There is no need for anything to be under any rug. There is no evidence that Obozo was born anywhere but Hawaii. The prevailing legal opinion is that a US citizen is either born or naturalized.
The prevailing Constitutional requirement for president is to be a natural born citizen, not just a U.S. citizen, and especially not by simply being “born or naturalized.” It’s why the SCOTUS said the 14th amendment does NOT say who shall be natural-born citizens. There’s a material difference between these classes of citizens. Obama is not and cannot be eligible.
agreed. Much more evidence shows a a Hawaii birth than any alternative. There is question around the birth certificate, no doubt, and there are a TON of questions about Obama’s life. Whether it is in his education, career or upbringing. At this stage it is not enough to sidetrack what is important in November 2012.
The only thing that might be of interest from an election standpoint would be his college funding. If he did lie about being a foreigner for either entry or funding, that is a legitimate character issue and one that would impact many voters. Unless there is clear cut, inarguable evidence, I wouldn’t even go there.
Yes there is. The fact that Stanley Ann showed up in Seattle in late August. It has been pointed out that no Airline would have allowed the baby to fly so soon after it was born. That pretty much proves Obama could not have been born in Hawaii on August 4, 1960.
The prevailing legal opinion is that a US citizen is either born or naturalized.
The prevailing opinion used to be that the world was flat. Citing as proof the fact that a lot of people believe something is known as the fallacy of "argumentum ad populum." I have little doubt that the prevailing legal opinion is that birth within our boundaries makes one a "natural born citizen", but I also have little doubt that this opinion is simply wrong, and is based on a faulty interpretation of the Wong Kim Ark decision, the 14th amendment, and the Original Common law.
One has to do actual research to realize that the founders didn't accept this blanket definition. There were many thousands of British Loyalists who were born after July 4, 1776 that were not considered American citizens by either the founders or the British. THOUSANDS. Their very existence refutes the stupid theory.
There is, however, a first hand account of his birth - in Mombasa, Kenya, by his paternal grandmother.
Would a grannie lie?