Posted on 02/05/2009 7:52:01 PM PST by MindBender26
Obama Born In The U.S. ? New Facts Say; “Probably Not!”
Let me be the first to admit that I have been a constant debunker of the “Obama Born Overseas” stories. How could it be possible? How could the DNC, Hillary, Edwards, the RNC, McCain, Romney, AP, BBC, ABC, FNC, etc, (and every 100th listing in the DC phone book) not have checked this out to its last level of possibility?
Well, it appears that they didn’t! Everyone assumed “the other guy did it.”
Forget for the moment all the clues left by the high-priced Obama and DNC legal teams. They are huge.
Obama and the DNC always argue “standing.” They could eliminate every legal challenge in 5 minutes by simply producing a certified copy of the original long-form birth certificate. Throw in the testimony of the Hawaii Registrar of Documents, a few retired FBI chief document examiners, and the doctor who delivered him for good measure.
If they did that in two or three courts of record, in light of the obvious media coverage it would receive, every other court nationwide would accept the precedence and the cases would all be over.
But they don’t. They keep telling the courts, “please don’t hear this case.” No proof of any kind. Just the legalese argument that the plaintiffs have no standing before that court.
That’s so overreaching, it’s like buying a refinery to get a 3000 mile oil change! And one day, some court is going to say…. “Show me the money, er,. ah, I mean, Show me the documents!”
But there is a second, and perhaps new point!
Where is that doctor who delivered him, or the midwife?
Stop and think. The delivery of a half Negro – half Caucasian baby was rare anyhere in 1961. Oriental babies were common in Hawaii of course, but a half Negro-half Caucasian baby with the funny name of Barrack Obama, in Hawaii? In 1961?
Even of you were a Republican, if you delivered a future President of the United States, wouldn’t you call some newspaper somewhere with your story. Or if you were the assistant obstetrician, or the anesthesiologist, or the scrub nurse?
What about the circulating nurse, or the pediatrician, one of a dozen nurses on the 24 hour-a-day shifts in the nursery, one of many nurses on the ward where Mrs. Obama would have stayed for three days, a records registrar, a technician of any kind, hell, even the janitor!
What about the clerks, ambulance drivers….. somebody ?!?!?!
Anybody ?!?!?!
Wouldn’t someone have been yelling their “credit” for this from the rooftops???? The date when he was born is (supposedly) known. Certainly all these (supposed) people would know where they were working then!
Where is somebody, anybody, who was there or even remembers the birth?
Sherlock Holmes once solved a case by noticing the dog that DID NOT bark.
Is this the same situation?
No credible news outlet has reported he was born in Kenya, only fringe websites and blogs with zero credibility. There was some confusion a couple years back about whether he was born in Kapoliani or Queens hospital in Honolulu because at one point his younger half sister mistakenly told reporters he was born in Queens hospital. That a younger relative might get mixed up about the exact hospital is hardly suspicious.
name another President who went to a Muslim country and changed his name and attended a public school that only accepted non-U.S. citizens.
That he changed his name has not been substantiated. That he lived in Muslim country for four years as a child is not relevant to his eligibility, and it is simply not true that US citizens could not attend public schools in Indonesia.
He has responded to numerous lawsuits asking for his birth certificate by filing defense motions to dismiss. That is certainly distinct from "not at all (evasive)."
When someone files a firivolous lawsuit against you, the proper course of action is to file a motion to dismiss. There is nothing evasive about it.
That is the epitomy of being evasive. He is evading the question via the legal evasive maneuver of challenging standing. Hello?
Filing a motion to dismiss is not synonyous with evasiveness.
Some of his family members are on record as witnessing his birth in Kenya.
Not true.
The Kenya Ambassador to the US is on record as claiming he was born in Kenya.
The Kenyan disavows all such claims. Not being a native English speaker, he was confused by radio talkshow host's questions and answered incorrectly.
Even if he had made such a claim, it would be meaningless, since he is in no position to have any special information on Obama's birth place.
Other citizens have signed affidavits that he was born in Kenya and those are on file in U.S. courts--
Seeing as how the courts have dismissed all the cases they have ruled on, these affidavits don't seem to have much credibility.
The hospital is relevant to Obama's claim that he was born in Honolulu because such information can be used to cross check the claim that he is qualified to be President.
No it can't. Hospitals don't keep records that long.
Wow. Lawyers are filing motions to dismiss in several of the cases filed to comple release of Obama's qualifications (if any) to be President under the NBC clause of the U.S. Constitution. Someone pays these lawyers.
As far as I know, they've filed two routine motions to dimiss, which is the only way to respond to lawsuits such as this. All campaigns have lawyers working on retainer, which means they get paid a fixed amount per month to handle routine work like this. As a result, it is highly unlikely the motions to dimiss cost Obama anything extra. It would almost certainly be covered under the retainer.
Furthermore, filing a motion to dismiss a frivolous lawsuit does not constitute an attempt to shield information. It is the only way to respond.
I doubt it very much. But call and ask if you really want to know. Their phone number is on the web.
First, show me the relevence to Obama being born in the US. Let's try to limit the diversions a little.
I very much doubt it. Please produce some evidence to substantiate this claim.
Like a a typical crank, when presented with evidence that your wild speculations are wrong, you respond with insults instead of logic.
Chief:”There was no need for Ann or Jr to be on the island after his birth to register the birth and at this point in time there is no evidence of their presence on the island. There was also no need for a document to be notarized stating the birth event just the statement of a person with knowledge of the event.”
Thanks for your comments. Regretfully, the possible connotations of this are that any Hawaiian long-form birth certificate on record in Hawaii (assuming there is one), would only lead to further investigations. But at least with that in hand, it would be easier to research the legitimacy of the document. If there is an attending physician or medical facility listed on the BC, it could be verified as accurate or dismissed.
There is nothing on a birth certificate that most normal people would be concerned to disclose. The fact that Obama is holding his so closely raises much speculation - if nothing else. It has certainly caused my mind to wander wildly about what damning evidence might be contained on that document!!
Another question I have considered is what information (if any) could the factcheck.org version of the BC be altered from the orignal on file. This question does assume that the factcheck.org document is accurate and a legitimate document issued by Hawaii (which is very much in question). Does Hawaii allow ammendments to BCs that would permit Obama, his mother, or grandparents to cause the long form and the abbreviated form to differ substantially? Could the fathers name differ? Obama Jr’s name? Any other vital information? It is an interesting question...
Protected by the constitution in no way means “under the jurisdiction” as demanded by the 14th.
I've already shown you what under the jurisdiction means. Why do you ignore it?
Anyone, except for foreign diplomats who are on U.S. soil are “under the jurisdiction”
The question of whether anchor babies are citizens is not relevant to this discussion since we know Obama's mother was a US citizen and his father a legal resident.
Therefore, may I humbly suggest you conduct that discussion on another thread?
Are you a tag team?
Your own lack of logic or credibility says yes. Very similar use of falsehood, and media propaganda in place of facts, and even a laughable claim to being a “social scientist” which appeals to false authority.
You’re e regular circus here.
Because your leftie opinion is negated by the facts.
Please discontinue your poping jay replies to me.
Yes the original document could have been placed under seal when Jr was adopted by Lolo and even he could not access it without a court order. When the original was sealed another document would have been produced reflecting the changes. I wonder whether further court action happened during the Obama Sr visit in 1971 which would generate yet another document so that two sealed documents are under court order? Lolo had to have adopted Jr prior to his return to Indonesia, there simply was no time for this to be done in Indonesia before Ann and Jr arrived. When Lolo returned to Indonesia he was sent into “exile” for a year so he would not contaminate others with any ideas he picked up while in the U.S. He arrived back in Indonesia about a week before Ann and Jr did, at a time when Indonesia was expelling foreigners and when no foreigner could attend the Indonesian schools.
As for the factcheck document pictures I have asked just which document experts Factcheck has in their employ that could state without a doubt that the document they photographed is real. Also it is curious that they didn’t take a full back page photo of the document, instead putting the focus on the seal and signature. One has to question why.
Do you think would UPI lie or cover up or confuse its readership in regards to reporting an alleged statement by the President of the United States?
No. I am saying the UPI article is written sloppily, so that it is not clear whether Obama himself claimed to be born in Queens hopsital, or whether the reporter inserted that on his own, beleiving it to be true (incorrectly).
The reason this interpretation is plausible is because the statement is not a direct quote, but a paraphrase of a statement on another subject, the hospital of birth being incidental to the topic at hand.
If you are asserting that a close Obama family member (O's half-sister) is wrong concerning such a fundamental fact of her half-brother's life
Yes. She was not yet alive when he was born, so she cannot know first hand where he was born. It is very plausible that she was mistaken. The evidence that she is mistaken is that every other quoted statement by Obama and other relatives indicates Kapiolani Medical center as his place of birth.
That he does not is already well established. What we are working now is what brings disinformatzia such as yourself here to provide cover for this coup.
Your assertion Re: anchor babies moron.
Enough of your ping-pong illogic and denial.
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.