I'm just honestly telling you this is a nonstarter that will never go anywhere.
Again, that's your OPINION. There are a lot of people that are saying there's something wrong with Obamas eligibility. More and more are questioning it.
There are a lot of people that are saying there's something wrong with Obamas elegibility. More and more are questioning it. I note the same mistakes being made with regard to Chester Arthur. True his elegibility might have slipped through the cracks, because the focus was on James Garfield, the presidential nominee. His father, William Arthur was born in Ireland and emigrated to Canada, thence to Vermont. A fine written citizenship certificate sworn in 1843, gave him American citizenship. His mother, Martha Stone born in Vermont. At least Arthur had two citizen parents.
I read that such a furore was raised by lawyer A. Hinman about the elegibility, that the Pubbies did not accept Arthur's willingness to stand in the actual election. Hinman's book was titled something like "A British Subject is President". As VP, Arthur took the place of the assassinated President Garfield in 1880.
You probably will know all of this though. I spent time on Ancestry.com today and find interference with records. Not that there is anything sensational to find. Just that spammers have interfered with these records. I am not paranoid though.
I banged away on the local Church of the LDS records on their computer this evening. No luck, except persons on the computer read out, faithfully claiming some connection to the ancestry of one Barack Obama and stating that hospital in Hawaii as his birth.
Wonder who told them. (chuckle)