Why the Barack Obama Birth Certificate Issue Is Legitimate

American Thinker ^ | November 26, 2008 | Joe the Farmer

[FreeAtlanta]

Does this Barack Obama birth certificate issue bug you because, although improbable, it's possible that he's not a natural born citizen, isn't eligible to be President under the Constitution, and this issue could be bigger than Watergate -- or any other "gate" in history?

Are you afraid that if you were even to raise the subject with your friends that they will think you wear a tinfoil hat, because Factcheck.org, the final arbiter of truth in the universe, said so?

Are you with the news media, and after spending so much money to get Barack Obama elected, you'd hate to ruin your investment?

Are you a talk radio host who thinks that if you say the burden of proof needed to demonstrate one is eligible to be Commander in Chief should be at least as high as, oh, say, the level to be eligible for Hawaiian homestead status (see 1.F. below), that you'd be forced to give equal time to someone who disagrees?

Are you a conservative, libertarian, or any conscientious constitutionalist from any ideological side of life, who's convinced something's not right, but you're afraid your reputation might be tarnished because, after all, this could be one big Saul-Alinsky-style set-up, and the joke would be on you?

Fear not! Joe the Farmer has prepared an outline showing that no matter how this issue is ultimately resolved, you have legitimate concerns, and that Barack Obama should, simply out of respect for the nation he was elected to lead, disclose the sealed vault copy of his birth certificate.

Given the circumstances, if Barack Obama respected this nation, he would prove it by the simplest and easiest of gestures - unless, of course, all this talk about change and hope was just a bunch of bull,

[bvw]

There’s no other logical reason for an honest person to join a specific topic discussion simply to discourage those engaged in it. Those whose sole purpose is to undermine honest discussion are called sappers.

There are hundreds of other current topics of discussion on FR this month, why are you compelled to make a remark that is discouraging and naught else, when you could pursue other topics -- the very topics you claim to care for?

[org.whodat]

Forgot to add, giving that we are where we are, I think the whole things is moot. The courts would never hear the case, they would say that it was a case for the politician's.

[real_patriotic_american]

I sent a FAX to U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas asking them to require Obama to prove that he is an American citizen. I, for one, don’t believe that Obama is eligible to serve as President.

The FAX number is (202) 479-2971

http://www.rallycongress.com/constitutional-qualification/1244

[FreeAtlanta]

You are wrong. Constitutionally, just having a Parent who is American isn't enough to make you eligible for the Presidency. Do a little reseach and find out the rest. Heck, just read through some of these hundreds of posts. The law has been stated often, and Barry (our #1 law inforcement officer?) is likely outside it.

Besides, if he was actually born in Hawaii under the name Barry Soerto(sp) and didn't legally change his name to Barak Obama (he thought it was cool?), then he committed fraud. It might be a technicality, but he can't be president.

[FreeAtlanta]

“Democrats” and other liars have found that taking over a good name and using it for the opposite, is a succesful political tactic.... if not a GOOD one.

[Windflier]

Thank you for making a stand, no doubt many will feel intimidated, but with enough of an organized force we can have a better tactical advantage than a larger unorganized force.

And therein lies our greatest challenge, in my opinion.

We conservatives have no deficiency of passion. What we lack is organization and focus. Think of the power that would be generated if the hundreds of online and offline activist groups, and their hundreds of thousands of members were organized under one umbrella group, with all of their efforts co-ordinated and focused into managed campaigns. It'd be un-stoppable.

Personally, I think that we're simply dispersed. We all innately sense that we are the real power in this nation, so why are the juveniles and moonbats in charge? They're better organized than we are. That's all.

[dianed]

You said,”...in reponse to a report published by the New York Times.”........

Wow! what do you know...the Congress now creates legislation in response to a TABLOID RAG..shocking!

[dianed]

You said,”...in reponse to a report published by the New York Times.”........

Wow! what do you know...the Congress now creates legislation in response to a TABLOID RAG..shocking!

[dianed]

The Naturalization Act of 1790 was repealed in 1795. Therefore, John McCain is still included in Donofrio’s suit as being ineligible.

http://hubpages.com/hub/Supreme-Court-Justices-Consider-Obama-Eligibility

[dianed]

Loved the Pic...I’m still laughing!

[Waco]

The SCOTUS should nullify the election, do the whole thing over, whatever it takes to satisfy the constitution.

[patriot08]

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/birthcertificate/index

[Godebert]

NO.

[bragginright]

It is true that the Naturalization act of 1795 superseded the 1790 act, but it didn’t change the citizenship implications of childeren of citizens born abroad as established by the prior act. Per the 1795 act(Sec. 3):

“...and the children of citizens of the United States, born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as citizens of the United States...”

[bragginright]

Citizenship definition is not in the Constitution. What makes citizenship a Constitutional issue is the citizenship requirement for a president. That was not changed and is still the same constitutional requirement.