Posted on 09/03/2009 12:58:54 PM PDT by kellynla
Cliff Kincaid, the editor of Accuracy in Media, has released a copy of his own birth certificate, in order to demonstrate what needs to be done to resolve the growing controversy over the alleged birth certificate of President Barack Obama. "My birth certificate includes the names of my mother and father, my mother's doctor, and the hospital in which I was born," said Kincaid. "This certified copy of an original long form document is what anyone who wants to be president should be prepared to produce."
Article II, Section 1 of the United States Constitution, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
The problem, of course, is that this provision does not require public disclosure of detailed information, in the form of a birth certificate with the names of the parents, hospital, and attending physician, and it does not mandate who makes the decision as to whether a particular candidate is constitutional eligible to be president. Our media should be performing that function.
Kincaid described what was on his own birth certificate: "It reveals that my mother's maiden name was Beverly Ann Mason and my father's name was Clifford Paul Kincaid. It says that my mother's doctor was Walter Washburn. He certifies in the document that I was born at 8:38 in the morning. It says that I was born in Research Hospital in Jackson County, Kansas City, Missouri, on May 16, 1954. It says my father worked as a warehouse supervisor for Owens-Corning Fiberglas."
By contrast, the "birth certificate" released by the Obama presidential campaign includes no name of a hospital, a location of that hospital, or a physician. "The contrast between what is on so many birth certificates for ordinary Americans, such as mine, versus what the Obama campaign has released, is striking," said Kincaid. "This contrast is what accounts for the many questions that have arisen and which have given rise to the so-called 'Birther' Movement. Many ordinary Americans are wondering why the major media have not explained why the Obama 'birth certificate' is so lacking in basic and essential information about where he was born and which doctor by name was there when he was born. If he was born in Hawaii, as he claims, then this information should be readily available and printed on the original birth certificate."
What Happened To Journalism?
"Journalism used to ask who, what, when, where, why and how," said Kincaid. "But today's pro-Obama journalists want to ignore those questions when it comes to the constitutional eligibility of the current occupant of the oval office. They would rather accept what the Obama campaign (and now administration) wants them to believe. The Obama document may reflect what is in another document, but we really have no way of knowing. The only way to address these questions is to identify where exactly he was born, in what hospital, and what doctor was present. All of this information should be on an original birth certificate."
Kincaid continued, "It is not unreasonable to ask questions about Barack Obama's birthplace. Anybody who has an original copy of their own birth certificate, or a certified copy of their own original birth certificate, should immediately understand that the Obama version is lacking in basic information that should be publicly available."
Kincaid asked, "Whatever happened to the public's right to know?"
A Newsmax.com story by David A. Patten noted that, contrary to widespread media reports, Hawaiian health officials have not publicly released President Obama's original, "long-form" birth certificate. He explained, "Many media reports have insisted the President's actual birth certificate is available on the Internet for anyone to download. It is not." What is posted, he noted, is Obama's "certification of live birth."
Patten said, "The document is essentially a summary of the actual long form birth certificate. The certification does not list the attending physician, the address or hospital where the delivery took place, or the parents' occupation. Typically, this information is included on the birth certificate."
Indeed, this is the kind of information on the birth certificate posted by AIM Editor Cliff Kincaid
Patten said that, throughout the controversy over whether Obama was not born in the United States and therefore is not constitutionally eligible to serve as president, "anchors and reporters have assumed wrongly that Obama's 'certification of live birth' contains the same information as an original, long-form birth certificate."
For example, Patten noted that MSNBC Hardball host Chris Matthews, who interviewed Rep. John Campbell, R-Calif., on July 21, lambasting him for co-sponsoring a House bill that would require presidential candidates to submit documents to establish their constitutional eligibility to serve as president, held up a copy of Obama's certification of live birth-not his birth certificate-as if it put the controversy to rest.
Another MSNBC host, Rachel Maddow, stated on June 11: "This baseless, mouth-breathing, whack-job theory became such an issue during the presidential campaign that Mister Obama did actually release a certificate of his birth from Hawaii, showing that he was born in Honolulu in 1961. And yet, the 'birther' movement persists." Over on CNN, anchor Rick Sanchez held up a document for cameras to zoom in on. "This is a reprint of his birth certificate . . . or as it says here, certificate of birth." The document presented by Sanchez was clearly marked "certification of live birth." It was not the real birth certificate.
Patten noted that critics "point out that Obama is the only modern president whose precise place of birth remains undetermined. Honolulu's Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital has been widely cited as his birthplace, but another Honolulu location has been mentioned as well. The hospital has declined to address whether Obama was born there. Presidential birthplaces typically receive recognition and commemoration."
$10,000 Offer
In order to drive this point home, WorldNetDaily.com editor Joseph Farah has offered $10,000 to the hospital where Obama was born that is listed on his long-form birth certificate.
Farah, whose website has been covering the controversy on a regular basis, says that "Barack Obama claims to have been born in Honolulu Aug. 4, 1961. His entire constitutional claim to the presidency rests on this premise. Yet, he refuses to release a copy of his long-form birth certificate-the only document that could possibly corroborate his claim. Instead, he has released to select news organizations and posted on the Internet a document that could never serve as proof he was born in the United States-a so-called 'certification of live birth,' a digital document that could, can and has been obtained by people who were actually born outside the country. The American people can never be certain their president is legitimate constitutionally without proof."
There were two newspaper birth announcements appearing contemporaneously in two Hawaii daily newspapers about Obama's birth but it's not clear whether they were generated by the issuance of the "certification of live birth" document or something else. In any case, they do not have the information that most people are seeking and which appears in original birth certificates.
WND had previously run on August 23, 2008, an article by Drew Zahn reporting that a group known as FactCheck.org had "obtained Obama's actual certification of live birth and that the document was indeed real." Furthermore, it said, "A separate WND investigation into Obama's certification of live birth utilizing forgery experts also found the document to be authentic."
FactCheck.org had claimed that its staffers had "seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate" and that "We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship." But it was clearly not the "original" birth certificate. And whether it meets the Constitutional requirement to be president is questionable.
In other words, FactCheck.org may have seen an "authentic" document, but it was not Obama's real birth certificate. The same group had also defended Obama's misleading campaign ads about his upbringing. Those ads claimed that he was raised mostly by his grandparents, when we know that Communist Frank Marshall Davis was his mentor for 10 years of his young life. Davis, who was black, had been picked by his grandfather, who was white, to be Obama's father-figure.
Columnist Frank Salvato has noted that hosts on the liberal MSNBC and CNN cable networks haven't been the only ones to attack those who raise questions about Obama's birthplace. He pointed out that Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck and Michael Medved have been quick to condemn the "birthers" as "a fringe group and a group detrimental to the conservative cause." Salvato says this attitude "is not only irresponsible, it is the antithesis of what they say they provide the public: media entities acting as serious governmental and constitutional watchdogs."
He adds, "What we need is for the conservative media to honestly look out for the Constitution...and right now, they are not."
On April 1, 2009, Andrew Walden, a conservative journalist based in Hawaii, tried to claim on Frontpagemag.com that Obama was in fact born in Hawaii and that "By refusing media requests for a look at the actual paper birth certificate, Obama's campaign gave sly backhanded assistance" to those claiming the version posted was a forgery. He noted, "The internet release of the birth certificate via hyper-partisan website Daily Kos on June 12 before posting it on a campaign website was likely calculated to fuel the frenzy." Walden asserted that the failure to release the long-form document was part of a Marxist strategy by Obama to "redirect the opposition down a blind alley."
He added, "It is time for folks to stop being played by the Obama campaign and drop this counter-productive 'phony birth certificate' nonsense. Obama opponents can find plenty of real material by focusing on the hard-left alliances, stated positions, personnel appointments and policy actions of the Obama administration and of the Democrat-controlled Congress."
Taking a different tack, former CIA officer Larry Johnson believes that Obama was born in Hawaii but that the original birth certificate is being withheld for other reasons.
He wrote on his blog http://www.noquarterusa.net that "Barack Obama was not named 'Barack' in the original birth certificate. He was 'Barry' not Barack. But that's not all. The birth certificate was amended when he was adopted by Lolo Soetoro, an Indonesian muslim, around 1968. David Axelrod and Barack Obama decided against trying to explain these issues, worried that the Soetoro birth certificate would reinforce the charge that Barack was a secret muslim. Such a charge would have muddied the waters and alarmed too many folks in the midwest and south. They covered it up and, with the help of an incurious media, kept these questions tamped down."
Meanwhile, CNN's Lou Dobbs has come under a vicious attack by Media Matters, the far-left media "watchdog" group, for merely covering the issue and raising questions about where Obama was born. The leftist group insists that Dobbs is guilty of promoting "racially charged conspiracy theories" because Obama is black.
Media Matters had previously criticized AIM Editor Cliff Kincaid's comments at the Conservative Political Action Conference, when he merely noted that while we knew where President Reagan was born, we don't know for sure where Obama was born.
As we have previously reported, in order to clear up the controversy, Rep. Bill Posey of Florida introduced H. R. 1503, whose purpose is to "amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to require the principal campaign committee of a candidate for election to the office of President to include with the committee's statement of organization a copy of the candidate's birth certificate, together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution." It was referred to the House Committee on House Administration.
If passed, however, this legislation would only impact the 2012 presidential election.
Constitutional Crisis
If it were to be proven that President Obama was ineligible to hold office, Salvato notes, "it would throw our country into a constitutional crisis the likes of which has never been seen. There is no provision for removing someone from the office of President or Vice President of the United States who has been deemed-after the fact- ineligible to have run for the office." He says the only possible remedy, impeachment, would be a practical impossibility, considering that Obama's political party controls Congress.
What's more, he raises these points:
"If someone is not technically the President of the United States how does the Legislative Branch remove him or her from the position? "Because the Commander in Chief would not technically exist and the Vice President wouldn't be technically seated as the President, would the military be prohibited from executing any order to remove the usurper? And who would give that order? "If the Supreme Court ruled that Article 2, Section 1 was not satisfied, where in the Constitution does it authorize them-or any other body-to nullify a federal election? "What would be the constitutional procedure for validating that the usurper was indeed ineligible to hold office and for removing him or her from control of the US military, the Executive Branch departments and the United States' nuclear arsenal?" Interestingly, back in the Winter 1992-93 edition of Parameters, the U.S. Army War College Quarterly, Charles J. Dunlap, Jr. published a fictional article, "The Origins of the American Military Coup of 2012," in which he speculated about a military takeover because "Americans became exasperated with democracy. We were disillusioned with the apparent inability of elected government to solve the nation's dilemmas. We were looking for someone or something that could produce workable answers. The one institution of government in which the people retained faith was the military."
What is most bewildering about you is that you know all of this. You just refuse to give it any weight. Instead of wanting the truth you attempt to put up a road block to those who seek it, thus protecting the accused who is clearly demonstrating guilty behavior.
I have pointed all of this out to you before. I just come along now and then so that new readers will understand what you are doing.
Most of them, yeah.
They are mumerous and most undermine his status as natural born including his parentage.
But none of them seem to have anything other than opinion and conjecture to back them up. And so many of them are easily shown to be false. That's the problem I've had with them all along. Making claims is one thing, backing them up is another. And that's where your allegations fall apart.
If you don't think the conflicting information, unanswered questions, and contradictions constitute probable cause for him to release the info, perhaps the fact that he's a publically elected official and has a respopnsibility to the electorate msy appeal to you as an American.
I don't see unsupported claims as probable cause. If you had any evidence at all to offer then I'd agree with you that he needs to show the evidence to be false...if he can. But until you have something indicating he's been lying all along then he's under no obligation to humor you.
What is most bewildering about you is that you know all of this. You just refuse to give it any weight. Instead of wanting the truth you attempt to put up a road block to those who seek it, thus protecting the accused who is clearly demonstrating guilty behavior.
And his guilty behavior is what? Not doing what you want him to do?
Our dance this morning will be short. I had a burst of energy when I saw your much repeated challenge.
I have no intention of explaining it any more. If you don't, at the root of it all, think that an elected official owes us the information souuprting their qualifications for the office, when asked by millions of people, then I can't help you.
My motiviation here, as I said, is to point out to readers that no matter how many times a resonable explanation is given, some people, as you do, will not seek the truth.
Last repeat word to you, for now.
The Occidental Obama - A Pawn In The Game
And:
WILL THESE TWO DOCUMENTS THROW PELOSI AND TOP DEMOCRATS INTO FELONY PRISON?
FoxNews is reportedly going to have a reporter there in the courtroom...
Hum... I am looking forward to getting my kids into school, and even more to having the time to watch this hearing live!
I am not sure what will come of it, given that it seems to be largely procedural in nature.
I wish that the Judge would just order discovery and let’s get AT this thing! Order Hawaii to release its documentation as well as Occidental College. Let’s do this and get it done.
Kelly will be there in the flesh. We will get the info unfiltered.
Saw an article last week that said $3.4 million had been spent to keep people from seeing his real long form birth certificate.
Hey, hey, hey...I said I would make every attempt to be there...
I still have my work to do here.
But, “if” I can get away, I will attend but there is still no guarantee I will be able to get into the courtroom.
According to the court clerk's office, there are only about 85 seats available in the courtroom.
Print out a Press pass ;-)
Oh SWEET! WOO HOO!
:) You can only do what you can do! I am hoping for your success anyway!
Thanks. I appreciate that.
One way or the other, at least we know that Fox News will be there...
I wish I could obtain a Press Pass too! LOL
Withdraw your support of the TRIPLE FOREIGN CITIZEN Soetoro and I’ll immediately withdraw my accusation that you believe the presidency is open to all citizens of every country on earth.
Soetoro’s very own website speaks of his KENYAN CITIZENSHIP and his BRITISH CITIZENSHIP. Even though you’ll never admit it, you KNOW the Constitution excludes citizens of foreign nations from POTUS eligibility.
You insist there’s no evidence that he’s not a natural born citizen despite his foreign citizenships that clearly prove it’s impossible for him to be a natural born citizen. For months I’ve seen you cheerlead for Soetoro like that and spit on the Constitution. As long as you persist in that madness and remain an Obama apologist, you have chosen to be a soldier in the fight against the Constitution. Whether you like it or not or whether you realize it or not, as long as you insist that citizens of other countries are eligible to be POTUS, you are saying that every person on the planet is a natural born citizen of the United States and that’s insane thinking on your part.
I’m unaware of any other country in the world who allows foreigners and non-citizens to be their head of state. Why should America be the only exception? Unless you hate America with a massive and rabid intensity, shouldn’t you object to America ignoring the Constitution and allowing itself to be ruled by a SELF-PROCLAIMED FOREIGNER?
Soetoro’s foreign citizenships are FACT and indisputable. By way of comparison, there is not even a shred of evidence to support the absolutely ridiculous claim that he was born on US soil and is a US citizen. Unless you can produce a valid authentic long-form birth certificate that contains the name of the hospital and the name of the doctor and signatures and stamp, etc, you will have proven for me that my statement is 100% true, THERE IS NO EVIDENCE THAT SOETORO WAS BORN IN HAWAII. Period.
Prove me wrong... name the hospital, name the doctor, YOU CAN’T...
So you see, not only is Soetoro NOT a natural born citizen as he himself has publicly admitted not once but twice, he’s not even a US citizen, based on what we know, he’s an illegal alien and is NOT eligible to hold the office of POTUS since foreign nationals are NOT eligible for the presidency. Per the Constitution, he is NOT president. He is a fraudulent USURPER and therefore a foreign terrorist. If there was even a semblance of justice or sense of right in this country, US Marshalls or the Military would capture and remove Mr. Soetoro from the White House, dead or alive. My strong preference would be alive so that he could spend the rest of life living in a Guantanamo cage with other terrorist animals. And BTW, the Military scenario would NOT be a coup, it would be ENDING Soetoro’s illegal coup.
Aren’t you the least bit worried that when the jig is up and Soetoro falls that you online Obot brownshirts who proudly and enthusiastically commit treason and serve as accomplices for a FOREIGN terrorist will be held responsible for your crimes and that it could justifiably result in the death penalty? You should be worried. He can’t hide the truth forever and you should be prepared for that.
Foreign usurpers suck. You should get hip to that.
Federal courts do not permit television cameras. If Fox has a reporter there, he will not be broadcasting live.
Produce the clause of the Constitution, the federal law, or the Supreme Court decision that defines natural-born citizen the way that you do and I'll agree he needs to be removed immediately. But you can't do that, can you?
For months I’ve seen you cheerlead for Soetoro like that and spit on the Constitution.
I'm not the one spitting on the Constitution.
Meh. You sunk my battle ship! LOL
Where was O born?
Were his parents US citizens?
Can anyone answere these questions?
And Barry Soetoro swore he never went by any other name.
According to the COLB, Hawaii.
Were his parents US citizens?
His mother was.
What do I win?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.