The birther brouhaha (FreeRepublic mentioned)

The LaGrange Daily News ^ | August 14, 2009 | Dave Kodl

[2ndDivisionVet]

Birthers are a loose knit cadre of internet individuals having reason to question the eligibility of Barack Obama to be President of the United States. At the core, Birthers simply want to know if our elected president meets the criteria laid out in Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution which specifies that a president must be at least Age 35, 14 years a resident, and a natural born Citizen. Natural born is the sore point as the country’s founders specifically intended anyone holding presidential office have no allegiance to any other country than the newly formed United States of America.

Lately, eligibility stories are popping up on CNN, FOX, and ABC - plus any of a number of conservative talk radio shows. Here are the basic arguments…

Why question our president’s status?

In April of 2008, Mr. Obama posted a Certification of Live Birth (COLB) from the state of Hawaii on his campaign website. Folks at FreeRepublic.com questioned the validity of this posted document. In fact, this first exposure of Mr. Obama’s alleged birth certificate was a clear fabrication. When Mr. Obama was born, Hawaii issued COLB’s to anyone who applied whether born in state or not. Mr. Obama’s sister is known Indonesian yet also has a Hawaiian COLB. So prior to the election and continuing today, the Birthers want to validate a true, original Birth Certificate - known as the vault copy. In addition, the Birthers would like to examine Mr. Obama’s various college records, selective service form, senate record, passport file, and scholarly papers.

This might seem trite but all records mentioned above have never been made available or reconciled to anyone at any time. Attempts to unearth this information are met with derision from the main stream news media and pushback from lawyers associated with the Obama administration. So much for transparency. Bottom line is we simply do not know who this guy is or if he meets Constitutional natural birth requirements. We have his two personal autobiographies - the first actually stating that he has a birth certificate in hand. Other than that, his history is blank.

Who cares?

If Mr. Obama is not qualified to be president of the United States, then any orders from him or documents signed by him have no legal basis. Locally, an Army colonel requested validation of Mr. Obama’s authority. The case heard in Columbus was dismissed - because the Army elected to pull this colonel’s assignment orders. Now a class action suit is being filed on behalf of at least a hundred military men and women that rightfully wonder if they are being sent into harms way by a Commander In Chief who is not legitimate and cannot invoke the rules of the Geneva Convention on their behalf. Further, the same attorney has filed suit this week against Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, to preserve records and facilitate validation of a Kenyan birth certificate purported to be for Mr. Obama.

If you put Steven King, John Grisham and Edgar Allen Poe in a telephone booth and rolled it downhill, you couldn’t generate a better mystery.

Yet, the solution is so obvious.

Sir, please show us your papers.

Believe it or not, there is not an official vetting process for president of the United States. The state-by-state qualification for candidacy is purely by affidavit signed by the applicant. The CIA or FBI may well know Mr. Obama’s history but they cannot broadcast their findings to the general public. One would think the Democratic Party might vet their candidates but they are under no obligation to do so.

As an Engineer, I believe that all people, given the same set of facts, will reach the same rational conclusion on any given issue. What we are lacking on this particular issue are facts. Please Mr. Obama - let’s see the facts.

Can we see your papers please?

[2ndDivisionVet]

It just won't go away, Barry.

[Sherman Logan]

If Mr. Obama is not qualified to be president of the United States, then any orders from him or documents signed by him have no legal basis.

This assertion is constantly made, but that does not make it fact.

[Boardwalk]

“Now a class action suit is being filed on behalf of at least a hundred military men and women that rightfully wonder if they are being sent into harms way by a Commander In Chief who is not legitimate and cannot invoke the rules of the Geneva Convention on their behalf.”

What say you Barry?

[trumandogz]

Mr. Obama’s sister is known Indonesian yet also has a Hawaiian COLB.

I have not seen his sister's Hawaiian COLB.

I wonder how the writer knows that she does have a Hawaiian COLB.

[truth_seeker]

A short succinct writing on the topic.

What a relief.

[Cicero]

This writer has done an excellent and persuasive summary of the case.

[Diogenesis]

Clearing the Smoke on Obama’s Eligibility: An Intelligence Investigator’s June 10 Report
"The Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii
In the State of Hawaii, back in 1961, there were four different ways to get an “original birth certificate” on record.
BC1. If the birth was attended by a physician or mid wife, the attending medical professional was required to certify to the Department of Health the facts of the birth date, location, parents’ identities and other information. (See Section 57-8 & 9 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).

BC2. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then all that was required was that one of the parents send in a birth certificate to be filed. The birth certificate could be filed by mail. There appears to have been no requirement for the parent to actually physically appear before “the local registrar of the district.”
It would have been very easy for a relative to forge an absent parent’s signature to a form and mail it in.
In addition, if a claim was made that “neither parent of the newborn child whose birth is unattended as above provided is able to prepare a birth certificate, the local registrar shall secure the necessary information from any person having knowledge of the birth and prepare and file the certificate.” (Section 57-8&9)
.... there is and was no requirement for a physician or midwife to witness, state or report that the baby was born in Hawaii.

BC3. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then, up to the first birthday of the child, a “Delayed Certificate” could be filed, which required that “a summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance for delayed filing or the alteration [of a file] shall be endorsed on the certificates”, which “evidence shall be kept in a special permanent file.”
The statute provided that “the probative value of a ‘delayed’ or ‘altered’ certificate shall be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence.” (See Section 57- 9, 18, 19 & 20 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).”

BC4. If a child is born in Hawaii, for whom no physician or mid wife filed a certificate of live birth, and for whom no Delayed Certificate was filed before the first birthday, then a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth could be issued upon testimony of an adult (including the subject person [i.e. the birth child as an adult]) if the Office of the Lieutenant Governor was satisfied that a person was born in Hawaii, provided that the person had attained the age of one year.
(See Section 57-40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961.)
In 1955 the “secretary of the Territory” was in charge of this procedure. In 1960 it was transferred to the Office of the Lieutenant Governor (“the lieutenant governor, or his secretary, or such other person as he may designate or appoint from his office” §338-41 [in 1961]).

In 1982, the vital records law was amended to create a fifth kind of “original birth certificate”. Under Act 182 H.B. NO. 3016-82, “Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that the proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.”
In this way “state policies and procedures” accommodate even “children born out of State” (this is the actual language of Act 182) with an “original birth certificate on record.”

[Publius6961]

Birther and proud.

The issue in a nutshell is this:

If there are Constitutional requirements for national office, how meaningful are they if they can be totally ignored?

If not ignored, can we just have the name of the person or office which DID verify that the requirements are met and on what basis?

Try giving important information to the federal government and say simply, "You have my word on it..."

NO. Some animals are not more equal than others.

[Slings and Arrows]

Ping!

[who_would_fardels_bear]

"As an Engineer, I believe that all people, given the same set of facts, will reach the same rational conclusion on any given issue."

If you believe this, then you are also a dewy-eyed optimist.

[Publius6961]

This assertion is constantly made, but that does not make it fact.

That denial is also often made, but that does not make it "fact" either.

[A_Former_Democrat]

Right. There are also age requirements in the Constitution so how valid are those if an authenticated BC is not provided?

Why even have these in there if they’re not going to be enforced? What kind of message is sent when someone does not adhere to the law? What other “exceptions” can be made, and where’s the limit, if any?

[MilspecRob]

The issue in a nutshell is this:

Any thought that will fit in a nutshell, belongs there.

[trumandogz]

Further, the same attorney has filed suit this week against Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State, to preserve records and facilitate validation of a Kenyan birth certificate purported to be for Mr. Obama.

Good to see that the reporter is right up to date on the whole "Kenyan Birth Certificate" issue.

What next, is he going to claim that it was against the law for Americans to travel to Pakistan in 1981?

[Frantzie]

100 military people? Is this Orly again? Can she get help or another attorney to file it? We need thousands. Afgghanistan with Obama running it will be another Vietnam quagmire. The media is saying nothing about it.

[humblegunner]

Good article.

[allmendream]

LOL!!! Probably.

[mrsmel]

Agree. I think that the distancing of themselves by some on the right on this issue is merely their attempt to appear more “rational” to those on the left, they never seem to learn. No matter what anyone thinks is the truth, the questions are perfectly valid and relevant. And you can believe that if things were reversed and it was a Republican president being questioned on the exact same issues, the left would consider it perfectly valid and relevant. What’s so hard about Hussein allowing a real BC and other records to be produced if there’s nothing to hide? That’s just too information that he doesn’t want to be seen, it’s not even just one thing. After all the digging the media did into President Bush’s records, even producing phoney documents when they couldn’t find anything real that fit their agenda, they’re in no position to be questioning people’s concerns here. Although consistent standards never yet stopped the leftist media from abusing their power.

[SpaceBar]

His father was a british national, therefore Barry cannot be a NBC nor legally President. Case closed.

[SpeedRacer]

"As an Engineer, I believe that all people, given the same set of facts, will reach the same rational conclusion on any given issue."

If you believe this, then you are also a dewy-eyed optimist.

He did say RATIONAL. As another engineer, I agree with him. But the real question remains - why won't B-HO let us see his records? All of his records?