Replies

Want the congress to remove him if fraud is indicated.

That we can agree on.

If congress would not act, I want the secretary of state of my state to not approve him for the ballot for the next election.

I don't think that would happen, but then I would not oppose the effort.

And what do you want?

I want conservatives to focus their efforts on what CAN be done and not chase rainbows. These lawsuits are moot. No court is authorized to remove Obama from power and the idea that "if he is not eligible he is not the president" is on a par with the 9/11 truthers (of which Mr. Berg [who has been referred to on this thread as a "patriot'] is a card carrying member).

Right now there is substantial independent evidence of a US birth. The Birth announcement within a week of the birth in the Honolulu paper, the statement of the nurse who remembers the birth and the statement from the State that the certificate of live birth is authentic. The information that he was born in Kenya is unsubstantiated hearsay. If Kenya produces a birth certificate showing he was born there, then this might change things.

Just remember that the first president of the United States to get a hospital birth Certificate was Jimmy Carter. Ronald Reagan didn't have one. How do we know he wasn't born in Ireland? And, quite frankly, at this point, who cares?

If Reagan was an illegal alien he was still the best president we have had in the last 140 years.

If Obama is a Natural Born Citizen, he is still on track to be the worst president of all time. But he's still "The President".

God help us all.

The State has made no such statement. Some low level official made a statement to the effect that it looked like one of their forms, but could not, by law verify it's contents. The Director of Health, the department that handles vital statistics has said that there is an official birth certificate on file for Obama, but that doesn't prove he was born in Hawaii as it's possible and desirable to get one even if one is not born in Hawaii.

The birth announce was likely triggered by the filing of the birth registration/certificate, but says nothing about place of birth.It's an indication that there is a birth certificate, but not of it's contents, other than the date.

But there is also information tending to make one doubt that he was born in Hawaii. The indications that the posted Certification of Live Birth is a fake/forgery. The supposed statement of his grandfather's "other" wife that she was there for his birth in Kenya. The statement, which I heard completely in context, of the Ambassador of Kenya to the US tending to indicate that BHO was born in Kenya and that the fact was known to "everyone" in Kenya.

But apart from the place of birth issue, there is the undisputed issue of his father not being a US Citizen, not only at the time of his birth, but ever. A ruling from a Court on whether or not that prohibits him from being considered a "Natural Born Citizen" as the term was understood by those who put that provision in the Constitution would seem appropriate. Citizen at birth may or may not be the same as "Natural born citizen". In point of fact the rules for Citizen at Birth have been changed from time to time by ordinary acts of Congress, which cannot logically change the meaning of Constitutional terms. Whatever "natural born citizen" meant in 1787, it means today. Even the 14th amendment speaks of "citizens", not "natural born citizens".

If the lawsuits do nothing but define the term, they will have served a useful purpose.