The "fair and impartial" media on the birth certificate

[bcj1755]

Hawaii again declares Obama birth certificate real
AP

By JAYMES SONG, Associated Press Writer Jaymes Song, Associated Press Writer – Tue Jul 28, 1:54 am ET

HONOLULU – State officials in Hawaii on Monday said they have once again checked and confirmed that President Barack Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen, and therefore meets a key constitutional requirement for being president.

They hoped to stem a recent surge in the number of inquiries about Obama's birthplace.

"I ... have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen," Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said in a brief statement. "I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago."

So-called "birthers" — who claim Obama is ineligible to be president because, they argue, he was actually born outside the United States — have grown more vocal recently on blogs and television news shows.

Fukino issued a similar press release Oct. 31, but was prompted to speak out again because of the renewed attention on Obama's beginnings. Hawaii's Health Department has been flooded in recent weeks with questions from individuals and several national TV news networks asking for proof that Obama was indeed born in Hawaii.

"They just keep asking over and over and over again," Health Department spokeswoman Janice Okubo said.

The Constitution states that a person must be a "natural-born citizen" to be eligible for the presidency. Birthers contend that Obama's birth certificate is a fake, and many say he was actually born in Kenya, his father's homeland. They've challenged his citizenship in court.

One widely circulated YouTube clip of a town hall meeting showed a Republican congressman getting booed for saying Obama is a citizen. Talk show host Rush Limbaugh and CNN's Lou Dobbs have also raised the issue, and 10 Republican members of Congress co-sponsored a bill that would require future presidential candidates to provide a copy of their original birth certificate.

However, it appears Congress has moved on and has accepted Obama's island birthplace. The U.S. House on Monday unanimously approved a resolution recognizing and celebrating the 50th anniversary of Hawaii becoming the 50th state. A clause was included that reads: "Whereas the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961."

State law bars the release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who does not have a tangible interest.

However, Obama's birth certificate along with birth notices from the two Honolulu newspapers were brought forward even before he took office. But that's done nothing to shake the belief by many Obama critics that the president was born abroad.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090728/...th_certificate

So the State of Hawaii is once again saying that Barry was born there. Uh huh, suuuuuure he was

"I ... have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen," Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said in a brief statement. "I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago."

And we're just supposed to take this guy's word for it? I can go on TV and say that I saw Klingons beaming down in my front yard, but that doesn't make it true. I'm betting he made both statements because someone from ACORN or the gov't "asked" him to say it if "he knows what's good for him."

State law bars the release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who does not have a tangible interest.

How very convenient, for Barry. Of course, if one of these cases would actually go to court and a judge would rule against the messiah, then Hawaii could be forced to release the so-called "birth certificate." Maybe that's why Barry has spent at least $800,000 (of WHO'S money?!) to keep all his records sealed.

I'm thinking that he's just shocked that this many people won't blindly worship him and demand to know the truth about his Kenyan birth, so he has his people lean on Fukino to say he saw the birth certificate again. I"m betting that he's really shocked that members of the military, whom Barry thinks should be mindless robots obeying his every whim, are standing up and demanding a birth certificate. Notice the "fair and impartial" media will barely mention the hundreds of thousands of people who want proof, and they won't mention the evidence against Barry at all, but yet they hop on the bandwagon and yell to the heavens procliaming Obama's "Hawaiian birth." And let us not forget the "birth certificate" that Barry already posted. Well, you all know what I think about that....It's a FAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAKE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

And notice how the "fair and impartial" media is labeling those of us that don't believe Barry was born in Hawaii as "birthers," trying to make us out to be some kind of weirdos or whackadoos. And why is that? Why, it's because we're inconsiderate enough to actually think for ourselves and not bow down and kiss Obambababababa's Kenyan a**

[kingchip]

I still want to know about the schooling in Indonesia. As I understand, a student MUST be a citizen of Indonesia to attend school. Thus, he would have had to renounce his American citizenship.

So what gives with that.

[45nut]

He ain't a citizen and we know it.

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by kingchip

I still want to know about the schooling in Indonesia. As I understand, a student MUST be a citizen of Indonesia to attend school. Thus, he would have had to renounce his American citizenship.

So what gives with that.

And add to that him travelling to Pakastan while he was in college. You know, when US citizens were forbidden to travel to Pakastan. So what passport did he use? We know it wasn't a US passport. Was it Kenyan? Or Indonesian?

[Suwannee Tim]

You guys are wasting your time. BHO is not going anywhere for the next 3-1/2 years. Say you were able to drive him out of office, what would you get then? Joe Biden? Big improvement! There is a lot can be done in the next few years to regain our country. Don't waste your time on this one.

[PharmrJohn]

Originally Posted by Suwannee Tim

You guys are wasting your time. BHO is not going anywhere for the next 3-1/2 years. Say you were able to drive him out of office, what would you get then? Joe Biden? Big improvement! There is a lot can be done in the next few years to regain our country. Don't waste your time on this one.

Exactly what I was thinking.

His records are not available to the public for the same reasons anyone's aren't. Privacy. The same law that protects an ordinary citizen protects him. He authorized the statement (likely in writing and in triplicate-----or these days in an online statement "Click this box"), it was looked at, the statement was made and that is that.

It's good enough for me. More often than not, I go by Akum's Razor. I feel this is the perfect example of such.

[45nut]

Originally Posted by PharmrJohn

More often than not, I go by Akum's Razor. I feel this is the perfect example of such.

This would be the easiest conspiracy theory to disprove. If he could, he could just show the real birth certificate.

Why spend $950,000 to quash all the law suits concerning this matter? Why doesn't he show the real one? Simple answer, because he doesn't have one. Aside from the phony one with fonts made in the 1990's that is.

Ockham's Razor - Ockham's Razor is the principle proposed by William of Ockham in the fourteenth century: ``Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate'', which translates as ``entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily''.

[Southern Boy]

Agreed that biden could be even worse, what about respect of the Constitution? Laws of the land that our founding fathers implemented should be above all other things in our nation. i believe we will defeat B.o. on policy and liberty issues, but this issue on nationality should continue on a side bar to preserve the law.and prevent future usurpers.

[Rocket J Squirl]

Originally Posted by 45nut

He ain't a citizen and we know it.

The new world order has spoken

The issue is over, even the conserves are throwing in the towel

[TranterUK]

It would seem there are reasons to think Barry is not a US citizen. There are also questions as to his education and faith.

It seems to me the biggest problem here is that it doesn't seem to matter to most people.

[satellite66]

Biden would not be worse. Biden is an idiot not a marxist. Does anyone think Biden would have the following the great reader does? Biden as president would guarantee a loss in 10 and 12 for the dems.
I don't think this issue should be on the front burner but if it ties up resources for them and gives them fits full speed ahead. Stop backing down let them back down.
Isn't anyone curious about why this came out now? The guy is just saying the same thing he said last year.

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by Suwannee Tim

You guys are wasting your time. BHO is not going anywhere for the next 3-1/2 years. Say you were able to drive him out of office, what would you get then? Joe Biden? Big improvement! There is a lot can be done in the next few years to regain our country. Don't waste your time on this one.

Originally Posted by PharmrJohn

Exactly what I was thinking.

His records are not available to the public for the same reasons anyone's aren't. Privacy. The same law that protects an ordinary citizen protects him. He authorized the statement (likely in writing and in triplicate-----or these days in an online statement "Click this box"), it was looked at, the statement was made and that is that.

It's good enough for me. More often than not, I go by Akum's Razor. I feel this is the perfect example of such.

Just sitting back and accepting this because "he's not going anywhere" is the same thing as condoning a blatant violation of the Constitution. But sure, we should just sit back and accept this because we've already accepted other blatant violations of the Constitution in the past. We accept ATF trampling on our right to bear arms and forcing us to fill out a 4473 when we want to buy a gun. We've accepted the feds pissing all over states' rights in violation of the 9th and 10th Amendments, so sure, let's just sit back and accpet this one too. How many of the people that are willing to accept this will be willing to accpet the forthcoming gun confiscations and national ID card and national security force. I mean, if we back down, then maybe King-Emperor Barack I His Great Awesomeness and All-Konwing Teleprompter will have mercy on us and let us retain just a tiny bit of the few liberties that we still have.

And as far as privacy goes, if I was running for political office and someone made a stink about my birth certificate or school records or military records, how much you want to bet that they could be released to the public under the FOIA, even if I did not want them to be released. But yet Barry has spent how much money to keep his past a secret. THAT right THERE tells me that he was, in fact, born in Kenya.

I say F*** THE KENYAN BA*****!!!! I had to show a stamped, sealed, notarized, certified, and signed LONG FORM birth certificate when I was enrolled in school in FL, again I got my learner's permit in FL, again when I got my driver license in FL, again when I enlisted in the USAF, again when I got my NC driver license, a few more times for various jobs, and yet again when I applied for my NC CHP, but yet this foreign-born communist usurper gets a free pass!

I agree with Satellite66, let Sneaky Joe's dumba** be POTUS, that will be a guaranteed Democratic loss in 2010 AND 2012.

[PharmrJohn]

Originally Posted by 45nut

This would be the easiest conspiracy theory to disprove. If he could, he could just show the real birth certificate......

If you are talking the original, I don't have mine either. I can't get it, because it doesn't exist anymore. Only verified copies exist. He did provide one such copy for viewing. Not only did he provide the document itself for examination, but he posted it on the Internet, albeit only one side. He has had the State of Hawaii make a statement not once but twice on the subject. What else does he need to do?

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by PharmrJohn

If you are talking the original, I don't have mine either. I can't get it, because it doesn't exist anymore. Only verified copies exist. He did provide one such copy for viewing. Not only did he provide the document itself for examination, but he posted it on the Internet, albeit only one side. He has had the State of Hawaii make a statement not once but twice on the subject. What else does he need to do?

You mean that short form that doesn't even contain enough info to obtain a driver's license? If I'd taken something like to DMV or to the Air Force recruiter, I'd have been turned down. Plus, where's the notary stamp on it? Even a scanned document would show the impression from the notary seal. If he dosen't have the original long form, he can get another one. Why won't he? Because his original birth certificate is in Kenya, that's why. I've had to prove many times in my life that I'm a natural born US citizen by showing a STAMPED, CERTIFIED, and SIGNED LONG FORM birth certificate, but yet to be POTUS he can post a short form that doesn't contain nearly enough info to obtain a driver's license, and that can easily have been photoshopped, and I'm just supposed to accept that? Fair is fair. I had to show a long form to be able to drive a car, or enlist in the military, or obtain a CHP, so why can't he show a long form to prove he's eligible to be POTUS?

[satellite66]

I had to produce BCs last month for my teenage kids to show they belonged on my health benefits which have not changed since their births.
Why are so many willing to give him a pass?

[Bobitis]

Originally Posted by bcj1755

You mean that short form that doesn't even contain enough info to obtain a driver's license? If I'd taken something like to DMV or to the Air Force recruiter, I'd have been turned down. Plus, where's the notary stamp on it? Even a scanned document would show the impression from the notary seal. If he dosen't have the original long form, he can get another one. Why won't he? Because his original birth certificate is in Kenya, that's why. I've had to prove many times in my life that I'm a natural born US citizen by showing a STAMPED, CERTIFIED, and SIGNED LONG FORM birth certificate, but yet to be POTUS he can post a short form that doesn't contain nearly enough info to obtain a driver's license, and that can easily have been photoshopped, and I'm just supposed to accept that? Fair is fair. I had to show a long form to be able to drive a car, or enlist in the military, or obtain a CHP, so why can't he show a long form to prove he's eligible to be POTUS?

Priceless!

My/my sons birth info is of 'public' record.
"PUBLIC"!
Anyone can get this info.

So.........?

[jacksonco]

Obama is not going anywhere until 2012. I do support the people that want this birth certificate issue settled in court once and for all. I however believe that the courts will rule in Obamas favor.

The bright spot is Obama will not be re-elected in 2012. There is a good possibility that the conservatives will regain much of the seats lost in the House and Senate by then. Obama's policies are beginning to sink his boat. Even some of the Dems are going against him now.

Economic recovery will not happen fast enough for him to lay claim to victory on that front. He is mishandling foreign affairs, his health policy does not exist because he wants the House and Senate to write it and pass it.

And he has shown that he will align with Muslim nations against Israel and has turned his back on the Jewish State. His days are numbered as president and he will be a one termer just like Carter was.

[cjh7819]

Originally Posted by bcj1755

You mean that short form that doesn't even contain enough info to obtain a driver's license? If I'd taken something like to DMV or to the Air Force recruiter, I'd have been turned down. Plus, where's the notary stamp on it? Even a scanned document would show the impression from the notary seal. If he dosen't have the original long form, he can get another one. Why won't he? Because his original birth certificate is in Kenya, that's why. I've had to prove many times in my life that I'm a natural born US citizen by showing a STAMPED, CERTIFIED, and SIGNED LONG FORM birth certificate, but yet to be POTUS he can post a short form that doesn't contain nearly enough info to obtain a driver's license, and that can easily have been photoshopped, and I'm just supposed to accept that? Fair is fair. I had to show a long form to be able to drive a car, or enlist in the military, or obtain a CHP, so why can't he show a long form to prove he's eligible to be POTUS?

You sir are Correct. Barack is not the Potus and I hope some day he and the people that are actually pulling the strings are held accountable for their actions and the lies that they are shoving down everyone's throats.

[bcj1755]

Here's more about this...

GOP headache: The birther issue

By LISA LERER & DANIEL LIBIT | 7/27/09 5:34 AM EDT
Updated: 7/27/09 1:12 PM EDT

When lawmakers return home for recess in August, they can expect to hear tough questions from constituents on the economy, health care and government spending.

But Republicans are preparing for something else: the birthers.

As GOP Rep. Mike Castle learned the hard way back home in Delaware this month, there’s no easy way to deal with the small but vocal crowd of right-wing activists who refuse to believe that President Barack Obama was born in the United States.

At a town hall meeting in Georgetown, a woman demanded to know why Castle and his colleagues were “ignoring” questions about Obama’s birth certificate — questions that have been put to rest repeatedly by state officials in Hawaii, where the birth certificate and all other credible evidence show that Obama was born in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961.

When Castle countered that Obama is, in fact, “a citizen of the United States,” the crowd erupted in boos, the woman seized control of the gathering and led a recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance. The video went viral; by Sunday, it had been viewed on YouTube more than half a million times.

And birthers say members should expect more of the same in the coming weeks.

“Absolutely,” says California resident Orly Taitz, the Russian-born attorney/dentist who has become a kind of ringleader for the movement. “It is a very important issue, one that politicians should have taken up a long time ago.”

Moments after speaking with POLITICO Saturday, Taitz posted a call to arms on her blog:

“I believe it is a serious concern and I hope that each and every decent American comes to town hall meetings with a video camera and demands action,” she wrote.

Having seen his colleague Castle come under attack, Rep. Pete Hoekstra (R-Mich.) is taking no chances.

“Before I got back to Michigan before the break, we’ll go through it, so that we’re versed in it,” Hoekstra said recently. “Just like anything else, if you see a hot issue ... it’s sort of like, ‘Let me go take a look at this and see what the status is.’”

Hoekstra believes there’s no “compelling case” questioning Obama’s origins. But after talking to Castle about his town hall, he knows that he’d better be ready with an answer.

The trick: What do you say?

Of the various approaches a put-on-the-spot pol can take, each carries its own risk of alienating constituents. Pick up a pitchfork in the cause of this conspiracy theory, and you risk damaging your reputation in the mainstream while aligning yourself with a movement some regard as having racist undertones.

Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.), co-sponsor of legislation that would force candidates to show their birth certificates, was widely mocked after he told MSNBC’s Chris Matthews that Obama is a U.S. citizen — “as far as I know.”

However, members who decide to challenge the conspiracy theory, as Castle did mildly, risk ticking off a shrill minority who can upend their events and then post the video on the Web.

And those who try to split the difference may find themselves getting doubly burned.

At a Wyoming town hall in April, birthers jumped on freshman Republican Rep. Cynthia Lummis.

“I’m not questioning your concern,” Lummis told the crowd, according to the Wyoming Eagle Tribune. “I am questioning whether there is credible evidence.”

The congresswoman ended up asking for anyone who had “evidence” to send it to her.

At a walk-in meeting in Sen. Tom Coburn’s Washington office, birthers gave the Oklahoma Republican’s chief of staff nine pages of documentation in support of their claims. The group later billed the meeting a success on one of Taitz’s blogs.

But when asked about the meeting, Coburn spokesman Don Tatro said that the office was simply trying to be “polite” and that “it is possible to mistake politeness for agreement.”

According to his office, Colorado Republican Rep. Doug Lamborn has received 33 inquiries about Obama’s origins, with 10 coming in over the past week.

So far, Hoekstra hasn’t faced any such questions.

“When you’re in a state with 15.2 percent unemployment,” he said, “most people have other things on their mind than this.”

But as if to illustrate the touchiness of the subject, Hoekstra quickly added: “Not that this isn’t important.”

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-Okla.) has also tried to find the elusive middle ground.

"They have a point," he said of the birthers last week. "I don't discourage it. ... But I'm going to pursue defeating [Obama] on things that I think are very destructive to America."

Inhofe put out a statement Monday clarifying his comment:

"The point that they make is the Constitutional mandate that the U.S. president be a natural born citizen, and the White House has not done a very good job of dispelling the concerns of these citizens," he said. "My focus is on issues where I can make a difference to stop the liberal agenda being pushed by President Obama."

Out-party politicians have long had to deal with conspiracy theorists on their side — the people who think that the Clintons killed Vince Foster or that the Bush administration helped orchestrate the Sept. 11 attacks.

“Twenty-five percent of my people believe the Pentagon and Rumsfeld were responsible for taking the twin towers down,” said Rep. Collin Peterson, a Democrat who represents a conservative Republican district in Minnesota. “That’s why I don’t do town meetings.”

But the birther phenomenon may present a bigger challenge — a potent blend of race and politics, fueled by conservative TV and radio pundits, and played out in a day when all that stands between a town hall meeting and Web omnipresence is a $100 flip cam.

Republican pollster Whit Ayers says that a member confronted with birther questions should immediately pivot the conversation back to big issues.

“You simply indicate that in a country where our fiscal policy is driving us toward bankruptcy, where we are wrestling with major issues of health care reform and fighting two wars for our safety, you don’t have time to deal with wild conspiracy theories,” he says.

That’s the approach House Republican Conference Chairman Mike Pence of Indiana takes.

“On that issue, I’m pretty distinctive that the president is from Hawaii,” he said. “I just don’t know where he’s coming from on health care.”

Such a response might satisfy many, or even most, but Taitz says that until Obama is removed from office, America’s other problems cannot be addressed. The fact that a few members of Congress have taken up her cause, with 10 Republicans signing onto Floria Republican Rep. Bill Posey’s legislation to amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971, has only encouraged her to buckle down in the fight.

As Taitz sees it, Campbell, who represents her congressional district in Southern California, was moved to co-sponsor the “Birthers’ bill” for fear of people like her.

Campbell spokesperson Muffy Lewis flatly denied that being the case, saying the issue of Obama’s birth certificate is a low priority in the congressman’s district. Plus, Campbell has stressed that the bill would apply only to future candidates — and is really just about avoiding these kinds of controversies in the future.

“It really wasn’t as much about constituents as it was his own principles,” said Lewis. “He thought it was a common-sense bill. Castle had a major issue [in his district], but it hasn’t been much of an issue in ours.”

But Taitz said that lawmakers everywhere should be prepared to “resign or be removed” if they “do not have the guts to stand for the Constitution and this country.”

Asked whether Republican lawmakers should be “afraid” of the birthers, Taitz said: “I wouldn’t say the word ‘afraid.’ I think they should be willing to resign or be removed. That is what they should do. ... Resign if you do not have the guts to stand for the Constitution of this country.”

Taitz has made nine trips around the country to rally support for her cause. In March, she traveled to Washington to personally hand out packets of documents to senators in the Hart Senate Office Building. Additionally, she says she has sent documents by certified mail to each of the members of the Senate Judiciary Committee, arguing that Obama is “totally illegitimate to be president.”

While the movement could be “politically threatening for particular Republicans,” Taitz says that the GOP as a whole has a chance to gain from it if it takes the right course of action.

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0709/25444.html

And here again the "fair and impartial" media is calling people that don't buy Barry's "born in Hawaii" story "birthers" and making them out to be racists and nutjobs. Even some so-called conservative Republican Senators are avoiding the question. Why? Why are members of Congress so damned scared of Obama? I wish Sen. Burr and/or Rep. Myrick would make some kind of statement about the issue, because my vote next year might rest on it. Does ANY member of Congress have enough backbone to stand up and demand a long form birth certificate from Barry? Just one. Even Coburn, who acts like a conservative, is sidestepping the issue. All these so-called conservative Senators keep saying that they want to concentrate on other ways to stop Obama's liberal agenda, well what better way then to prove he's not eligable to be POTUS and get him impeached?! Get his Kenyan a** kicked out and he can no longer push his socilaist aganda! But I guess that's too easy and makes too much sense for a politician.

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by Bobitis

Priceless!

My/my sons birth info is of 'public' record.
"PUBLIC"!
Anyone can get this info.

So.........?

Everyone's birth records are public records, unless you're a foreign born Marxist usurper that was illegally "elected" POTUS.

Originally Posted by jacksonco

Obama is not going anywhere until 2012. I do support the people that want this birth certificate issue settled in court once and for all. I however believe that the courts will rule in Obamas favor.

The bright spot is Obama will not be re-elected in 2012. There is a good possibility that the conservatives will regain much of the seats lost in the House and Senate by then. Obama's policies are beginning to sink his boat. Even some of the Dems are going against him now.

Economic recovery will not happen fast enough for him to lay claim to victory on that front. He is mishandling foreign affairs, his health policy does not exist because he wants the House and Senate to write it and pass it.

And he has shown that he will align with Muslim nations against Israel and has turned his back on the Jewish State. His days are numbered as president and he will be a one termer just like Carter was.

Yeah, Barry's dropping faster than the Iraqi Air Force, but it's still not fast enough for me.

You're right that any court that even bothers to hear one of these cases will side with Obama. The judges are government employees and they know that Uncle Sugar signs their paychecks. They'll let the country go down the toilet just so they won't lose their pension

[45nut]

I think the heat these bastids are going to get on their recess will make many of them wake the hell up. Maybe we can force this issue into the forefront and make some progress.

Originally Posted by PharmrJohn

What else does he need to do?

Once again: Show the real one, not the short form already shown to be a fabrication (by the 1990's Windows Fonts), but the correct long form. Don't you think that the Hospital is following King Barrack I The Hussein The Most Holy and Powerful Potentate's orders? Surely you're not that naive as to believe something without proper proof? All I need to see is the long form with a seal, Dr's signature and everything bcj stated as required on same said long form. After that, I'm cool. Until then, he is an impostor and usurper, not POTUS.

[momo]

If this self described "mutt" had a real birth certificate, why doesn't he just show it and save himself a whole bunch of money in lawsuits? Answer: he doesn't have it.

[sabashimon]

Worth a read....and apropos

July 30, 2009.

Suborned in the U.S.A.
The birth-certificate controversy is about Obama’s honesty, not where he was born.

By Andrew C. McCarthy

Throughout the 2008 campaign, Barack Hussein Obama claimed it was a “smear” to refer to him as “Barack Hussein Obama.” The candidate had initially rhapsodized over how his middle name, the name of the prophet Mohammed’s grandson, would signal a new beginning in American relations with the Muslim world. But when the nomination fight intensified, Obama decided that Islamic heritage was a net negative. So, with a media reliably uncurious about political biographies outside metropolitan Wasilla, Obama did what Obama always does: He airbrushed his personal history on the fly.

Suddenly, it was “just making stuff up,” as Obama put it, for questioners “to say that, you know, maybe he’s got Muslim connections.” “The only connection I’ve had to Islam,” the candidate insisted, “is that my grandfather on my father’s side came from [Kenya]. But I’ve never practiced Islam.” Forget about “Hussein”; the mere mention of Obama’s middle initial — “H” — riled the famously thin-skinned senator. Supporters charged that “shadowy attackers” were “lying about Barack’s religion, claiming he is a Muslim.” The Obamedia division at USA Today, in a report subtly titled “Obama’s grandma slams ‘untruths,’” went so far as to claim that Obama’s Kenyan grandmother is a Christian — even though a year earlier, when Obama’s “flaunt Muslim ties” script was still operative, the New York Times had described the same woman, 85-year-old Sara Hussein Obama, as a “lifelong Muslim” who proclaimed, “I am a strong believer of the Islamic faith.”

Such was the ardor of Obama’s denials that jaws dropped when, once safely elected, he reversed course (again) and embraced his Islamic heritage. “The president himself experienced Islam on three continents,” an administration spokesman announced. “You know, growing up in Indonesia, having a Muslim father . . .” The “Muslim father” theme was an interesting touch: During the campaign, when the question of Barack Hussein Obama Sr.’s Islamic faith reared its head, the candidate curtly denied it with an air of what’s-that-got-to-do-with-me? finality: “My father was basically agnostic, as far as I can tell, and I didn’t know him.” And, it turns out, the spokesman’s fleeting bit about “growing up in Indonesia” wasn’t the half of it: Obama had actually been raised as a Muslim in Indonesia — or, at least that’s what his parents told his schools (more on that in due course).

These twists and turns in the Obama narrative rush to mind when we consider National Review’s leap into the Obama-birth-certificate fray with Tuesday’s editorial, “Born in the U.S.A.”

The editorial desire to put to rest the “Obama was born in Kenya” canard is justifiable. The overwhelming evidence is that Obama was born an American citizen on Aug. 4, 1961, which almost certainly makes him constitutionally eligible to hold his office. I say “almost certainly” because Obama, as we shall see, presents complex dual-citizenship issues. For now, let’s just stick with what’s indisputable: He was also born a Kenyan citizen. In theory, that could raise a question about whether he qualifies as a “natural born” American — an uncharted constitutional concept.

The mission of National Review has always included keeping the Right honest, which includes debunking crackpot conspiracy theories. The theory that Obama was born in Kenya, that he was smuggled into the U.S., and that his parents somehow hoodwinked Hawaiian authorities into falsely certifying his birth in Oahu, is crazy stuff. Even Obama’s dual Kenyan citizenship is of dubious materiality: It is a function of foreign law, involving no action on his part (to think otherwise, you’d have to conclude that if Yemen passed a law tomorrow saying, “All Americans — except, of course, Jews — are hereby awarded Yemeni citizenship,” only Jewish Americans could henceforth run for president). In any event, even if you were of a mind to indulge the Kenyan-birth fantasy, stop, count to ten, and think: Hillary Clinton. Is there any chance on God’s green earth that, if Obama were not qualified to be president, the Clinton machine would have failed to get that information out?

CERTIFICATE AND CERTIFICATION
So, end of story, right? Well, no. The relevance of information related to the birth of our 44th president is not limited to his eligibility to be our 44th president. On this issue, NRO’s editorial has come in for some blistering criticism. The editorial argues:
The fundamental fiction is that Obama has refused to release his “real” birth certificate. This is untrue. The document that Obama has made available is the document that Hawaiian authorities issue when they are asked for a birth certificate. There is no secondary document cloaked in darkness, only the state records that are used to generate birth certificates when they are requested.
On reflection, I think this was an ill-considered assertion. (I should add that I saw a draft of the editorial before its publication, was invited to comment, and lodged no objection to this part.) The folly is made starkly clear in the photos that accompany this angry (at NRO) post from Dave Jeffers, who runs a blog called “Salt and Light.”

To summarize: What Obama has made available is a Hawaiian “certification of live birth” (emphasis added), not a birth certificate (or what the state calls a “certificate of live birth”). The certification form provides a short, very general attestation of a few facts about the person’s birth: name and sex of the newborn; date and time of birth; city or town of birth, along with the name of the Hawaiian island and the county; the mother’s maiden name and race; the father’s name and race; and the date the certification was filed. This certification is not the same thing as the certificate, which is what I believe we were referring to in the editorial as “the state records that are used to generate birth certificates [sic] when they are requested.”

To the contrary, “the state records” are the certificate. They are used to generate the more limited birth certifications on request. As the Jeffers post shows, these state records are far more detailed. They include, for example, the name of the hospital, institution, or street address where the birth occurred; the full name, age, birthplace, race, and occupation of each parent; the mother’s residential address (and whether that address is within the city or town of birth); the signature of at least one parent (or “informant”) attesting to the accuracy of the information provided; the identity and signature of an attending physician (or other “attendant”) who certifies the occurrence of a live birth at the time and place specified; and the identity and signature of the local registrar who filed the birth record.

Plainly, this is different (additional) information from what is included in the certification. Yet, our editorial says that “several state officials have confirmed that the information in permanent state records is identical to that on the president’s birth certificate [by which we clearly meant ‘certification’],” and that the “director of Hawaii’s health department and the registrar of records each has personally verified that the information on Obama’s birth certificate [i.e., certification] is identical to that in the state’s records, the so-called vault copy.” (Italics mine.)

That misses the point. The information in the certification may be identical as far as it goes to what’s in the complete state records, but there are evidently many more details in the state records than are set forth in the certification. Contrary to the editors’ description, those who want to see the full state record — the certificate or the so-called “vault copy” — are not on a wild-goose chase for a “secondary document cloaked in darkness.” That confuses their motives (which vary) with what they’ve actually requested (which is entirely reasonable). Regardless of why people may want to see the vault copy, what’s been requested is a primary document that is materially more detailed than what Obama has thus far provided.

Now, let’s address motives for a moment. Are some of those demanding the full state records engaged in a futile quest to prove Obama is not a U.S. citizen? Are they on what the editors call “the hunt for a magic bullet that will make all the unpleasant complications of [Obama’s] election and presidency disappear”? Sure they are. But not everyone who wants to see the full state records falls into that category. I, for one, have very different reasons for being curious.

WHO IS THIS GUY?
Before January 20 of this year, Barack Obama had a negligible public record. He burst onto the national scene what seemed like five minutes before his election to the presidency: a first-term U.S. senator who actually served less than four years in that post — after a short time as a state legislator, some shadowy years as a “community organizer,” and scholastic terms at Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard that remain shrouded in mystery. The primary qualification supporters offered for Obama’s candidacy was his compelling life story, as packaged in 850 pages’ worth of the not one but two autobiographies this seemingly unaccomplished candidate had written by the age of 45.

Yet we now know that this life story is chock full of fiction. Typical and disturbing, to take just one example, is the entirely fabricated account in Dreams from My Father of Obama’s first job after college:
Eventually a consulting house to multinational corporations agreed to hire me as a research assistant. Like a spy behind enemy lines, I arrived every day at my mid-Manhattan office and sat at my computer terminal, checking the Reuters machine that blinked bright emerald messages from across the globe. As far as I could tell I was the only black man in the company, a source of shame for me but a source of considerable pride for the company’s secretarial pool. They treated me like a son, those black ladies; they told me how they expected me to run the company one day. . . . The company promoted me to the position of financial writer. I had my own office, my own secretary, money in the bank. Sometimes, coming out of an interview with Japanese financiers or German bond traders, I would catch my reflection in the elevator doors — see myself in a suit and tie, a briefcase in my hand — and for a split second I would imagine myself as a captain of industry, barking out orders, closing the deal, before I remembered who it was that I had told myself I wanted to be and felt pangs of guilt for my lack of resolve. . . .
As the website Sweetness & Light details, this is bunk. Obama did not work at “a consulting house to multinational corporations”; it was, a then-colleague of his has related, “a small company that published newsletters on international business.” He wasn’t the only black man in the company, and he didn’t have an office, have a secretary, wear a suit and tie on the job, or conduct “interviews” with “Japanese financiers or German bond traders” — he was a junior copyeditor.

What’s unnerving about this is that it is so gratuitous. It would have made no difference to anyone curious about Obama’s life that he, like most of us, took a ho-hum entry-level job to establish himself. But Obama lies about the small things, the inconsequential things, just as he does about the important ones — depending on what he is trying to accomplish at any given time.

In the above fairy tale, he sought to frame his life as a morality play: the hero giving up the cushy life of the capitalist “enemy” for the virtues of community organizing. But we’ve seen this dance a hundred times. If Obama wants to strike a connection with graduating students in Moscow, he makes up a story about meeting his “future wife . . . in class” (Barack and Michelle Obama met at work). If he wants to posture about his poverty and struggle in America, he waxes eloquent about his single mother’s surviving on “food stamps” so she could use every cent to send him “to the best schools in the country” (Obama was raised by his maternal grandparents, who had good jobs and were able to pull strings to get him into an elite Hawaiian prep school). If he wants to tie himself to the civil-rights struggle of African Americans, he tells an audience in Selma, “There was something stirring across the country because of what happened in Selma . . . so [my parents] got together and Barack Obama Jr. was born” (Obama was born in 1961, four years before the civil-rights march in Selma — by which time his parents had divorced and his mother was planning a move to Indonesia with the second of her two non-African-American husbands). If he wants to buy a home he can’t afford, he “unwittingly” collaborates with a key fundraiser (who had been publicly reported to be under federal investigation for fraud and political corruption). If he wants to sell a phony stimulus as a job-creator, he tells the country that Caterpillar has told him the stimulus will enable the company “to rehire some of the folks who were just laid off” (Caterpillar’s CEO actually said no, “we’re going to have more layoffs before we start hiring again”).

The fact is that Obama’s account of his background is increasingly revealed as a fabrication, not his life as lived; his utterances reflect the expediencies of the moment, not the truth. What is supposed to save the country from fraudulence of this sort is the media. Here, though, the establishment press is deep in Obama’s tank — so much so that they can’t even accurately report his flub of a ceremonial opening pitch lest he come off as something less than Sandy Koufax. Astonishingly, reporters see their job not as reporting Obama news but as debunking Obama news, or flat-out suppressing it. How many Americans know, for example, that as a sitting U.S. senator in 2006, Obama interfered in a Kenyan election, publicly ripping the incumbent government (a U.S. ally) for corruption while he was its guest and barnstorming with his preferred candidate: a Marxist now known to have made a secret agreement with Islamists to convert Kenya to sharia law, and whose supporters, upon losing the election, committed murder and mayhem, displacing thousands of Kenyans and plunging their country into utter chaos?

A MUSLIM CITIZEN OF INDONESIA
The aforementioned Indonesian interval in Obama’s childhood is instructive. Obama and the media worked in tireless harmony to refute any indication that he had ever been a Muslim. It’s now apparent, however, not only that he was raised as a Muslim while living for four years in the world’s most populous Islamic country, but that he very likely became a naturalized citizen of Indonesia.

Shortly after divorcing Barack Obama Sr., Obama’s mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, married an Indonesian Muslim, Lolo Soetoro Mangunharjo, whom she met — just as she had met Barack Sr. — when both were students at the University of Hawaii. At some point, Soetoro almost certainly adopted the youngster, who became known as “Barry Soetoro.” Obama’s lengthy, deeply introspective autobiographies do not address whether he was adopted by the stepfather whose surname he shared for many years, but in all likelihood that did happen in Hawaii, before the family moved to Jakarta.

Under Indonesian law, adoption before the age of six by an Indonesian male qualified a child for citizenship. According to Dreams from My Father, Obama was four when he met Lolo Soetoro; his mother married Soetoro shortly thereafter; and Obama was already registered for school when he and his mother relocated to Jakarta, where Soetoro was an oil-company executive and liaison to the Suharto government. That was in 1966, when Obama was five. Obama attended Indonesian elementary schools, which, in Suharto’s police state, were generally reserved for citizens (and students were required to carry identity cards that matched student registration information). The records of the Catholic school Obama/Soetoro attended for three years identify him as a citizen of Indonesia. Thus Obama probably obtained Indonesian citizenship through his adoption by Soetoro in Hawaii. That inference is bolstered by the 1980 divorce submission of Ann Dunham and Lolo Soetoro, filed in Hawaii state court. It said “the parties” (Ann and Lolo) had a child (name not given) who was no longer a minor (Obama was 19 at the time). If Soetoro had not adopted Obama, there would have been no basis for the couple to refer to Obama as their child — he’d have been only Ann Dunham’s child.

In any event, the records of the Catholic school and the public school Obama attended during his last year in Indonesia identify him as a Muslim. As Obama relates in Dreams from My Father, he took Koran classes. As Obama doesn’t relate in Dreams from My Father, children in Indonesia attended religious instruction in accordance with their family’s chosen faith. Moreover, acquaintances recall that young Barry occasionally attended Friday prayers at the local mosque, and Maya Soetoro-Ng, Obama’s half-sister (born after Lolo and Ann moved the family to Jakarta), told the New York Times in a 2008 interview, “My whole family was Muslim, and most of the people I knew were Muslim.” In fact, back in March 2007 — i.e., during the early “Islamic ties are good” phase of Obama’s campaign — the candidate wistfully shared with New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof his memories of the muezzin’s Arabic call to prayer: “one of the prettiest sounds on earth at sunset.” Kristof marveled at the “first-rate accent” with which Obama was able to repeat its opening lines.

The point here is not to join another crackpot conspiracy, the “Obama as Muslim Manchurian Candidate” canard. Obama was only ten years old when he left Indonesia; there is no known evidence of his having made an adult choice to practice Islam, and he is a professed Christian. The point is that he lies elaborately about himself and plainly doesn’t believe it’s important to be straight with the American people — to whom he is constantly making bold promises. And it makes a difference whether he was ever a Muslim. He knows that — it’s exactly why, as a candidate, he originally suggested his name and heritage would be a selling point. Obama’s religious background matters in terms of how he is perceived by Muslims (Islam rejects the notion of renouncing the faith; some Muslims, like Libyan strongman Muammar Qaddafi, make no bones about regarding Obama as a Muslim; and — as the mainstream media took pains not to report during the campaign — it is suspected that significant illegal donations poured into the Obama campaign from Islamic countries and territories). Obama’s religious background also matters in terms of how he views American policies bearing on the Muslim world.

WHEN DID INFORMATION SUDDENLY BECOME A BAD THING?
While it is all well and good to belittle the birth-certificate controversy, without it we’d know only what the media and Obama himself would tell us about his multiple citizenships, which is nothing. As noted above, we now know Obama, by operation of British and Kenyan law, was a citizen of Kenya (a status that lapsed in 1982, when he turned 21). That’s something voters would find relevant, especially when Obama’s shocking 2006 conduct in Kenya is considered. But we don’t know about his Kenyan citizenship because the media thought it was newsworthy. We know it only because of the birth-certificate controversy: Pressed to debunk the allegation that Obama was born in Kenya, his embarrassed supporters felt compelled to clarify his Kenyan citizenship.

By contrast, the question whether Obama ever was an Indonesian citizen is still unresolved, as are such related matters as whether the foreign citizenship (if he had it) ever lapsed, and whether he ever held or used an Indonesian passport — for example, during a mysterious trip to Pakistan he took in 1981, after Zia’s coup, when advisories warned Americans against traveling there. By the way, many details about that journey, too, remain unknown. Obama strangely neglected to mention it in his 850 pages of autobiography, even though the 20-year-old’s adventure included a stay at the home of prominent Pakistani politicians.

There may be perfectly benign answers to all of this. But the real question is: Why don’t the media — the watchdog legions who trekked to Sarah Palin’s Alaska hometown to scour for every kernel of gossip, and who were so desperate for Bush dirt that they ran with palpably forged military records — want to dig into Obama’s background?

Who cares that Hawaii’s full state records would doubtless confirm what we already know about Obama’s birthplace? They would also reveal interesting facts about Obama’s life: the delivering doctor, how his parents described themselves, which of them provided the pertinent information, etc. Wasn’t the press once in the business of interesting — and even not-so-interesting — news?

And why would Obama not welcome Hawaii’s release of any record in its possession about the facts and circumstances of his birth? Isn’t that kind of weird? It would, after all, make the whole issue go away and, if there’s nothing there, make those who’ve obsessed over it look like fools. Why should I need any better reason to be curious than Obama’s odd resistance to so obvious a resolution?

There’s speculation out there from the former CIA officer Larry Johnson — who is no right-winger and is convinced the president was born in Hawaii — that the full state records would probably show Obama was adopted by the Indonesian Muslim Lolo Soetoro and became formally known as “Barry Soetoro.” Obama may have wanted that suppressed for a host of reasons: issues about his citizenship, questions about his name (it’s been claimed that Obama represented in his application to the Illinois bar that he had never been known by any name other than Barack Obama), and the undermining of his (false) claim of remoteness from Islam. Is that true? I don’t know and neither do you.

But we should know. The point has little to do with whether Obama was born in Hawaii. I’m quite confident that he was. The issue is: What is the true personal history of the man who has been sold to us based on nothing but his personal history? On that issue, Obama has demonstrated himself to be an unreliable source and, sadly, we can’t trust the media to get to the bottom of it. What’s wrong with saying, to a president who promised unprecedented “transparency”: Give us all the raw data and we’ll figure it out for ourselves?

— National Review’s Andrew C. McCarthy is a senior fellow at the National Review Institute and the author of Willful Blindness: A Memoir of the Jihad (Encounter Books, 2008).

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q...TVmZmU=&w=MA==

[PharmrJohn]

Originally Posted by 45nut

I think the heat these bastids are going to get on their recess will make many of them wake the hell up. Maybe we can force this issue into the forefront and make some progress.



Once again: Show the real one, not the short form already shown to be a fabrication (by the 1990's Windows Fonts), but the correct long form. Don't you think that the Hospital is following King Barrack I The Hussein The Most Holy and Powerful Potentate's orders? Surely you're not that naive as to believe something without proper proof? All I need to see is the long form with a seal, Dr's signature and everything bcj stated as required on same said long form. After that, I'm cool. Until then, he is an impostor and usurper, not POTUS.

But my short form has modern fonts as well. It's not a forgery. My 1982 copy is typewritten, because copies were not computer generated at the time. The font is a non-issue I am afraid. As I stated, I don't have my original from1963, that is why I need the modern ones to prove my birth.

The seals on mine are weak and don't show nicely even on the original, much less a copy. They are raised....but just barely. His has the seal at the top if I am remembering correctly.

And part of the certification (the date) bleeds through from the back. A doctor's signature is not needed in this case. Just the certification. If it's there, it's there. Some certifications bleed all the way through....some don't.

So far, the same short form I have (as well as my wife's and children) has sufficed ITO proof of birth in everything I have needed them for so far. In fact, tomorrow, I will take my short form down and see if I can get an enhanced driver's license with it. I will use my most recent one that has only the certification stamp on the back. No actual signature. I have time and I need one anyway.

Now, ITO being naive. Don't think so. Facts are facts. If a short form is good enough for us.....it's good enough for him. But we'll see. I'll post if I was able to get my enhanced with what I have.....it is most basic.

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by PharmrJohn

But my short form has modern fonts as well. It's not a forgery. My 1982 copy is typewritten, because copies were not computer generated at the time. The font is a non-issue I am afraid. As I stated, I don't have my original from1963, that is why I need the modern ones to prove my birth.

The seals on mine are weak and don't show nicely even on the original, much less a copy. They are raised....but just barely. His has the seal at the top if I am remembering correctly.

And part of the certification (the date) bleeds through from the back. A doctor's signature is not needed in this case. Just the certification. If it's there, it's there. Some certifications bleed all the way through....some don't.

So far, the same short form I have (as well as my wife's and children) has sufficed ITO proof of birth in everything I have needed them for so far. In fact, tomorrow, I will take my short form down and see if I can get an enhanced driver's license with it. I will use my most recent one that has only the certification stamp on the back. No actual signature. I have time and I need one anyway.

Now, ITO being naive. Don't think so. Facts are facts. If a short form is good enough for us.....it's good enough for him. But we'll see. I'll post if I was able to get my enhanced with what I have.....it is most basic.

Enahanced DL? You mean the RFID tracking chip. Big Brother in your walet They can take that "enhanced" BS and cram it up their cramhole! Sideways! Just say NO! Here in NC you cannot use a short form for obtaining a DL. It must be a long form with a raised seal. But then, NC has been tightening up ID requirements because of all the illegals flooding this place. Actually, when I got my learner's permit and my first license, in FL, I was required to show a long form with a raised seal. And, when I enlisted in the USAF, I again had to present a long form with raised seal.

I posted this in another thread, but it is pertinent because you brought up the issue of a raised seal. These scans are from my birth certiificate that was issued in 1979 (I was born in 78, it took Louisiana almost a year to send my brith certificate to my mother) The last one, form my CHP, is actually very hard to see on the actual permit, as it spends all its time in my wallet. But it shows very clearly on a scan. And if, as an Obamite recently told me, the seal and signature is on the back, then why won't they release the back side of the "birth certificate"? As my scans clearly show, a raised seal WILL show on either side of a scanned document.

This first picture is the raised seal from my long form birth certificate, scan taken from the front (I cropped out the nonpertinent parts, such as my personal info). Also notice that there is s signature from the State Registrar (of Louisiana, in this case), something that is noticibly absent from Obama's "birth certificate."

The second picture is the same seal, but from the backside. (Again, nonpertinent info, in this case a blank page, has been omitted.)

Third, is the raised seal on my NC CHP, scanned from the backside. The permit is laminated adn the seal shows on a scan quite clearly. (Again, extranious info has been omitted.)

As you can plainly see, a raised seal will indeed show up on a scanned document, even if the seal was stamped from the back. Now, before you go off on "they did things differently back then," I should point out that my mother was born in 1957 and her birth certificate has a raised seal on it. AND the fact that Obama's "birth certificate" is printed on the Nov. 2001 edition of the form, as is plainly shown on the posted "birth certificate."