The titles of this thread, and of the thread on the Greeley Gazette don’t comport with the statement by Gen. Curry. The title, intentionally or not, suggests that a birth certificate or birth on our soil makes Obama eligible. The statement by Gen. Curry was “...saying he agrees with Lakin that the President should provide proof of eligibility.” Curry did not, at least in what was reported, mention birth certificates. He asked for “proof of eligibility.”
Obama’s ineligibility has been “proved” by Obama himself. Having an alien father is not the same as “born on the soil of citizen parents,” or, from John Bingham’s address to the House in “...of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural-born citizen;”
As the “Anchor Baby” discussion, around the meaning of the authors of the 14th amendment proceeds, watch how pundits avoid the above statement by John Bingham. They all know. Even Ann Coulter and Roger Hedgecock refer to another of the contributors, Senator Stewart, as the “principal author of the 14th Amendment. Are they afraid of naming Bingham, called “The Madison of the 14th Amendment” by Justice Hugo Black because of his clarity on natural born citizenship? Obama’s ineligibility has become a hot potato. Because his father was never a citizen, Obama, by his own admission, was born a British Subject, Obama cannot be a natural born citizen. Read a bit about John Bingham and his fierce campaign to right the wrong of racial discrimination. http://www.constitution.org/col/intent_14th.htm It would be a just irony to have the words of the the man most responsible for fighting for the citizenship of slaves, making them equal under the Constitution, clarify that the racist in the White House sits fraudulently in office, using racial division to curtail our Constitutional freedoms.
It is obviously true that the regime has gone to considerable effort to keep most of the legal documents concerning Obama's life concealed, from disappearing kindergarten records, to prosecuting records technicians who might have seen his test records and grant applications, to perhaps killing an operative working for Obama’s security chief sent to “cauterize” Obama’s U.S. State Dept. passport records.
Dr. Lakin did include “...and puts to rest the other reasonable questions surrounding your unproven eligibility.” Perhaps he wants to open the door using what appears to be the “low-hanging-fruit” of concealed records to reach discovery. The natural born citizen charge, while obviously true, leads straight to the Supreme Court, and may enhance the likelihood of a lengthy stall, backroom meetings, and the kind of transparency for which the regime has become famous. The lack of records is in evidence, and may be sufficient evidence to force discovery. If there is a trial, some judge must state the definition of a natural born citizen. Would anyone dare contradict John Jay, John Marshall, Morrison Waite, James Wilson, James Kent, Joseph Story, or 14th Amendment John Bingham?
If a birth certificate exists, which I suspect is the case, then the concealment was to direct attention from the fact of ineligibility based upon an alien father and Obama’s admitted birth as a British citizen. If some court is granted discovery, a birth certificate will appear with some story about why it was embarrassing. Like Chester Arthur who helped prolong the false charge that Chester was born in Canada or Ireland, leading the political enemies away from the real weakness. Arthur always had a U.S. birth certificate which he never chose to make public. The false charge became such an issue that the date of Arthur's father's naturalization was never explored until Leo Donofrio came across the documents in 2008, documents obviously missed when Arthur had his personal effects burned shortly before his death. Arthur, like I believe, Obama knew that if he were ever forced to reveal the birth certificate, he held the trump card. After being forced to prove his U.S. birth no one would dare ask other questions.
My negative assumption is that Dr. Lakin is another elaborate charade to misdirect the public, like an illusionist telling you what to watch, as were Senate Bill 2678 and Senate Res. 511 by Clair McCaskill to give the impression that McCain had been, after ten years of hearings and law suits, finally made eligible. I don't think this is likely. Lakin’s public service was hard earned. He would have too little to gain. It's like the combat seasoned pilots over Long Island who saw a missile headed for Flight 800. They had nothing to gain from lying, whereas the Clinton administration, FBI and CIA, by covering the truth, protected the president's re-electability. So I'm assuming that the Lakin position is a legal tactic. I do agree with you, the Lakin statement is inconsistent with the legal and Constitutional certainty that Obama’s ineligibility is based upon evidence provided long ago by Obama himself. That was audacious, and clever. He knew he couldn't hide it, so he advertised it. Obama chose, from my new favorite among political slogans, Andy Stern's “First use the power of persuasion, and if that doesn't work, the persuasion of power” to surpress the few who might know or learn about the meaning and intent of the framers requirement of natural born citizenship for just our president. The Obama team is counting on our ignorance, and counting on considerable help from the state-run media in keeping us ignorant.