In an effort to educate some people on Facebook who tend to pooh-pooh the concerns of millions of Americans who want to know whether or not Barack Hussein Obama is a natural born citizen and thus eligible to be president, I ended up battling a person named "Floyd Debarber."
Since some readers here may not have access to Facebook, here is a copy of the post and comment thread:
Christine - I have created a website/blog list of sites (in the right sidebar) that cover the Obama/Soetoro ineligibility for POTUS question. It can be a great resource when you need to counter those who think that Obama's ineligibility for POTUS is a frivolous complaint. You can also see several websites that explain Why Natural... Born Citizen for POTUS Matters!
http://talkwisdom.blogspot.com/2010/04/fyi-new-list-at-talk-wisdom.html
Yesterday at 8:08am
*******
David Havard JBFC, you're dumb. He's an American citizen, it's been proven time and time again. GIVE IT UP.
Yesterday at 8:12am
*******
Kristina McMichael Treon - david prove it to me, right here...show me the proof
Yesterday at 8:13am
*******
David Havard http://aroundthesphere.files.wordpress.com/2009/07/obama-birth-certificate1.jpg
Yesterday at 8:15am
*******
Floyd Debarber David -They will believe this until their dying day. No amount of proof will be enough to satisfy them.
Yesterday at 8:17am
*******
Stephanie Fredricks You've got people saying it's real, you've got people saying it's fake. Why?
Yesterday at 8:19am
*******
Kristina McMichael Treon you do realize, anyone can make up anything on this computer.....all i saw was a form. nothing related to the government or remotely related....this could be all made up.
Yesterday at 8:19am
*******
Christine - THE RELEVANT OBAMA ADMISSION
At Barack Obama’s web site, the following admission:
“FactCheck.org Clarifies Barack’s Citizenship
... See More
‘When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…’ “
Read that last line again.
“That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…”
That’s an admission that Great Britain “governed the status” of Barack Obama, Jr. He has chosen to highlight this on his own volition.
And this leads to the relevant question:
HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN’S STATUS BE “GOVERNED” BY GREAT BRITAIN?
A natural born citizen’s status should only be governed by the United States.
Hat Tip: Natural Born Citizen blog
Yesterday at 8:19am
*******
Floyd Debarber - As the son of a Kenyan, Obama had dual citizenship (US and UK Colonial, later Kenyan) until he became an adult, at which time he forfeited his Kenyan citizen status.
Yesterday at 8:22am
*******
Amber Cahill - Wow....that BC doesn't look fake or anything. Completely different than any other birth certificate that I have seen - but David and Floyd believe it's real so it must be real right?
Yesterday at 8:24am
*******
Christine - United States Constitution - Article II Section 1 clause 5:
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.
Exactly what is a Natural Born Citizen?
... See More
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEnaAZrYqQI
Yesterday at 8:27am
*******
David Havard - If you go and get a copy of your birth certificate they all look like that. Only retarded people believe that he is not a citizen of the United States. It's as simple as that, either you're a retard or you're not.
Yesterday at 8:27am
*******
Stephanie Fredricks Floyd,- I have a child who also had dual citizenship. She is ineligible to become POTUS.
Yesterday at 8:28am
*******
Christine - David - please read and learn. There is a difference between a citizen vs. a natural born citizen. NBC is required to be eligible for POTUS.
Yesterday at 8:29am · Christine Watson Watch this video. It explains it very clearly:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QEnaAZrYqQI
Yesterday at 8:30am
*******
Amber Cahill - David - I have a copy of my birth certificate, and my husbands, and my children's - they don't look a THING like that - and contain a lot more information.....which that one should contain and doesn't. And simply because I do not believe he is american born does not make me, or anyone else a retard - you are an ass.
Yesterday at 8:31am
*******
Kristina McMichael Treon - i dont care what or who obummer is...i just know he could careLESS about the american ppl...he is not good for this country at alll. look at all the states sueing over this healthcare crap
Yesterday at 8:31am
*******
David Havard - Amber, exactly how much more information does your BC hold? Please site specific examples on how yours is different than OUR Presidents.
Yesterday at 8:37am
*******
Kristina McMichael Treon - mine is different....have you looked at yours lately?
Yesterday at 8:40am
*******
Christine - David - the B.C. doesn't really matter (unless Obama/Soetoro isn't the biological son of Obama Sr.) because his father was never a U.S. Citizen! Therefore, Obama Jr. cannot be a natural born citizen which requires 2 U.S. Citizen parents.
Yesterday at 8:45am
*******
David Havard - Yes, I had to go get a copy of mine when I applied for my Passport. I'd post mine but it's at home in a lock box. Could it be that each state has different birth certificates?? OMG, no wai?!?!?
Yesterday at 8:45am
*******
Amber Cahill - While it's not right in front of me - off the top of my head it contains the name of the hospital, how many siblings were in the home, names of county/state officials, residential address....maybe the name of the doctor....can't remember all the differences right now - but there are a lot more - that I will be happy to rattle off to you tomorrow.
Yesterday at 8:52am
*******
David Havard - Read about half way down, there are two different BC. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_certificate
Yesterday at 8:54am
*******
Amber Cahill - Well, the one I had to use to get my passport, or even go on a cruise, has to be the official raised print on the colored paper with the seal and certificate kind....if he's got one of those - I would like to see it - the one posted above isn't even certified.
Yesterday at 8:58am
*******
Floyd Debarber Stephanie - Of course she is ineligible - she is a chils!
Seriously - are you cetain she is ineligible or only inelegible until she drops the non-US citizenship?
Christine - A natural born citizen requires NO US citizen parents. If you are born in the US, you are a citizen by birth regardless of the nationality of your parents.... See More
Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"
•Anyone born inside the United States *
•Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person's status as a citizen of the tribe
•Any one born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.
•Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national
•Any one born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year
•Any one found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21
•Any one born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time)
•A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
* There is an exception in the law — the person must be "subject to the jurisdiction" of the United States. This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.
Yesterday at 9:02am
*******
David Havard - I can't do this anymore, some of you people are f**king hopeless. Dear lord, if I ever post on this retarded page again please kill me.
Yesterday at 9:03am
*******
Kristina McMichael Treon - i still don't think even if it is his BC, it would make him a better president........he is bad for america
Yesterday at 9:04am
*******
Floyd Debarber - Dacid -LOL. I hear you. Go bang your head against the wall for a couple hours. It will be just as rewarding as arguing with the birthers.
Yesterday at 9:05am
*******
Kristina McMichael Treon - yes, please dont try to change my mind about obummer b/c its a lost cause.......i have made my mind up unless he starts really careing about our constitution and the ppl
Yesterday at 9:09am
*******
Kristina McMichael Treon - caring
Yesterday at 9:10am
*******
Stephanie Fredricks Floyd, - she's 19 and hasn't reached the proper "age" yet. She is a child, born on foreign soil, to a 17 year old US citizen mother and a British citizen father. I have a consular report of live birth abroad as well as an English birth certificate. She had dual citizenship until the age of 18. She is ineligible based on her birth "stats", if you ... See Morewill.
She's also the victim of an internation parental kidnapping, and it hurts me deeply, so I'll not continue this discussion. Sorry. I shouldn't have brought it up, but it's sort of similar, no? :(
Yesterday at 9:11am
*******
Amber Cahill - And you know the short form "image" used in that Wikipedia article was created by the illustrator....
Yesterday at 9:12am
*******
Floyd Debarber Stephanie - Sorry to open a wound.
Yesterday at 9:16am
*******
Christine - Floyd - you need to educate yourself before you make bold faced lies like that! Go to this site, read and LEARN!
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
Yesterday at 9:17am
*******
Stephanie Fredricks - You didn't, I did. It's all good, chief. :)
Yesterday at 9:17am
*******
Floyd Debarber - Christine - What did I lie about?
Yesterday at 9:18am
*******
Christine - There is a difference between a natural born citizen vs. a citizen. Please read this:
http://www.newmediajournal.us/staff/fsalvato/2008/12032008.htm
Yesterday at 9:21am
*******
Floyd Debarber - Christine - I realize the presidnet has to be a natural born citizen. naturalized citizens are NOT eligible to be president. I still don't know what you think I lied about.
Yesterday at 9:24am
*******
Christine - Floyd - You wrote: "A natural born citizen requires NO US citizen parents. If you are born in the US, you are a citizen by birth regardless of the nationality of your parents.... "
That is not true!
Yesterday at 9:56am
*******
Floyd Debarber - So I oversimplified a bit.
The Supreme Court has never explicitly ruled on whether children born in the United States to illegal immigrant parents are entitled to birthright citizenship via the 14th Amendment, although it has generally been assumed that they are. A birth certificate issued by a U.S. state or territorial government is evidence of citizenship, and is usually accepted as proof of citizenship.
In the case of United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898), the Supreme Court ruled that a person becomes a citizen of the United States at the time of birth, by virtue of the first clause of the 14th amendment of the Constitution, if that person is:... See More
Born in the United States
Has parents that are subjects of a foreign power, but not in any diplomatic or official capacity of that foreign power
Has parents that have permanent domicile and residence in the United States
Has parents that are in the United States for business
Yesterday at 10:00am
*******
Christine - Floyd wrote: "So I oversimplified a bit."
Yep...spoken like a true blue ObaMAO Bot! LOL
Yesterday at 10:16am
*******
Floyd Debarber - Do you agree that you can be a natural-born citizen without having any US citizen parents?
Did I lie?
Yesterday at 10:20am
*******
Christine - No. I don't agree. Please see what the lawyer whose case is still pending against Obama in the Third Circuit Court has to say:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/
Yesterday at 10:24am
*******
Floyd Debarber - Not agreeing with me and the US Supreme Court is significantly different than me lying to you. And sinc ethis case has not yet been diecide, It in no way changes the applicability of the 14th amendment regaarding the definition of a natural-born citizen.
*******
End of postings
*******
The conversation in that thread clearly illustrates the confusion that many Americans have regarding natural born citizen status (which is required for POTUS in the United States Constitution - Article II Section 1 Clause 5) vs. U.S. citizen or naturalized citizen status.
Interestingly enough, WorldNetDaily has some screen shots of articles that were previously available for reading; but now, the words "Kenyan-born" for Obama have since been scrubbed from the original sites.
Isn't that odd?
Doesn't it make you think that Obama was previously described as "Kenyan-born," but now that he ran for president and fraudulently occupies the White House, the evidence of that fact is continually being scrubbed?
I wonder how many archived articles also carry additional damning evidence about his place of birth!
When you visit the article at WorldNetDaily, you will also see the now infamous video of Michele Obama stating that Kenya is her husband's "home country."
How much more evidence is needed that Obama is hiding his COLB because if it was made public, people would see that he was born in Kenya and therefore has, and always will be, ineligible for POTUS? He is the usurper in chief, who is ruining our nation, our economy, our health care system, our financial system, our sovereignty, our protections, our national security policies, our foreign policies, our friendship with Israel, and much much more! It is so obvious that he is trying to create a Marxist gangster government against the will of WE THE PEOPLE!
My question: When can we call this treason???
Hat Tip:
WorldNetDaily
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
18 comments:
Hi Christine,
I still do not understand at all why NO Republican is calling for the impeachment of President Obama? If he clearly is not eligible, I would expect an outcry from every single Republican. But where is the outcry?
I have my suspicions, but that is all that they are. Perhaps things will change when Conservative Republicans take back the House and the Senate.
Obama will be a one term Resident. He won't get away with the deception a second time around.
Hi Christine,
To me this doesn't make any sense. If the Republicans take back the house and senate (unlikely) then what is going to change? If they know he is not eligible to be president now, then they are creating more problems for this country. Why isn't the Supreme Court doing anything?
If President Obama should not be president because of facts, then the Republicans had better start moving on this. Otherwise they are just as guilty on keeping this 'great secret.' To me this shows this is just another conspiracy theory.
I would bet that Obama gets elected again. The economy is showing signs of recovery and that can only be attributed to what the current president has done--certainly no one is going to thank the Republicans if it continues to get better. If anything, there may be more of a Democratic majority when November rolls around...
Kevin,
Wow! That's a bold statement. Please tell me: In what way is the economy doing that can be attributed to the president? I mean, I can point to several things that he has done to make it worse. Please specify what can be credited to Obama alone?
Kevin,
A little follow-up: When you give your list of things that can be credited to Obama alone, I'm sure that you no doubt can make the "cause and effect" case outlining how it can be credited to him (i.e., what he did and exactly how that caused the improvement?)
BTW - On your Supreme Court question (why aren't they doing anything): You do realize that they can't take action until they have a valid case submission, right? Until liberals finally manage to take over anyway, they can't simply say "We're going to put a stop to this."
Kevin,
Ditto what Gary wrote.
Also, since the Dems have the majority, any legislation that Republicans would put forth asking Obama to prove his place of birth would be rejected.
When Congress changes hands to Republican majorities in the House and Senate, Obama will be a lame duck resident...unless the Kerchner et al vs. Obama et al case gets heard. Then, it is likely that the truth about his place of birth will have to be revealed. According to several important Kenyan leaders (see my latest post), it is a well known fact that Obama Jr. was born in Kenya. Just need to prove it in court.
Hi Gary and Christine,
Let's see--Obama helped bail out the auto industry and spent quite a bit of money (as you well know) trying to jump start the economy. You know this since both of you complain about it. Now the economy is starting to show signs of recovery. One leads to the other. I see signs all over California and Oregon about stimulus money being spent on public works. This leads to jobs.
See here for the economic news, as reported by Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/04/14/bernanke-expresses-confidence-economic-recovery/).
See also this report:
http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/14/news/economy/recovery_act_jobs/index.htm
If you can give me specific examples that he has made things worse, I would be happy to hear them. I don't think he is a miracle worker. However, if the economic recovery can't be attributed to Obama, then who can it be attributed to???
Gary--you ask: "You do realize that they can't take action until they have a valid case submission, right?" Yes, and that has been my point. A valid case is needed--and stating that the President is not a U.S. citizen eligible to be president is not a valid case. Anyone can attack anyone else in the court. If valid, it will work. However, for some reason the accusation that Obama shouldn't be president never makes it (see Orly Taitz who was just uninvited to a Tea Party even because of her endless lawsuits over this very issue). You would think that ANY Republican would be pushing this hard, this this would be a great way to get rid of this president. But that hasn't happened. Thus it seems to me that the accusation is false.
"...it is a well known fact that Obama Jr. was born in Kenya" What? Well known where? Why would his mother have him in Kenya and then lie to her son? Do you think she could see into the future to guess that her son would later become president? What about the family members of Obama that he still has in Kenya? Do you think they have all been kept quiet about the 'fact' that he was born in Kenya? Besides, I think all of this is pointless because even if Obama was born in Kenya and was kicked out, some Republicans would then go after the Vice President (maybe he was born in Kenya too?) and then the Speaker and so on. The real problem here is that some Republicans don't like a Democrat in the White House.
Kevin,
It would be advantageous for any American woman to give U.S. citizenship to her child. It doesn't matter who he grows up to be. The evidence of Obama's place of birth is questionable. And since he refuses to release his COLB to settle the matter, it is obvious that he is hiding something...big.
In case you have missed the logic of the birthers, here is why Obama can't be a natural born citizen (required by Article II, Section 1, clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution):
THE RELEVANT OBAMA ADMISSION
At Barack Obama’s web site, the following admission:
“FactCheck.org Clarifies Barack’s Citizenship
‘When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…’ “
Read that last line again.
“That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children…”
That’s an admission that Great Britain “governed the status” of Barack Obama, Jr. He has chosen to highlight this on his own volition.
And this leads to the relevant question:
HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN’S STATUS BE “GOVERNED” BY GREAT BRITAIN?
A natural born citizen’s status should only be governed by the United States.
Hat Tip: Natural Born Citizen blog
*******
I just heard that Megan Kelly is going to discuss the possible court martial of Lt. Colonel Terrence Lakin, (who has refused deployment until he sees Obama's proof of POTUS eligibility) on her Fox News show tomorrow. Perhaps this will give the Lt. Col. standing to ask the court to force Obama show proof of his eligibility to be POTUS.
Kevin, Kevin, Kevin...
Play a little thought game with me. Assume that I am in a group that is hostile to religion. I'm sure you can imagine that. I then say that "There are definite things going on in the world that can only be attributed to God." People as why and I reply "If not God, then what else could be causing things?"
Now I would hope you would agree that as a matter of faith my attitude would be acceptable but certainly provides no type of evidence. Substituting "Obama" for "God" makes the statements no more sound.
On the specifics you listed, you mentioned that Obama has spent a lot of money and that is certainly true. Most of his jobs created in however are in the government sector, making them a long term loss for tax payers. A great many, such as the construction jobs you mention, are short term and will not significantly influence long term job creation or recovery, though there will be some value gained from enhancing infrastructure.
Graphs of the last five major recessions show nothing unusual about the recovery aspect of this one, from which I deduce that there is nothing special or spectacular being done.
Now, as to reasons I can cite that Obama has harmed economic growth...
I'll begin by asking you to agree that job growth depends at least in part by a business's assessment that it can make more by hiring people than it will lose. Seem reasonable? I would ask you also to assume that if people invest in a business, through stock or other financial institutions, they expect a positive return on their investment. So now we get to Obama on business.
1. As far back as his campaign, Obama made it clear that he would attack businesses that he didn't like. One specific announcement he made was that if someone wanted to build a coal fired energy plant they could, but that the government would bankrupt it. Traditional energy sectors on notice - Don't invest. Don't hire.
2. As part of his automobile bailout, he completely disregarded precedents of bankruptcy law by dismissing claims of secured creditors (stockholders) and handing large parts of GM over to the unions. Lesson - This government will not support investment. It will favor unions, which tend to make the business less productive and make workers more expensive to hire.
3. Obama's tactic of demonizing any group who opposes his plan. Over the course of the past year, this has included banks, insurance companies, doctors, pharmaceutical companies, auto dealers. The government has demonstrated that it will take steps to heavily regulate each of these companies in turn. Lesson - Expenses and taxes on each of these companies are going up.
4. Obama's statement that "There is a time to make profits. Now is not that time." Message - The government will limit any opportunity you have to make a good return on investment.
Is any of this making sense, Kevin? The government cannot grow an economy and wage war on business at the same time. Instead of doing anything to bring the two sides together, he is gleefully keeping business and labor at each other's throats, and the only winner will be the politicians.
Hi Christine,
Above you stated " it is a well known fact that Obama Jr. was born in Kenya." But factchecker.org, which you quoted, states he was born in Hawaii. Which is it? Is factchecker.org now lying?
Hi Gary,
I like playing thought games.
I listened to his speech about the cap and trade and the coal plants (given in 2008). Yes, he said that cap and trade would bankrupt the coal industry. However, it has been widely taken out of context. If you look at the rest of it, he says that it is an illusion to think that coal can be gotten rid of. Here is the rest of what he said:
“So if somebody wants to build a coal-powered plant, they can. It’s just that it will bankrupt them because they’re going to be charged a huge sum for all that greenhouse gas that’s being emitted. That will also generate billions of dollars that we can invest in solar, wind, biodiesel, and other alternative energy approaches. The only thing that I’ve said with respect to coal -- I haven’t been some coal booster. What I have said is that for us to take coal off the table as an ideological matter, as opposed to saying if technology allows us to use coal in a clean way, we should pursue it, that I think is the right approach. The same with respect to nuclear. Right now, we don’t know how to store nuclear waste wisely and we don’t know how to deal with some of the safety issues that remain. And so it’s wildly expensive to pursue nuclear energy. But I tell you what, if we could figure out how to store it safely, then I think most of us would say that might be a pretty good deal.
“The point is, if we set rigorous standards for the allowable emissions, then we can allow the market to determine and technology and entrepreneurs to pursue, what the best approach is to take, as opposed to us saying at the outset, here are the winners that we’re picking and maybe we pick wrong and maybe we pick right.”
That might be wrecking the old, dirty coal industry, but it will build up a newer, cleaner coal industry (or something else if the coal companies can't get their act together). To me that is helping other industries instead of just one. Car companies also don't like it when miles/gallon requirement goes up, but they do it and it makes them money when they then advertise (and sell) their fuel efficient vehicles. That seems pretty good for business.
#2 I don't know of a case where common stock holders get anything out of a company that is going bankrupt. They are always last on the list and lucky to get everything. My brother-in-law works for GM. His stock was preserved.
#3--The job of any president, Democrat or Republican, is to push his agenda. That shouldn't be a surprise to anyone. I don't recall President Obama calling his detractors or other businesses demonic.
#4--I can't speak for Obama, but when an insurance company claims it needs to raise premiums because it is running out of money, while making billions in profit doesn't quite seem right to me. I don't know about you, but I didn't like paying $5.50/gallon for gas when Exxon and other petroleum companies were making billions and billions extra. Of course, they are a company and I have a car, so I don't have too much of a choice. You might like to give a company money which it then pays to executives, but I don't. I'm not saying I think the government should run businesses. But if a business is going bankrupt and the government props it up to get it afloat, it shouldn't be able to keep screwing the tax payers.
You ask "Is any of this making sense, Kevin?" As you can see, my answer is definitely yes.
Kevin - About Factcheck.org. Please read this and go to the site:
butterdezillion said...
Lakin has made a good call. The Hawaii Department of Health has already confirmed, in 2 different ways through official communications, that the Factcheck COLB is a forgery, because
1) The DOH has made a statutory confirmation that Obama's birth certificate is amended. DOH Administrative Rules, which were illegally hidden from the public until Nov 2009, say that any genuine COLB must have note of the amendment. Factcheck doesn't and is therefore known as a forgery. And
2) Janice Okubo stated that the certificate numbers were given by the state registrar on the "Date filed". The Facthceck COLB shows a "date filed" 3 days before the Nordyke twins' but the cert number is 2 later than theirs.
Hawaii law says an amended birth certificate does not qualify as prima facie evidence, which means that the best Hawaii has is only legal hearsay - the same legal validity as the Kenyan BC's so ridiculed by so many.
Documentation - including the official DOH communications - at http://butterdezillion.wordpress.com/2010/01/11/red-flags-in-hawaii-2/
Also, when I get a chance I will provide you with a blog that has kept track and documented most of Obama's lies. Last time I checked (months ago) there were over 200!!
Why is WND being so deceitful about this? This entire website has nothing to do with the topic WND was writing about-it is about Hawaiians getting native land. The article in the Star Bulletin, according to WND states: "The Hawaiian certification of live birth Barack Obama posted on his campaign website and distributed to select news organizations as proof he was a "natural born citizen" would not be accepted as a "birth certificate" even for some Hawaiian state government eligibility issues, WND has learned." But that is not what the Bulletin stated.
Here is what part of the Star Bulletin states (http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html):
"She added that the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized the state's current certification of live birth "as an official birth certificate meeting all federal and other requirements."
The issue of what constitutes an official Hawaii birth certificate received national attention during last year's presidential campaign. Those who doubted Barack Obama's American citizenship called the copy of the Hawaii birth document posted on his campaign Web site a fake.
Asked about that document, Okubo said, "This is the same certified copy everyone receives when they request a birth certificate."
We found a discussion of "the truth about Obama's birth certificate" on the Web site FactCheck.org -- www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html.
The organization describes itself as "a nonpartisan, nonprofit 'consumer advocate' for voters that aims to reduce the level of deception and confusion in U.S. politics."
It says a "certification of live birth" is, in fact, a short-form official birth certificate. Information included in the document might differ from state to state."
That last sentence is the last sentence in the Star Bulletin. I don't know who runs WND, but they need to fire that 'reporter' for not reporting the truth.
The article you give (butterdezillion) states "Though ridiculing “birthers” publicly, the DOH has PRIVATELY confirmed Obama’s online COLB’s as forgeries – a fact the DOH has known since the beginning." Privately? With whom? Who stated this? This is all just hearsay. I am not surprised to see that this is all based on a 'private' conversation.
This is a closed case for me--Obama is fully eligible and everything else is just a conspiracy theory.
Hi Christine,
I am looking all over for an official statement from the Hawaii Dept. of Health stating that his birth certificate is amended. I can find lots of news websites that state the opposite (http://www.kitv.com/politics/17860890/detail.html); http://www.starbulletin.com/news/breaking/State_Department_of_Health_declares_Obama_birth_certificate_legal.html.
Here is what one news source published just last month (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100317/ap_on_re_us/us_obama_birth_certificate):
" Birthers beware: Hawaii may start ignoring your repeated requests for proof that President Barack Obama was born here.
As the state continues to receive e-mails seeking Obama's birth certificate, the state House Judiciary Committee heard a bill Tuesday permitting government officials to ignore people who won't give up.
"Sometimes we may be dealing with a cohort of people who believe lack of evidence is evidence of a conspiracy," said Lorrin Kim, chief of the Hawaii Department of Health's Office of Planning, Policy and Program Development.
So-called "birthers" claim Obama is ineligible to be president because, they argue, he was actually born outside the United States, and therefore doesn't meet a constitutional requirement for being president.
Hawaii Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino issued statements last year and in October 2008 saying that she's seen vital records that prove Obama is a natural-born American citizen."
The website, WND, states that the Health Dept. has stated the Live Birth is not valid, but the link they give does not state this at all. In fact, the website that WND points people to is about getting a homesteading permit!
Here is what WND states:
"The website of the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands, however, states clearly the certification of live birth touted by the Obama campaign, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs and a host of other Obama defenders is not acceptable as a form of identification to qualify under this program. " Here is the link they give (http://hawaii.gov/dhhl/applicants/appforms/applyhhl). Here is what it says:
"Primary Documents
Birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth and Certifications of Live Birth) and Certificates of Hawaiian Birth are the primary documents used to determine native Hawaiian qualification.
The Department of Hawaiian Home Lands accepts both Certificates of Live Birth (original birth certificate) and Certifications of Live Birth because they are official government records documenting an individual’s birth. The Certificate of Live Birth generally has more information which is useful for genealogical purposes as compared to the Certification of Live Birth which is a computer-generated printout that provides specific details of a person’s birth. Although original birth certificates (Certificates of Live Birth) are preferred for their greater detail, the State Department of Health (DOH) no longer issues Certificates of Live Birth. When a request is made for a copy of a birth certificate, the DOH issues a Certification of Live Birth."
(continued)
Kevin,
Going slightly out of order,
#2. The key phrase that you use in this answer is "I don't know." You might want to at least try to educate yourself on matters that you comment on. Then you would know that the courts are the ones that legally divide assets in the case of bankruptcy, not the executive branch. Aside from that, it doesn't matter who you know that didn't get anything from stock. According to law, those with a debt interest, such as stockholders, are supposed to have a definite precedence in how funds are to be distributed. The government violated that precedence to award assets that should have gone to stockholders to unions and governments.
BTW - Your reply completely ignores the substantive point, which was if the investors feel the government will not act in a lawful manner to protect their investments, they will either not invest or do so elsewhere.
3. I didn't say that called anyone demonic. I said that he was "demonizing" them, as in waging a campaign to cast them as bad, wicked, greedy, etc. Again, no reply to the substance of the comment. Yes, every president pursues their agenda. This president's agenda is rapidly degrading the private sector, with losses in revenue, employment, and all that goes with it.
4. The health insurance industry maintains a profit margin of around 3%, one of the lowest of any huge industry, and a great deal of the price increases are caused by government mandates. Right now in Massachusetts, a state that has a health care system very similar to the one to be put in place by Obama-care, the companies have stopped selling insurance polices. They can't afford to. Because of the government mandates combined with price controls, they now will lose money on every policy they sell. Welcome to the future of America. This is what is sometimes referred to as "The liberal two-step." This is the process where liberal politicians create an environment where market solutions cannot possibly succeed and then are "forced" to step in when the market "fails."
As far as your missive on energy companies, all you are really saying is that you find it acceptable to tax and destroy businesses that you don't like in favor of ones you do. That's a nice fascist sentiment, but it has very little to do with American democracy. It also has an historical track record of failure. Research similar attempts at renewable energy jobs in Spain and the bath their economy took. Europe has had high energy taxes for decades and they still have developed enough clean energy to make up for the loss, which was never really the point. They simply needed a rationale to increase taxation to be better able to control the population. In that, they have succeeded.
If the slogan from 1984 was correct, if ignorance really was strength, then liberals really would be a race of super-humans.
Kevin wrote:
"This is a closed case for me--Obama is fully eligible and everything else is just a conspiracy theory."
Then please explain why Obama has spent over 1.8 million dollars on lawyers to keep from showing the public (or a courtroom) his vault-length COLB? If the man has nothing to hide, why would he do such a thing?
Oops! Correction. According to The Obama File:
$2,161,155.11 -- And the money continues to flow into Perkins Coie.
Hi Christine,
What proof does this Obama File have that he spent over 2 million on this? Are there actual receipts that President Obama made to lawyers? He only made 5 million this past year--are you saying he spent nearly 1/2 his income on this??? I would like to see some real evidence here.
Hi Gary,
You said: "That's a nice fascist sentiment, but it has very little to do with American democracy." We've gone over this. Let me ask you the same question I ask you before: Do you and your family want to live in a mercury-infested landscape? Or an air-polluted landscape? If the answer is yes, please explain. If the answer is no, then see my comment above about the coal industry.
By the way, what do you think of the issue around President Obama's birth certificate? I haven't heard you comment on that yet. Is he the real president? Or is he a fake who has spent his entire adult life hiding the evidence so that some point in the future he could run for president, even though he and half the rich liberals in this country knew he really couldn't?
Post a Comment