I commented here a few days back that the Obama long-form birth certificate from Hawaii just about had to have a raised seal, even though it’s not visible in the White House scanned copy. Recall that even in an extremely high-resolution scan of Obama’s earlier-released Certification of Live Birth, the seal was nearly invisible, and that the long form is a lower-resolution image.
The seal is confirmed. An NBC correspondent, Savannah Guthrie, who attended the White House release of the of the long form had the opportunity to view the real deal and said that she “felt the raised seal” (video and transcript).
And here is a photograph taken by Guthrie showing the seal:
Obama birth certificate showing seal – Guturie – use Browser zoom
The big point for me in this is that it pretty much torpedoes the altered layers theory. The version in this photo is the one WITH THE SEAL on it, meaning this is what came from Hawaii (unless you think the White House faked the raised seal, and if you’re that far gone, you don’t belong here).
Thanks to y_p_w for the tip.
Savannah Guthrie is actually a White House CGI creation.
Gullible Obots!
He’s already spent eleventy gazillion dollars having the all of the rest of his records sealed…..what’s one more?
Clearly, that vixen Savannah Guthrie is an obot co-conspirator and is probably having an affair with Obama, or would be if he wasn’t all gay and stuff.
This picture is much lower resolution than the one released by the White House.
The claim that “nearly invisible, and that the long form is a lower-resolution image” is absurd.
Cool!
The first four posters all posted mocking & absurd theories.
Code looks like this:
Argh, seems I can’t post anything with tags in it… *sigh*
Endorsed, Authenticated and Presented twice.
Why not post a physical picture of the original 50 year old document?
Let me retry my botched pseudo-code posting with a little less tags:
[birtherCode]
BEGIN
$objTraitor = new unAmericanObotTraitor(‘Savannah Guthrie’);
Conspiracy::add($objTraitor);
$arrBuzzwords = generateBuzzwords(‘Marxist’, ‘Thug’, ‘Ineligible’);
Propaganda::addPosting(PEST_AND_EFAIL, ‘She is in on it’, $arrBuzzwords);
Whine::some_more();
repeat ad nauseam;
END
[/birtherCode]
Your code needs more commenting.
That’s not what Dr. C meant. He meant that the long form is lower resolution than the earlier scan of the COLB (probably the high-res COLB image that the Daily Kos posted).
Now this photo from Guthrie is released at some rather low resolution. Still – it seemed to have been taken with the birth certificate on a table with enough of an angle to see where the seal is. Not only that, but the NBC reporter says that she saw the real thing and even felt the seal. I would have thought that other WH reporters would have access to the same document, but I haven’t heard any claiming to have handled the birth certificate.
It’s in a bound volume, and apparently the Registrar has placed it in a safe with other valuables. It’s probably on a white-background form, and there’s no way that’s ever leaving the DoH office. I think President Obama could probably come in and inspect it by request, but I’m not sure they’d let him take a photo or handle it. There are other certificates in the volume, and those are supposed to be confidential. Even FoxNews reported it (for Dr C – I think a short blurb is fair use).
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/27/obama-birth-certificate-moved-secure-location-months-ago/
“Fukino, who left office in December, said that during her term as health director, Obama’s birth certificate was moved from a file vault, where bound books containing vital records line the shelves in handwritten, leather-bound ledgers, in colors chosen over the course of decades — and placed inside the vault’s five-foot-tall, grey, metal combination and key lock safe that holds money and other valuables.
** ** **
Obama’s original certificate of live birth is bound with one ledger containing 499 other certificates of people born in Hawaii in 1961, according to Fukino. There are 500 sheets per book, and 35 volumes of 1961 birth records. The last series of digits in the registration number found on Hawaiian long form and current computerized-format birth certificates indicate which number volume the original document can be found inside the health department first-floor vault.”
Now I’m not sure why this was published in late April, but they say they talked to her in Feb.
Because it would still be criticized by birfoons (I’ve come to love that term, kudos to whomever coined it) as “just a picture on the web”, while every sane person would find it redundant because it contains the same information.
Why not post a physical picture of the original 50 year old document?
Do you let other people tell you how to do your job?
I popped on over to “obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com” to see if they are as silly as I think they are, they did not disappoint. What a pathetic site, Severe disillusionment is clearly shown. One wonders how these people can survive or even make it through a single day. Almost every comment is dripping with hate. Do they even know what they are hating? Living in their world must be very frightening.
Unless Savannah Guthrie presents evidence of her birth in the US to parents who were citizens at the time of her birth, we have no way to know if she is an NBC correspondent as she claims.
Then again, maybe she’s only a natural born correspondent, born to two correspondent parents on a major network’s premises (or does it have to be “live on air”?).
Of course, this would be less of a problem for American Born Citizens, Critical Birther Sycophants and Foolish Oppressive Xenophobes.
That is a good question on who coined the term “birfoon”. The first time that I saw it used was on Politijab in 2009. The earliest usage I can find is in a post by Lola_Getz. (http://www.thefogbow.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=546&p=10929&hilit=Birfoon#p10929
(Now on The Fogbow)
Why and for whom, exactly?
People who will never vote for Obama?
I’d rather see him busy hunting down more terrorists than wasting time trying to appease small-minded, paranoid bigots who think WND is an actual news source.
hateobama.com rates WND as the most reliabull news site on the internet, due to WND’s efforts it is certain that Obama will not be president in 2017, quite an achievement, thanks Corsi!
What do you think a photocopy is? It is, natch, a photo copy. See, they’ve got a camera in this machine and it takes a picture of the original and copies it onto the State’s special security paper. Then, the registrar looks at the original and the copy and signs the copy swearing before God that it is a true and accurate copy. The Director of the Department of Health also watched the photographing of the original and swears, before God, that what they took a photo of was, in fact, the original.
What you have, then, is better than a run-of-the-mill photograph. This photo has the full weight of the entire State of Hawaii behind it. They swear, before God and man, that it is the same as what they have in their files.
I think what you’re asking is why don’t they make a less certain copy available? One without a State Seal and certification? Or, are you asking why won’t they show a copy individually to you?
Thank you Greg. What next?
Butterdezillion has just exhibited a pure example of the birther mentality.
Having made the ‘lack’ of seal the central piece of her argument for the BC being a fake, the news that the seal could be seen on these photos might have caused BZ some anguish.
Not at all.
She’s now claimng that the seal on the image shows that it is a fake.
http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2011/05/13/obama-bc-seal-contradicts-factcheck/
He does have a way of wrapping things up nice and tight, doesn’t he?
Well she did get one thing right….there is “serious do-do going on.” Unfortunately for her, it’s all “going on” on her blog.
So saying because she claims the seal is different between the short form and the long form. Given the quality of the second image, I don’t see how she could tell.
It looks like hateobama.com has been scrubbed.
Sorry, my FTP client will only send files, not physical pictures. I do have a framed physical picture of the 50-year-old document on the wall in my study.
Saw it.
I think it’s pretty simple. The majority of Hawaii’s certified birth certificates are run through the standard process by regular office clerks at the DoH. They run it through their electric embosser, which (at least since 2007) produces this stylized version of the seal. There are a whole bunch of birth certificate copies that show the same seal, as well as earlier ones that showed different versions of the seal. That’s the thing about the Hawaii DoH. They’ve changed seals, borders, paper, title, etc several times in the last decade. I don’t think it’s any conspiracy, but it allows the birthers to claim that because it’s different than other versions, it must be fake.
I recall some blogger made a big deal about the seal and made a request for a copy of it directly from Director Fukino.
http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2010/12/miss-tickly-makes-big-deal-over-seal/
The blog post is now “protected”, but what I remember about it was that it showed a charcoal etching that showed a less blocky version of the seal. I wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a manual embosser sitting on the desk of the Director of Health with a “high-res” version of the seal that she uses for letters or documents that she personally issues. Since Director Fuddy claims that she personally oversaw the production of the birth certificates, there’s a chance that her own embosser was used.
I have some documents with an official embossed seal, and they look like someone just didn’t press hard enough on the handle. You see something, but it just isn’t clear. That doesn’t make them any less official. I’ve also seen embossed seals that were pressed so hard that they tore through the paper.
Just too funny. It is a “physical picture of the original 50 year old document.” However, the document pictured has official verification and approval of its authenticity.
shorter butternutter: “heads i win, tails you lose …”
see also: “lalalalala icanthearyou …”
Wow! Fantastic. A photo showing the seal.
Do you have a link to the birth certificate photo by Savannah Guthrie? I cannot find it on the net anywhere. Did she take any other photos of the birth certificate?
It’s time for birfoonyland to secede from it’s known existence.
A birther on NBC’s blog claimed the long form was fake because when he zoomed really far in, the image became very pixelated.
And he was probably one of the smarter birthers…
I know it’s a cliché but stupidity really should be painful.
Birthers would be easy to identify.
They would be the people stumbling around while screaming in agony.
http://0.tqn.com/d/politicalhumor/1/0/n/U/moran.jpg
The links were posted on Nativeborcitizen a couple of days ago. The only other photo in her collection is a closer shot.
http://lockerz.com/s/96540937
http://lockerz.com/s/96540721
I still don’t see no seal. A couple of penguins maybe, but no seal.
–Stevie Wonder
Has this document been ‘Attested’ by a independent firm to confirm its authenticity?
Much better than that. It has been end-to-end confirmed and attested to by the OFFICIAL people who directly saw and procured it and who are in charge of such things.
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/News_Release_Birth_Certificate_042711.pdf
No “independent firm” 3rd party with no direct knowledge of the event nor experience/responsibility for creating such records is going to top the ONLY official people who actually do this and who were directly involved directly coming out and stating it.
It still needs a independent ‘attestation’ done to it by professional documentation experts for historical purposes. I don’t see why the White House would object or anyone else. I find it odd they are not doing this.
By “attestation” you mean someone who will agree with what you neeeeeeed to be true.
And by “professional document experts” you mean internet geeks who post blogs from ntheir parents basements.
The Whitehouse did all they needed to do for any purpose, legal or historical or otherwise, back in 2008. This latest document is surplus to requirements.
What you find odd is not only ridiculous and spurious…. it’s irrelevant.
No it doesnt. They have 2 physical copies that were specifically requested and attested to in the full chain of letters also provided to and released at the same time as the press conference on the release. Plus the HI GOV official statement which was posted soon thereafter, confirming the whole story from their end (Link I already gave you.)
I’m sure one of those copies will appear in his Presidential Library some day in the future and you can visit it then if you really care so much. If you can’t wait that long, then maybe you should make a personal trip to his Chicago campaign H.Q. That is where the original COLB was kept.. why don’t you spend the time and ask them if they’ll have the LFBC on display and then you can visit it there.
This story is done and over with. If you are truly going to go down the rabbit hole of entertaining silly conspiracy theories of fraud, then face it – you’ve already LOST, because your conspiracy requires EVERYONE in official capacity to be “in on it”…and if that was the case, then EVERYONE is the OFFICIAL position and there is NOTHING you can do about it. GAME OVER.
Daniel’s reply to you pretty much covered the issue as well, so I’ll repeat him again here and say I fully agree with what he added:
Know I do not mean that. Why are you against a independent firm of document experts doing a ‘Attestation’ for authenticity and historical purposes?
By independent you mean whoever the birthers want? Good lord you guys have no right to the document and where was your call for any previous President to release their birth records?
Why do you feel it is necessary or would serve any purpose?
You must first be able to define WHO this “independent firm” would be and THEN make your case for WHY their “expertise” would somehow be more “expert” than the actual HI DOH officials who already attested to these records in order for such an expense of time and money to be worth the effort.
THEN you must be able to suffiently explain how this “independent firms” results would be any more official and not subject to further endless speculation…. Face it, if some “independent firm” came back attesting to the document, just as ALL officials who matter ALREADY have, you’d still be unhappy and demand another “independent firm” to examine their results…and over and over and over again.
In other words, you are obvious in your true motives here. YOU don’t like the results and NO amount of evidence is ever going to make you happy, unless it completely conforms to your preconceived gut-reactions against Obama. You can’t deal with reality. Give it a rest. This issue is OVER.
Is this going to be the next “Obama could end this tomorrow if he would only release his long form. Why are you against him just answering peoples questions?” You know, the line of BS you lot trotted out for nigh on 3 years.
What exactly would they attest to? Is there any precedent for state records to be attested to? Are you really a retired intelligence officer? Can I have an independent firm attest to that?
Simple question: Are you for a independent firm of document experts doing a Attestation’ for authenticity and historical purposes? Yes or No
Simple question: Are you against a independent firm of document experts doing a Attestation’ for authenticity and historical purposes? Yes or No
Who, like factcheck? Remember, you immediately called them tools of the Obama machine when they came out with something you didn’t like.
In any case, let them examine the original document all they like. Let them knock themselves out. Its probably going to be in chigago like the other birth certificate was, so go ahead and ask like Factcheck did. But I guarantee you, all they would say is “This seems to have been printed a month ago, the markings are consistent with the time and the legal record of production is ironclad. Its genuine.”
At which point you will call them Obots and demand a REALLY REAL independent examination.
I’m going to say No unless you tell me what they would “attest to”? Let me give you an example. Suppose I say i graduated from MIT. MIT says I graduated from MIT. So what exactly would an independent firm do?
If you run such a firm and are soliciting business you would need a detailed proposal before anyone will give you a nickel.
Why are people (computer experts, graphic designers) saying that the document has many anomalies?
People? What people? Again, if I show you an MIT diploma and you call MIT and they say, “Yep, he’s an MIT grad”, then it wouldn’t matter whether the diploma was printed on toilet paper. What would your analysis show? Come on, let’s have a proposal. Pretend you were looking for funding. Sell me on this.
You aren’t REALLY a retired intelligence officer, are you? Be honest now.
YES, I am AGAINST it.
You do know that Dr Ron Pollard (Polarik) is neither a computer expert nor a graphic designer, right? He works as a statistician and has no computer graphics or IT qualifications.
When you show your driver’s license to a police officer, they don’t say “Well, this may be an official item from the state but we need it verified by a third party.
If the document really has historical value, it has it already. No third party verification is required. That’s what state certification means. It’s even in the Constitution that birthers say they revere but in reality want to shred – it’s called Full Faith and Credit. The state vouched for the document, thus it is real. Period. Put it in a museum now if you like, because no third party will be considered to have greater weight than the state that issued the document.
This is something birthers just don’t get – even if there was a trial, and birthers got to put some “birther expert” on the stand to say “It’s a forgery”, that expert will LOSE against a state official simply saying “It is real”, because the Constitution mandates that such be so.
Because they are BIRTHERS. Bigoted idiots who can’t accept reality and therefore have to make up elaborate excuses to support their fictional fantasy-world view.
Its that simple.
Don’t know him nor ever heard of him. Why do you assume I do?
Bingo. Exactly!
Why do you assume I am a birther?
He is the original birther document expert, the one that “proved” the COLB was forged and claimed he was one of the top forensic computer document experts in the country, amongst other things
Of course then it was revealed he was nothing of the sort, but Birthers still claim him as their top forensic document expert.
That’s not true. I don’t think these guys are birthers. They are educated computer experts or graphic designers who think this document has anomilies. It seems widespread.
I highly doubt it too. Birthers and most con artists like to intentionally use names that convey something opposite of reality, so they can more easily hoodwink their marks.
But regardless of this Birther’s title, he’s demonstrated only a LACK of intelligence in his posts and concerns.
Retired? That part I believe. Most of the birthers seem to be older folks resistant to the modern world.
However, it is pretty clear we are dealing with yet another typical Concern Troll hack, wasting his time here on a failed mission of propoganda peddling.
It doesn’t matter who they are. The State of Hawaii is the final authority on Hawaiian state documents. MIT is the final authority on MIT degrees. The Federal Reserve is the final authority on US currency. No independent authority can possibly overrule them.
Because you sound just like one.
SIMPLE definition here – if you are still questioning the validity of Obama’s BC, you ARE a Birther.
But some people do have fake drivers licenses and fake birth certificates. Do you agree?
Let’s try this again. Whoever they are they know less about Hawaiian state documents than the State of Hawaii. That’s the simple truth.
Why does it have to be that way?
How do you know?
Not with signed statements from the Department that issued the drivers license and a full signed record of how and when the drivers license was delivered to the persons house, they don’t.
Not if the state says they are real. You keep missing this point, so I’ll shout it to you:
WHEN THE STATE OF HAWAII SAYS A HAWAIIAN STATE DOCUMENT IS REAL, THEN BY DEFINITION IT IS.
Now which “intelligence” service did you retire from?
No, it is not.
If by widespread, you mean that various birther sites discuss it and birther posters make comments on it on every article they can find and that the same bigoted folks who’ve been always sending chain email-letters of fake stories back and forth are still sending them… then yeah, it is widespread within the same birther circles it always has been.
…But beyond your protected little bubbles, it gets dismissed and ridiculed rather rapidly, just as talk of alien abductions and Elvis living on the moon.
So sorry, I realize your intentional game here is trying to spread the Concern Troll lies of the birther agenda again, but its going nowhere.
You folks are done and relegated back to your musty corners of diseased conspiracy, where the ranting nuts always belong…
How do you know otherwise?
A meaningless and irrelevant analogy.
Those “some people” with fake drivers licenses and fake birth certificates DON’T have OFFICIAL ISSUING ATHORITIES coming out on coming out and CONSISTENTLY attesting to the AUTHENTICITY of said documents.
Be gone, Concern Troll! You’re efforts here are nothing but constant FAIL. Go back to your safe little birther sites where the gullible will buy any diseased nonsense you peddle them. The real world is NOT for you.
Because you chose to make it so. Take some self responsibility.
Stop being a Birther and repeating birther nonsense and move on with your life.
If you don’t like being called a Birther than stop acting like one. The choice is yours.
You have the ability to not say stupid Birther things and be called out as a Birther for it, so if you don’t like it, you only have yourself to blame.
There is a official Hawaii government statement saying the long form is real? I did not know this. Can you direct me to a link?
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/News_Release_Birth_Certificate_042711.pdf
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/Birth_Certificate_Request.PDF
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/News_Release_Birth_Certificate_042711.pdf
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html
Yes, they do. However, the state will not vouch for the authenticity of such. You seem to be of the misapprehension that when there’s the question of whether a document is valid, each side is supposed to provide experts and whichever expert is more persuasive, wins. If you’re talking about a 240 year old letter purported to be from George Washington, that might be true. But in the case of a government document, it is solved by simply asking whether or not the issuing authority actually issued the document. In this case, Hawaii actually said in advance that they did, indeed, issue the document, so therefore there is no questioning it. No court will entertain even the merest thought, because the state says it is valid and the Constitution says that if the state says so, it IS so.
The specific language (sequence of code words) from the Hawaii Department of Health necessary to state that the long form is real so that the birthers will accept it has not been disclosed by the birthers; however, for general purposes the Obama FAQ at http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html that links to the White House scan of the long form would be considered by normal people as endorsement by the Department of Health of the White House image.
I suggest you read the Health Department page preceding and all the links in it. If you still have doubts, don’t come back here because we’re not equipped to deal with extreme cases.
For the purposes of brevity can we start with what you know?
Odd, This long form is different than what Fukino described in a MSNBC interview.
Here is part of the article:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42519951/ns/politics-more_politics/t/ex-hawaii-official-denounces-ludicrous-birther-claims/
“She found the original birth record, properly numbered, half typed and half handwritten”
What Obama released isn’t half written.
Hi NC1. How’s tricks?
What intelligence service were you kicked out of again? Why won’t you say? Are you ashamed of what you did?
No. Not at all.
You are desperately trying to take the statement “half” way to literally…and thus why you fail and come across so foolish.
There are plenty of hand-written notations on the document. Pretty standard stuff.
Nothing to see here. Give it up.
US Army (Retired). Twenty years and two months. Loved every minute of it.
Can you prove it? By the way, confirmation from the Army will not be sufficient.
No. Just stating the facts. Fukino said Obama’s birth record is half-typed and half handwritten. What Obama released is all typed except the signatures. It is a fact that what Obama released ‘is not’ half written.
He should be back in a few minutes. He has to swing by WND so he can copy and paste the newest birther talking points.
Do you know what else is a fact? This: http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html
Feel free to stop embarrassing yourself any day now.
Simple question: Which independent firm of document experts?
You choose and please explain why it is the absolute right choice.
You must have one in mind or you wouldn’t have suggested it, right?
Just goes to show that ‘Military Intelligence’ is an oxymoron.
It is when you include the medical information that not ever part of a published birth cert but is attached to the physical bottom of the vital records in the files. Those are typically handwritten.
I think Fukino’s description is consistent with the long form. You are taking it too literally.
I have engaged in these nit-pick word games with birthers before, but I find it now tiresome and a waste of time.
She would have seen the bottom half. The part marked “for medical use only” that is never released to the public. That most likely would have been completed by a nurse with handwritten entries.
You’re giving “intelligence” a bad name.
So? The document is what the State of Hawaii stands behind. It’s an official document and no supposed expert can overcome that.
I’m assuming that his “Army” pension is not enough and he has gone into the document business and is attempting to drum up $$$.
By the way, where is the proof that Mr “Retired Intelligence Officer” was ever an intelligence officer? So far I have seen ZIP.
What’s odd is Obama’s long form have a seal like the Nordyke twins seal? If he was born a day before his should look just like theirs.
perhaps he needs to bring his intelligence out of retirement.
“What’s odd is Obama’s long form have a seal like the Nordyke twins seal? If he was born a day before his should look just like theirs.”
That may be the funniest thing I’ve read in several days.
How is it funny? Why doesn’t Obama’s long form have the same type of seal like the Nordyke twins certificates?
I would’ve liked to be able to laugh at this as well but the only thing I can do is wish is that the birthers who troll this site had the decency to make sure that what they type makes sense to the rest of us.
Yeah….and it should be photo-statically copied with the same machine as the Nordyke’s…and signed by the same dead Director of Health. Jeez.
“How is it funny? Why doesn’t Obama’s long form have the same type of seal like the Nordyke twins certificates?”
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! ! ! Oh stop! My sides hurt!
WHEW! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA ! !
It is funny because you clearly don’t understand that the seal is on the copy (to certify its validity) and not the original (which is valid because it is in the Hawai’ian DoH archive). It is funny because the seal would have been placed on President Obama’s long form a couple of weeks ago, vs. half a century ago for the Nordyke certificates (or whenever the Nordyke’s got the copies of their birth certificates that have been displayed online). It is funny because you are one again proving yourself to be a particularly moronic concern troll who lacks the wit to comprehend just how completely pathetic all of its arguments are. Does that help?
Surreal is more interesting than stupid or bizarre.
Will,
Be careful – remember what happened to the hyenas in ‘Who Framed Roger Rabbit?” You don’t want to go the way of all of your irony meters now, do you?
Well why can’t Obama just post a real picture of his original from Kapi-olani?
Tell you what. You get yous. Go to the state registrar from wherever you were born and arranged to view your original birth certificate and take a picture of it with a digital camera. When you manage that, come back and let us know.
Because you would ask for the placenta next?
I think we need some third party independent psychiatrists to determine if that guy is in his right mind
That’s what he posted. A photocopy IS A REAL PICTURE. Open up a photocopier. What’s inside? A camera. It just prints the image on regular paper instead of film.
Have you ever seen where someone sits on the Xerox machine and takes a picture of their ass????
Very interesting read.
http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/05/13/research-summary-on-hawaii-birth-certificate-number-151-1961-010641/
Listen, I gut my Birth cert this week. I did it because, guess what, I’VE LOST MY OLDER ONE.
You might have heard that Obama has moved around a bit over the years.
And hospitals don’t give out birth certs. The DOH does.
Curious. Where is the official statement from the Dept of Health? What you posted was from Donalyn DelaCruz who doesn’t work at the Dept of Health. Where is a offical statement from Fuddy?
This is interesting:
The following report was compiled by the person who traveled to Hawaii last July and reported her findings to The Post & Email shortly thereafter.
â–According to the COLB posted on http://www.factcheck.org/ for Mr. Obama, his birth certificate number is 151-1961-010641. The number was allegedly assigned when his birth certificate was allegedly filed with the State Registrar on August 8, 1961. The Nordyke twins, whose original long-form birth certificates were posted on the internet, are identified as file numbers 151-1961-010637 and 151-1961-010638 respectively, and were assigned and accepted by the State Registrar on August 11, 1961. I am in possession of an email dated February 3, 2010 in which Ms. Okubo stated that the certificate numbers were assigned by the State Registrar and only in the main DoH office located on Oahu (Honolulu).
â–Based on this information, it is not possible that 151-1961-010641 was assigned three days earlier than were 151-1961-010637 and 151-1961-010638. The file number 010641 was likely assigned on Friday, August 11, 1961 and no later than Monday, August 14, 1961.
â–A small group of researchers that I work with identified an infant girl named Virginia Sunahara, born on August 4, 1961 at Wahiawa Hospital in Wahiawa, Oahu, HI. Due to complications, she was transferred to and later died at Kapiolani Women and Children’s Medical Center (most likely) on August 5, 1961. This happens to coincide with date of birth and birthplace of the Nordyke twins. Assuming that her medical records were also transferred to Kapiolani, the birth certificate likely originated at Kapiolani and was included in the group of birth certificates that contained the Nordyke twins.
a. Born the morning of August 4, 1961 at Wahiawa Hospital, Wahiawa, Oahu, HI.
b. Due to complications, the infant was transferred to hospital in Honolulu. Kapiolani Medical Center for Women and Children is the most likely; however, Queens Medical Center is also a possibility.
c. Died at Kapiolani the morning of August 5, 1961.
d. Death notice appears in the Honolulu Star Advertiser on August 8, 1961 and the Honolulu Star-Bulletin on August 14, 1961 for Tomiyo Sunahara; no birth announcement was published.
e. Interred at National Cemetery of the Pacific, aka Punchbowl in Sept. 1961.
f. One researcher requested verification from the Veterans Administration that Virginia Sunahara was interred in plot U-966F (Sunahara listed as buried here. See: http://www.interment.net/data/us/hi/oahu/natmem/hawaii_stosv.htm) and was informed that there were no records responsive to her request. The gravesite in question was allegedly occupied by James T. Sawamura. I visited Punchbowl on July 21, 2010 to confirm. I went into the office to obtain information about plot number U-966-F. Virginia Sunahara was not listed in the database; the clerk showed me the computer screen. The database indicates that James T. Sawamura is buried there. Born Jul 23 1926; Died Oct 14 1980.
g. The same researcher made a UIPA request from the DoH for an abbreviated, non-certified copy of the Sunahara COLB per the DoH Public Health Regulation Chapter 8B and was informed “no records exist that were responsive to her request,” which is the UIPA equivalent response that this person did or does not exist, according to the DoH. The correct response based on previous requests for other abbreviated, non-certified copies of the COLB, is “denied per HRS 338-18” since the requester “does not have a direct and tangible interest.” PHR Chapter 8B does however allow the release of such information but the DoH thus far refuses to comply.
h. I personally visited the DOH Office in Honolulu on July 21, 2010 and found Virginia Sunahara’s name in both the birth and death indexes spanning 1960-1964.
i. The research team did some footwork and determined the following: The father, Tomio Sunahara, was cremated and interred at the Mililani Memorial Gardens. Born Oct 13 1924; Died Mar 26 1968.
j. I visited the Sunahara birth address of xxxxxxxxxxxxxx. The house was in a relatively poor area, the house was unkempt and was not much more than a shack; there were discarded items and lawn bags full of pop and beer cans scattered everywhere. I approached the door where I could hear Fox News blaring in the background and knocked. A 50ish man in a pair of swim trunks, no shirt, answered the door. From what I could see, the house was extremely unkempt and had not been cleaned in years. There was stuff piled everywhere. The man at the door was Virginia’s brother, xxxxxxx.
k. I asked if xxxxxx, Virginia’s mother was home, and he asked me what the purpose of my visit was. I explained that I was researching infant deaths in 1961 and that I had attempted to visit Virginia’s gravesite at the National Cemetery but I could not locate it. He confirmed his father Tomio was buried at Mililani (which is no more than 5 miles from Wahiawa) and that Virginia was buried with him. I asked again if I could speak with the mother and he took me to a room located behind the carport and knocked on the door. The mother was asleep but awoke and came to the door. The condition of her room was the same as the inside of the house. He left me with the mother and returned to the house. I explained again that I was researching infant deaths and wanted some details regarding the death of Virginia. This is what I got:
i. Tomiyo/Virginia Sunahara was born the morning of Aug 4 1961 at Wahiawa General Hospital.
ii. She was having difficulty breathing and they transferred her to a hospital in Honolulu. Mrs. Sunahara did not remember which one but I assume it was Kapiolani since it is was more likely equipped to handle neonatal complications. She also could not recall where she was taken or who the physician was. You have to keep in mind that she is 83 years old, and this event occurred 50 years ago.
iii. Virginia survived less than a day which likely places the time of death sometime in the early AM of Aug 5 1961.
iv. I asked I could see the birth/death documentation and she said she could not remember if she even had it. Even if she did, given the condition of the house, I seriously doubt that she would have been able locate it.
v. I expressed my condolences to the mother regarding her loss, thanked her for the information and then left.
l. I called a member of the research team and asked them to find out where Mililani Gardens were located. After I left Wahiawa to head back toward Honolulu, I saw an exit for Mililani and exited. I stopped at the public library and obtained driving directions.
m. In the meantime, the research team member contacted the mortuary and confirmed that Virginia was indeed buried there with her father, Tomio as was her brother Stephen who passed away in 2002. According to mortuary, Virginia’s remains were dug up at the National Cemetery October 1968 and placed with her father’s, Tomio Sunahara.
â–I drove to the cemetery and stopped at the first office I came to and obtained the plot location. I explained that I was researching infant deaths from 1961 and asked if it was possible to view Virginia’s birth and death documentation (which was likely transferred to the mortuary when her remains were transferred). I was informed that I could not see the documentation due to legal and privacy concerns.
â–I located the gravesite. Again, by all appearances, this has been here for quite some time. There is zero evidence that this grave marker is a recent addition.
â–During my visit to the DoH office in Honolulu on July 20, 2010. I examined and made images of various index books:
a. The 1955-1959 birth index
b. The 1960-1964 birth index
c. The 1960-1964 death index
d. The 1960-1965 marriage index by Groom
e. The 1966-1970 marriage index by Groom
f. The 1960-1965 marriage index by Bride
â–All of the index books with the exception of the 1960-1964 birth index included the date range in the header on each page. My analysis is that there is a canned report the Vital Records department can run for the various indexes based on a specified date range and it is one of the parameters included when the report is printed. The fact that the 1960-1964 index lacks the date range in the header is a good indication that a custom report was generated to include Mr. Obama. His name was either somehow inserted or a report was created to include all births registered between the years of 1960-1964 and Mr. Obama. I have no doubt that the DoH has some sort of birth registration for Mr. Obama; however, his birth was likely registered sometime after 1964 or it is either a late/delayed or foreign birth registration.
â–During my visit I spoke with “Jesse the Vital Records Supervisor” and asked him if the birth indexes included foreign/out-of-state births, Hawaiian Births, and Late/Delayed Registration Births and I was informed no, that they included only the births that met the general birth criteria. I asked to see the aforementioned and I was told they did not exist or were not available. This is in direct conflict with the DoH Specific Records Retention Schedule items VDR-10, VDR-6, VDR-1. The Post & Email was able to obtain pages from the Certificate of Hawaiian Birth Index from Ms. Okubo, so its existence has already been confirmed. I asked if I could obtain a copy of a specific person’s index data and I was informed no, that it would contain too much information. I asked if I could obtain a redacted copy that included only information that appears in the index books (vital event, name and gender), and again, I was informed no.
Summary/Analysis:
â–The VA cemetery records were most likely computerized sometime in the late 1970’s or early 1980’s. Virginia’s data was erroneously entered into the database at that point and time.
â–According a fellow researcher, an audit of the burial records was to have been performed around 2003. Either Punchbowl cemetery neglected to perform the audit, or it at least failed to verify Virginia’s records. In or after 2006, Virginia’s burial record was removed from the VA database.
â–None of the databases that have been offered as evidence e.g. Find A Grave, Burial Internment, usgov.org are the actual VA database. They are just a snapshot of what the VA had on record at a particular point and time. It is not clear how long it takes for these auxiliary databases to self-correct or if they ever do.
â–Also, I believe that there was no official name change from Tomiyo to Virginia. According HRS 338, death certificates must be received by the DoH within three days. The Sunaharas probably had not selected a name for the baby prior to her death. The timeframe for submittal for a birth certificate is not as stringent (seven days). By the time the birth certificate was submitted, they decided on the name Virginia and the DoH updated its records accordingly for the death certificate. It is rare the issuance of a death certificate precedes a birth registration so the DoH likely retroactively updated its death record in regard to the first name.
â–If Virginia’s certificate number is 151-1961-010641, it was likely processed at the DoH on the 11th and no later than the 14th, based on the Nordyke twins’ certificate numbers (010637 and 010638) and the date they were processed, which was the 11th. We know that the DoH assigns a numerically sequential certificate number when it is received and accepted/filed. In other words, it is not pre-printed on a form that is distributed to all the HI hospitals. It is only way it can control the sequential numbering of the births otherwise the certificate numbers would be all over the place.
â–The delay of the internment at the National Cemetery that is assumed to have occurred on Sept 28, 1961 (based on the VA database snapshots in 2006) most likely had to with how long it took the Sunaharas to obtain approval from the VA to bury Virginia’s remains there. She was either embalmed, then held in cold storage at the mortuary that handled the remains, or she was cremated and the Sunaharas held her remains until such time that she could be interned at the National Cemetery. The latter makes the most sense, and cremation is a common method of handling remains in Asian culture
Maybe you should look up 2 posts to where I gave you it, troll.
‘Intelligence officer’ my right testicle.
First off, the CoLB released 3 years ago was proof that President Obama is a natural born US citizen. Second, can you prove you are not a racist? Because asking the first black president for documentation that was never asked of his predecessors after he has already released more documentation in addition to a document that is proof of all of the relevant facts to any reasonable standard seems like the act of a racist to me. Third, a hospital copy is not an official document – you have seen the official document and it has an iron-clad chain of custody. Either admit that President Obama was born in Hawai’i and is therefore a natural born citizen or implicitly declare that you are a bigoted birther who pals around with racists.
We don’t need any help for that. “Retired intelligence officer” (and I use the word “intelligence” very loosely) is out of his mind like every other birther in existence. From reading his posts I can tell that he is prescription-strength stupid.
No. It really isn’t. It is a complete and utter load of crap – analysis of the numbering of those certificates (plus Stig’s BC [who’s announcement was in the paper with President Obama’s]) suggests something like the hypothetical workflow Doc C suggested rather than your naive birther fantasies. Face it – the birthers have been rendered completely and permanently impotent.
I am still waiting for proof that you are a “retired intelligence officer”. I have asked several times. Where is it?
😀
[I am still laughing! OMG, what an idiot!]
Interesting. So if I disagree with Obama I’m considered a racist?
Simple question. Have you stopped beating your wife yet? Yes or No.
Look “Retired Intelligence Officer”, either prove you are what you say or i will have to report you to the authorities for impersonating someone of intelligence . And a pertty poor impersonation it is.
No, but if you think that President Obama is not a natural born citizen then you are prejudiced against him which is most likely due to racism and you shouldn’t be surprised when you are called on it. It has been proven beyond any doubt that, taken as a whole, the birthers are stupid, ignorant, intellectually dishonest, seditious, unpatriotic, unAmerican racist scum who denigrate the Constitution that they pretend to revere in pursuit of their vile and traitorous goal of overturning a fair election. I personally disagree with President Obama on several issues, but I don’t make up lies and pretend that he is an ineligible communist.
Natural born citizen has never been defined so I can’t call him a natural born citizen.
Then the same would be true for all past and future Presidents. Perhaps NO ONE is a natural born citizen, or perhaps EVERYONE is. Did they teach you logic in “intelligence” school?
See Judge Brown’s decision in Ankeny v. Daniels (Indiana Court of Appeals). If the founding fathers didn’t believe that the term ‘Natural Born Citizen’ wasn’t well defined in the context in which the rest of the Constitution is understood to be defined why didn’t they specify the definition like they did with the term treason? Are we to believe that the Founders were idiots or are we to believe that you are a moron?
Interesting. I found this. John Bingham, the father or architect of the 14th Amendment defined natural born citizen as this.
“Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
Didn’t Obama’s father owe allegiance to the British Crown?
No, he didn’t; not while he was in the US. While he was here, he was free to tell the Queen to eat dirt. What could she have done to him? He owed me some money though and i’m trying to collect from his son, but no luck so far. Can you help?
Besides, when Bingham says “your Constitution” that is an odd usage if he means the US Constitution. Shouldn’t he have said, “our Constitution”? So, I can only conclude he means some other Constitution.
Logic my friend…
Why can’t you stop beating a dead horse?
Seriously, why can’t accept the evidence and stop pestering decent people? Folks like you have been making ridiculous demands for almost three years now. Well you got more than you deserved with the long form, but your 15 minutes are over.
Maybe in a decade or so you can get on some documentary on cranks of the early 21st century.
I’m sorry but you seem to be wrong. Obama’s father was governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 and was a British subject. Also Bingham said this:
“All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))
So apparently Obama doesn’t pass the test if his father’s allegiance was to a foreign sovereignty. This is very interesting to say the least.
President Obama was born under the jurisdiction of the United States of a father that was subject to the jurisdiction of the United States (i.e. he wasn’t a diplomat or enemy soldier). According to the actual 14th Amendment he was born a citizen of the US rather than becoming a citizen through naturalization – if Bingham meant anything different (which he didn’t, by the way…) he should have wrote it into the Constitution differently. Trying to redefine the 14th amendment to create a loophole that will make the first black president ineligible is about as racist as you can get without actually advocating slavery, by the way… you should be ashamed of yourself.
If you read the context of Bingham’s remark and the debate on the Civil Rights Act of 1866, you will see that he is excepting the children of ambassadors, not the children of non-citizen aliens.
Yes, I am 100% against it. Birthers have wasted too much of the nation’s time already. To give them anything more would be a bad object lesson to every bratty child on the country.
To grant such a request based on willful stupidity would be dumbing down the nation; it would be a victory for nuttiness over sanity. It would be letting the inmates run the asylum.
Actually, I’m guessing that even if President Obama’s father had been a diplomat (the exception being talked about), President Obama would have still been a natural born citizen due to Dr. Dunham’s citizenship. In any case, Barack Obama Sr. was, in fact, subject to US jurisdiction so there is absolutely no uncertainty in this case. I find your willingness to repeatedly advance discredited racist memes to be interesting, however…
I could not agree with this statement more – if the birthers don’t understand that they are in a time out, then we have to rub their nose in their own $hit and swat them with a rolled up newspaper until they get it…
I haven’t mentioned anything about racism nor shown signs of racism. It’s interesting looking back that all presidents post grandfather clause were born to ‘two’ U.S. citizen parents.
Interesting.
According to a new Gallup Poll reported by USA Today, only 47 percent of those surveyed say they think Obama “definitely” was born in the United States.
Charles Franklin, a University of Wisconsin political scientist, told USA Today that the findings show the public no longer has faith in the “traditional” gatekeepers, such as the news media and top political leaders.
Obama released the image late last month, saying he had no time for such silliness as questions about his birth, then departed for an appearance on Oprah’s television show.
Part of the doubt that remains could be attributable to a long list of analysts who have come out with statements casting doubt on the integrity of the online image posted by the White House.
Web document experts have questioned the document’s authenticity, and a close inspection of the Hawaii Department of Health state registrar’s official stamp on the birth records even reveals an apparent typographical error.
The stamp, affixed April 25, 2011, says “TXE RECORD.”
Yet, on a copy of a Hawaii long-form birth certificate issued only one month earlier, the stamp says “THE RECORD.”…
That’s a rather sloppy way of stating it. BNA 1948 isn’t a governing body. Obama’s father was a British subject. However, the jurisdiction of the United States is absolute within its borders (except where we exempt certain individuals by law or by treaty — such ambassadors and their families) and so regardless of his citizenship, Obama’s father was within the jurisdiction of the United States. This is accordance with the common law that was the law practiced by the founders of our Country.
I have to give everybody the benefit of the doubt at the outset, and I can excuse someone whose civics education comes from birther blogs. If you really care to get your facts straight, look at the other side of the issue first, which could come from any number of sources, including the Citizenship topical link on the right sidebar of this blog.
Their fathers were naturalized before they were born thus they were born to ‘two’ U.S. citizen parents making them natural born citizens if we go by John Bingham’s definition.
You’re fighting a losing battle. Actually, the battle was lost three years ago. Hawaii has confirmed that Obama was born there. Also, it was known long before the 2008 election that his father was not a US citizen. If it were a problem, the Democratic party never would have let him run and the Republican party would have challenged it if they had. Do you really think that you’re better at interpreting the law than people who actually do it for a living?
Aah, “Officer”. You tried hard. You tried to be inquisitive, you tried to act insulted when we called you a birther, then you shifted to concern troll, but you couldn’t help it. In the end, you went full birther as your ilk always does.
Time for a new sockpuppet eh?
1930 census, Line 65, Agnew’s father was naturalized in “1903.” Spiro Agnew was a natural born citizen born of U.S. citizen parents. Parents are relevant because they hand down their allegiance to their children at birth. Barack Obama’s website fight the smears said his fathers British status governed his childrens status at their births.
See here:
“As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.s children.”
Interesting isn’t it?
If Retired Intel needs more help:
YICK WO V. HOPKINS, 118 U. S. 356 (1886) http://supreme.justia.com/us/118/356/case.html
The same definition here was quoted in Truax v. Raich (1914).
If you are referring to Mickey Booth’s child’s LFBC, evidence suggests it was obtained about a decade ago, not one month ago… Were you lying or just ignorant?
There are few things that I would be willing to bet my actual life on.
Two of them are:
1- Obama’s BC is genuine, and he was born in Hawaii.
2- “Retired Intelligence Officer” was never an Intelligence Officer.
I have worked at various celebrity autograph conventions, where people go to meet celebs and pay for their autographs.
Imagine if you were at one, walked up to Mickey Rooney and had him autograph a photo right in front of you. While he signs it, a person snaps of photo of you standing with him, watching him sign it. After Mr. Rooney is finished, he hands you the signed photo with a smile. At the same time, the shows promoter fills out and gives you a COA as well as the photo. You immediately tell him you won’t accept it is a real signature unless it is verified by a third party document expert.
This is a day in the life of (never been a) Retired Intelligece Officer.
Our friend “RIC” is hitting on all birther cylinders today.
He believes every single birther lie about the President, even ones that are mutually exclusive.
I think he should be banned unless he provides his Intelligence credentials. Otherwise, why should we engage a dishonest mental case?
I’d rather see the President busy hunting down more terrorists than wasting time trying to appease small-minded, paranoid bigots who think WND is an actual news source.
Your little, sad, pathetic and diseased mind is obsessed with all things birther.
You’re a troll with irrelevant, bigoted delusions. You lost and you will always lose. Your complete lack of respect for U.S. law and legal authority is vile and reprehensible.
“Oop’s”? Interesting.
I didn’t write the article. I think they are refering to a long form recieved on March 15th, 2011. It didn’t have the TXE but THE from Onaka’s stamp.
I should have mentioned that the case I cited was also cited in WKA, though sometimes birthers (or “eligibility deniers”) turn off when they here mention of that case.
Yeah, it looks like “TXE” but then that’s a typo nobody would make. “X” and “H” are nowhere near each other on the keyboard. Most likely just a poorly inked H at low resolution. The Guthrie photo of the original from Hawaii, showing the seal, looks a little H-like too. Nothing to see here. Move along.
Incorrect – you’ve expressed opinions which are espoused by many known racists, used an argument so classically racist that the only precedent in the SCOTUS is from the majority in the Dredd Scott decision, and made yourself part of a group who has advocated a double standard be applied to the first black president. That seems racist to me…
By the way, the grandfather clause was never used – every single US president has been a natural born citizen.
I agree. In fact, I think he should be reported to the FBI for falsely claiming to be a former intelligence officer. Isn’t that a crime?
If he claims to be military intelligence as opposed to CIA, possibly.
I know that even in the darkest days of the CIA, the NSA, the DIA, etc., they didn’t hire pathological liars with low IQs.
Then we’ll go with ignorant. Nothing wrong with that. Now you know better though, so don’t repeat the lie again. (By the way, if you want me to believe that the document was issued recently, you will have to get Dr. Fuddy to confirm that in an official statement…)
That’s what he claimed. Hasn’t shown a shred of proof.
No, they were generally pathological liars with high IQs.
Wong Kim Ark was declared a citizen but not a natural born citizen. A attorney named Mario Apuzzo whom I just discovered has a interesting website about the false perception that WKA was a natural born citizen.
Then you might be interested in Marios debate with real lawyers around the time the Supreme court threw out his last birther case. See the comments section at
http://www.caaflog.com/2010/11/21/this-week-in-military-justice-21-november-2010-edition
Oh Sorry. The major portion of the debate is at
http://www.caaflog.com/2010/11/28/this-week-in-military-justice-28-november-2010-edition/
Sorry for sending him your way dwight, but at least the reading will keep him busy for a while… 😀
The lower court said Mr. Wong was a natural born citizen. The opposition argued that if the SCOTUS found in his favor that Mr. Wong would be eligible to be president. The SCOTUS agreed and and ruled in Mr. Wong’s favor (implicitly declaring him a natural born citizen [I just wanted to make that clear since you seem to be hard of thinking]). Mario is wrong – I wouldn’t trust him with a DUI case (which is where his expertise in the law lies). He moderates his blog in order to censor arguments that he cannot rebut. And no one buys your ‘I just found this…’ routine, by the way…
If you really just discovered birtherism, it would be interesting if you would tell us what the evidence was that convinced you that vile seditious lies were the truth and why you would ignore so many well supported arguments that show birtherism to be based in nothing but shameful bigoted lies – that would really be interesting, in my opinion.
Yes, and when this is true, people are believing any and every crank idea that comes down the pike.
With the age of the Internet, any fool can make a pretty web site. The traditional gatekeepers are even more important because the average Internet user doesn’t have the investigative resources to sort out truth from rumor.
You might be surprised how much time I spend researching crank birther claims. I can do that because I am retired and this is my specialized hobby. Such effort would be impractical for the average person or on a broader topic.
How can Obama be a dual citizen and natural born citizen at the same time?
That is the challenge of the internet age – not finding information, but determining the quality of the information you’ve found. I do believe that eventually some new form of gatekeepers will evolve – hopefully sooner rather than later…
I challenge you to read the whole decision. You might find it interesting.
http://supreme.justia.com/us/169/649/case.html
Retired Intelligence Officer:
Do you believe foreign countries should have a say as to who can become the American President?
The same way that Spiro Agnew (Greek citizen) and Thomas Jefferson (French citizen) were – the US does not recognize foreign law when it comes to determining who it considers citizens. Why do you want to cede US sovereignity to foreign countries? Do you think that Kim Jong Il should get to determine who natural born US citizens are? That idiocy is a logical consequence of your reasoning, by the way – interesting…
Obama is only a dual citizen by British law. British law is not recognized by the US Constitution. Any country in the world could declare anyone in the US their citizen. Would you like to let Iran veto who runs for President of the US? That’s what follows from your question.
We have had several dual-citizens who became President (Eisenhower for one). At least one, Jefferson, was dual citizen (French) WHILE he served as President.
The way you all put it is that anchor babies born to illegals can someday be president. That should not be allowed to happen. I doubt the founders wanted a president after the grandfather clause ran out with a British Subject father who gave his son dual allegiances at birth. The way it looks from reading Mr. Apuzzo’s site is that we have a usurper sitting in the White House. Brian Shatz needs to be investigated. The OCON forms are missing the provisional wording that certifies the candidates as Constitutionally eligible. The wording appeared on Gore’s and Kerry’s OCON forms but not Obama’s. Can someone explain why? This is down right suspicious as to why that happened.
A dual citizen is someone who is claimed as a citizen of two countries a natural born citizen in someone who was born a citizen rather than becoming a citizen thorough naturalization. President Obama was a citizen at birth (he didn’t have to be naturalized therefore he was natural born) and had potential British and later Kenyan citizenship. There is no evidence that he ever asserted this citizenship and it expired when he reached majority (23, I believe).
To paraphrase John Wayne (he was an American Icon – I assume that an unpatriotic scumbag like yourself doesn’t know who John Wayne was…), you may not have voted for him, but he’s your president and you should hope that he does a good job. Also, Americans have been repeatedly told that it is patriotic to support your president in a time of war – why do the birthers lack any patriotism?
“A attorney named Mario Apuzzo whom I just discovered . . .”
Riiiiiiiiiight. More comedy gold from the birfoon.
Well if you feel that way, get to work on a Constitutional amendment.
Reality check: do you seriously believe the Chief Justice of the United States Supreme Court would swear in a President he believed was ineligible on Constitutional grounds?
Apuzzo is an attorney representing someone challenging Obama. He is an advocate for a position, and he has no expertise in constitutional law. That’s the last place you should go for an authoritative opinion. If you really want an authoritative opinion, how about former US Supreme Court justice Sandra Day O’Connor, writing in a letter to a school child?
So what if “anchor babies” are allowed to run for President? I’m being honest here. I know you ignore pretty much everybody as you wait to cut and paste your next birther screed, but let’s be honest.
The Unabomber was eligible to be President. John Wilkes Booth was eligible to be President. There’s lots of people who are eligible to be President that would not get the votes.
If an “anchor baby” is beyond age 35 and has resided in the US for at least 14 of their years, let them run. You seem unwilling to let the voters decide who they want, instead you want to just make sure people you don’t like can’t run at all. My guess is (for better or worse) there would be enough people unwilling to vote for an “anchor baby” at this time that they would have no chance at winning an election. So no problem. No need to strike them from the ballot.
I feel similarly about an “ineligible candidate”. If there really were a wholly ineligible candidate, I actually believe the people wouldn’t elect them.
What birthers are really afraid of is not Obama now – they’re afraid if he’s allowed on the ballot in 2012 (and he will be), he will win. After all, if they thought he’d lose, no reason to kick him off. Take the “easy win”. They want him off the ballot because they think he will win, much like the ruling party in Iran allows opposition candidates only in areas where they know they will not be elected, but bars them in areas where there might be a close vote.
Which is exactly why reasonable people do not take anything the fail attorney Apuzzo has to say on the subject.
Apuzzo has LOST every one of his birther cases. That really should tell you something…. if you were a reasonable person, that is.
Why are Apuzzo, Kerchner and so many other birthers supportive of the Dred Scott v. Sandford decision?
So you ask a completely UNRELATED question to what you’ve been doing here and making a completely FALSE argument.
NOTHING you’ve been whining about has anything to do with “disagreeing” with Obama’s policies or position.
What YOU HAVE been doing is flailing about for any possible excuse you can grasp at to DENY the legitimacy of the POTUS, despite ALL consistently corraborating EVIDENCE and OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT statements that back that up.
Why is that, perhaps? Why do YOU have such an intense and visceral need to PRETEND he is anything other than the Natural Born American Citizen and POTUS that he is?
Nobody is making you agree with his polices nor his positions. Nobody cares if you do or not. Nobody is making you cast a vote for him or anyone else.
But YOU – You need to desperately PRETEND he’s not “real” and somehow “illegitimate”.
YEAH, I’d say that is pretty clear bigotry. Racism is only one form of bigotry and only a subset of xenophobia, at that. I don’t know enough (nor do I care) about you to know what your personal insecurities and petty world views are to pin down what is the source motivations of YOUR particular form of bigotry. It could be ideologically based, religion-based, general xenophobia or standard racism…or any combination of the above.
It really doesn’t matter whether it is racism or some other form of bigotry. It is STILL irrational BIGOTRY.
So yes, you come across as a BIGOT. And a sore loser. And an utter spiteful fool.
And a disingenuous Concern troll.
Now go away and return to the slimy dark hole in which your birther ilk belong.
Arguing for the support of the shameful Dred Scott case is a pretty telling indicator of true underlying racism as a motivator….
Why was the OCON forms for Obama in Hawaii missing the provisional wording stating the candidate was constitutionally eligible when Kerry and Gores had their OCON forms included with the wording?
How did he lose the cases when they never went to trial?
Can you explain why Hawaii left off the constitutional eligibility wording for Obama on it’s OCON form? The wording was included on Kerry and Gore’s.
Which is why many of the actual racists amongst what became the Birthers were caught off-guard and *shocked* when Obama won in 2008. Despite all the polls clearly indicating he had a strong liklihood of winning. These racists can only perceive the world through their own limited and ugly mindset.
They simply could not conceive of a world that would elect someone with the skin color, name and heritage of Barack Obama to the greatest and most powerful office in the world. That it happened was a complete assault on their personal perspective of what someone’s “place” in the world should be…
That he NOT ONLY won, but won with a COMMANDING and DECISIVE margin of victory on EVERY SCALE – both individual votes cast AND the all important Electoral College – was just further rubbing of reality into their faces, like salt in a wound.
Hence why they can’t move on with their lives and wake up every day seething and still focused on this silly issue over 2.5 years later. They MUST not only do whatever they can to try to prevent his reelection (once, they can pretend was merely a “mistake”…but twice…now THAT really proves their ugly worldview wrong).
But that is not nearly enough. They must desperately DENY his very existence and legitimacy in the first place. If it was a close election, with the decision hanging in the balance of a single state, LIKE the PREVIOUS TWO Presidential Elections before – well, then they could simply live with the delusion that it was somehow decided wrong and claim one state must be corrupt.
But they have NO way to explain away a 9.5 MILLION vote margin in FAVOR of Obama in what was the greatest amount of votes EVER cast in a Presidential election and the LONGEST and MOST COVERED Presidential election cycle in history.
…And THAT and its implications for the future scares them more than anything else.
This constitutional scholar and lawyer thinks Obama is not a natural born citizen
His bio:
[Mr. Titus taught constitutional law, common law, and other subjects for nearly 30 years at five different American Bar Association approved law schools. From 1986 to 1993, he served as the founding Dean of the College of Law and Government in Regent University, Virginia Beach, Virginia. Prior to his academic career, he served as a Trial Attorney and a Special Assistant United States Attorney with the United States Department of Justice in Washington, D.C. and Kansas City, Missouri. Today he is engaged in a general practice with a concentration in constitutional strategy, litigation, and appeals.
Mr. Titus holds the J.D. degree (cum laude) from Harvard and the B.S. degree in Political Science from the University of Oregon from which he graduated Phi Beta Kappa. He is an active member of the bar of Virginia and an inactive member of the bar of Oregon. He is admitted to practice before the United States Supreme Court, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, the United States Court of Claims, and the United States Courts of Appeals for the Sixth, Seventh, Ninth, Tenth, District of Columbia and Federal Circuits. His constitutional practice has taken him into federal district courts in Alabama, Arizona, Georgia, Montana, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Oregon, Texas, Wyoming, and the District of Columbia and the state courts of Idaho, Texas and North Dakota.
He has testified on constitutional issues before the United States Congress. He has also testified on state and federal constitutional issues before several state legislatures. His views on constitutional law have received wide circulation on the Internet and other media, and among members of Congress, state legislatures, and public policy advocates and organizations.
Mr. Titus has written numerous articles, book chapters and constitutional studies and analyses. He is the author of God, Man & Law: The Biblical Principle, a widely acclaimed text on American common law. His e-books on the common law and constitutional liberty (co-authored with Gerald Thompson) are available at http://www.lonang.com. Mr. Titus is regularly invited to lecture and conduct workshops on American legal and constitutional history before civic groups. ]
Please listen.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esiZZ-1R7e8&feature=player_embedded
Well, Scientist beat me to it, so I’ll echo what he said:
If you don’t understand that, then you are admitting that you [don’t] [demeaning remark removed. Doc.] understand the basic fundamental principals of how laws and courts work.
Friviolous cases get tossed out and dismissed ALL the time. That is a LOSS.
Further, YES, “standing” is a key concept and it *IS* a criteria of MERIT in a case. If you are dismissed on standing, you have FAILED to meet the most basic critera of merit.
Give it up, Retired [demeaning remark removed. Doc.] Officer. All you have is a wall of FAIL and long debunked Birther talking points that we’ve heard and soundly thrashed many times before.
BINGO! Exactly!
She didn’t necessarily say that. The reporter was paraphrasing her. I didn’t see any quotes. Now – what would that mean? Could it be that part was handwritten (i.e. the signatures)?
Retired Intelligence Officer May 14, 2011 at 4:23 pm (Quote) #
“Why do you assume I am a birther?”
Copying and pasting from obamareleaseyourrecords (see The Ugly below) is typical [denigrating remark removed. Doc.] [birther].
What is required by law? Were the forms accepted by the appropriate official? Since we know for a fact that President Obama is Constitutionally* eligible there is no damage that has been done nor is there any possible redress the courts could grant. If you’d like to remove President Obama, then petition your representatives to start impeachment proceedings – if you try anything else then any patriotic Americans will rise up to stop your seditious activities.
* I notice that birthers don’t seem to follow the standard American practice of capitalizing the word ‘Constitution’ when referring to the US Constitution – why do birthers continually disrespect the Constitution if they revere it like they claim?
They were dismissed (and called frivolous) before reaching a trial – seems like Mario is a loser to me…
I noticed a distinct lack of citations of any credible legal authority who agrees with this view – which is in distinct contrast to the words of Justice Gray who called Mr. Wong as much a citizen as the natural born child of citizen parents. I’m going to go with the words of a SCOTUS Chief Justice over those of some whackjob on YouTube (with all of 337 views – I’m amazed that it took birthers 3 years to come up with a “Constitutional scholar” who was stupid enough or dishonest enough to spew the ‘2 citizen parent nonsense). Given the way he used the term ‘law of nations’ I suspect that he’s a closet Vattelist – who’s book doesn’t support the idea that President Obama isn’t natural born, by the way (according to a real French lawyer who has actually read and understood the book in its original French [like the Founders did]). Your credibility is just soaring to new lows…
No you don’t know Obama is Constitutionally eligible. He is a dual citizen and not a natural born citizen. John Bingham, the father of the 14th Amendment stated this in defining a natural born citizen.
“All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))
Then in 1866, Bingham also stated on the House floor:
“Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
Again, it was commonly known in 2008 who Obama’s father was and what his citizenship status was. This is not new information in any way. If it was a problem, Obama would not have been allowed to run for president. Do you have anything new, or would you like to just continue spinning your wheels?
Well I do know that the courts, the Congress of the US, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, including the present Republican controlled one, His opponents in the last election, and his opponents in the upcoming one. The officials of the state of Hawaii, Pretty much every recognized and credentialed Constitutional and legal expert in the entire country….. AND the fact that he’s sitting in that Oval Office right now…. all disagree with you.
So I can believe a deluded and pathetic internet nobody…. or I can believe the vast wave of experts and authorities on whose shoulders the question rests, and who are satisfied with Obama’s eligibility.
Yeah I’m -a- gonna go with them…..
Yeah I’m
Should read “the courts, the Congress of the US, including the present Republican controlled one, the Joint Chiefs of Staff,”
You must be oblivious to how stupid everything you said is.
1) Bingham’s comments are statements of opinion. It doesn’t matter that he had a role in writing the 14th amendment, unless those views were actually in the amendment itself upon ratification, which they weren’t.
2) Why was Obama allowed to run for president, then his election certified, if he was ineligible by these standards? The circumstance of his father’s citizenship was never a secret.
3) Your warped view gives power of who is eligible to be our president to OTHER COUNTRIES. If dual citizenship disqualifies a man from running for president, then tomorrow, Moammar Ghadafi (you know, the Libyan dictator whose name I can’t be bothered to look up a correct spelling on) could enact a law stating “ALL AMERICAN CITIZENS ARE FROM THIS DAY FORWARD CITIZENS OF LIBYA UNTIL THE DAY THEY DIE. THIS ACT CANNOT BE INVALIDATED, REPEALED, OR OVERTURNED BY ANY ACT OTHER THAN BY THE LIBYAN GOVERNMENT.”
Really though, just answer point number 2. Why is Barack Obama president now if a disqualifying condition was publicly known well before the election?
But this Constitutional scholar (he was the President of the United States and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court) thinks that the Constitution should be interpreted by looking a English Law.
“The language of the Constitution cannot be interpreted safely except by reference to the common law and to British institutions as they were when the instrument was framed and adopted. The statesmen and lawyers of the Convention who submitted it to the ratification of the Conventions of the thirteen States were born and brought up in the atmosphere of the common law, and thought and spoke in its vocabulary. They were familiar with other forms of government, recent and ancient, and indicated in their discussions earnest study and consideration of many of them, but when they came to put their conclusions into the form of fundamental law in a compact draft, they expressed them in terms of the common law, confident that they could be shortly and easily understood.“Chief Justice William Howard Taft in Ex Parte Grossman.
So to interprete the Constitution, we need to study what the English Laws were at the time the Constitution was drafted.
Gorefan that quote makes an obvious point I’d never thought of. The Founding Fathers were basically educated Englishmen. It makes very little sense to believe, as the Birthers do, that their inspiration for a code of laws for their new nation would be predominantly influenced by a Swiss scholar.
1. Yes we do. He’s serving as POTUS. That’s more proof than anything. *duh*
2. Any past “dual citizenship” issues you wish to whine about are not only irrelevant to the US laws, but also EXPIRED for him a long time ago.
3. As others have pointed out, these issues were well known about his past both during and long before the 2008 election. Didn’t seem to matter to the electorate, which OVERWHELMINGLY elected him. It will matter even less to the 2012 voting public. Sucks to be you, [Demeaning comment deleted Doc.].
He has quite some interesting beliefs which may cause one some concern… Have you followed his religious positions. Have you read how in 2008, he insisted not on the born to two citizen parents but rather on the birth certificate. If he considered that Obama could never have been a NBC then why the distraction.
Sour grapes.. Titus is just upset that under Obama, God will never be reintroduced into our Government
Read more at this blog
Any further questions?
Justice Wayne said the same thing in Ex parte William Wells,
“At the time of the adoption of the Constitution, American statesmen were conversant with the laws of England and familiar with the prerogatives exercised by the crown. Hence, when the words to grant pardons were used in the Constitution, they conveyed to the mind the authority as exercised by the English crown, or by its representatives in the colonies. At that time, both Englishmen and Americans attached the same meaning to the word pardon. In the convention which framed the Constitution, no effort was made to define or change its meaning, although it was limited in cases of impeachment.“
And Chief Justice Marshall said this in United States v. Wilson.
“As this power had been exercised, from time immemorial, by the executive of that nation whose language is our language, and to whose judicial institutions ours bear a close resemblance, we adopt their principles respecting the operation and effect of a pardon, and look into their books for the rules prescribing the manner in which it is to be used by the person who would avail himself of it.”
And Alexander Hamilton wrote a legal brief about the meaning to the terms “direct tax and excise” as they appear in the Constitution.
He begins by saying that the Constitution does not give a definition to the terms,
“What is the distinction between direct and indirect taxes ? It is a matter of regret that terms so uncertain and vague in so important a point are to be found in the Constitution. We shall seek in vain for any antecedent settled legal meaning to the. respective terms—there is none.
After a length discussion about excise and direct taxes, he ends the brief by telling us where to look for the definition,
“If the meaning of the word excise is to be sought in the British statutes, it will be found to include the duty on carriages, which is there considered as an excise, and then must necessarily be uniform and liable to apportionment; consequently, not a direct tax.”
Some argument results from this, though not perhaps a conclusive one: yet where so important a distinction in the Constitution is to be realized, it is fair to seek the meaning of terms in the statutory language of that country from which our jurisprudence is derived.“
WOAH! What a totally creepy ultra-RWNJ theocrat nutjob Titus is!!!
From another great detailed link provided by NBC…here’s just a few select paragraphs from 2006 (this guy has a LONG history of being off his rocker):
http://www.yuricareport.com/Dominionism/PublicStoningNotJustForTaliban_Sugg.html
Yeah, I’d call people like Titus and his followers dangerous, seditious and anti-American Theocrats.
They truly are the American Taliban. Against education and openly advocating stoning people who disagree with them…*sheesh*… these zealot *ssholes want to take civilization back centuries.
G what do you think it means since Titus was fired from Regent University. Do you think he might have been a bit too extreme even for them?
Hard to say. I have no idea. He’s definitely TOO Extreme.. that’s the only thing I’m sure on.
More on Dr. Herb who judges all:
“Dr. Herb Titus On Sonia Sotomayor: Measured By The Word Of God And Found Wanting – Sotomayor v. The Bible”
“But, if one takes a closer look, Judge Sotomayor’s self-identification as a “Latina judge” reveals a person who is definitely not qualified to be elevated to the nation’s highest court. Indeed, a closer look reveals that she should be removed from the court of appeals on which she currently sits.”
“Clearly, Judge Sotomayor’s view of herself as a judge, when measured by the Word of God, is found wanting.”
http://www.theamericanview.com/index.php?id=1390
He either must despise Jefferson or have a revisionist’s take on this Founding Father’s view of religion and Christianity.
“. . . Jefferson was a deist because he believed in one God, in divine providence, in the divine moral law, and in rewards and punishments after death, but did not believe in supernatural revelation. He was a Christian deist because he saw Christianity as the highest expression of natural religion and Jesus as an incomparably great moral teacher. He was not an orthodox Christian because he rejected, among other things, the doctrines that Jesus was the promised Messiah and the incarnate Son of God.”
http://www.firstthings.com/article/2008/08/the-deist-minimum–28
You have your smear backwards. the OCON form for Hawai’i stated he was constitutionally eligible, whereas the others did not. Kerrys form had no clause stating he was eligible.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/20761067/Hawaii-2000-and-2004-Certs-Rep-and-Dem
Hawai’in law changed between 2004 and 2008 and so they had to be accomidated. Thats all.
And Obama signed several nomination papers for states which asked him to declare he was a natural born citizen.
hey Suranis, does that mean Retired Intelligence Officer, is not intelligent?
You might think so, I couldn’t possibly comment.
[/politician]
Has our ‘Intelligence Officer’ moved on to a different thread ROTFL…
He exhausted all of his birther talking points pretty quickly so he has to lay low for a few weeks, change screennames, and then post the exact same things again once he thinks that we’ve forgotten about it.
Yep. Standard birther zombie Concern Troll pattern.
The problem with their thinking is that they can only see the world through their own projection of personal limitations. Just because their pea-brains have such a low retention rate that anything said in a few weeks seems totally “new” to them, doesn’t mean it works in the larger world…
Just because we’ve tried to move on from their long-dead zombie horse corpses a long, long time ago doesn’t mean we’ve forgotten about how bad they smell…
Do you have references?
The Arizona form has been available as a link on the Native and Natural Born Citizenship Explored website for years now:
http://moniquemonicat.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/arizona-election-nomination-papers-barack-obama-signed-statement-he-is-a-natural-born-citizen2.pdf
Here is the Arkansas handbook for candidates:
http://www.state.ar.us/sbec/pdfs/2010_candidate_handbook.pdf
On page 17, it states:
Federal, State and District Offices:
Must file a signed affidavit of eligibility with the secretary of the state committee of the political party stating that the candidate is eligible to serve in the office he or she seeks
Here is Arizona
http://www.azsos.gov/election/2010/Info/Candidates_and_Political_Committees/Candidates_and_political_committees.pdf
On page 17:
Affidavit of Qualification:
A candidate must file with the nomination paper an Affidavit of Qualification printed on a form prescribed by the Secretary of State. The affidavit must include facts sufficient to show that, other than the residency requirement, the candidate will be qualified at the time of election to hold the office sought. A.R.S. § 16-311(D).
I haven’t searched all 50 states, but since Obama was on the primary ballot in Arkansas and Arizona, it is clear that he had to have filed affidavits attesting to his eligibility.
Not everyone got an “A” in English. On average birthers are less educated than the obots.
Not to dismiss this impressive-sounding resume, but there is quite a lot left unsaid. Teaching at Pat Robertson’s Regent University is a negative in my book and the other 4 schools where he supposedly taught aren’t mentioned. What he testified to before Congress isn’t mentioned, nor what cases he argued before the courts mentioned nor whether he won or lost. Simply being admitted to practice before these federal courts isn’t any special mark of achievement. The only thing I know that he testified to before Congress was in favor of a the Constitution Restoration Act, a bill to strip federal courts of any jurisdiction to hear cases challenging a government entity’s or official’s “acknowledgment of God as the sovereign source of law, liberty, or government.”
The only case I know of that he argued was on the losing side, defending Judge Moore’s Ten Commandments monument in the Alabama judicial building. Moore lost his job in the process. I also know that Titus represented the “Gun Owners of America” and was in favor or restoring gun ownership rights to those convicted of domestic violence.
If Dr. Titus had raised this issue before Obama ran for office, I would have been more impressed, but so far as I know before 2008 no American lawyer, judge or legal scholar has ever said that someone born a citizen in the United States wasn’t natural born. There have been some who argued that the children of non-citizens were not in some cases citizens at all (e.g. Dred Scott and the losing side in US v Wong) but never given that someone was born a citizen in the US that they were not natural born citizens. On the other hand, there are numerous authorities who say that they are.
Arizona. Which can be found on my site.
[Fixed hyperlink. Doc.]
I saw it on NBCs site. I think there’s some law in Tennessee that says he has to sign some form too.
I think the context was showing how different states have different forms and regulation that have to be filled vis a vis the presidential election
Hell, I didn’t hardly never git ayys in anglush nohow neither, but I don’t go around spouting off about how I revere the Constitution while continually disrespecting it in ways both large and small like the birthers do… I don’t care how educated anyone is or isn’t, sedition wrapped in the flag is despicable.
Your thoughts are not facts. A UNIX system administrator is not a graphics expert and a graphics designer doesn’t necessarily know anything about the internal structure and optimization of PDF documents.
Politico.com, on the other hand, did contact a PDF expert who doesn’t share your views.
Do you have a link for this? Can’t find it….
Sorry, the PDF Expert was at Fox News, not Politico.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/04/29/expert-says-obamas-birth-certificate-legit/
http://www.thepostemail.com/2011/05/13/research-summary-on-hawaii-birth-certificate-number-151-1961-010641/
This is whole piece pasted by RIO is a pile of caca, but I just wanna say that the birth certificate is NOT a part of the child’s medical record and DOES NOT go to the receiving facility. Not even a copy of it. There is no reason for it to. It stays at the birth facility until completed, checked for accuracy and in those days, signed by the mom.
Even today when the standard certificate includes things like “Assisted ventilation required for more than six hours”, the clerk at the birth facility calls the receiving facility for that information to complete the certificate.
Lord knows, as a NICU nurse I have transferred (and received) an awful lot of babies and never once saw a birth certificate except in the delivery room and on Maternity.
For someone who purports not to be a birther, and only recently (yeah, I believe that one) came upon birther arguments, s/he sure has them down. I also find it pretty hard to believe than anyone but NC1 would really use the “half hand written” argument. That was one of the more absurd arguments she came out with….which is quite an accomplishment considering the number of absurd arguments she came out with.
So let’s look at some of the things our newest birther who is too ashamed to admit they are a birther has come up with.
We need to experts to verify the Presidents birth certificate? Now why exactly would we do that? We have a document, probably with a better provenance than any other document in American history. The COLB, n its face, it is sufficient for the federal rules of evidence to be a self authenticating document. But the the state of Hawaii further vouched for the document, with public declarations it was legit. They then made an except to policy, and issued an official copy of the original document. Again, in any federal court, it is a self authenticating document, just as it stands. The state further vouched for it on their official website. What exactly can any “expert” add?
And then there are the junk law arguments about citizenship. You drag out Apuzzo, a DUI attorney. A DUI attorney that had to answer a show cause order from the court as to why he should not be sanctioned because of those arguments. If a court asks you to explain why they should not sanction you for making an argument, it stands to reason, you should not be relying on those arguments (and yes, that means not only did he lose, but he lost in a BIG way).
You then drag out to Herb Titus as your attempt at a “Constitional scholar” and lawyer. As evidenced by Mario Apuzzo (and Orly Taitz), being a lawyer proves nothing, except that the person passed a bar exam somewhere. It is by no means a measure of competence on any subject. Secondly, as has been pointed out before, no remotely serious person with a JD refers to themselves as “Dr” based on their JD. That includes every serious lawyer, and every serious law school professor (you want to be called “Dr” then get a SJD). No serious lawyer calls themselves Esq. either…but that’s another conversation…back to Herb. So why exactly is Herb a “Constitutional scholar”? I could not find any scholarly articles published in any law journal by him (granted, I didn’t spring for the conclusive evidence of a Westlaw or Lexis search…those things cost money…but I had no trouble finding references to other actual scholars via internets). That’s usually a good indication that one is a scholar. So he was assistant prof at a couple of 2nd tier law schools and dean of a 4th tier law school? Does that make him a scholar? The fact that he takes arguments that no one else in academia, or the legal community in general takes? Does that make him a scholar? Or is it the fact that he feels the need to puff up his positions by sticking “Dr” in front of his name? Sorry, but when someone asks to name a Constitutional law scholar, the name “Herb Titus” isn’t the name that rolls off people’s lips (Lawrence Tribe is probably the #1 name most folks in the legal community will come out with). You have one crack pot with a long history of crack pot legal theories.
And funny…for someone who objects to the birther tag, s/he is very familiar to with birther websites.