to “having someone with divided loyalties could have been disastrous for us . As you have also mentioned this letter in another article” (my statement).

    All of the Founders thoughts words and deeds that I referenced goes to this question! Then the question becomes what is meant by Foreign Influence and guarding against such. It is simply a matter of semantics, for someone were to have undue foreign influence as a president, they would in FACT have divided loyalties or loyalties to another. I have never said that Obama is a Foreigner, you placed these words in my mouth, by my reference of Jay’s letter, I gave you that I could not remember what his words were exactly and I deferred to your judgment. I have been unable to locate the exact letter that I referred to; wherein Jay uses the word “foreigner”, please provide the link to this full letter.

    I am relying on the work of others which have some measure of credibility though found the following;

    “John Jay wrote in a letter to George Washington dated 25 Jul 1787:

    “Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen. ”

    http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/09/is-being-born-citizen-of-united-states.html

    If I parse his words he is saying that he wants to guard against admitting “Foreigners” into the administration of our government, the use of the semicolon means another complete thought within the same same sentence. He is not saying to excludes them from the Commander in Chief, then he states that the Commander in Chief should not be anyone but a natural born citizen. So if I were read his words with the Constitution which was being drafted in July 1787 the president is precluded from being a foreigner by Article II Sec. 1, which was being concurrent with it’s drafting as it was not completed until September 17, 1787. His language is in deference to the great admiration he holds for Washington, as it was he had exchanged many letters through the years with and him and Washington opened the Constitutional Convention. It is simply a conveyance of respect that he holds for him with the words “Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable.” he defers simply to Washington, nothing more.

    This is not the full letter, again I have been unable to readily find it. However it fits with what I have proffered. To guard against a person that would unduly be influenced by foreign sources. Hence; in other parlance of speech of the Queens English, divided loyalties. What allegiance do foreigners have? When they become Naturalized American Citizens they renounce their former loyalty and accept fealty to the Constitution and the U.S.A. Therefore his use of “foreigner” is proper, one with loyalties to another.

    You bring up a great question, where are Obama’s loyalties? His actions have been unlike anything I have ever seen a President do. Without belaboring the point many things have happened that have made me question who he really serves? His reluctance to be frank about his past and his propensity to keep all of his credentials hidden and has spent what is rumored to be millions to keep all this hidden does not help to answer this question does it? It is not my past that is at issue it our president’s, my opinion is just that an opinion and I have serious doubts as to who he actually serves, do you? Though I build my beliefs to quote Newton “I have stood on the shoulders of giants” the founders among them.

  66. avatar
    Majority Will March 18, 2012 at 10:33 pm #

    Al Halbert: This is probably the worst example of a “Straw Man” argument I have ever seen.

    “A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position.[1] To “attack a straw man” is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2]”

    Link to definition;
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

    Let me rephrase, “argument”.

    Irony meters aren’t safe anywhere near you.

  67. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 18, 2012 at 10:39 pm #

    Until such time as Mr. Halbert answers my question: “Do you consider Barack Obama a foreigner?” or admits that he has refused to answer the question. He is banned from participation on this site.

  68. avatar
    Lupin March 19, 2012 at 3:17 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: Until such time as Mr. Halbert answers my question: “Do you consider Barack Obama a foreigner?” or admits that he has refused to answer the question. He is banned from participation on this site.

    Isn’t that exactly what he did in the last thread when I asked him to prove he had voiced his concerns anywhere prior to Obama’s election? Crickets ensued.

  69. avatar
    dunstvangeet March 19, 2012 at 4:06 am #

    I’d like him to answer this question…

    Two people…

    PERSON A: Someone born to 2 foreigners on U.S. Soil who naturalize 1 day after the birth of the child. He never steps outside of the country, and 35 years later runs for President.

    PERSON B: Someone born to 2 U.S. Citizen parents on Foreign Soil. They naturalize 1 day after the birth of the child. He never steps foot inside the country until his 21st birthday. He then spends 14 years in the country and then runs for the Presidency on his 35th birthday.

    Now, please tell me which one has more foreign influence. Birthers tend to say that PERSON A has more influence than PERSON B. After all, the founders had absolutely no problem with PERSON B, but then had a problem with PERSON A.

    And yes, this is a philosophical argument.

  70. avatar
    Northland10 March 19, 2012 at 7:30 am #

    Though, he may not get out of banned since he will not answer the Doc’s question, I think a little response is in order:

    Al Halbert: Nothing was more to be desired than that every practicable obstacle should be opposed to cabal, intrigue, and corruption.

    This is on the section about the creation of the Electoral College. Hamilton was stating how their system would prevent cabal and intrigue. Their way of “vetting” was to separate the election process away from the center of power.

    Al Halbert: The Federalist Papers do not mention the issue of presidential qualifications.

    That is quite correct. However, in the section about the qualifications of the Congress and Senate, there is a discussion on whether to completely disqualify those of “foreign birth and education” or to allow them into the councils of the nation. There was not even a consideration of any type of parentage.

    So, using the Federalist Papers whose only mention was “foreign birth and education,” do you consider Obama to be a foreigner?

  71. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 19, 2012 at 8:00 am #

    This is also a theme in the Federal Convention, again about the Electoral College. However, the cabal and intrigue wasn’t so much about foreigners, but domestic cabal and intrigue. The provision that the electors meet in their individual states restricted communication between them to prevent some sort of collusion.

    Northland10: This is on the section about the creation of the Electoral College. Hamilton was stating how their system would prevent cabal and intrigue. Their way of “vetting” was to separate the election process away from the center of power.

  72. avatar
    Scientist March 19, 2012 at 8:16 am #

    Dr. Conspiracy: The provision that the electors meet in their individual states restricted communication between them to prevent some sort of collusion.

    Did they have their internet access suspended and cellphones confiscated while they were meeting?

  73. avatar
    Paper March 19, 2012 at 11:59 am #

    Hmmm, makes me think perhaps indeed it is time to move on from the Electoral College. Of course, it does take away power from the states. I’ve always understood the power structure of that framework. But perhaps we’ve moved along enough at least to have direct elections of a president?

    Scientist: Did they have their internet access suspended and cellphones confiscated while they were meeting?

  74. avatar
    Rickey March 19, 2012 at 12:00 pm #

    Al Halbert: This is what the FOUNDERS thought and believed and just some of the thoughts and opinion on the need for a Natural Born Citizen to be president;

    Let’s simplify this.

    Please cite one civics textbook, history textbook, or constitutional law textbook which states that a natural-born citizen must have two United States citizen parents.

    That is all I am asking for – a single unambiguous citation which is directly on point.

  75. avatar
    Paper March 19, 2012 at 1:17 pm #

    That sounds like the birthers I know. I think birthers are a diverse group. We have what seems to be a split between forgery-birthers and parenthood-birthers. The birthers I know seem squarely in the forgery camp. They are relentless on that angle, talking of a video that actually records the birth records in Hawaii being planted. These are high conspiracy types. Also, the main one is an Oath Keeper. Only Ron Paul, by the way, is untainted by conspiracy; so I am told by them. Race is less of an issue; conspiracy is more to the point. Romney really is just as bad to these guys. They also are truthers, and believe the Clintons are murderers. Obama now has joined Clinton as a murderer in their eyes (Breitbart). It’s all about the conspiracy for them.

    These forgery-birthers I know are not racists. Their relationship with race is complex, with African-Americans now part of the family. Their primary anger is about scoundrels and freeloaders and such, and when they do talk down African-Americans, they do so in the same way and for the same reasons they do for their own Caucasian family members.

    I do not applaud them in any way shape or form. I just think the hate is not racially focused for them. Their hatred is broader. It’s all charted out by conspiracy.

    I think of the Civil War, and while slavery was the key to states rights issues (there wouldn’t have been a war without slavery), not every person fervently defending states over federal was or is a racist. I think they misunderstand what actually motivated the war, and the actual motivations now behind states rights proponents (not racial, but power and money motivations). They don’t see the human scale of corruption; it has to be big bad centralized conspiracy all in one place, from one center. And everyone who does not see that is a “sheeple.”

    I do not know parenthood-birthers personally. Just from reading and listening and watching here and elsewhere, I suspect they tend more toward the racist and bigoted, hard and soft. I find these birthers defend a view that I consider deeply un-American Though it has been part of America forever, it also is the part we keep moving away from over and over again throughout our history. The Statue of Liberty does not read give me only your successful WASPs.

    In contrast, I find the forgery-birthers sloppy in their anger, but their focus more about criminal acts, even if there has been no crime. Their sloppiness sometimes spills over. For instance, there are many nationalities with criminal factions. Hating the criminal factions can lead to sloppiness about the nationality. It is a very very short jump from there to bigotry and then racism, but this nexus is where the focus shifts from one to the other, or broadens and separates.

    This is why it can be hard to tell the difference. Bigots do masquerade and pretend and speak in code, and there also are people who legitimately speak no tin code but about their concerns, some of which are legitimate concerns.

    Birtherism serves as a useful illustration why it is important to be informed and aware enough to separate oneself from the code, because the forgery-birthers I know are not really willing to be aware in such a way. They insist they aren’t racist or bigoted, and I do not think they are, knowing them quite well. But they are close to that nub, that nexus, in large part because they believe so much in their rightness that they do not think they have to create a clear distance. They are conspiracy types to the core and are very self-righteous in that regard. Self-righteousness is quite blind. Only “sheeple” talk of racism and bigotry to obfuscate the true conspiracy which is going to kill us all. Pure conspiracy rant.

    At any rate, these are some preliminary reflections on my personal experiences with these types. For what it is worth.

    Dr. Conspiracy: On the other hand, they could be legitimately crazy, finding conspiracies and ineligibility under every rock and behind every tree.

  76. avatar
    Sef March 19, 2012 at 6:23 pm #

    Some idiot is trying to palm off the Bomford BC again
    http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=5737

  77. avatar
    Judge Mental March 19, 2012 at 7:54 pm #

    dunstvangeet:
    I’d like him to answer this question…

    Two people…

    PERSON A: Someone born to 2 foreigners on U.S. Soil who naturalize 1 day after the birth of the child.He never steps outside of the country, and 35 years later runs for President.

    PERSON B: Someone born to 2 U.S. Citizen parents on Foreign Soil.They naturalize 1 day after the birth of the child.He never steps foot inside the country until his 21st birthday.He then spends 14 years in the country and then runs for the Presidency on his 35th birthday.

    Now, please tell me which one has more foreign influence.Birthers tend to say that PERSON A has more influence than PERSON B.After all, the founders had absolutely no problem with PERSON B, but then had a problem with PERSON A.

    And yes, this is a philosophical argument.

    Re Person B…….I don’t get it…..are you sure you typed what you intended to? Why would B’s parents, who are already US citizens, have to naturalize at all, let alone 1 day after their child is born ?

  78. avatar
    dunstvangeet March 19, 2012 at 9:22 pm #

    They naturalize in a foreign country (therefore giving up their U.S. Citizenship). According to the United States Supreme Court (Perkins v. Elg), that act doesn’t affect the citizenship of the minor.

    So, according to birthers:

    1. A child born to 2 foreigners who naturalize in the United States 1 day after their child is born, child never leaves the United States: Too much foreign influence and dual alliegances.

    2. A child born to 2 U.S. Citizens who renounce after their citizenship 1 day after their child is born, child never sets foot in United States until 14 years before they run for President: Eligible to be President because they don’t have divided alliegance.

    This is the idiotic argument that we’re dealing with.

  79. avatar
    Al Halbert March 20, 2012 at 1:01 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy March 18, 2012 at 10:39 pm (Quote) #

    Until such time as Mr. Halbert answers my question: “Do you consider Barack Obama a foreigner?” or admits that he has refused to answer the question. He is banned from participation on this site.

    Pursuant to this question and demand I submit the following;

    1. Obama adoption in Indonesia

    “While Donald Trump pursues the dead end that Barack Obama was born in Kenya (HE WAS NOT), the actual elephant in the room that most of the media and pundits studiously ignore is the fact that Barack Obama was adopted by Lolo Soetoro and, for most of his life as a child and teenager, Barack was commonly known as Barry Soetoro. The adoption was processed in Indonesia after Barry and his mother moved to Indonesia. The adoption was carried out in Indonesia and not the United States.”

    “Barry Obama’s mom married an Indonesian student named Lolo Soetoro in 1966. The new family moved to Indonesia in 1967 and the six year old Barry was enrolled in school. Barack Obama has not released his adoption records, but the adoption took place in the 1966-67.”

    “One other piece of circumstantial evidence that Barack Obama was, at one point in his life, legally known as Barry Soetoro comes from the 1980 divorce of Obama’s birth mother and his adopted father, Lolo Soetoro.”

    Adoption of Barry by Soetoro makes him eligible to be an Indonesian Citizen, if he ever factually held U.S. Citizenship is doubtful as discussed below. So then he would be if nothing else a Dual Citizen of Britain by his Fathers nationality; Kenya a British Protectorate and Indonesian by adoption. If he was adopted by Soetoro it would have made Obama eligible for Indonesian Citizenship, since 1958 they use Jus Soli and Jus Sanqinius to determine citizenship and specifically forbids dual citizenship. Children that are adopted are treated differently than others since it is their national policy to not usurp the Citizenship of other nations, children are the exception. This is anything but the definition for a Natural Born Citizen in Article II Sec. 1 of our Constitution; flip a coin and choose your nationality and citizenship, U.S, British, Kenyan, Indonesian or…?

    http://www.noquarterusa.net/blog/58550/barack-obama-running-from-barry-soetoro/

    2. Wikipedia Obama AKA Barry Soetoro is in Jakarta in 1967 to 1971; Jakarta years

    “From ages six to ten, Obama attended local schools in Jakarta, including Besuki Public School and St. Francis of Assisi School.[18] In 1971, Obama returned to Honolulu to live with his maternal grandparents, Madelyn and Stanley Armour Dunham, and with the aid of a scholarship attended Punahou School, a private college preparatory school, from fifth grade until his graduation from high school in 1979.[“

    This sets the stage for the Kristof article in the New York Times and the Muslim connections, which follows next.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_Obama#Early_life_and_career

    3. Kristof Article in the New York Times 3/6/2007 with then Senator Obama and the Muslim connection

    “I was a little Jakarta street kid,” he said in a wide-ranging interview in his office (excerpts are on my blog, http://www.nytimes.com/ontheground). He once got in trouble for making faces during Koran study classes in his elementary school, but a president is less likely to stereotype Muslims as fanatics — and more likely to be aware of their nationalism — if he once studied the Koran with them.”

    “Mr. Obama recalled the opening lines of the Arabic call to prayer, reciting them with a first-rate accent. In a remark that seemed delightfully uncalculated (it’ll give Alabama voters heart attacks), Mr. Obama described the call to prayer as “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.”

    This article is interesting by the sheer fact that by his own narrative from Dreams from my Father he was in Hawaii in 1971 he was only 10 years old. This means that having spent only four years in Indonesia, 6 thru 10, that after 36 years he could with relative fluency speak Arabic and recite the call to prayer. While it is within the realm of possibility that he could do so, it is unlikely, though hints at a story that has not been fully told regarding Obama and his early life.

    As a anecdotal story I had a girlfriend many years ago she was born and raised in Germany, she came here in her early twenties after marrying an American GI and had an above average intelligence. She became Americanized, she still spoke with an accent, however when her parents called from Germany and spoke in deutsch, she had trouble carrying on a conversation as she was no longer fluent. So pardon me if after 36 years our president is fluent and appeared to have the correct tonality to his Muslim call to prayer, curious.

    However he made no bones about how he felt about the Muslim “Call to Prayer”, it bears repeating here “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth at sunset.” Mr. Kristof has stated he has a video of this interview and his intonation of the prayer.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/06/opinion/06kristof.html?_r=1

    Obama professes his Muslim Faith at minute 5:14 of the linked video below and does not place his hand over his heart when the National Anthem is played, he shares the stage with Hillary, Bill Richardson and Ruth Harken

    Snopes Verifies the National Anthem incident
    http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/anthem.asp

    Obama Talks about his Muslim, no Christian faith and Video of National Anthem incident starts at minute 5:14
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iuXxtg4M_z8

    Left handed Flag salute by Obama and Michelle
    http://urbanlegends.about.com/od/barackobama/ss/obamas_left_handed_flag_salute.htm

    Obama has Visited 57 States of America
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EpGH02DtIws

    What type of president or then Senator does not hold his hand over his heart for our National Anthem? Or for that matter any patriotic American would instinctively do this, would they not; and is a given for a President, or heck even a Senator, notice Hillary. Furthermore Obama is confused on which faith he actually embraces, misspoken word or a Freudian slip? However who does not know that you use your right hand to cross your heart when the National Anthem or Flag is Raised, it is also appropriate to give a military salute when the Flag is Raised as well, if in uniform.

    As well as being confused on how many States we have in this Nation, the last Star to be added to our Flag, Hawaii; is the 50th State why would he not know this? There are however 57 Member States in the Organization of Muslim Cooperation Alliance.

    4. Claims of Obama’s Harvard Juris Doctorate (law degree) has ties an advisor to a Saudi Prince.

    “However, it appears that his Harvard education may have been paid for by a foreign source. Khalid Al-Mansour, an advisor to Saudi prince Al-Walid bin Talah, told Manhattan Borough president, Percy Sutton, that he was raising money for Obama’s Harvard tuition.”

    http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/the-mystery-of-barack-obama-continues/

    Video of Percy Sutton sting his connection to Obama & Mansour

    http://www.newsmax.com/KenTimmerman/obama-sutton-saudi/2008/09/03/id/339914

    We also have the uncanny peripheral relationship to a Saudi Prince (Muslim) claiming to be raising money for the Mom and Apple Pie American Christian (Obama claims he is Christian). Son of an African Student and a White Bread Gal born in Kansas. In what universe does this occur and how does this happen? This is extraordinary to say the least that an Orthodox Muslim; Khalid Al-Mansour, born as Don Warden an American Citizen would place such interest in Obama, why? Couple the ability to recite the Muslim call to prayer and it becomes another question entirely and is suggestive of deeper ties than Obama indicates. If it is a lie to what end as he was just some silly student wanting a Harvard education and it serves no purpose for “Khalid Al-Mansour” or Percy Sutton to lie about this in the late 1980’s, as he was a nobody then. Though appears powerful domestic and international sources and persons were grooming him for some future…?

    5. Unedited report of retired CIA operative who hired an investigator that investigated Obama’s BC, we talked about this before, a LFBC by Affidavit.

    “Sections 57-8, 9, 18, 19, 20 & 40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act explain why Barack Obama has refused to release the original vault birth certificate. If the original certificate were the standard BC1 type of birth certificate, he would have allowed its release and brought the controversy to a quick end. But if the original certificate is of the other kinds, then Obama would have a very good reason not to release the vault birth certificate. For if he did, then the tape recording of Obama’s Kenyan grandmother asserting that she was present at his birth in Kenya becomes far more important. As does the Kenyan ambassador’s assertion that Barack Obama was born in Kenya, as well as the sealing of all government and hospital records relevant to Obama by the Kenyan government. And the fact that though there are many witnesses to Ann Dunham’s presence on Oahu from Sept 1960 to Feb 1961, there are no witnesses to her being on Oahu from March 1961 to August 1962 when she returned from Seattle and the University of Washington. No Hawaiian physicians, nurses, or midwives have come forward with any recollection of Barack Obama’s birth.”

    “The fact that Obama refuses to release the vault birth certificate that would instantly clear up this matter almost certainly indicates that the vault birth certificate is probably a BC2 or possibly a BC3.”

    The newspaper notification of his birth is also provided by the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which released the announcement the same as any other birth reported to DOH by hospitals and clinics as they just released information as the recordation agency of any births reported in the state, by affidavit or otherwise.

    “If you combine an awareness of what the Certification of Live Birth posted on the internet really is with 1) a knowledge of the relevant statutes in 1961 and 2) Obama’s stubborn refusal to permit the release of the real birth certificate and his determination to fight any legal actions that would compel him to do so, it becomes clear that there is no logical explanation for Obama’s refusal without taking into consideration the relevant statutes. Then his behavior becomes clear. The Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii is the missing piece of the puzzle.”

    Since Obama was in fact BORN to a Father of foreign origin, she was too young to convey Citizenship, she was shy 2 years of being 19.

    “In 1961 if a 17 year old American girl gave birth in a foreign country to a child whose father was not an American citizen, that child had no right to any American citizenship, let alone the “natural born” citizenship that qualifies someone for the Presidency under Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution.”

    “In 1961, the year that Barack Obama was born, under Sec. 301 (a) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, Ann Dunham could not transmit citizenship of any kind to Barack Obama.”

    “ 7 FAM 1133.2-2 Original Provisions and Amendments to Section 301 (CT:CON-204; 11-01-2007)“

    “a. Section 301 as Effective on December 24, 1952: When enacted in 1952, section 301 required a U.S. citizen married to an alien to have been physically present in the United States for ten years, including five after reaching the age of fourteen, to transmit citizenship to foreign-born children. The ten-year transmission requirement remained in effect from 12:01 a.m. EDT December 24, 1952, through midnight November 13, 1986, and still is applicable to persons born during that period.”

    “As originally enacted, section 301(a)(7) stated: Section 301. (a) The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth: (7) 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 ten years, at least five 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 by such citizen parent may be included in computing the physical presence requirements of this paragraph.”

    Hawaii Changes name of Certificate; better known as COLB

    “On June 12, 2008 the title for this abbreviated form was Certification of Live Birth. The title for the form that this family received in the first week of June 2009 is Certificate of Live Birth. I called The Dept of Health and confirmed that the title of the form had been changed. The bureaucrat that I spoke to said the change had been made “recently”, but could not or would not tell me when. Sometime between June 12, 2008 and the first week of June 2009 the Hawaiian Dept of Health changed the title of this abbreviated form from “Certification of Live Birth” to “Certificate of Live Birth“. Why?”

    Hawaiian Official make deceptive statements

    “On June 7, 2009, a spokeswoman for the Hawaii Department of Health told a rather obvious lie (or engaged in a pretty transparent verbal deception) in another attempt to discourage further investigation into the issue of whether Barack Obama was born on Oahu. “The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth certificates as was done in the past”, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo. “The department only issues certifications’ of live births, and that is the official birth certificate’ issued by the state of Hawaii, she said. ” [Honolulu Star Bulletin] “

    Link directs back to Honolulu Star Adviser a dead end
    http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html

    “This statement was false or deliberately very misleading. Here, from a Hawaii state document that was posted on June 10, 2009, is a description of how to apply for “the original Certificate of Live Birth” (the original birth certificate) as opposed to the Certification of Live Birth:”

    State of Hawaii requires LFBC to prove Hawaiian ancestry, supposedly unavailable since statements by DOH and Vital Statistics personnel declare only COLB available

    “In order to process your application [to prove native Hawaiian ancestry], DHHL [Department of Hawaiian Homelands] utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL.”

    http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl

    Hawaii statements were deceptive in 2008 just before the election

    “Why did the Hawaiian Dept of Health wait until June 6, 2009 to announce to the world that the original paper Certificates of Live Birth had been destroyed (presumably in 2001)? Shouldn’t this have been part of Dr Fukino’s statement on October 31, 2008 (right before the November election), a statement which deceptively implied the contrary:”

    Entire Unedited Report by retired CIA Operatives Investigator; http://www.westernjournalism.com/exclusive-investigative-reports/clearing-the-smoke-june10/

    6. Passport breach by John Brennan TAC Firm, an unpaid adviser to Obama Campaign in 2008, later became National Security advisor. Federal witness (Lt. Harris, person who accessed the file) was fatally shot.

    “The Analysis Corporation (TAC), which was headed by John O. Brennan, a former CIA agent who is an adviser to Mr. Obama’s presidential campaign on intelligence and foreign policy. “

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/mar/22/passports-probe-focuses-on-worker/

    “Saturday, April 19, 2008″

    “A key witness in a federal probe into passport information stolen from the State Department was fatally shot in front of a District church, the Metropolitan Police Department said yesterday.”

    “Lt. Quarles Harris Jr., 24, who had been cooperating with a federal investigators, was found late Thursday night slumped dead inside a car, in front of the Judah House Praise Baptist Church in Northeast, said Cmdr. Michael Anzallo, head of the department’s Criminal Investigations Division.”

    “Cmdr. Anzallo said a police officer was patrolling the neighborhood when gunshots were heard, then Lt. Harris was found dead inside the vehicle, which investigators would describe only as a blue car.”

    “Emergency medics pronounced him dead at the scene.”

    The cooperating witness, Lt. Harris has conveniently been murdered and Mr. Brennan is now safely ensconced in the role of National Security adviser safely behind a cloak of national secrecy unable to shed any light on this issue when he was directing TAC. The possibility that this is a random act is always possible, however the nexus with the Passport Probe by Federal officials is ominous and troubling, that another body stacks up when it comes to Obama.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2008/apr/19/key-witness-in-passport-fraud-case-fatally-shot/

    Conclusion;

    To fully answer your question; I have researched this issue I can say with a high amount of certainty that Obama has not PROVEN his right to claim United States Citizenship much less “Natural Born Status.” I cannot say with any certainty what Nationality he may even be? The fact of the very real possibility that he does indeed have a LFBC by affidavit and is now more than likely the reason to continue to secret all his records in the State of Hawaii and elsewhere is more than plausible; it is most likely.

    His adoption records by Soetoro is another unanswered question which would then sully the nativity narrative from his book Dreams from my Father and destroy his claim to citizenship. This is probably an appropriate time to mention that Stanley Ann Dunham Obama Soetoro passport records are apparently missing as well which became known pursuant to a FOIA request, though was unable to locate the actual request. These particular records could have shed some light on Obama’s early years as children were commonly placed on their Mothers Passports during this time.

    However it is also the little things; not showing any reverence for the National Anthem, not knowing what hand to place over his heart when the flag is raised, these are things that every child is taught in this nation from an early age, much less the exclusive private education he received as a young man in Honolulu. The ability to recite with almost perfect intonation (though maybe subjective by Kristof, video is best evidence) the Muslim call to prayer after being absent from Indonesia a Muslim Nation for 36 years is baffling and astounding since he was only 10 years old when he left. The slip up in an interview where he states his Muslim Faith, then is corrected by the journalist as being a Christian, that is definitely something one does not make a mistake about. Believing that there are 57 States in our Nation, he lived in the 50th State, why does he not know this. When there are 57 Member States to the Organization of Muslim Cooperation Alliance, the little details seem so difficult for him. As a corollary, this is one of the ways that intelligence operatives get tripped up as they lack the deep knowledge of a citizen of the nation they infiltrate and are caught when interrogated by not knowing such little bits of information.

    The servile bow to the Saudi Prince in April 2009 was characterized by a Canadian, journalist as he commented “Americans Bow to No One, they are not of a Monarchy, much less a deep servile bow to the Saudi Prince.” An American President should know this; as our International Diplomatic Protocols have been developed by our State Department to recognize our distinction as a “Constitutional Republic” and not a Monarchy. We take fealty to the Constitution not a Man or Woman of Royal Heritage as a Nation that believes in self rule and the Rule of Law. His Harvard education being paid for by powerful people with ties to a Saudi Prince; now puts this “deep servile bow” in perspective.

    The Birth Certificate that Obama caused to be placed on an official Government Website has been declared to be a forgery by many sources; and now a credible official Law Enforcement agency of the State of Arizona. Along with this a charge of forgery and fraud was leveled on his Selective Service registration card as well; without one he could not have been elected to federal office. The complicity of the State of Hawaii in their guarded statements and the changing of the name of birth certificates or certifications (COLB) is another in 2009. Not to mention their duplicitous statements regarding the ability to receive a true and certified copy of an original document and impeached by the requirements of the State of Hawaii Homelands Heritage Agency itself, to require only these types and just such documents as the LFBC. This corroborates the statements of Mile Zullo about Hawaii officials possibly being complicit at least at some level, the deceptive statements impugned their credibility. Arizona’s Maricopa County Sherriff’s investigation also found that INS microfiche records for the week of Aug. 1st thru 7th of 1961 from Hawaii were missing from the National Archives in Washington. These records are required to be filed with INS (now ICE) when you enter the country regardless of nationality.

    The coincidences keep stacking up, one upon another.

    The nexus of John Brennan and the TAC corporation, a company he managed and an employee of his was implicated in a passport data breach of Obama’s records with the FBI investigating in 2008. Mr. Brennan then became secreted behind the cloak of National Security by being made a National Security advisor to Obama, after being an unpaid advisor to the Obama Campaign in 2008, when the breach occurred. The witness who actually breached the files was cooperating with federal authorities was murdered in cold blood, under mysterious though fortuitous circumstance for Obama and Mr. Brennan.

    However; he is in possession by his own words (April 27, 2011 News Conference LFBC debuted) of his so called “true and certified” copy of his LFBC. To end the matter all he needs to do is release his records for analysis from the Hawaii Vital Statistics vault. A Forensic analysis of the original records is necessary to clear this matter up once and for all. This can be done thru Hawaii Statute 338-18, the refusal to do so is OMINOUS and MYSTIFYING!

    So given all of the facts and circumstances I have laid before you I can say with a high level certainty that he has NOT proven his claim to U.S Citizenship much less Natural Born Citizen status as required by Article II Sec.1 of our Constitution. Therefore he must be a “FOREIGNER” of unknown and unproven origin until proven otherwise and has usurped the Office of President of the United States of America!

    Al Halbert
    March 20, 2012

    Sent to DOC as e-mail as well

  80. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 20, 2012 at 4:24 pm #

    That answer doesn’t advance the previous discussion much. So here’s a revised question:

    If born in Hawaii, do you consider Barack Obama a “Foreigner?”

    Obviously we can’t debate the constitutional issue without at least hypothetically nailing down the place of birth.

    Al Halbert: Until such time as Mr. Halbert answers my question: “Do you consider Barack Obama a foreigner?” or admits that he has refused to answer the question. He is banned from participation on this site.

  81. avatar
    JPotter March 20, 2012 at 4:41 pm #

    There is a obsessive subspecies of birther troll that takes as much exception to being moderated / banned as to having their idea rejected. I would guess that the more obsessive the troll, the less intentional the trolling … they’re just obsessive nuts. As opposed to false flaggers, wanna be parody artists, the terminally bored. No matter the defect behind the keyboard, it’s all trolling on the rest of us.

    Do you get much spam from trolls gone by, Doc? Yet another reason not to be a moderator. To Doc be all the glory, haha.

  82. avatar
    Scientist March 20, 2012 at 4:59 pm #

    Al Halbert: Assorted nonsense

    http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

    In case you’re wondering Al, the others do worse.

  83. avatar
    Al Halbert March 20, 2012 at 5:36 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    That answer doesn’t advance the previous discussion much. So here’s a revised question:

    If born in Hawaii, do you consider Barack Obama a “Foreigner?”

    Obviously we can’t debate the constitutional issue without at least hypothetically nailing down the place of birth.

    First of all; my opinion is only that, an opinion. Which has been rendered by the words deeds and actions of others by investigating this matter, so given these FACTS, it is our President that has to answer these QUESTIONS; not I! I have answered your initial question, I do not KNOW with any certainty where he was BORN and declared him a FOREIGNER of unknown origin predicated on the Facts I presented. Until such time as Obama places his bona fides for examination by forensic experts (releasing vault data from Hawaii), I remain convinced of his status as an undocumented alien, foreigner and usurper of the Office of President.

    The FACTS remain; which you have NOT bothered to dispute in one iota, and dismiss out of hand. Then you move the Goal Posts on me by changing the question. Again; I believe that he has a LFBC by Affidavit and until Obama chooses to end this matter, I will maintain my position predicated on the “Words, Deeds and Actions” of others as I believe I presented a prima facie case for my beliefs.

    Anything else; is just supposition, on a possible false premise and a Straw Man argument which you want me to ACCEPT. Again I have NO valid evidence or belief as to where he was BORN!

    Definition of Straw Man;
    “A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent’s position.[1] To “attack a straw man” is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the “straw man”), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2]”

    “The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:

    1. Person A has position X.

    2. Person B disregards certain key points of X and instead presents the [superficially similar position] Y. Thus, Y is a resulting distorted version of X and can be set up in several ways, including: (emphasis mine [superficially similar position ])

    1. Presenting a misrepresentation of the opponent’s position.

    2. Quoting an opponent’s words out of context — i.e. choosing quotations that misrepresent the opponent’s actual intentions (see fallacy of quoting out of context).[2]

    3. Presenting someone who defends a position poorly as the defender, then refuting that person’s arguments — thus giving the appearance that every upholder of that position (and thus the position itself) has been defeated.[1]

    4. Inventing a fictitious persona with actions or beliefs which are then criticized, implying that the person represents a group of whom the speaker is critical.

    5. Oversimplifying an opponent’s argument, then attacking this oversimplified version.

    3. Person B attacks position Y, concluding that X is false/incorrect/flawed.

    This sort of “reasoning” is fallacious, because attacking a distorted version of a position fails to constitute an attack on the actual position.

    Link to Source Wikipedia;
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

    You have presented version 2. subset (5.) and 3.; while not refuting any and all of my arguments for my premise.

  84. avatar
    Scientist March 20, 2012 at 6:23 pm #

    Al Halbert: Believing that there are 57 States in our Nation, he lived in the 50th State, why does he not know this. When there are 57 Member States to the Organization of Muslim Cooperation Alliance, the little details seem so difficult for him.

    The comment was made during the Democratic primaries. Care to guess how many primaries there were in 2008? I know YOU wouldn’t but here is the list:

    50 states +
    DC
    Puerto Rico
    US Virgin Islands
    Guam
    Northern Marianas
    American Samoa
    Democrats Abroad (US citizens resident abroad, registered as Democrats)

    Total = 57

  85. avatar
    Suranis March 20, 2012 at 6:31 pm #

    Al. read the law sometime. especially B

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1483

    (a) Except as provided in paragraphs (6) and (7) of section 1481 (a) of this title, no national of the United States can lose United States nationality under this chapter while within the United States or any of its outlying possessions, but loss of nationality shall result from the performance within the United States or any of its outlying possessions of any of the acts or the fulfillment of any of the conditions specified in this Part if and when the national thereafter takes up a residence outside the United States and its outlying possessions.

    (b) A national who within six months after attaining the age of eighteen years asserts his claim to United States nationality, in such manner as the Secretary of State shall by regulation prescribe, shall not be deemed to have lost United States nationality by the commission, prior to his eighteenth birthday, of any of the acts specified in paragraphs (3) and (5) of section 1481 (a) of this title.

    Is this guy really the chairman of an investigative subcomittee??

  86. avatar
    Al Halbert March 20, 2012 at 6:40 pm #

    Scientist: The comment was made during the Democratic primaries.Care to guess how many primaries there were in 2008?I know YOU wouldn’t but here is the list:

    50 states +
    DC
    Puerto Rico
    US Virgin Islands
    Guam
    Northern Marianas
    American Samoa
    Democrats Abroad (US citizens resident abroad, registered as Democrats)

    Total = 57

    Territories are NOT States, Citizens living abroad are not STATES, they would then VOTE though an Absentee BALLOT of their States of Residence, as in Military Serving Abroad vote through an absentee ballot of their STATE of residence!

  87. avatar
    Al Halbert March 20, 2012 at 6:49 pm #

    Suranis:
    Al. read the law sometime. especially B

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1483

    Is this guy really the chairman of an investigative subcomittee??

    This question is superfluous, it is the LAW at the time Obama and his Mother’s age was in question regarding their age(s) at the time;

    “a. Section 301 as Effective on December 24, 1952: When enacted in 1952, section 301 required a U.S. citizen married to an alien to have been physically present in the United States for ten years, including five after reaching the age of fourteen, to transmit citizenship to foreign-born children. The ten-year transmission requirement remained in effect from 12:01 a.m. EDT December 24, 1952, through midnight November 13, 1986, and still is applicable to persons born during that period.”

    Nice try…!

    Are you sure you want to make this ARGUMENT, as it destroys Obama’s claim to Natural Born status and…!

  88. avatar
    misha March 20, 2012 at 7:10 pm #

    I have written this several times before, and I will try again. While in Israel, I was asked to serve, so I went to the US Embassy in Tel Aviv, and spoke with a legal affairs officer.

    Since there is a proviso that serving in a foreign military can cause loss of US citizenship, I asked what would happen. The officer told me the only way I could lose US citizenship, is if I renounced it in writing.

    I returned to the States on my US Passport.

    This Indonesian scenario is made from whole cloth.

  89. avatar
    misha March 20, 2012 at 7:24 pm #

    Al Halbert: Obama professes his Muslim Faith at minute 5:14 of the linked video

    US Constitution, Article VI, paragraph 3: “…no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”

    Al Halbert: As well as being confused on how many States we have in this Nation

    In his January 2003 State of the Union speech, President George W. Bush said, “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.”

    So where are the WMDs, and the mobile bio-weapons labs? Do you think it was so Cheney’s cronies could get their paws on oil?

  90. avatar
    Thrifty March 20, 2012 at 7:35 pm #

    Scientist I think your attempted rebuttal is a little off. As I recall, Obama’s comment about 57 states was not because he didn’t know there were 50 states, or that he counted DC and the territories. It was actually more like a simple slip of the tongue born of exhaustion. Everyone does it.

    Snopes explains it a bit better than I do.

    http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/57states.asp

    Scientist: The comment was made during the Democratic primaries. Care to guess how many primaries there were in 2008? I know YOU wouldn’t but here is the list.

  91. avatar
    sfjeff March 20, 2012 at 7:44 pm #

    >So given all of the facts and circumstances I have laid before you I can say with a high level certainty that he has NOT proven his claim to U.S Citizenship much less Natural Born Citizen status as required by Article II Sec.1 of our Constitution. Therefore he must be a “FOREIGNER” of unknown and unproven origin until proven otherwise and has usurped the Office of President of the United States of America! Al HalbertMarch 20, 2012Sent to DOC as e-mail as well

    Wow…what a big bunch of ‘stuff’- I read the first few lines and then i realized it was all just Birther talking points mixed in with every possible anti-Obama rhetoric.

    Reminds me of what the attorney’s on the Indiana Election Panel said: “This isn’t evidence…this is hearsay and crap(my term)….”

  92. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 20, 2012 at 7:48 pm #

    Scientist asked you how many Democratic Primaries there were. You didn’t answer. Is that because you didn’t see the question, because you were embarrassed that you were unable to answer the question, or because you did know the answer but felt that to admit that there were 57 primaries and that tired Obama might have said states for primaries people who make a big deal about the comment are more interested in smears than sense?

    Al Halbert: Territories are NOT States, Citizens living abroad are not STATES, they would then VOTE though an Absentee BALLOT of their States of Residence, as in Military Serving Abroad vote through an absentee ballot of their STATE of residence!

  93. avatar
    Al Halbert March 20, 2012 at 7:51 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    Scientist asked you how many Democratic Primaries there were. You didn’t answer. Is that because you didn’t see the question, because you were embarrassed that you were unable to answer the question, or because you did know the answer but felt that to admit that there were 57 primaries and that tired Obama might have said states for primaries peoplewho make a big deal about the comment are more interested in smears than sense.

    So this REFUTES my entire, premise….?

  94. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 20, 2012 at 7:54 pm #

    I am tired of your opinions. Go away. You’re banned.

    Al Halbert: First of all; my opinion is only that, an opinion

  95. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy March 20, 2012 at 7:56 pm #

    No, it proves that you are not an honest debater, and do not deserve to have your writing published on this web site.

    Al Halbert: So this REFUTES my entire, premise….?

  96. avatar
    Thomas Brown March 20, 2012 at 8:11 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I am tired of your opinions. Go away. You’re banned.

    He finally got to you? My compliments on your tolerance; you lasted weeks longer than I would have.

  97. avatar
    Stanislaw March 20, 2012 at 8:50 pm #

    Even though the birther is banned, just one last thing…

    Al Halbert: This question is superfluous, it is the LAW at the time Obama and his Mother’s age was in question regarding their age(s) at the time;

    “a. Section 301 as Effective on December 24, 1952: When enacted in 1952, section 301 required a U.S. citizen married to an alien to have been physically present in the United States for ten years, including five after reaching the age of fourteen, to transmit citizenship to foreign-born children. The ten-year transmission requirement remained in effect from 12:01 a.m. EDT December 24, 1952, through midnight November 13, 1986, and still is applicable to persons born during that period.”

    Nice try…!

    Are you sure you want to make this ARGUMENT, as it destroys Obama’s claim to Natural Born status and…!

    Hawaii was a state in 1961 when the President was born there. How many times are birthers going to recite that statute without actually reading it first?

  98. avatar
    Scientist March 20, 2012 at 9:03 pm #

    Al Halbert: Territories are NOT States, Citizens living abroad are not STATES, they would then VOTE though an Absentee BALLOT of their States of Residence, as in Military Serving Abroad vote through an absentee ballot of their STATE of residence

    For those who are interested (Al isn’t interested in anything that challenges his pre-conceptions) Democrats abroad had their own primary in 2008 which selected 14 convention delegates. It was conducted on-line. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democrats_Abroad#Presidential_primary_of_2008
    They will have one this year in May.

    Citizens who are absent from the US for a short time and military members vote in their state of residence. Long-term civilian expats are often dropped from state rolls and disenfranchised, which is unfair since the US continues to expect them to pay taxes. The Democratic party decided to address this by holding a primary amongst those voters. As far as I know, the Republicans have not, but that is their choice.

    Territories in fact, do vote in the primaries (though not in the general, except DC).

    So when Obama said 57, he was refering to all the primaries, not just states. Anyway, if verbal slips disqualified Presidents, how would one explain Reagan and Bush?

    Dr. Conspiracy: I am tired of your opinions. Go away. You’re banned.

    Here is the truth about Al and his ilk, they have lost and they know it. They are elderly and rather accept with good grace that their time grows short and try to make the most of every day, they are just cranky. Not just birtherism but their entire vision of a country by, for and about only white Christian males is dying. Not only did Obama win, but he will likely do so again. Even if he doesn’t, he will not be the last multi-ethnic President. There will be others. There will also be women Presidents and openly gay Presidents.

    Al and his pals are on the losing side of history. Probably many are too dim to know it, but I suspect from his anger that Al knows it all too well

  99. avatar
    G March 20, 2012 at 9:24 pm #

    Agreed!

    Scientist: Here is the truth about Al and his ilk, they have lost and they know it. They are elderly and rather accept with good grace that their time grows short and try to make the most of every day, they are just cranky. Not just birtherism but their entire vision of a country by, for and about only white Christian males is dying. Not only did Obama win, but he will likely do so again. Even if he doesn’t, he will not be the last multi-ethnic President. There will be others. There will also be women Presidents and openly gay Presidents.

    Al and his pals are on the losing side of history. Probably many are too dim to know it, but I suspect from his anger that Al knows it all too well

  100. avatar
    Majority Will March 20, 2012 at 9:34 pm #

    Al Halbert: Territories are NOT States, Citizens living abroad are not STATES, they would then VOTE though an Absentee BALLOT of their States of Residence, as in Military Serving Abroad vote through an absentee ballot of their STATE of residence!

    You’re post is puerile. People misspeak.

    Here’s why it’s childishly silly (that’s what puerile means).

    George W. Bush misspoke all the time.

    “I’m telling you there’s an enemy that would like to attack America, Americans, again. There just is. That’s the reality of the world. And I wish him all the very best.” – George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., Jan. 12, 2009

    “Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.” – George Bush, Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004

    I don’t believe the former President was actually supporting terrorists or the destruction of the U.S. which is what those quotes mean if you take them literally. Did you take his quotes literally like you did President Obama’s misstatement?

    Dan Quayle once said, “Welcome to President Bush, Mrs. Bush, and my fellow astronauts.”

    Did you giggle to your sock puppets that Dan Quayle was crazy because he thought he was an astronaut? No? Why not?

  101. avatar
    Majority Will March 20, 2012 at 9:35 pm #

    You’re post is puerile. People misspeak.”

    And typos happen too.

  102. avatar
    Majority Will March 20, 2012 at 9:43 pm #

    Scientist: Here is the truth about Al and his ilk, they have lost and they know it. They are elderly and rather accept with good grace that their time grows short and try to make the most of every day, they are just cranky. Not just birtherism but their entire vision of a country by, for and about only white Christian males is dying. Not only did Obama win, but he will likely do so again. Even if he doesn’t, he will not be the last multi-ethnic President. There will be others. There will also be women Presidents and openly gay Presidents.

    Al and his pals are on the losing side of history. Probably many are too dim to know it, but I suspect from his anger that Al knows it all too well

    Hear, hear.

    It’s the last gasps of a pathetic, angry dying breed of intolerant bigots who fantasize that living in the U.S. is an non-stop episode of The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet.

  103. avatar
    Paper March 21, 2012 at 12:03 am #

    Just a note for anyone who might read Al Halbert’s list and wonder what is actually true:

    We have already discussed the issue of the laws at the time of Obama’s birth regarding his mother’s age *if* she had given birth to him outside of the country. First, there is a retroactive law after the one Al cites that would cover her and make any child she had abroad a citizen, despite the technicality Al raises. But secondly, if her marriage was not valid (her husband was a bigamist after all), then the law Al cited still covers his mother and makes him a citizen.

    Thus, there is no scenario where the President would not be a citizen.

  104. avatar
    G March 21, 2012 at 12:22 am #

    Kudos for pointing that out to any casual readers who might pop by.

    Yes, his entire post was full of nonsense. There is not one piece of his spiel that hasn’t been debunked or torn apart at some earlier point within this blog and its commentary. It really becomes redundant to have to continuously rebut the same zombie talking points that have been shredded over and over and over and over again…

    Paper: Just a note for anyone who might read Al Halbert’s list and wonder what is actually true:We have already discussed the issue of the laws at the time of Obama’s birth regarding his mother’s age *if* she had given birth to him outside of the country. First, there is a retroactive law after the one Al cites that would cover her and make any child she had abroad a citizen, despite the technicality Al raises. But secondly, if her marriage was not valid (her husband was a bigamist after all), then the law Al cited still covers his mother and makes him a citizen.Thus, there is no scenario where the President would not be a citizen.

  105. avatar
    John Reilly March 21, 2012 at 12:35 am #

    I have a book my Grandfather got called “None Dare Call it Treason” which recites numerous conspiracy theories about John Kennedy. I learned in school of the time the Jewish rice merchants kept ships offshore outside of Rome to drive the prices up in Caesar’s time. Roosevelt knew of Peal Harbor. Munitions makers cause wars to increase profits. People who believe in conspiracy theories cannot be dissuaded by facts. These are the folks who believe Bush and/or Cheney were in on 9/11. (Not true. We all know it was the International Jewish Conspiracy. This is where Misha puts in the trademark symbol.)

    The President was born in Hawaii because Hawaii says so. The Electoral College voted for him. Congress, with no dissent, approved the results of the Electoral College vote. The Chief Justice swore him in. Twice. The way our system works, that’s about as definite as one can get. To believe otherwise you have to believe in the most massive conspiracy ever seen, in which no one except Tim the elections clerk has spilled the beans. And you have to get past Hawaii saying he was born there. It always comes back to that.

    Unlike un-Americans like Al Halbert, I’m back working for my Uncle. The company got a call, and we are on contract. Lower price than usual. It took me well under a minute to say “yes, sir. Where do I report?” Real Americans are loyal to the President no matter who he is. Watch the end of “Game Change” and pay attention ton Woody Harrelson’s lecture at the end to Gov. Palin. Steve Schmitt got it right.

    If Al and Veritas want to be productive, there are plenty of soup kitchens etc. in this country dealing with people with real problems. Making stuff up, however, solves no problem and, in my view, un-Americn.

  106. avatar
    G March 21, 2012 at 2:01 am #

    Excellent advice! I completely agree and wholeheartedly support your suggested solution. Kudos.

    John Reilly: If Al and Veritas want to be productive, there are plenty of soup kitchens etc. in this country dealing with people with real problems. Making stuff up, however, solves no problem and, in my view, un-American.

  107. avatar
    Suranis March 21, 2012 at 12:14 pm #

    Al Halbert: This question is superfluous, it is the LAW at the time Obama and his Mother’s age was in question regarding their age(s) at the time;

    “a. Section 301 as Effective on December 24, 1952: When enacted in 1952, section 301 required a U.S. citizen married to an alien to have been physically present in the United States for ten years, including five after reaching the age of fourteen, to transmit citizenship to foreign-born children. The ten-year transmission requirement remained in effect from 12:01 a.m. EDT December 24, 1952, through midnight November 13, 1986, and still is applicable to persons born during that period.”

    Nice try…!

    Are you sure you want to make this ARGUMENT, as it destroys Obama’s claim to Natural Born status and…!

    I direct your attention to the sentance frangment ” to transmit citizenship to foreign-born children.” That law applied to children born outside the territorial United States. Not to Barack Obama

    To quote myself “Al, read the law sometime.”

  108. avatar
    Majority Will March 21, 2012 at 9:20 pm #

    Cantor says he has full confidence’ in Stearns despite ‘birther’ flap

    (excerpt) The GOP leader, in the very brief interview, made clear that he’s not among the people that question the president’s citizenship. “Let’s just get it straight … I believe the president is an American citizen, so that question I can dispense with,” Cantor said.

    (http://thehill.com/blogs/e2-wire/e2-wire/217367-cantor-has-full-confidence-in-stearns-despite-birther-questions)