Obama may be a natural born citizen after all

[AlexW]

“I don’t want to see a newspaper announcement or an online COLB. Just show us the birth certificate. How hard is that? Seriously.”

That’s all that I ask for.

My understanding is that the newspaper list is automatic, and from anyone that obtained the certification paper that Obozo
and the media are touting.
It in no way means that he was born in Hawaii.

[WilliamofCarmichael]

Unless it identifies the hospital why is a birth notice in a newspaper so important?

Here's why I ask.

I was not born in a hospital.

My birth registration was in Apr. and the day of my birth was in Jan. (of the same year).

My long form B.C. is stamped "DELAY".

Every bit of information on the "factcheck" certificate could be printed from my delayed registration -- and my parents, and the "attendant" (at my birth), could have been lying when they registered my birth.

In April the local newspaper notice of my birth used information from the registration.

[autumnraine]

I can send you the Obama divorce papers.

[frog in a pot]

“Yes, that would certainly be considered on its face, good, strong corroborative evidence.”

Evidence of what? Does the announcement say where the infant was born?

[ckilmer]

According to ObAMAfILE

How does July 22, 2008 sound as the birth announcement discovery date. The "birth announcement" is on microfilm/fiche from the Honolulu public library microfilm of a notice placed in the Sunday Advertiser Aug. 13, 1961. The announcement in the "Births, Marriages, Death" section read: "Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama, 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy., son, Aug. 4." Notice how the birth announcement says Mr. and Mrs. Barak Obama. We already have recorded that Obama's wife michellle said Obama's mother was "very young and very single" when obama was born.

The problem is, Orland Scott Lefforge owned and occupied the house at 6085 Kalanianaole Highway. The "Obamas" didn't live there.

In 1961 the Dunhams lived on Kamehameha Avenue, while Obama Sr. lived on 11th Avenue. The Lefforge family, including their 3 children under the age of seven were residing at the luxury home listed on Obama’s newly found birth announcement -- 6085 Kalanianaole Highway.

I have never seen any evidence that Obama Sr. and Anna Dunham ever lived as a married couple anywhere.

.................

According to WND

Arakaki told Baro's investigators she had no recollection of Obama being born or of the family living next door having a black child born to a white mother.

Baro sent a team of investigators to Honolulu to explore records regarding current residents of Kalanianaole Highway and to track down residents back to 1961.

Baro's investigators were unable to locate any current or past resident of Kalanianaole Highway who could recall Obama or his family living at the address listed in the Sunday Advertiser announcement.

Baro also sent investigators to the newspaper offices to examine files, but the Advertiser could not confirm who actually placed the ad.

According to Baro's affidavit, Beatrice Arakaki affirmed she was a neighbor of the address listed. She has lived at her current residence of 6075 Kalanianaole Highway from before 1961 to the present.

Moreover, Arakaki said she believed that when Obama lived with the Dunhams, his grandparents, the family address was in Waikiki, not on Kalanianaole Highway.

[smalltownslick]

I think he’d be a natural born citizen if his father was Frank Marshall Davis or Malcolm X.

[Secret Agent Man]

I don’t think he’s trolling. He’s had an account for about 5 years. I think he would have been sniffed out by now.

[Rembrandt]

“Who delivered Barak?”

Well, that’s a touchy one. Opinions are divided; it was either Bill Clinton’s father or “the one armed man” from The Fugitive - they may have been one and the same person!

[GOPyouth]

If the only fact was that Obama was born of an American mother, he would be a natural citizen. However, my concern is the possibility that Obama holds dual citizenship. I don’t know offhand if that would disqualify him from taking the oath.

[DavidFarrar]

Yes, I am aware of your points. Thank you. But are you sure the marriage doesn't matter? As you say, what matters is the "...legal status of the mother, the father and the geography where the baby was born at that time." These are the very points I thought I was addressing.

As far as geography goes, I assumed it was Hawaii. As far as the legal status of the mother...she was unwed if her marriage wasn't legally recognized by Hawaiian law. The legal status of Obama's father, as far as Barack Obama Jr. being a "natural born U.S. citizen is concerned, is irrelevant, again, since the marriage wasn't legally recognized in Hawaii, marriage certificate or not.

ex animo

davidfarrar

[Godebert]

"Anyone born in the US, with very few exceptions, e.g. those born to foreign diplomats, is a natural born US citizen. It makes no difference if the parents were US citizens or if they were married.

Go here to educate yourself:

http://federalistblog.us/2008/11/natural-born_citizen_defined.html

[Boiling Pots]

So they’ve lived there “over 40 years.” Lets say it’s 45...that would put it 1964. Obama was born in 1961. They could have moved in those three years before they arrived.

[mamelukesabre]

read the rest of the thread! Then repost. Jeeze, you’re as clueless as the original poster.

[BIGLOOK]

'pearls before swine', John.

Some don't do homework and some skip classes and everyone has opinions.

[GovernmentShrinker]

I do believe the correct definition of a "natural born" U.S. citizen is of being born of two U.S. citizens

Where do you get that belief? There's certainly no evidence that that was the intent of the framers of the Constitution.

[iowamark]

My understanding is that being a "natural born" US citizen is,Constitutionally,different from simply being "a citizen"

I have seen some argue that some people born citizens are something like "statutory citizens," not natural born citizens. I believe that to be incorrect. There are only two types of citizens: natural born and naturalized.

I read a comment written by a Justice of the SCOTUS (can't recall who or when) that said to be a "natural born" citizen one must have been born in the US of *two* US citizens.

Almost certainly incorrect. Many millions of Americans, and some US Presidents, have been born to non-citizen parents. Once again, some people try to argue for multiple classes of citizenship. Those claims are destined to fail.

[LegalEagle61]

Bottom line is this guy won’t produce anything to prove anything he is being accused of, why? He has reportedly paid millions to keep the BC and other documents sealed from the public, why? Why not just produce the BC and prove everyone is nuts? Its because he is hiding something that would make the country turn on him instantly if it were found out. He is a radical, probably worse than we even know and what we know already is bad enough. He came from nowhere, from the worst political machine there is, and no one really knows him. What we do know is scary enough. His heritage is no coincidence and his defense of terrorists is no coincidence either. All ties together. I would love to read his Thesis on Soviet Nuclear Disarmament-—why would he hide that? Likely because he blames the United States in it and conveys his radical ideas that would scare the whole country.

[sonic109]

How come no one has the Harvard Law Review articles ? Aren’t they printed in the Harvard Law Review and would be found in a library ? Sorry for my ignorance on this.

[Safrguns]

If he was truly born in Hawaii, I think the vast majority of “birthers” would vanish. Who the hell would deny a natural born American their status because of the actions or age of his/her parents? If you are born here, you are natural born... ask any Mexican.

Problem is, Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii.

Ask his grandmother (oops... they shut her up now)

[aruanan]

Where do you get that belief? There's certainly no evidence that that was the intent of the framers of the Constitution.

You should have said, "Where do you get that belief? I've never come across anything that states that was the intent of the framers of the Constitution; therefore, that cannot have been the intent of the framers of the Constitution." That would be a more accurate statement. Of course, you'd still be wrong. The problem isn't what was commonly known at the time of the framing or what framers said about this matter, just the scope of your knowledge.