Replies

All too true. Being born in Hawaii doesn’t automatically confer upon him the status of a natural born citizen nor does that alone qualify him to be POTUS.

Seriously, are you obtuse?
If his father is who he says he is then is he qualified to be POTUS since his father had British citizenship at birth which, in turn, gave him dual citizenship?
What is the harm in proving beyond a shadow of a doubt who his father was?

Obama wrote a book in 1995, twelve years before he ran for president called Dreams For My Father which details in great specificity exactly who his father was, where his father was born, and what the political situation in Kenya was before and after independence from the British Empire.
There is NO constitutional requirement nor law in the US Code that a person’s parents must be American citizens in order to qualify as a natural born citizen as long as the candidate was born in the United States.

“Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by [the Supreme Court of the United States in their 1898 decision in the case of U.S. v.] Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Just as a person “born within the British dominions [was] a natural-born British subject” at the time of the framing of the U.S. Constitution, so too were those “born in the allegiance of the United States natural-born citizens.”—Indiana Court of Appeals, “Ankeny et. al. v The Governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels,” Nov. 12, 2009

I've already shown you the fallacy of your argument.
You still need to read the footnotes.

¹⁴We note the fact that the Court in Wong Kim Ark did not actually pronounce the plaintiff a “natural born Citizen” using the Constitution‟s Article II language is immaterial. For all but forty-four people in our nation‟s history (the forty-four Presidents), the dichotomy between who is a natural born citizen and who is a naturalized citizen under the Fourteenth Amendment is irrelevant. The issue addressed in Wong Kim Ark was whether Mr. Wong Kim Ark was a citizen of the United States on the basis that he was born in the United States. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. at 705, 18 S. Ct. at 478.
¹⁵We reiterate that we do not address the question of natural born citizen status for persons who became United States citizens at birth by virtue of being born of United States citizen parents, despite the fact that they were born abroad. That question was not properly presented to this court. Without addressing the question, however, we note that nothing in our opinion today should be understood to hold that being born within the fifty United States is the only way one can receive natural born citizen status.

Posting it all over again doesn't change what the footnotes say.

Are you getting credits towards you matchbook cover school of shoe repair and mail order degree program for your blogging? Looks like you failed the Law Degree and are trying for a Master-debater degree. Do they give a Certified Degree you can hang on the wall? Does it have a real seal and signature?

Obama wrote a book in 1995, twelve years before he ran for president called Dreams For My Father which details in great specificity exactly who his father was, where his father was born, and what the political situation in Kenya was before and after independence from the British Empire.

Anyone can write a book and say most anything. But a birth certificate would provide legal proof of his father's identity.