Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

4625 · Jul 31, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

BCTTWR said:
Obama is a fraud. No denying that except for the lemmings that cheer him on as he destroys the U.S. economy.

I suggest that you gather all your like-minded acquaintances and resolve to assist in the election of the next presidential opponent of His Royal Highness Comrade Crown Prince Hussein (who is a black man very near the white women, I might add); 2016 will be here before you know it!!:thumbsup

MannyLovitto · Jul 31, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Mark! Annie is begging you to stop making American Republicans look like complete Cranks

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WYQr2a4vqqg&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WYQr2a4vqqg&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Joe Contrarian · Aug 2, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]BORN IN THE USA?[/FONT]
[FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Is this really smoking gun of Obama's Kenyan birth?[/FONT]  
  [FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+1]
Attorney files motion for authentication of alleged 1960s certificate from Africa[/SIZE][/FONT]
 <hr size="1">[SIZE=-1]Posted: August 02, 2009
11:55 am Eastern

[/SIZE]  [SIZE=-1]  ? 2009 WorldNetDaily  [/SIZE]

WASHINGTON ? California attorney Orly Taitz, who has filed a number of lawsuits demanding proof of Barack Obama's eligibility to serve as president, has released a copy of what purports to be a Kenyan certification of birth and has filed a new motion in U.S. District Court for its authentication.
<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody><tr> <td width="614">

This document purports to be a Kenyan certification of birth for Barack Obama, allegedly born in Mombasa, Kenya, in 1961 </td> </tr> </tbody></table>
The document lists Obama's parents as Barack Hussein Obama and Stanley Ann Obama, formerly Stanley Ann Dunham, the birth date as Aug. 4, 1961, and the hospital of birth as Coast General Hospital in Mombasa, Kenya.
<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody><tr> <td width="800">

Document enlarged to show detail alleges Barack Obama was born at Coast General Hospital in Mombasa on Aug. 4, 1961 </td> </tr> </tbody></table>
No doctor is listed. But the alleged certificate bears the signature of the deputy registrar of Coast Province, Joshua Simon Oduya. It was allegedly issued as a certified copy of the original in February 1964.

WND was able to obtain other birth certificates from Kenya for purposes of comparison, and the form of the documents appear to be identical.
<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody><tr> <td width="823">

An enlarged view of the bottom of the document
</td> </tr> </tbody></table>
Last week, a counterfeit document purporting to be Obama's Kenyan birth certificate made the rounds of the Internet, but was quickly determined to be fraudulent. The new document released by Taitz bears none of the obvious traits of a hoax.

Taitz told WND that the document came from an anonymous source who doesn't want his name known because "he's afraid for his life."

Taitz's motion, filed yesterday in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, requests the purported evidence of Obama's birth ? both the alleged birth certificate and foreign records not yet obtained ? be preserved from destruction, asks for permission to legally request documents from Kenya and seeks a subpoena for deposition from Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

"I filed the motion with the court asking for expedited discovery, which would allow me to start subpoenas and depositions even before Obama and the government responds," Taitz told WND. "I am asking the judge to give me the power to subpoena the documents from the Kenyan embassy and to require a deposition from Hillary Clinton so they will be forced to authenticate [the birth certificate].

"I'm forcing the issue, where Obama will have to respond," she said.
"Before, they said, 'You don't have anything backing your claims,'" Taitz explained. "Now I have something. In fact, I have posted on the Internet more than Obama has. My birth certificate actually has signatures."

Join the petition campaign to demand President Obama resolve the question by revealing his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate!

Taitz's most celebrated case involved a military officer, Maj. Stefan Cook, whose order to deploy to Afghanistan was revoked when he challenged Obama's eligibility to hold office. That case has now been refiled in federal court in Florida, raising the specter of a class-action claim among members of the military that their orders aren't valid because of questions surrounding Obama's constitutional eligibility.

Taitz told WND she plans to file additional paperwork with the Florida court tomorrow, adding the alleged Kenyan birth certificate to Maj. Cook's case.

The suit seeks damages and a declaratory judgment. Named as defendants are Simtech, Cook's former civilian employer, and several officials, including Col. Louis B. Wingate and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.

WND previously reported a judge in Georgia dismissed Cook's case when the government suddenly revoked his orders to report to Fort. Benning for deployment to Afghanistan.

WND reported when the case originally was filed that Cook's concern was that without proof that there is a legitimate commander in chief, the entire U.S. Army becomes "merely a corps of chattel slaves under the illegitimate control of a private citizen."

Cook told WND: "As an officer in the armed forces of the United States, it is [my] duty to gain clarification on any order we may believe illegal. With that said, if President Obama is found not to be a 'natural-born citizen,' he is not eligible to be commander in chief."

The new complaint says it seeks Cook's reinstatement with his civilian employer, Simtech Inc., as well as protection from the Department of Defense and president "from further retaliation for plaintiff's challenge to the president's constitutional authority."

See the movie Obama does not want you to see: Own the DVD that probes this unprecedented presidential eligibility mystery!

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest all of the questions.

WND has reported that among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, his Punahou school records, his Occidental College records, his Columbia University records, his Columbia thesis, his Harvard Law School records, his Harvard Law Review articles, his scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, his passport, his medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.

Developing ...

Note: Members of the news media wishing to interview Joseph Farah, Jerome Corsi, Drew Zahn, Joe Kovacs, Chelsea Schilling,Les Kinsolving or Bob Unruh on this issue, please contact WND.

MannyLovitto · Aug 3, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WYQr2a4vqqg&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WYQr2a4vqqg&color1=0xb1b1b1&color2=0xcfcfcf&hl=en&feature=player_embedded&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Joe Contrarian · Aug 3, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Texas lawmakers sign on to ‘birther' bill

By STEWART M. POWELL and HILLARY SORIN
WASHINGTON BUREAU

Aug. 3, 2009, 12:52AM

<script type="text/javascript"> /*<![CDATA[*/ document.write("<a href='http://www.facebook.com/sharer.php?u=" + document.location.href + "&t=" + document.title + "'>

Facebook<\/a><\/div>"); document.write("<a href='http://www.stumbleupon.com/submit?url="+encodeURIComponent(document.location.href)+"%26title%3D"+encodeURIComponent(document.title)+"'>http://images.chron.com/common/735/ext/images/16x16_su_shado</script>WASHINGTON — Six Texas congressmen are in the middle of a summertime political tempest sweeping the nation's capital over legislation to require future presidential candidates to show birth certificates to prove they are “natural born citizens” of the United States eligible to serve as president.

[COLOR=Black][U][B]The effort by the lawmakers, including Houston-area Reps. Ted Poe, R-Humble, and John Culberson, R-Houston[/B][/U][/COLOR], stems from a so-called “birther movement” mounted by some conservative Republicans and talk-show hosts who continue to question whether President Barack Obama is a natural born citizen.

The Texans have not adopted the prove-it's-not-true approach pressed by talk-show hosts such as Rush Limbaugh, who insists “Barack Obama has yet to prove he's a citizen” and “all he'd have to do is show a birth certificate.” But the lawmakers' effort lends credence to what some dismiss as a fringe movement fanned by unsubstantiated rumors swirling on the Internet thanks to bloggers such as Californian Orly Taitz. [COLOR=Red][B][U]“I believe it is a serious concern” that requires Congress to “subpoena all of Obama's vital records,”[/U][COLOR=Black] [/COLOR][/B][COLOR=Black]Taitz writes[/COLOR][B][COLOR=Black].[/COLOR][/B][/COLOR][COLOR=#000000]

The Constitution stipulates that “no person except a natural born citizen” shall be eligible to serve as president. The Presidential Eligibility Act proposed in March by Rep. Bill Posey, R-Fla., would require campaign committees to submit a copy of the candidate's birth certificate to the Federal Election Commission with other documentation as necessary to prove eligibility.

[B]Little League test[/B]

Poe, a former prosecutor and criminal court judge, says he “never said” Obama was born “anywhere but the United States,” but adds: “To ensure that we eliminate future debates and adhere to the Constitution, we simply should do what Little Leagues all across our country do and require that birth certificates be provided at the time of registration.”

Culberson says any candidate seeking federal elective office “should be required to prove that they meet the requirements laid out in our Constitution.”

Other former candidates have faced similar questions, including Republican presidential nominee John McCain, who was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936.

“Requiring future presidential candidates to provide their birth certificates in 2012 and thereafter is a commonsense way to avoid unnecessary controversies and conspiracy theories,” adds Rep. Louie Gohmert, R-Tyler.

Rep. Randy Neugebauer, R-Lubbock, collaborated on the bill in hopes of quelling stubborn controversies that are distractions and “not good for our nation,” said spokeswoman Michelle Ozanus.

Of the 10 co-sponsors enlisted by Posey, six are from Texas, including Poe, Culberson, Gohmert, Neugebauer, Kenny Marchant, R-Coppell and John Carter, R-Round Rock.

Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, D-Houston, challenged what she described as a bid to impeach Obama's birthright as the first black president.

“In all my lifetime whether you are the winner or the loser, I have never heard of anyone raising the question of the birthplace of the duly elected president.” State officials in Hawaii vouched for Obama's birth last month.

They said state law prevents public release of an individual's birth certificate.

The president turns 48 on Tuesday. [I][EMAIL="stewart.powell@chron.com"]stewart.powell@chron.com[/EMAIL][/I]
[I][EMAIL="hillary.sorin@chron.com"]hillary.sorin@chron.com[/EMAIL]

[IMG]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3090/2897950750_d82b8dd021.jpg
[/I][/COLOR]

Joe Contrarian · Aug 3, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

sarajay said:
Lol i never knew any of this, thanks for the info guyz

Prob a fake, but it doesn't matter...one of Hussein's other 89,242 sealed documents will eventually do him in.

More and more Americans are catching on just how big of a fraud this guy is and becoming scavengers.

So one way or the other, with that many patriots gunning for his head, the Marxist Kenyan is pretty much screwed.

:+excited-:+excited-:+excited-:+excited-:+excited-

BCTTWR · Aug 3, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Barck's grandma witnessed the birth. She bear witness Barack was born in Mombasa. Now we have a birth certificate confirming this fact.

4625 · Aug 3, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

I've got "Marxist" and "Kenyan" (which the judges rule is a substitute for "birth certificate"); if I can get a "teleprompter" out of this thread, my pick three will hit yet again!!!

Joe Contrarian · Aug 3, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Reid Attacks Birthers In Floor Speech

Posted by Brian Montopoli

(CBS/Wikipedia)

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid attacked the birthers ? the group of conspiracy theorists who believe President Obama is not a U.S. citizen despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary ? in a speech on the House floor this afternoon.

Reid's comments suggest Democrats have begun to view the birther movement as an asset ? an opportunity to link the opposition party to a fringe group that discredits its message overall.

After attacking Republicans for offering "one radical distraction after the next" in the health care debate, Reid said "they not limited to health care." He continued:

An artificial controversy is getting far too much attention lately - one that ignores the undeniable and proven fact that our president was born in the United States of America. Just last week, one of the Republican leaders in the House of Representatives continued to give it credence.

Let's be clear: It is a phony issue that does not deserve even a minute of our attention on the floor of the United States Senate. It is absurd, irresponsible and baseless, and the false claims have long ago been easily refuted.

The American people have every right to expect we will solve real problems before creating fake ones. And they should know that rather than helping them get ahead, some of our colleagues would rather spew ludicrous conspiracy theories.

In other birther-related news, last night one of the most prominent members of the movement, Orly Taitz, released what was purported to be the president's Kenyan birth certificate. You can see it here.

Faced with the document, the birthers "quickly divided between the credulous ? people who believed that the new certificate was genuine ? and skeptics who believed that their movement was being taken for a ride," reports The Washington Independent's David Weigel. Unsurprisingly, the latter were correct: Weigel catalogues a litany of problems with the document, including the fact it purports to be from the "Republic of Kenya" but boasts a publication date that is before said republic was founded. More here.

And here's an, ahem, entertaining interview with Taitz on MSNBC today:

<iframe src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22425001/vp/32274609#32274609" scrolling="no" width="425" frameborder="0" height="339"></iframe>

Joe Contrarian · Aug 3, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

The more FLAK you are taking, the closer to the target you are. :thumbsup

The Kenyan fraud could easily stop this massive bolder steamrolling toward his illegal govt, but he won't do that because as soon as any of those tightly sealed documents are released, he will be forced to resign in Nixonian disgrace.

Folks, this guy has something BIG to hide.

roscoe · Aug 3, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

more people are involved in this conspiracy than the moon landing hoax! it's only a matter of time,somebody will break!

MannyLovitto · Aug 3, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Kinda blush when I confess my thought that the Orly Taitz broad is a GILF

MannyLovitto · Aug 3, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Though I bet she would be like Faye Dunaway's character in NETWORK...No matter how hard I was banging her, she would not stop talking conspiracy theories the entire time.

Joe Contrarian · Aug 5, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Why the Founding Fathers Were ?Birthers?

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13295

By JB Williams Saturday, August 1, 2009

The label of ?birther? is fast becoming a noble badge of honor for millions of Americans who are not willing to let their Constitution die without a good ole patriot?s fight!

The leftist Obama propaganda press would love for you to believe that ?birthers? are just a bunch of ?crazy racists? that number in the hundreds, and that they have NO basis to demand proof of whom and what <i><input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">Barack Hussein Obama</i> really is?

But the ?birthers? actually number in the millions and the basis for their demands were set in stone by the men who wrote and ratified the US Constitution. If millions of American ?birthers? are ?right-wing nuts,? they are in good company with men like Thomas Jefferson, James Madison, John Adams and Ben Franklin.

Obama has been running from his entire past all of his political life. His many minions in the press have been running interference every step of the way.
For the record, the following Obama records remain under lock and key, more than two years into public demands for Obama ?transparency"? and Obama has spent a reported $1 Million in legal fees to keep them SEALED!

Obama?s official <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">birth records -SEALED
His Occidental College records -SEALED
His Columbia <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">College records -SEALED
His Harvard <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">College records -SEALED
His <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">College Thesis -SEALED
His Harvard Law Review articles -SEALED
His Indonesia Adoption records -SEALED
His Passport file -SEALED
His connection to countless foreign and domestic thugs -SEALED

Yet the American press, now to include Fox News Channel?s Bill O?Reilly, insist that they somehow inherently know with absolute certainty, that Barack Hussein Obama was indeed born in Hawaii, a ?natural born citizen,? not just ?a citizen? or a ?native citizen,? and that millions of Americans who think he should provide a minimum level of proof, are just ?crazy? -"racists" or possibly even ?potential domestic terrorists? as Obama?s Department of Homeland Security recently suggested.

Since ALL Obama records remain SEALED, what files did O?Reilly and others investigate in order to draw their absolute conclusion that Obama is legit and millions of Americans are nuts?
What?s all of the stink about?

US Law establishes that while there are several ways one can become a US citizen, there are actually only three different types of US Citizens with three very different sets of qualifications and citizen rights.

A <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">US Citizen
A Native Born Citizen
A Natural Born Citizen

Today, we have to add one more category, the ?illegal? <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">US citizen. But that story is for another day.

A foreign born immigrant, who has successfully navigated the naturalization process, is a legal <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">US citizen with all of the Constitutional rights afforded a <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">US Citizen with the exception of one, the right to be President of the United States. As a matter of Constitutional case law, - 94 ?Whatever the term ??natural born?? means, it no doubt does not include a person who is ??naturalized.??

In this regard, the issue of Obama?s adoption by Indonesian citizen Lolo Soetoro is also of consequence, as Obama could only be a <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">US citizen by way of ?naturalization.? There is no record of Obama naturalizing as a U.S. citizen upon returning from Indonesia.

All of this is at the heart of the debate over where <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">Barack Hussein Obama II was born. His family and friends say that he was born in Kenya. His political allies say that he was born in Hawaii, our fiftieth state. Obama has stated that he was born in Hawaii and he has presented as proof, THREE different Certifications of Live Birth (COLBs) [ NOT the same as a Certificate of Live Birth ] and he has named TWO different hospitals located in Hawaii, as his official place of birth.

But since he has refused to open up his official <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">birth records in Hawaii, nobody knows for certain where <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">Barack Hussein Obama II was born. Contrary to leftist attempts to spin, the mere fact that such a constitutional requirement exists implies that one must provide proof of compliance, if and when asked to do so.

NOTE: One can be a <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">US citizen without being a ?native citizen? or a ?natural born citizen.? It must also be stated that Hawaii issued Certifications of Live Birth to foreign born non-citizens of the US as a regular practice.

If <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">Barack Hussein Obama II was indeed born in Hawaii, and this can be verified by authenticating his official birth records alleged to exist in Hawaii, then he could be a ?US Citizen? and maybe even a ?Native Born Citizen? having been born on American soil. To date, no such evidence has been made available for purposes of authentication.

However, one can be both a ?US citizen? and a ?Native Born citizen? and still NOT be a ?Natural Born Citizen.?

As an example, what are often referred to as ?anchor babies? are both US citizens and Native Born citizens as a matter of federal law. But as a matter of <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">the US Constitution, specifically Article II -Section I, they are NOT a ?natural born citizen? as their parents were NOT citizens of the U.S.

NOTE: <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">Barack Hussein Obama I, Obama?s legal birth father was NOT a <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">US citizen. He was a British subject and a legal citizen of Kenya.
Under ?natural law? at the foundation of the ?natural born citizen? clause, a blood descendent will inherit by way of natural law, the fathers name and citizenship, no matter where they were born.

Until the election of <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">Barack Hussein Obama, all Presidents since and including Martin Van Buren were born in the United States, a descendent of parents who were both US citizens.

Why the Founders were ?Birthers?

It was the Founding Fathers who wrote and ratified, ?No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President;?
They based this clause on the following; ?Congress, in which a number of Framers sat, provided in the Naturalization act of 1790 that ??the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond the sea, . . . shall be considered as natural born citizens. . . .?? 96 This phrasing followed the literal terms of British statutes, beginning in 1350, under which persons born abroad, whose parents were both British subjects, would enjoy the same rights of inheritance as those born in England; beginning with laws in 1709 and 1731, these statutes expressly provided that such persons were natural-born subjects of the crown.?

So, had both of Obama?s parents been US citizens, he would indeed be a ?natural born citizen? of the US, even if he had been born in Kenya. By way of ?natural law,? he inherited the name and citizenship of his father, in Kenya, not the US.

As his father was not a <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">US citizen, but rather a citizen of Kenya, Obama inherited by birthright, natural law, his fathers name and citizenship. He is NOT a ?natural born citizen? of the US, no matter where he was born.

The Founders exempted themselves from the ?natural born citizen? clause because at the time of ratification, there were no ?natural born citizens,? - US citizens born to two parents who were both US citizens.

But from President Martin Van Buren on, US born descendents of two US citizens did exist and up until the election of <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">Barack Hussein Obama, those who became president passed the ?natural born citizen? requirement in the Constitution.

Clearly, the Founders were very serious ?birthers.? But why were they ?birthers?? What were they so worried about?

Dual or Divided Loyalties

The president of the United States has unfettered access to ALL national security information. He is afforded powers unlike any other individual on earth. His finger rests on the Red button and his office is respected and revered around the globe. He is the international representative of every American citizen.

 Such an office cannot be held by one with even the potential for dual or divided loyalties. The international pressure to act upon global interests instead of American interests is immense. Only one with completely undivided loyalties can be trusted. He MUST be a ?natural born citizen? as the Constitution requires.

Above all else, the Founding Father?s feared a despotic central government that would one day turn its abusive power on its people. They went to great pains to design a Representative Republic limited in scope and power by constitutional text that would best secure the people against such an event, including Article II -Section I, intended to keep leaders with foreign loyalties from ever holding the broadest power on earth.

Then, they told us to alter or abolish any government that became a threat to Life, Liberty or the pursuit of Happiness.

They were ?extremists...? They didn?t trust central power and they sure didn?t trust that power in the hands of someone with dual or divided loyalties.

Why the ?Birther? Movement is EXPLODING!

Demonstrated by plummeting approval ratings only six months into office, the American people have seen enough of Obama?s ?global? agenda, at odds with American interest, and what was once ?hope? for ?change? six months ago, has become fear, anger and discontent. Obama took office six months ago with a +28 point strong approval rating. Six months later, Obama finds himself at a -12 point approval rating, an unprecedented 40 point swing!
The Obama administration has named more unelected Czars in six months than pre-Soviet Russia named in its thousand year existence. They have forced industries into bankruptcy only to emerge the property of the federal government. They are ramming Marxist laws through a leftist congress so fast that members of congress don?t even have time to read them before they pass.

Members of congress are now afraid to hold town meetings for fear of being attacked by angry constituents who have had enough of watching DC elitists run roughshod over the other side of the aisle, the states and the American people. (http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20090731/pl_politico/25646)

There are TWO reasons why the ?birther? movement is EXPLODING instead of going away, despite daily attacks and name calling from the lamestream press.

The Constitution, including Article II -Section I either stands or it doesn?t.

The people are watching the utter hourly destruction of their nation in Washington DC and they need a peaceful way to end that destruction legally, before things become violent. The flaw in the left?s plan to change the Unites States into a secular socialist One World Order is they have foolishly underestimated the desire for freedom and liberty in the hearts and minds of most Americans.

They have miscalculated? The 22.4% of the population who voted for Marxism in the last two election cycles thought that they won the right to shove Marxism down the throats of every American. They are horrifically mistaken?

By launching a heavy handed all-out assault on individual freedom and liberty from every possible front at breakneck speed, they have sent the nation into shock and dismay. Even many, who foolishly voted for the mystery messiah last November, are now jumping ship after watching him make a mockery of the US Constitution and the principles and values that made America the greatest free nation ever known to mankind.

The people need to right the ship and remove every anti-American fraud from the halls of the federal government before things get really ugly. Afraid to confront their constituents, law-makers are running for cover. When representatives stop listening to the people they work for, the people will stop talking and start acting!

If Obama is a ?constitutional? president, he is going to have to prove it and fast. If not, he is going to have to leave the people?s White House, in handcuffs if need be! The issue will not go away. The Constitution stands or all bets are off!

Every member of his administration and his party who had knowledge of, participated in or provided cover for the greatest hoax every perpetrated on the American people, must step down with him.

The people will have to figure out what to do next, but one thing is certain, - this ?silent coup? will not stand much longer. The walls are closing in and Obama & Co. are trapped in their own massive web of deceit.

People do NOT spend a million dollars to hide something
that there is no reason to hide.

The inescapable reality is this? - We have an unconstitutional resident of the White House and a whole lot of people working around the clock to keep him in office, for God only knows what purpose.

Although 22.4% of Americans don?t seem to care about that, millions of American ?birthers? do, as did the Founding Fathers.

Sooner or later, Obama is going to have to prove that he is legitimate. The longer it takes for him to come forward and do so, the more dangerous the situation will become, as citizens grow increasingly angry over the utter destruction of their country.

The truth exists in Obama?s official birth, adoption, college and passport records. Nobody hides the truth unless the truth will expose a lie?
Even Obama?s political allies had better start calling for the truth and fast, or they will sink with him! The Founders had it right and on that basis alone, so do the ?birthers.?

We?re keeping a list of all who have chosen badly?

roscoe · Aug 5, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

does it matter that everything you birthers hang your hat on has been debunked! there is a better chance that the moon landing was faked, than that president obama was not born in hawaii!

Joe Contrarian · Aug 5, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Media Blackout on Obama eligibility dates back to November

By Douglas Hagmann & Judi McLeod Tuesday, August 4, 2009

Do you remember Watergate? Thirty-five years ago this Sunday, U.S. President Richard M. Nixon submitted his letter of resignation for his role in the scandal. There was the crime ? the break-in, and then there was the cover-up by the Nixon administration. There were threats, media manipulation and disinformation. It was the cover-up more than the crime itself in the aftermath of the Watergate break-in that led to the downfall of the Nixon administration. It was a politically critical time for our country, but we survived because of the strength of the U.S. constitution.

Now, we potentially face a new constitutional crisis stemming from the refusal of Barack Hussein Obama to produce a one-page document that would confirm his eligibility to hold the highest office in the land. Eligibility to hold office is not a ?fringe? matter, but a core constitutional issue that lies at the very heart of a growing controversy.

Although we do not have the birth certificate or proof of ineligibility, the Northeast Intelligence Network and Canada <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">Free Press have documentation of a cover-up relating to the issue of Obama?s eligibility to hold office. The proof we possess not only exposes a well orchestrated cover-up, but also provides critical insight into why the topic of Obama?s eligibility has failed to gain traction in the corporate media.

The Northeast Intelligence Network and Canada <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">Free Press are in possession of extremely sensitive investigative documents, including a stunning written admission by a nationally known talk show host stating that he was threatened with his career ? or worse - should he talk about the issue of Barack Hussein Obama?s birth records to a national audience. This <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">document was obtained on December 10, 2008, and provides explicit detail of a ?gag order? imposed on this host before and immediately following the national election last November.

After receiving and authenticating the <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">document, US based veteran private investigator Douglas J. Hagmann opened a full scale investigation into the media blackout, with specific emphasis on tracing the blackout origins to those issuing them. This investigation was conducted in conjunction with Judi McLeod, founding editor of Canada Free Press and Brian Thompson, CFP Information Technology chief following a meeting near Toronto, Ontario last December. At that meeting, it was decided to keep the existence of the <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">document secret until additional evidence could be obtained.

Today, after an extensive eight month investigation, the Northeast Intelligence Network and Canada <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">Free Press are breaking their silence and revealing explosive information about a widespread cover-up that began at the earliest stages of the Obama presidential campaign. The cover-up traces back to some of the most powerful and influential people in the U.S. and continues today.

Summary of the Evidence

As noted above, we are in possession of a written account by a well known national <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">talk show host who details how he was prohibited to discuss the controversy of Barack Hussein Obama?s eligibility as president of the United States. This signed <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">document cites exact dates and times when he was forbidden to discuss any aspect of the <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">birth certificate controversy, and includes direct references to the individuals responsible for such prohibitions. Further, his statement identifies the individuals who originated the orders and their positions, and confirms that failure to adhere to the order would likely end his career in that industry. He also confirms that other, less specific but more menacing threats were implied during conversations with those making the subject off limits.

Although we possess the original <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">document containing the name and contact information of the <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">talk show host, we have decided not to publish his name or network affiliation at this time. Based on the correspondence from this individual and respecting the nature of the threats to him personally and professionally, it is our decision to allow him to enjoy anonymity until such time as he decides to reveal the facts himself at a time of his choosing.

From multiple interviews conducted within the last eight months, we have obtained information from other sources, independent of the above, who have also been instructed to avoid any discussion of the <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">birth certificate issue at all costs, to wit:

The account of an administrative assistant employed in New York City by a cable network news station who provided significant, detailed information of a 2008 meeting between the top network executive and four-(4) well-known news anchors. This source confirmed that she drafted the memo to the various hosts to notify them of the date, time and location of this high-level meeting at the request of the network?s top executive.

Present at this meeting, she verified that the network official issued ?warnings? to the personalities ?to avoid any on-air discussion of the birth place, eligibility, and news accounts of litigation compelling [Barack Hussein] Obama to produce a legitimate copy of his <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">birth certificate.? She stated that the network executive had her arrange the conference immediately following a meeting ?between [the network executive] and an attorney closely associated with candidate Obama who was acting on his behalf.?

The statement of a corporate secretary for a major news network confirming the existence of a one-page inter-office memo, bearing the markings ?confidential? and ?not for dissemination,? addressed and distributed to news anchors and on-air talent? that specifically instructed the recipients to avoid any discussion pertaining to the Obama <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">birth certificate controversy. The memo was written and distributed in October 2008, and specifically instructed on-air talent to ?advise guests, as necessary, to refrain from citing any news story, legal proceedings, Internet ?blogs? or other sources that pertain to the ongoing eligibility controversy of future President Barack Obama.?

As outlined above, our Investigation has uncovered both direct and indirect evidence of threats being made against some of the nation?s top radio and television personalities, which would explain some giving this topic mere lip service. As one source interviewed during the course of this investigation stated, ?I?ve got a career and family to think about.?

Although no one should be surprised over the manipulation of the news, the nature of this manipulation, and the extent of the threats against journalists, should shock even the most well grounded.

Any reasonable person must question the motivation of the media moguls. The individuals who have ? and continue to threaten talk show hosts, news anchors, and others are the top people. We are not talking about mid or upper level management ? this is from the very top in all cases. If there is nothing to the <input name="IL_MARKER" type="hidden">birth certificate issue and the question of eligibility, why the secrecy?
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/13403

roscoe · Aug 5, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)


<CENTER>******** type=text/javascript></SCRIPT>******** type=text/javascript src="http://z.blogads.com/www/delivery/ajs.php?zoneid=15&cb=64287082912&loc=http%3A//www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/23/756088/-De-bunking-birther-talking-points&referer=http%3A//www.bing.com/search%3Fq%3Ddebunking+the+birthers%26Form%3DDLCDF7%26pc%3DMDDC%26src%3DIE-SearchBox"></SCRIPT><NOSCRIPT></NOSCRIPT>******** language=JavaScript type=text/javascript src="http://banners.blogads.com/pan/adx.js"></SCRIPT>******** language=JavaScript type=text/javascript></SCRIPT>******** language=JavaScript type=text/javascript src="http://banners.blogads.com/pan/adjs.php?n=028882319&what=zone:111&exclude=,&referer=http%3A//www.bing.com/search%3Fq%3Ddebunking+the+birthers%26Form%3DDLCDF7%26pc%3DMDDC%26src%3DIE-SearchBox"></SCRIPT><NOSCRIPT></NOSCRIPT></CENTER>
Story Updated.

Debunking birther talking points

by COkdub

Share this on Twitter - Debunking birther talking points

******** language=javascript type=text/javascript>//Create your sharelet with desired properties and set button element to falsevar object = SHARETHIS.addEntry({title:'Debunking birther talking points',url:'http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2009/7/23/756088/-Debunking-birther-talking-points'},{button:false, offsetLeft: -200});//Output your customized buttondocument.write('

');//Tie customized button to ShareThis button functionality.var element = document.getElementById("share");object.attachButton(element);</SCRIPT>

Thu Jul 23, 2009 at 08:23:48 AM PDT

This past week, the birthers have been brought front and center by the national media. No doubt, most of you have encountered birthers in the comments section of any online articles that even remotely relate to President Obama or the Obama administration. I call this Birther's Law:

Birther's Law [internets] "When a news story is posted online; the closer that said story is in relation to President Obama or the Obama administration, the probability that someone will insert birther talking points into the comments section of the story approaches one."

The players in the birther game are too numerous to list here, but Kossack aarrgghh has been doing an excellent job chronicling the leaders, players and moves thus far in Birfistani.
I'll try and debunk the birther talking points. It is my opinion that birtherism has nothing to do with whether or not Barack Obama is eligible to hold the office of President of the United States. Every time you de-bunk a birther myth, they simply move the goal posts and spout the next talking point.
Birtherism is 100% about smearing and de-legitimizing Barack Obama and trying to remove him from office by means necessary.

COkdub's diary :: ::

1. President Obama was born in Kenya and his birth certificate is a forgery.
FALSE. Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii. A scanned copy of his Certification of Live Birth (COLB) is posted here and digital photographs of the document are here. Some alternate resolutions that more clearly show the raised seal and document border are posted here. A picture of the signature stamp on the certificate is here and the raised seal on the certificate can be seen here.

The birthers, of course, questioned the authenticity of President Obama's birth certificate. So the Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, released a statement verifying that they had President Obama's birth certificate on file.

"Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai?i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai?i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama?s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures," Fukino said.

An official from FactCheck.org went to the then-Obama headquarters in Chicago and had the chance to touch and hold President Obama's birth certificate.

Recently FactCheck representatives got a chance to spend some time with the birth certificate, and we can attest to the fact that it is real and three-dimensional and resides at the Obama headquarters in Chicago. We can assure readers that the certificate does bear a raised seal, and that it's stamped on the back by Hawaii state registrar Alvin T. Onaka (who uses a signature stamp rather than signing individual birth certificates).

Even Bill O'Reilly says that Barack Obama's birth certificate is legit.
<EMBED height=344 type=application/x-shockwave-flash width=425 src=http://www.youtube.com/v/GT1SXCQgv2A&hl=en&fs=1& allowfullscreen="true" allowscriptaccess="always"></EMBED>

Most birthers are not satisfied with the COLB and instead demand that President Obama release his long-form birth certificate. Problem with that is that the State of Hawaii no longer issues long-form birth certificates.

No, you can?t obtain a "certificate of live birth" anymore.
The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.
The department only issues "certifications" of live births, and that is the "official birth certificate" issued by the state of Hawaii, she said.

Two Hawaiian newspapers, the Honolulu Advertiser and the Star Bulletin printed his birth announcements and both reported that he was born on August 4, 1961 as indicated on his birth certificate.

<TABLE><TBODY><TR><TD>

</TD><TD>

</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
As for claims that the newspaper announcements could have been faked,

The exact same notice appeared the following day in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin. The numerous birth announcements above and below the Obama listing also were identical in both papers, which were unaffiliated, competing publications.
Advertiser columnist and former Star-Bulletin managing editor Dave Shapiro was not at either paper in 1961, but he remembers how the birth notices process worked years later when both papers were jointly operated by the Hawaii Newspaper Agency ? which no longer exists.
"Those were listings that came over from the state Department of Health," he said. "They would send the same thing to both papers."

Another theory floating around is that the state of Hawaii allows parents to register their foreign-born children as being born in Hawaii. Not so, according to Janice Okubo, spokeswoman for the Hawaiian Department of Health.

As for the theory that Obama's original birth certificate might show he was foreign born, Okubo said the "Certification of Live Birth" would say so. Obama's does not. Again, it says he was born in Honolulu.

Birthers also like to use an interview with President Obama's step-grandmother Sarah Obama, as evidence that he was born in Kenya. The interview was conducted by American anti-abortion activist and street preacher Ron McRae (WARNING link to Free Republic) and the birthers use a heavily edited version of the interview as their evidence. But by using a full transcript, it is much clearer exactly what Sarah Obama says. Full audio is available here.

MCRAE: OK I?m sorry. I, I thought she said she was present when he was born. I was?
TRANSLATOR OGOMBE (sounding exasperated): No, no! The, the woman was not present. She was uh not, a what?you see, she was here in Kenya, and Obama was born in America. That is, that?s obvious.

There are some birthers who believe that President Obama was born in Kenya and his posted birth certificate is forged because the race listed on the certificate for his father is "African". Per the instructions for filling out a birth certificate, race of a parent is determined by what the parent believes their race to be. Barack Obama Sr. would most likely not consider himself an African American because he was not an American citizen, so he likely checked the box for other and wrote in "African".

2. Barack Obama lost his citizenship when he and his mother moved to Indonesia.

FALSE. President Obama and his mother moved to Indonesia when he was six years old after his mother married Lolo Soetero.

Obama's mother remarried a man from Indonesia who worked in the oil industry, and when Obama was six they moved there. The family lived near the capital of Jakarta, where his half-sister Maya was born. At the age of ten, Obama returned to Hawaii and lived with his maternal grandparents; later his mother and sister returned as well.

The birther tall tale is that President Obama lost his US citizenship when he was adopted by his step-father in Indonesia. There is no credible evidence that Obama was formally adopted by his step-father; as no adoption records exist.
Birthers also rely on a school registration form filled out by Barack Obama's step father, Lolo Soetero, as proof that President Obama was once an Indonesian citizen. On line three, Lolo stated that Barack Obama was an Indonesian citizen. However, the document also states on line two that President Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii. In addition, the school document would be deemed hearsay and could not be used as evidence in a court of law, per the Federal Rules of Evidence, Rule 902.

Indonesian law does not permit children to become citizens if they would, at the time, have dual citizenship.

(1)A child outside a marriage of a mother who is a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia or a child out of a legal marriage, but who has in a case of divorce been assigned to the care of its mother, a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia, who follows the nationality of the father, a foreigner, may present a petition to the Minister of Justice in order to acquire the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, <INS>if, after, having acquired the citizenship of the Republic of Indonesia, it possesses no other nationality or states at the same time to have released another nationality according to the procedure stipulated by the legal provisions of the country of origin and/or according to the procedure stipulated by the agreement on the settlement of the bi-nationality between the Republic of Indonesia and the country in question.</INS>

The country in question here would be the United States of America. According to The Immigration and Nationality Act, minor children may not have their US citizenship renounced. So, President Obama never lost his US citizenship during his time in Indonesia.

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

3. Barack Obama is not eligible to be President of the United States because he is a British/Kenyan citizen.
FALSE. Some birthers also contend that because Barack Obama Sr. was a native of Kenya, that President Obama is a British citizen. In 1961 when Barack Obama II was born, Kenya was a colony that fell under British rule. It is true that at birth, President Obama held both United States and Kenyan citizenship. Barack Obama Sr.'s citizenship was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. The status of Barack Obama Sr.'s children, including Barack Obama II, was also governed by the same act.

Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.

When Kenya became it's own country in 1963, all people who had been defined as British citizens under The British Nationality Act ceased to be British citizens and became citizens of Kenya instead. This is according to the Kenyan Constitution.

Every person who, having been born in Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963...

Every person who, having been born outside Kenya, is on 11th December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall, if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become, a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1), become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963.

Years later, the section of The British Nationality Act of 1948 which gave President Obama his British citizenship in the first place was repealed with The British Nationality Act of 1981.
In addition, because President Obama never renounced his US citizenship nor swore an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically ended on August 4, 1982 when he was twenty one years old. President Obama's loss of Kenyan citizenship is in accordance with the Kenyan Constitution.

A person who, upon the attainment of the age of twenty-one years, is a citizen of Kenya and also a citizen of some country other than Kenya shall, subject to subsection (7), cease to be a citizen of Kenya upon the specified date unless he has renounced his citizenship of that other country, taken the oath of allegiance and, in the case of a person who was born outside Kenya. made and registered such declaration of his intentions concerning residence as may be prescribed by or under an Act of Parliament.

4. Barack Obama could not have traveled on a US passport to Pakistan when he was in college, because there was a travel ban to Pakistan.
FALSE. As mentioned at a California fundraiser in 2008, Barack Obama traveled to Pakistan with his college friend in 1981. The story told by birthers is that it would have been impossible for Obama to travel to Pakistan on a US passport because of a State Department travel ban for that country. Therefore, Obama must have held and traveled to Pakistan on a passport from another nation that he was a citizen of, such as Indonesia or Kenya.
According to the official document from the State Department, there was merely a travel advisory for Pakistan, not a travel ban. Thirty day visas were available to US citizens at Pakistani airports.

5. Even if Barack Obama was born in Hawaii, he is not eligible to be President of the Unites States because he only had one citizen parent.
FALSE. According to Article II, Section I of the United States Constitution,

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

The 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution gives us a framework for what constitutes a United States citizen.

All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

President Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on August 4, 1961. Under the Hawaii Admission Act, Hawaii was declared to be a state of the union on March 18, 1959; two entire years before Barack Obama was born. Therefore, he was born in the United States and was subject to its jurisdiction at birth; making him a citizen.
Birthers, however, have determined that since Barack Obama's father was not a United States citizen that President Obama is not a citizen of the United States because he only has one citizen parent. However, the United States Supreme Court has defined United States citizenship more broadly than the birthers, as shown in United States v Wong Kim Ark.

This was the first case in which the Court interpreted Section I of the Fourteenth Amendment, in which all persons born in the United States are defined as citizens.

Expanding on the 14th Amendment, in Wong the court ruled that all persons born in the United States are citizens regardless of the citizenship status of their parents. This is also known as jus solis.

6. If President Obama would just call the State of Hawaii and have them release his long-form birth certificate it would clear all of this up.
FALSE. First off, as noted above the State of Hawaii does not issue long-form birth certificates.
Secondly, President Obama is a defendant in numerous eligibility lawsuits; a list of which can be found here. When you are a party in a legal suit, it is NEVER a good idea to have outside communications with parties that could be named as witnesses in your case (such as employees of the State of Hawaii).
Also, we have seen over the past one year and one month since the President's COLB was first scanned and posted online how much this conspiracy has grown. The birther conspiracy nuts have, as noted above, several theories; some of which cannot be debunked using a birth certificate. Releasing any more documents will not help to put this situation to bed, it will only deepen the conspiracy.
As Loren from Barackryphal writes (emphasis mine),

RP: "So you want to know why Obama won't take the simple measure of releasing his birth certificate, when you already have at least eight consecutive fall-back arguments you'll make if he does so, whereby you'll continue to insist that he's ineligible for the Presidency even after he proves that he was born in Hawaii?"
Birther: "Right."
RP: "Y'know, if I were Obama, I think I'd save my ten dollars too."

In addition to the facts and evidence cited above, in response to the FOIA lawsuit Strunk v U.S. Department of State, the Departments of State and Homeland Security answered in a document that debunks almost all of the birther lies.

To the extent this paragraph alleges that President Obama is not a natural-born citizen of the United States or is otherwise ineligible to serve as President of the United States, that allegation is denied.
Specifically, Defendants deny that President Obama was born in Kenya or anywhere outside the state of Hawaii.
To the extent this paragraph alleges that Lolo Soetoro is or ever was President Obama?s father by birth or adoption, that allegation is denied. To the extent this paragraph alleges that President Obama is or ever was a practicing Muslim, that allegation is denied.

Major props to these awesome researchers for the quotes cited above
Doc at Obama Conspiracy Theories
nbc at Native and Natural Born Citizenship Explored
Pat Gund at Yes to Democracy
my fellow Obots from Politijab

<LINK rel=stylesheet type=text/css href="http://images.dailykos.com/blogads3/567552434/feed.css">******** language=javascript src="http://images2.dailykos.com/blogads3/567552434/feed.js"></SCRIPT><LINK rel=stylesheet type=text/css href="http://images.dailykos.com/blogads3/268421135/feed.css">******** language=javascript src="http://images2.dailykos.com/blogads3/268421135/feed.js"></SCRIPT><LINK rel=stylesheet type=text/css href="http://cache.blogads.com/735758808/feed.css">******** language=javascript src="http://cache.blogads.com/735758808/feed.js"></SCRIPT>

******** type=text/javascript src="http://edge.quantserve.com/quant.js"></SCRIPT>******** type=text/javascript>_qacct="p-94z2SIg8PaHLI";quantserve();</SCRIPT><NOSCRIPT></NOSCRIPT>******** type=text/javascript src="http://www.google-analytics.com/urchin.js"></SCRIPT>******** type=text/javascript>_uacct = "UA-50193-1";urchinTracker();</SCRIPT>
******** language=javascript type=text/javascript src="http://causehive.com/static/actiontag_json.js"></SCRIPT>******** language=javascript type=text/javascript src="http://causehive.com/static/actiontag.js"></SCRIPT>

2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e2348ji23e

Joe Contrarian · Aug 16, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Most Democrats are Birthers too
<small> August 16, 2009 | davidfarrar </small>

Of course many Democrats are upset with the title, but it's true. Most Democrats know Barack Obama can't meet the provisions of Article ll, Section l, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, or at least aren't sure whether he can or not.

Rather than go all over the issues again, let's just go to Congressman Bill Posey's bill:

The Presidential Eligibility Act (H.R. 1503)

The Presidential Eligibility Act (H.R. 1503)

Washington, May 15 - On March 12, 2009 Congressman Posey introduced H.R. 1503, a bill to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act to require beginning in 2012, the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the Office of President to include with the committee's statement of organization documentation (including a birth certificate) as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution.

Here's my point: Most people are shocked when they learn there is no formal qualification process to run for the President of the United State, once the most powerful position in the world. People see themselves being required to produce a birth certificate to place their children in public school, get a new driver's license, any number of state and federal functions now days where a person's identify is required, except when running for the Presidency of the United States. There the only thing required is your honorable word that you have meet all of the requirements.

Civil wars have been started over far less. So wouldn't it be prudent to take this Birther issue, even if you don't believe a word of it, and support legislation that would act to avoid this kind of "misunderstanding" in the future? It seems like a slam-dunk piece of common sense legislation. So why aren't Democrats crawling all over this bill?

Now I am sure we are going to hear a lot of excuses, but the bottom line is, if Democrats are so sure Barack Obama can meet the requirements of Article ll, Section l, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, they should be supporting this legislation for the good of the country. And the only real reason why they aren't is because they too believe their man can't meet muster. It's as simple as that.

So if you want to know who actually believes Barack Obama can't meet his Constitutional requirements, all you have to do is look at what people do, or, in this case, what they don't do, instead of listening to their words.

Note what it says in the lower left-hand corner:"DATE FILED BY REGISTRAR". This means there was some information contained in Barack Obama's "certificate of live birth" application the registrar could not independently verify.

Think about it.

tank · Aug 16, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Joe Contrarian said:
Note what it says in the lower left-hand corner:"DATE FILED BY REGISTRAR". This means there was some information contained in Barack Obama's "certificate of live birth" application the registrar could not independently verify.

Think about it.

Free Republic:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAOYou clowns are not even funny now, just plain stupid:LMAO:LMAO
Yes think about it....:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO

Joe Contrarian · Aug 16, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Bottom line: Despite all the red herrings, strawmen and smear campaigns, B. Hussein Obama can't/wont' meet the provisions of Article ll, Section l, Clause 5 of the Constitution.

Why is this so important and why are millions and millions of American patriots kicking up a fuss at the present time?

Because the illegal Kenyan will be running for reelection in 2012 and you can never lay enough groundwork.

Stay tuned...

op:

tank · Aug 17, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Joe Contrarian said:
Bottom line: Despite all the red herrings, strawmen and smear campaigns, B. Hussein Obama can't/wont' meet the provisions of Article ll, Section l, Clause 5 of the Constitution.

Why is this so important and why are millions and millions of American patriots kicking up a fuss at the present time?

Because the illegal Kenyan will be running for reelection in 2012 and you can never lay enough groundwork.

Stay tuned...

op:

Joe you seem like a smart enough guy so do not let these fools at free republic drag you down to their stupidity.
The county/state is the one that prints up this certificate and they do not do it on the day you were born...that is why their is a 4 day difference from when he was born and when the certificate was made. Same way with a marriage license...they do not print that on the day you was married either.
I did not get my kids birth certificate from the county until 2 weeks later.
The hospital certificate is the one with your feet on it but is not a legal document.
The boys at free republic need to stick with health care instead of wasting their time on this.

Joe Contrarian · Aug 17, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

<hr size="1" noshade="noshade">

<hr size="1" noshade="noshade"> 
  [FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]'Where's the birth certificate?' Vegas, baby![/FONT]
[FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+1]Eligibility billboard campaign going strong with debut on the Strip[/SIZE][/FONT]  
 <hr size="1">[SIZE=-1]Posted: August 16, 2009
7:13 pm Eastern

[/SIZE]  [SIZE=-1]  ? 2009 WorldNetDaily  [/SIZE]
 LAS VEGAS ? They say, "What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas."

Not this time.

Here's the picture to prove it.
<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="625">

The newest "Where's The Birth Certificate" billboard ? in Las Vegas</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
The latest billboard in the "Where's the birth certificate?" campaign is up for gawkers in the city of billboards ? Las Vegas, Nev.

Right smack dab in front of the plush Mandalay Bay Hotel on Mandalay Bay Drive tourists will be greeted with the most vilified message in the White House and media today.

And the national fund-raising campaign to erect many, many more billboards around the country questioning Barack Obama's constitutional eligibility for office is going strong ? with a total of $115,000 collected so far.

Have you contributed yet to the "birth certificate" billboard campaign? It's not too late. In fact, Joseph Farah, editor and chief executive officer of WND, says the campaign is just getting started and that he plans to continue through the election of 2012 if necessary. If you agree the Constitution means what it says and that it is the responsibility of all Americans to enforce it, make your donation now.

Farah said the campaign was born of frustration with timid elected officials in Washington, corrupt judges around the country and a news media that show a stunning and disturbing lack of curiosity about the most basic facts of Obama's background ? especially how it relates to constitutional eligibility for the highest office in the land.

Not surprisingly, the campaign was quickly met with opposition. Just two weeks after it was launched, CBS, one of the largest media conglomerates and a leading provider of outdoor advertising, officially banned its local salesmen from accepting the "birth certificate" billboard leases from WND. No reason was ever given.
<table align="right" border="0"> <tbody><tr> <td width="301">

'Where's the birth certificate?' billboard on I-35 in Waco, Texas </td> </tr> </tbody></table>
The next day, the national trade and political lobbying association for the billboard industry issued a press release defending CBS' action for refusing "misleading" advertising. A few days later, Lamar Advertising, another billboard industry giant joined CBS. And a few days after that,
Clear Channel, a media goliath owning 1,200 radio stations across America and controlling tens of thousands of billboards, followed suit.

But the campaign had already made waves. Suddenly, there were debates on Fox News over the issue of Obama's eligibility mentioning the billboard campaign. MSNBC followed with reports ? albeit sneering ones. Rush Limbaugh talked about the birth certificate issue all three hours in one of his daily shows ? the largest talk-radio program in the world.

Farah's [COLOR=blue ! important][FONT=&quot][COLOR=blue ! important][FONT=&quot]phone[/FONT][/FONT][/color][/color] has not stopped ringing since with media calls.

Even local TV news and local talk-radio programs got into the act ? sometimes together.

But the real fruit of the campaign, explains Farah, are the billboards themselves.

"Seeing these billboards springing up around the country is quite a phenomenon," he says. "It has been less than six weeks since this idea was hatched and already the billboards are becoming a familiar sight."

<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="614">

"Where's The Birth Certificate?" billboard in Pennsylvania</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="581">

"Where's The Birth Certificate?" billboard in Buena Park, Calif.</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
You can see the familiar WND design in Hamburg, Pa.; Buena Park, Calif.; the city of Commerce, Calif.; and even down in Louisiana. Meanwhile, others are using their own initiative and "designs" to make the same point ? like the billboard operator in Chehalis, Wash., and a less professional effort in Linden, Texas.
<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="600">

"Where's The Birth Certificate?" on private sign next to Interstate 5 in Washington state.</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="626">

Birth certificate question raised in Ball, La.</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
Farah also devised a way for everyone to get into the act ? with your own car or your own yard.

There are magnetized bumper stickers with the now-famous message and design ? "Where's the birth certificate?"

And there are yard and rally signs you can either take to your next tea party or turn your own property into a mini-billboard location.
<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="581">

"Where's The Birth Certificate?" billboard next to Santa Ana Freeway in Commerce, Calif.</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
WND previously launched a petition campaign that has collected nearly half a million names demanding Obama's eligibility be verified and demonstrated publicly. That campaign continues. That list has been shared with members of the Electoral College and the chief justice of the U.S. Supreme Court.

You can support the billboard campaign right now by making a donation online.

Those wishing to donate by check can send them to:

WND
P.O. Box 1627
Medford, OR 97501

(Donations are not tax-deductible. Donations of amounts greater than $1,000 can be arranged by calling either 541-474-1776 or 1-800-4WND.COM.

If you are a member of the media and would like to interview Joseph Farah about this campaign, e-mail WND.

KTBKRUSHER · Aug 17, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

for the love of pete why won't you drop this.
it's over..done...
quit it..
drop it..
move on

MannyLovitto · Aug 17, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

JoetheCanadian declares: Why is this so important and why are millions and millions of American patriots kicking up a fuss at the present time?

Manny: A few thousand Americans and one Canadian in Toronto hardly make for "millions and millions of American patriots"

Meanwhile...how much money have you sent to the WND billboard campaign, Markie?

hahahahahahahahahahahaahahahaha

Total Recall · Aug 18, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

　
Roscoe-please cut the BS with your "debinking article."
Didnt you bother to check the address listed on the old newspaper notice?. Obamas "proof" of birth turns out to be an address that was the residence of Orland Scott Lefforge, a Professor at UH at Manoa, Dept. of Speech and later an assistant to Sen. Daniel Inouye in 1967.
Prove it you say?

How about some.eyewitness proof?
Beatrice Arakaki affirmed the occupants of 6085 Kalanianaole Highway as her neighbors the very well to do Lefforge family. She should know - she has lived at her current residence of 6075 Kalanianaole Highway from before 1961 to the present..She had no recollection of a black child born to a white mother.occuping a home which would have been grossly beyond the financial means of an 18 year old single mother anyway.
So - Obama could have never lived there. Period. End of story.
You cannot seriously think you can debunk this. If you think you can be my ghost.
Thats only one question among many that I guarrantee no "debunking article" will ever touch- let alone be able to debunk.2348ji23e
[/SIZE][/FONT][/SIZE][/FONT]

Joe Contrarian · Aug 18, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Why the Birth Certificate Issue is Important <hr noshade="noshade" size="1"> View Comments |

Print This Post |

by Timothy Birdnow | August 18th, 2009 

It's not the nature of the evidence but the seriousness of the charge.

When William Jefferson Blythe Clinton was impeached by the House of Representatives on December 19, 1998, most Democrats and the entirety of the mainstream media were outraged that a sitting president should be so ill-used for purely political ends. The argument made by the Clinton spin machine ? and eagerly gobbled up by their slobbering allies in the media ? was that the impeachment was about Mr. Clinton's private sex life, and that Prosecutor Ken Starr was simply digging up salacious material to smear Their Guy. Clinton's polling data remained high, and the knock-kneed Senate was too frightened of this popular President to vote to convict. RINO Benedict Arlen Specter tried to vote "not proved" but changed his vote to acquittal when he was not allowed to do so.

But the Republican-controlled House of Representatives did not fear the dark of night, nor the political arrow that flies by day; they impeached the randy Mr. Clinton despite the potential political ramifications. Why did they do that? Because they understood the arguments, understood that what Mr. Clinton did was not a personal matter between himself and Monica Lewinsky (and Hillary and Chelsea) but involved a wrong committed against a largely unknown woman from Arkansas. Clinton was not impeached over Lewinsky; she was simply evidence of corruption, of witness tampering, obstruction of justice, and perjury.

Perjury. Keep that word in mind.

There has been a simmering issue, one that began before Barack Hussein Obama took office. The Obama camp has spent over a million dollars to keep his birth certificate (and other documents) from being examined. Everyone assumed that the birth certificate issue would go away, but like the killer in a bad horror flick it continues to rise from the grave. Why? The issue could be laid to rest very easily, yet the Obamaniacs refuse to do so.

Perhaps they are playing the "birthers" as chumps?

A quick point on that; "birthers" is intended as a pejorative, much like calling George Bush "shrub." We should not be using it on our side, whether one agrees with what I would call the disclosurists or not. Frankly, I am mindful of Saul Alinsky:

Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it. Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions.

The attempt here is to tie the disclosurists in with the right-wing nuts in the pro-life camp, you know, those people that DHS has dubbed as domestic terrorists . . ..

Are they playing the disclosurists for chumps? Remember, Obama was a community organizer and devotee of Alinsky. Another Alinsky rule:

Power is not only what you have, but what the enemy thinks you have.

The crushing defeat of Republicans by Obama and his Party have given us chronic bullied syndrome; we think they are unbeatable. The enemy sees this bunch as having far too many weapons at their disposal. Sometimes a thing is exactly what it seems.

And it seems that somebody has something to hide.

Watergate was not about the crime (which, it seems likely, Nixon was not behind) but about the cover-up. Remember, it's not the nature of the evidence but the seriousness of the charge.

Once again, we should take a page from Alinsky:

Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.

The enemy has demanded such disclosures from Republicans as a routine matter; remember Dan Rather's fake Air National Guard story? Proof was demanded from President George W. Bush that he fulfilled his obligations.

Remember Clarence Thomas having to prove he was not a sexual predator? Remember the demands that Sarah Palin prove she was the mother of her Down's Syndrome child?

And the Democrats never judged their own wing nuts; how many members of the Democrat caucus were present at the screening of Fahrenheit 911, and how many rose in thunderous applause at the end? Yet this steady drumbeat of falsehood, innuendo, and out-and-out lies eroded support for President Bush and Republicans in Congress. In short, it worked; the nature of the evidence was immaterial because the public was soured by the accusations.

Now, here we have a President who swore an oath that he was qualified to be president, and yet he refuses to allow the American People to verify the veracity of that claim ? and his refusal has cost him a million dollars.

Is this a case of perjury? President Clinton was impeached for perjury.

The media used to howl about the "public's right to know" yet remain silent here.

Many good conservatives are telling the disclosurists to shut up, to stifle themselves (you gotta love Archie Bunker) in a manner almost identical to the Obama Administration, which is demanding silence from critics. Now, I'm not impugning their motives, but I am saying they are wrong to attempt this; it suggests an embarrassment, a sense that, yes, we are a bunch of kooks who are trying to keep quiet lest the general public get wise. But this is about more than just politics (though it is a solid political weapon); this is about the rule of law.

We heard much about the rule of law during the Clinton impeachment. The whole reason the House went forward was to uphold the rule of law. The Constitution lays out the qualifications for office holders, and Congress codifies those qualifications. One qualification is that a person must be either born here, or be born to citizens. In the case of Obama the law at that time specified that a woman could not pass on her citizenship if the father was a non-citizen and the child was born overseas, if she had not reached the age of majority. Under U.S. law at that time Barack Obama would not be a citizen, since his mother was only 18 IF he was born in Kenya ? something his maternal grandmother has claimed. Oh, and Obama was a dual citizen of both Kenya and the U.S., a point he neglected to tell the American voters.

The point is, there is no controlling legal authority on the federal level; that is why the U.S. Supreme Court refused to hear the case. It is ironic that SCOTUS should suddenly rediscover federalism here, but what are we to do? Essentially, the Court ruled this a matter for the individual states. That the states have been horribly lax (for example, an immigrant from Nicaragua ? Roger Calero ? ran for president on the Socialist Worker's Party in California in 2004) and that the President is the one office holder who is truly elected nationally, it seems important to have some sort of mechanism to double-check the qualifications of the man who would be king (an increasingly literal statement).

But both parties are salivating over the prospective votes of the 12 to 20 million illegal immigrants already here (and even if you don't believe many of them vote, at least you must know many of their children ultimately will ? especially if we get Obamamnesty) and neither side wants to make waves.

How can the Republicans push this issue, with so many potential voters being told that their children could one day become president? There are a LOT of non-native born children out there, and this represents a potentially huge voting block. The open borders crowd see this as an enormous loser, a stealing of the American Dream from hard-working illegal aliens. This is vitally important to the future; how many more unqualified candidates will we see? We need some solid laws to clarify this, and now is the time to have that debate.

In point of fact, we have been disregarding unpalatable portions of the Constitution for years. The Constitution resembles the comic book Plastic Man: something stretched beyond any sort of corporeal sensibility.

Democrats and their media allies have argued for the "living Constitution" while we conservatives have argued for "original intent," and even the recently confirmed Sonia Sotomayor claimed she would follow original intent in her rulings. Oh, and SCOTUS could not remove Obama from office if they were willing to trigger a Constitutional Crisis. Yet here we have a case of original intent, and many conservatives are running for the hills, because they are fearful of a political backlash.

But will there be one? Obama surrogates have supplied certificates of live birth and other dubious documents, but what if a smoking gun is produced?

There are only two ways of removing a sitting president: vote him out of office after his term has expired, or impeachment. SCOTUS cannot remove him, nor is there any recall mechanism. Will the Democrat-controlled Congress remove their own president? Granted, they'll still have Joe Biden in office, something likely to embarrass them.

Or they can amend the Constitution to allow non-native-born citizens to be president (hear that Ah-nold!). Neither of these prospects are going to be pleasing to them; either step is apt to cause a political uproar. Republicans really won't lose by keeping this issue alive, at least as long as they keep stressing that this is about transparent government and establishing proper legal mechanisms to follow the law. The Democrats have no good options here, and are forced to follow another Alinsky rule:

Ridicule is man's most potent weapon.

They are trying (rather desperately) to make this issue go away by ridiculing those who are demanding answers. Unfortunately, many on our side are doing likewise.

Once again, why doesn't the President simply put this stuff (and it includes many other documents) out there for the public? We know this man has broken the law in the past with his cocaine use; is he trying to protect some other dark secret? Stop people at the birth certificate, and perhaps that will protect other, more incriminating documents? Democrats have demanded special prosecutors for less, and have engaged in endless fishing expeditions with very little credibility ? think Valerie Plame, for instance.

Yes, there are other issues begging attention, but they often contain dizzying detail guaranteed to glaze over the eyes of the average voter. Will the average citizen understand ? or care about ? the details of Obama's monetary policy? Cheating to become president is something everyone can understand.

Americans still respect the rule of law, and still believe in living by the rules.

Whether Obama broke those rules or not is immaterial; it isn't about the crime it's about the cover-up, or at least about the seriousness of the charge. He works for us; he is not just beholden to one region or group, but to the American People, and he is accountable to the nation as a whole.

Granted, there are times when a president must invoke Executive Privilege, but this isn't such a time. Americans have every right to know these things.

roscoe · Aug 18, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

mr. contrarian, does the term ''beating a dead horse'' mean anything to you?

Joe Contrarian · Aug 18, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

roscoe said:
mr. contrarian, does the term ''beating a dead horse'' mean anything to you?

mr. roscoe,

Are you referring to the recent amateurish Kenyan birth certificate which proved to be a predictable hoax?

An obvious red herring in the hopes of discrediting and quieting a growing movement -- make it appear the "birthers" (We The People) laid an egg.

The reality is nothing has changed.

We still have a President who swore an oath that he was qualified to be president, yet has stubbornly refused to allow the We The People to verify the veracity of that claim -- and his refusal thus far has cost him a million dollars. :blink:

Is this a case of perjury? Recall President Clinton was impeached for perjury.

Is this a case of Watergate? Recall the cover up turned out to be greater than the crime (it always is).

mr. roscoe, this is bigger than those two shameful events COMBINED. :doh1

Keep snickering...all great truths begin as blasphemy.

Paging Dr. Common Sense: where art thou?

roscoe · Aug 18, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Long-Form Versus Short-Form

******** type=text/javascript></SCRIPT>******** type=text/javascript src="http://a.stanzapub.com/delivery/ajs.php?zoneid=489&clr_link=2181BA&clr_title=2181BA&clr_bg=FFFFFF&clr_border=FFFFFF&clr_text=515151&source=acf=&cb=10845664272&loc=http%3A//newsflavor.com/opinions/debunking-the-obama-birthers/&referer=http%3A//www.bing.com/search%3Fq%3Ddebunking+the+birthers%26src%3DIE-SearchBox%26FORM%3DIE8SRC"></SCRIPT>******** type=text/javascript></SCRIPT>******** type=text/javascript src="http://scripts.chitika.net/eminimalls/amm.js"></SCRIPT>

<IFRAME style="DISPLAY: none" id=ch_ad153 height=0 marginHeight=0 src="about:blank" frameBorder=0 width=0 allowTransparency name=ch_ad153 marginWidth=0 scrolling=no></IFRAME><NOSCRIPT></NOSCRIPT>
“A short-form birth certificate is unacceptable!!!Obama should release his original birth certificate to the public!!! Why hasn’t he released it? What does he have to hide?”
This assertion is a favorite on [COLOR=#2181ba !important][COLOR=#2181ba !important]Internet [COLOR=#2181ba !important]message[/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]

boards. It is often presented as the end all of the [COLOR=#2181ba !important][COLOR=#2181ba !important]conservation[/COLOR][/COLOR]. “If he would just show his original birth certificate,” Birthers claim “I would understand.”

This is based on a fundamental flaw. First, the “original birth certificate” is the actual document that was signed in 1961 while Obama’s parents were standing there. Obama was probably still covered in amniotic fluid when this document was signed. Obama’s long-form birth certificate is not his to release. The state of Hawaii does not release the long form certificate to the public. Furthermore, the long-form certificate is used for statistical purposes. It doesn’t have any more information on it than the short-form except birth weight, doctor’s name, etc.
The reason why states even have short-forms is because the short form contains the information that is actually important. Basically, the difference between them is minimal. In fact, long-form certificates may soon be obsolete. Electronic databases will take their place.
Television and radio host Lou Dobbs has made a big thing of the fact that the Obama certificate is a “Certificate of Live Birth” not the original document. “It just verifies that the state of Hawaii has a certificate on file,” he repeats.
This is not a profound statement. It isn’t evidence of something fishy. The State department would deem Obama’s short-form birth certificate acceptable- that’s why Hawaii gives them out to people. If the state of Hawaii says it has a certificate on file, then that’s the end of it. In August 1961, an announcement ran in both of Hawaii’s major newspapers, announcing the [COLOR=#2181ba !important][COLOR=#2181ba !important]birth[/COLOR][/COLOR]

of Mr. and Mrs. Barack Hussein Obama’s first child. It was placed by the President’s Grandparents.

Instead, Obama Birthers believe that it is all part of an elaborate conspiracy.

Joe Contrarian · Aug 18, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Mr. roscoe, wake up and smell the hummus -- you can't even get a passport with the short form.

tank · Aug 18, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

roscoe said:
Long-Form Versus Short-Form

******** type=text/javascript>******** type=text/javascript src="http://a.stanzapub.com/delivery/ajs.php?zoneid=489&clr_link=2181BA&clr_title=2181BA&clr_bg=FFFFFF&clr_border=FFFFFF&clr_text=515151&source=acf=&cb=10845664272&loc=http%3A//newsflavor.com/opinions/debunking-the-obama-birthers/&referer=http%3A//www.bing.com/search%3Fq%3Ddebunking+the+birthers%26src%3DIE-SearchBox%26FORM%3DIE8SRC">******** type=text/javascript>******** type=text/javascript src="http://scripts.chitika.net/eminimalls/amm.js">

<iframe style="display: none;" id="ch_ad153" marginheight="0" src="about%3Cb%3E%3C/b%3E:blank" allowtransparency="" name="ch_ad153" marginwidth="0" scrolling="no" width="0" frameborder="0" height="0"></iframe><noscript></noscript>
?A short-form birth certificate is unacceptable!!!Obama should release his original birth certificate to the public!!! Why hasn?t he released it? What does he have to hide??
This assertion is a favorite on [COLOR=#2181ba !important][COLOR=#2181ba !important]Internet [COLOR=#2181ba !important]message[/color][/color][/color]

boards. It is often presented as the end all of the [COLOR=#2181ba !important][COLOR=#2181ba !important]conservation[/color][/color]. ?If he would just show his original birth certificate,? Birthers claim ?I would understand.?

This is based on a fundamental flaw. First, the ?original birth certificate? is the actual document that was signed in 1961 while Obama?s parents were standing there. Obama was probably still covered in amniotic fluid when this document was signed. Obama?s long-form birth certificate is not his to release. The state of Hawaii does not release the long form certificate to the public. Furthermore, the long-form certificate is used for statistical purposes. It doesn?t have any more information on it than the short-form except birth weight, doctor?s name, etc.
The reason why states even have short-forms is because the short form contains the information that is actually important. Basically, the difference between them is minimal. In fact, long-form certificates may soon be obsolete. Electronic databases will take their place.
Television and radio host Lou Dobbs has made a big thing of the fact that the Obama certificate is a ?Certificate of Live Birth? not the original document. ?It just verifies that the state of Hawaii has a certificate on file,? he repeats.
This is not a profound statement. It isn?t evidence of something fishy. The State department would deem Obama?s short-form birth certificate acceptable- that?s why Hawaii gives them out to people. If the state of Hawaii says it has a certificate on file, then that?s the end of it. In August 1961, an announcement ran in both of Hawaii?s major newspapers, announcing the [COLOR=#2181ba !important][COLOR=#2181ba !important]birth[/color][/color]

of Mr. and Mrs. Barack Hussein Obama?s first child. It was placed by the President?s Grandparents.

Instead, Obama Birthers believe that it is all part of an elaborate conspiracy.

You are wasting your time. These idiots will only believe what the master sheep tells them to believe.Sad but funny none the less.

MannyLovitto · Aug 18, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Mark L Contrarian declares: Mr. roscoe, wake up and smell the hummus -- you can't even get a passport with the short form.

=====

Markie, I don't know how passports are issued within your country of residence - Canada, but I do know that the short form BC I received from the State of Texas last fall was sufficient for me to obtain my first US passport.

Sorry to just yank your cyber drawers all the way up to the back of your neck yet again...but hey....when you bend over and show it all to the world, you gotta figure that someone is going to pinch your fat little Canadian cheeks.

Joe Contrarian · Aug 18, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]BORN IN THE USA?[/FONT]
  [FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Obama's parents didn't live at newspaper birth address[/FONT]
  [FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+1]Barack's dad had bachelor pad, mother left Hawaii with baby[/SIZE][/FONT]
 <hr size="1">[SIZE=-1]Posted: August 18, 2009
9:25 pm Eastern

[/SIZE] [FONT=Palatino, Times New Roman, Georgia, Times, serif]By Jerome R. Corsi[/FONT]
 [SIZE=-1]  ? 2009 WorldNetDaily  [/SIZE]

 <table align="right" border="0"> <tbody><tr> <td width="245">

Ann Dunham with Barack Obama Sr. during his return visit to Hawaii in about 1971. The couple divorced in 1964.
</td> </tr> </tbody></table> Additional documents uncovered by WND support a previous report that President Obama's parents did not live together as husband and wife at the Honolulu address listed in birth announcements in two local newspapers.

Both newspapers, the Honolulu Advertiser and the Honolulu Star-Bulletin, carried the announcement that Barack Obama Jr. was born Aug. 4, 1961, to Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama, residing at 6085 Kalanianaole Highway in Honolulu, Hawaii.

Additional research has established that the grandparents, Madelyn and Stanley Dunham, lived at 6085 Kalanianaole Highway, not Barack Obama Sr. and Ann Dunham.

Moreover, Mr. and Mrs. Obama apparently did not live together after their marriage, with Dunham evidently remaining in the rented 6085 Kalanianaole Highway house.

See the movie Obama does not want you to see! Order the DVD that probes this unprecedented presidential mystery!

Barack Obama Sr. lived alone at an 11th Avenue address in Honolulu, closer to the university. Dunham left Hawaii for Seattle in August 1961, the month of Barack Obama Jr.'s birth, to study at the University of Washington.
WND can find no listing in the Polk directories to document Dunham and Barack Obama Sr. ever living at the same address.

As WND previously reported, according to an affidavit from private investigator Jorge Baro, the neighbor who has lived at 6075 Kalanianaole Highway since before Obama was born had no recollection of the family next door having a black child born to a white mother.

Very likely, the neighbor, Beatrice Arakaki, did not recall the Obama family because the primary residents were the grandparents, the Dunhams.

At most, Ann Dunham Obama and her son lived at 6085 Kalanianaole Highway only a few days, and there is no evidence Barack Obama Sr. ever lived there, despite the address having been listed in the Honolulu newspapers as the residence of the parents.

After Dunham left for Seattle, Barack Obama Sr. likely would have lived at his 11th Avenue address.

<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="596">

Polk listing for Stanley and Madelyn Dunham</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
A search of the Polk's Directory of Honolulu for 1961-1962 indicates 6085 Kalanianaole Highway was being rented by the grandparents. Madelyn L. Dunham is listed as a loan interviewer and escrow agent at the Bank of Hawaii, and Stanley A. Dunham is listed as a manager with Pratt Furniture.

<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="596">

Polk listing for Ann Obama</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
In a separate listing, Ann S. Obama, Obama's mother, is identified as a student living at the 6085 Kalanianaole Highway address; Barack H. Obama, her husband, is listed as a student living at 625 11th Avenue.

As WND previously reported, a Honolulu title search documented 6085 Kalanianaole Highway was purchased in 1958 by Orland Scott Lefforge, a University of Hawaii professor, and his wife/companion Thelma Young, who remained owners into the 1970s.
<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="557">

Honolulu title records</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
The Polk Directory shows Lefforge and Young living at 6085 Kalanianaole Highway in 1963, not when they purchased the home in 1958.

Mother and son move to Seattle

WND has separately documented that Ann Dunham was enrolled in extension classes at the University of Washington 15 days after Barack Obama Jr. was born.
<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="537">

</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
The Polk directory for Seattle in 1961-1962 listed the residence for Mrs. Anna Obama, a student, at 516 13th Ave. E, apartment 2.

<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="441">

Ann Obama residence listing in Polk Directory</td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
WND has also documented Dunham resettled in Seattle and did not return to Hawaii until after Barack Obama Sr. left the islands to begin his studies at Harvard in September 1962.

Why Dunham did not resume her studies at the University of Hawaii after her son was born is unclear.

The Honolulu Advertiser reported that in 1963, the grandparents moved into Apartment 110 at Alexander Street.

The newspaper also reported that in 1963, after she returned to the University of Hawaii, Ann Dunham Obama's address was listed in a university directory as 2277 Kamehameha Avenue.

Records document she filed for divorce from Barack Obama Sr. on Jan. 23, 1964.

In his autobiography, "Dreams from My Father," Barack Obama discloses that his father had been offered a scholarship from the New School in New York City that would have permitted him to bring his wife and son with him.

Instead, Barack Obama Sr. took a less generous scholarship and went to Harvard.

As WND has reported, the Hawaii Department of Health will not authenticate that the department issued the short-form Certificate of Live Birth, or COLB, released by the Obama campaign, listing Barack Obama Sr. as the father.

WND has also reported President Obama continues to spend thousands of dollars on legal fees to block any court from ordering the public release of his long-form original birth certificate, which includes details such as the hospital of birth.

MannyLovitto · Aug 18, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Joey, did your parents live at the Canadian address which they listed on your birth certificate back in 1975?

:cocktail

tank · Aug 18, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

WND and Jerome Corsi.:LMAOEnough said.These lunatics just keep on going like the energizer bunny looking dumber all the time.Great job boy's and keep up the good work:LMAO

4625 · Aug 18, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Relax. 1) Joey's opinion is for amusement purposes only; after all, do we really think he's ever convinced anyone of anything? 2) By posting here, the wackjobs are not out harming the neighborhood children; 3) the mountie wannabe can't even vote in our country; and 4) Assuming there are Americans with the same defects displayed by joey, no matter how loud they yell or how long they hold their breath, the twenty-percenters are still only twenty percent.
I recommend having fun with our very own forum Weeble (Weebles wobble but they don't fall down). After all, no matter how blistered joey's buns become, he always comes back for more, though leading with his chin. . .

Joe Contrarian · Aug 24, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]BORN IN THE USA?[/FONT]
  [FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Congressman eyes lawsuit over president's eligibility[/FONT]
  [FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Republican finds birth certificate sizzling topic at Arizona town hall[/FONT]
 <hr size="1">[SIZE=-1]Posted: August 23, 2009
8:36 pm Eastern

[/SIZE]  [SIZE=-1]  ? 2009 WorldNetDaily  [/SIZE]
 <table align="right" border="0"> <tbody><tr> <td width="224">

Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz. </td> </tr> </tbody></table>
WASHINGTON ? U.S. Rep. Trent Franks, R-Arizona, told a townhall in Kingman yesterday he is considering a lawsuit to establish Barack Obama's eligibility for the presidency.

Franks said there is conflicting evidence on the question of Obama's status as a "natural born citizen."

His allusion to the possibility of a lawsuit forcing release of Obama's original, long-form birth certificate is as far as any member of Congress has gone on this issue.

The eligibility issue was one of the hottest topics at the town hall meeting that included concerns about national defense, stimulus spending, health-care bills and the "cash-for-clunkers" program.

Franks said it would take 34,000 years to pay off the indebtedness incurred by the Obama administration.
Demand the truth by joining the petition campaign to make President Obama reveal his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate!

Some 950 people attended the boisterous event in a local church.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest all of the questions.

WND has reported that among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, his Punahou school records, his Occidental College records, his Columbia University records, his Columbia thesis, his Harvard Law School records, his Harvard Law Review articles, his scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, his passport, his medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.
<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="614">

"Where's The Birth Certificate?" billboard helps light up the night at the Mandalay Bay resort on the Las Vegas Strip. </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
Because of the dearth of information about Obama's eligibility, WND founder Joseph Farah has launched a campaign to raise contributions to post billboards asking a simple question: "Where's the birth certificate?"
The campaign followed a petition that has collected over 450,000 signatures demanding proof of his eligibility, the availability of yard signs raising the question and the production of permanent, detachable magnetic bumper stickers asking the question.

The "certification of live birth" posted online and widely touted as "Obama's birth certificate" does not in any way prove he was born in Hawaii, since the same "short-form" document is easily obtainable for children not born in Hawaii. The true "long-form" birth certificate ? which includes information such as the name of the birth hospital and attending physician ? is the only document that can prove Obama was born in Hawaii, but to date he has not permitted its release for public or press scrutiny.

Oddly, though congressional hearings were held to determine whether Sen. John McCain was constitutionally eligible to be president as a "natural born citizen," no controlling legal authority ever sought to verify Obama's claim to a Hawaiian birth.

MannyLovitto · Aug 24, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Hey Markie...If you were to send that WorldNetDaily Sucker Fund a couple hundred bucks (American, kid..not any of that low-value Canadian jack you get paid with) I bet they might even put one of those billboards up in Toronto right across the street from your apartment.

And you could then tell all your neighbors, "LOOK AT WHAT I DID!!"

tank · Aug 24, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

Joe Contrarian said:
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]BORN IN THE USA?[/FONT]
  [FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Congressman eyes lawsuit over president's eligibility[/FONT]
  [FONT=Palatino, Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif]Republican finds birth certificate sizzling topic at Arizona town hall[/FONT]
 <hr size="1">[SIZE=-1]Posted: August 23, 2009
8:36 pm Eastern

[/SIZE]  [SIZE=-1]  ? 2009 WorldNetDaily  [/SIZE]
 <table align="right" border="0"> <tbody><tr> <td width="224">
Rep. Trent Franks, R-Ariz. </td> </tr> </tbody></table>
WASHINGTON ? U.S. Rep. Trent Franks, R-Arizona, told a townhall in Kingman yesterday he is considering a lawsuit to establish Barack Obama's eligibility for the presidency.

Franks said there is conflicting evidence on the question of Obama's status as a "natural born citizen."

His allusion to the possibility of a lawsuit forcing release of Obama's original, long-form birth certificate is as far as any member of Congress has gone on this issue.

The eligibility issue was one of the hottest topics at the town hall meeting that included concerns about national defense, stimulus spending, health-care bills and the "cash-for-clunkers" program.

Franks said it would take 34,000 years to pay off the indebtedness incurred by the Obama administration.
Demand the truth by joining the petition campaign to make President Obama reveal his long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate!

Some 950 people attended the boisterous event in a local church.

WND has reported on dozens of legal challenges to Obama's status as a "natural born citizen." The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

Some of the lawsuits question whether he was actually born in Hawaii, as he insists. If he was born out of the country, Obama's American mother, the suits contend, was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time.

Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.

Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated in the hundreds of thousands of dollars to avoid releasing a state birth certificate that would put to rest all of the questions.

WND has reported that among the documentation not yet available for Obama includes his kindergarten records, his Punahou school records, his Occidental College records, his Columbia University records, his Columbia thesis, his Harvard Law School records, his Harvard Law Review articles, his scholarly articles from the University of Chicago, his passport, his medical records, his files from his years as an Illinois state senator, his Illinois State Bar Association records, any baptism records, and his adoption records.
<table align="center" border="0"> <tbody> <tr> <td width="614">
"Where's The Birth Certificate?" billboard helps light up the night at the Mandalay Bay resort on the Las Vegas Strip. </td> </tr> </tbody> </table>
Because of the dearth of information about Obama's eligibility, WND founder Joseph Farah has launched a campaign to raise contributions to post billboards asking a simple question: "Where's the birth certificate?"
The campaign followed a petition that has collected over 450,000 signatures demanding proof of his eligibility, the availability of yard signs raising the question and the production of permanent, detachable magnetic bumper stickers asking the question.

The "certification of live birth" posted online and widely touted as "Obama's birth certificate" does not in any way prove he was born in Hawaii, since the same "short-form" document is easily obtainable for children not born in Hawaii. The true "long-form" birth certificate ? which includes information such as the name of the birth hospital and attending physician ? is the only document that can prove Obama was born in Hawaii, but to date he has not permitted its release for public or press scrutiny.

Oddly, though congressional hearings were held to determine whether Sen. John McCain was constitutionally eligible to be president as a "natural born citizen," no controlling legal authority ever sought to verify Obama's claim to a Hawaiian birth.

Suddenly I see a district in Arizona getting it's federal funding cut in half.

roscoe · Aug 24, 2009

Re: Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

mr contrarian, you have finally convinced me! if they have somehow hidden obama's kindergarten records, this really must be a wide ranging conspiracy!:LMAO:LMAO:LMAO

Revealed:'The Obama birth certificate protection act'? (Born in the USA????)

2

2

2

2

2

2

EOG Dedicated

2

2

2

EOG Veteran

2

2

2

EOG Veteran

2

EOG Veteran

2

EOG Dedicated

2

EOG Dedicated

2

2

2

EOG Enthusiast

2

EOG Veteran

2

EOG Veteran

2

EOG Dedicated

2

2

2

EOG Dedicated

2

2

2

EOG Dedicated

EOG Veteran