Posted on 04/11/2014 4:42:10 PM PDT by don-o
Thank you, elengr. You made a really excellent point. Obama’s photo is on the bio. No narcissist could resist reading a favorable bio of himself in print, and still less so when his actual pic went along with it. Of course he read and approved it. Anyone who suggests otherwise doesn’t know what they’re talking about on multiple levels.
But even beyond that is the fact that Obama accepted a large amount of cash, in two separate installments, to write the book described in the bio. Obama’s defenders have insulted their own intelligence by trying to separate the bio from the book; they are clearly a reflection of each other.
Iow, the Journeys in Black and White begin in Kenya. Look no further than Acton & Dystel’s own blurb/hook for this info. Obama certainly planned to write that story when he took not one but two advances for the project. He’s just not sufficiently focused or talented to write his own book. Hence eventually the project was dumped on Ayers, who wrote an altogether different book.
DL, if there was any doubt about Hook’s political affiliation, post 125 removes it. That is pure, undiluted, 100-proof Fogbowism. It is the most Obotish/trollish post I’ve ever read. Anyone who can read that and imagine CpnHook is a conservative is simply not paying attention.
CpnHook, at least you’re obvious about it. Some trolls make some effort, however disingenuous, to blend into their conservative surroundings. Your loud and proud, ‘I’m an Obama-loving prog and I don’t care who knows it’ is honest if nothing else. Props for that.
Miriam Goderich’s statement raises many obvious questions. Most notably, it’s idiotic on its face, and could only have been accepted by the MSM & Obots—overlapping categories. Anyone else would ask the blindingly obvious questions, and acknowledge that there was a very good reason Goderich herself has never been asked to explain her nonsensical ‘explanation.’
I've postulated this answer before. Stanly Ann was irresponsible. Anyone so irresponsible as to HAVE their child in Canada, (and therefore depriving him of his highly valuable American citizenship) is likely too irresponsible or lazy to have gone to the trouble of registering him in Washington. (assuming you could get witnesses to go along with it. People generally had more integrity back then.)
Madelyn, on the other hand, was the epitome of a no nonsense doer. She didn't mess around, she took care of problems for her irresponsible daughter. (note that Barry lived with Madelyn rather than Stanley Ann from 1971 onward. )
Besides, Hawaii's birth certificate laws were probably the laxest in the nation,(and still are) and Madelyn also did work at the local courthouse and was likely above question or reproach.
It was EASY for Madelyn, and perhaps not so much for Stanley.
I have yet to see a post from him that doesn't read like Fogbow dreck. Life is too short to fool with fools.
Lol. Excellent point. Believe me, it won’t take much more of this time wasting nonsense before I join you in that conclusion.
To help Obots understand.
Posit a very conservative politician who is wildly popular with the Tea Party. Call her Parah Salin. From the onset of her meteoric rise questions swirl around her birthplace. She claims to have been born in Minnesota. However, a fellow conservative says she was born in Canada, and a variety of indicators point in that direction.
Salin’s supportors vociferously reject the claim. They point out that Minnesota officials have confirmed Salin’s birth, and charge that her detractors just don’t like strong conservative women.
But the rumors will not die. Fueled by Salin’s extreme reluctance to release documention, strange oddities in the few records she grudgingly does release, and an unprecedented number of sealed/hidden documents, the ‘born in Canada’ charge lives on.
Then a startling revelation occurs. A pamphlet printed by Salin’s first literary agent surfaces. The text is shocking. ‘Born in Moose Jaw Canada, Salin’s unlikely journey takes her south to the continental US and ultimately even further north, to the governorship of Alaska. Her upcoming book, ‘From Cold to Colder’ details her staunch defense of Reagonesque conservatism at ever step of the way.’
Her critics pounce. She was commissioned to write this story. She took $ for it. It clearly begins in Moose Jaw, Canada. The jig is up!
Her defenders say she never saw the blurb. Anyway, it was only a clerical error. The state of Minnesota has claimed her. Case closed.
Obots say they would accept this explanation. That all they’d need to know is that her own agent had no idea where she was born, and that the proposed book was based on a ‘fact-check error’, and that would be the end of it. They would finally throw in the towel, acknowledge her Minnesotan birth, and quit the battlefield in shame.
They lie.
Ha ha ha funny. Now lets present the original to a private testing lab.
Did MD do work at the local courthouse in 1961? IIRC that was later.
And why send SD to Canada to have the baby?
Why not send her to the Booth Home in Honolulu or Spokane?
Do you think SD could have paid her own plane fair to Washington? Obviously MD was running the show.
BTW, here is the Pennsylvania law (VITAL STATISTICS LAW OF 1953) on registering births (amended in 2001):
“Section 401. Birth Registration: General Provisions.—(a) A
certificate of each birth occurring in this Commonwealth shall be filed with the local registrar of the district in which the birth occurs within a period prescribed by regulations of the Advisory Health Board. The certificate shall be prepared, signed and filed by the attending physician or licensed midwife, except that when there is no attending physician or licensed midwife the certificate shall be prepared, signed and filed (1) by the father, or (2) in the event of his death, disability or absence,
by the mother, or (3) in the event of her death or disability, by the householder of the premises or superintendent of the institution in which the birth occurs, or (4) in the event of the absence or disability of all persons heretofore named, then by such person acquainted with the facts as the local registrar
shall designate. The Social Security number or numbers of each parent shall be obtained and maintained separately by the department in a fashion that permits routine screened inquiries, unless there is good cause for not requiring the furnishing of such number or numbers in accordance with Federal regulations. This information is considered confidential and is to be made available only to Federal and State agencies responsible for establishing paternity or enforcing child support orders.
(b) Upon filing of the certificate, the department shall
provide the father or the mother with a brochure relating to
the existence of and eligibility for the Children’s Health
Insurance Program (CHIP) under Article XXIII of the act of May 17, 1921 (P.L.682, No.284), known as “The Insurance Company Law of 1921.”
(401 amended June 25, 2001, P.L.725, No.69)
Looks like just about anybody can register a birth in Pennsylvania.
Original, hard copy editions of old newspapers can be read at the Library Of Congress.
________________________
Yes, well, I don’t see the years in question on their index. And that’s provided that anyone is able to go to DC to the Library of Congress to find it and let’s just make a wild guess that even if the copies WERE there, they’re “lost” at present, just like so many documents that are supposed to exist get “lost”.
Possibly valid point. This stuff is starting to run together for me, and I just haven't been keeping up with it like I used to.
And why send SD to Canada to have the baby?
There is a story about Madelyn Dunham's coworkers having no idea she had a grandson until he ran for the Illinois Senate. (some 30 years or more after the fact.) It mentions that she kept no pictures of him on her desk, and never mentioned during all the time she worked there that she had a grandson.
Her behavior is that of someone who is not proud of her grandson, which is an unusual behavior in most cases. However, Madelyn Dunham came from a time period in which miscegenation was illegal in many states. Madelyn Dunham was born in Kansas during some very serious racial strife between blacks and whites, and she had without a doubt the attitudes of her era, as did likewise Mr Stanley Dunham. (Also born in Kansas.) Obama even said so. (Typical white woman of her era.)
In 1960, it was extremely unusual for a white girl to get pregnant from a black man, and I have little doubt that Stanley and Madelyn Dunham were none to pleased about it. So what was the normal process for embarrassing pregnancies back in 1961? Go send them to live with a distant relative. Well guess where Stanely Ann's Aunt was living in 1959? Canada. Later in Blaine Washington, right smack on the border with Canada, and with the only nearby hospital across the border *IN* Canada.
So why send SD to Canada to have the baby? Because her parents were embarrassed and that's where her nearest female relative was.
Do you think SD could have paid her own plane fair to Washington? Obviously MD was running the show.
It is reasonable to suggest that both Madelyn Dunham and Stanley Dunham likely agreed that Stanley Ann needed to go elsewhere to have her baby. Specifically to her Aunt Eleanor Belle Dunham Berkebile.
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=34618044
So why bother to register him in Hawaii? If you are embarrassed by him and are planning on dumping him anyway, what’s wrong with him being Canadian? Why bother to plan out his future? And how would they know that he wouldn’t acquire American citizen from her daughter?
BTW, I now remember we had this discussion some time ago.
The findagrave link doesn’t work.
There would be nothing stopping granny from privately doing what was best for her grandson—procuring US citizenship—while publicly keeping it quiet. You can nitpick this thing to death, 4Z, but what would be the point? The Canadian scenario could have happened. We don’t know for sure if it did or didn’t, but it’s a possibility. If the travel records of the National Archives hadn’t been vandalized, we might know more—and almost certainly would [or there’d have been no reason to degrade the record].
I mentioned other sources of availability in addition to the Library of Congress.
You don’t believe that there are folks who question Obama’s eligibility anywhere in the Washington DC metro area? Those folks could check out the Library of Congress newspaper archives.
Here’s the February 6, 1990 issue of the New York Times that a person can order in hard copy format from their archives for a fee:
http://www.nytimes.com/1990/02/06/us/first-black-elected-to-head-harvard-s-law-review.html
And a hard copy of this article can be ordered directly from the Chicago Tribune archives:
http://articles.chicagotribune.com/1990-02-07/news/9001110408_1_ann-dunham-chicago-housing-authority-barack-obama
I find it entirely plausible that a mother can be utterly embarrassed by what her daughter did, yet want no ill to befall her grandchild. Why would you think the two things would be mutually exclusive?
I also think that over time those very likely racist white grandparents came to love their mixed race grandchild.
And how would they know that he wouldn’t acquire American citizen from her daughter?
Because Madelyn was no fool. It would probably take her less than a day to find the answer to that question back in 1961. The law at the time would have rendered him not an American because his mother hadn't met the residency requirements specified in the 1952 naturalization law. She wasn't old enough to meet them.
For that matter, if her daughter was sent to Canada to have her baby, Madelyn may have had several months to look up the pertinent law prior to his birth. I expect they had copies of the naturalization act of 1952 in Honolulu back in 1961.
It still remains a plausible theory with no holes of which I am aware.
The findagrave link doesn’t work.
This one I tested when I previewed the message. It works.
http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=34618044
I believe the historical dots will someday show Obama has deep roots in Indonesia through his mama Stanley Ann who was probably intimate with an Indonesian guru named Subuh. His Kenya appearances result from mama and her parent’s desire to legitimize the birth. There is a long history here that has made it easy in some ways to obfuscate Obama’s background.
Good points. I don’t know. That was my feeling about the born in Kenya. I sure he got a lot of mileage out of it with black people. I bet he was officially American to go to Harvard law. It is a mystery wrapped in an enigma wrapped in some big big money how he got in there with nothing to show for himself. So anything re Harvard would HAVE TO have him born in Hawaii or he wouldn’t be American like he told,the school and maybe that would negate his degree?
No, the agency acted faithfully as Obama's agent and put out a story Obama and they thought would enhance interest in him and sell books for them and him.
If Miriam Goderich had said it was an editing error, a slip of the copy and paste, I might be inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt. But, no, she maintained it was a "fact checking mistake". She lies. She had the real issue in her mind and thus could not bring herself issue a credible lie, editing errors and facts being separate mental categories, so she settled for fact-check error. LOL! Stoopid bitch! As if she ever checked any facts! LOL!
Obviously, the only reason it ever came up was that Obama aspired to higher office than Mayor of Da Sh¡tty of Chicagah, and Adjunct Con Law Professor Obama knew about Section 1 of Article 2 of that document he loathes. Up until that time, no problem: being a Kenyan immigrant with a compelling bio who is "articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy" was kind of neat, right?
Of course, Obama's lie in the book blurb notwithstanding, the evidence is quite overwhelming that he was no immigrant, that he was born in Honolulu and thus is eligible to elected to the highest office by the clueless Sheeple of our land. The Constitution only requires that he be a natural born citizen. It doesn't bar frauds or traitors from the highest office. It's only a Constitution, after all. Deciding who is a traitor and who should be President is up to the Sheeple.
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.