Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Born In The U.S. ? New Facts And Questions Say; 'Probably Not!'
Source? Sherlock Holmes | MB26

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?


TOPICS: Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: aconspiracy; artbell; barackobama; berg; bho2008; bho2009; bho44; birthcertificate; birthers; certifigate; citizenship; colb; conspiracy; constitution; coverup; crackerheads; democrats; democratscandals; eligibility; frivolouslawsuit; frivolouslawsuits; hawaii; ineligible; kenya; naturalborn; naturalborncitizen; obama; obamanoncitizenissue; obamatrolls; obamatruthfile; orly; orlytaitz; scotus; skinheads; taitz; tinfoil; tinfoilhats; truthers; usurper
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 921-940941-960961-980 ... 1,461-1,479 next last
To: El Gato
No he was not. He was here on a student visa. That does not a "legal resident" make.

Yes it does. While he was a student, he resided legally in the state of Hawaii. That makes him a legal resident. Of course, he was not a permanent resident, but a resident nonetheless.

941 posted on 02/07/2009 8:50:01 PM PST by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 919 | View Replies]

To: Scanian
If these guys look to the MSM as “credible news sources,” what more do we really need to know about them? Being 80% liberal Democrats makes them credible, I suppose.

Those, and the Annenberg Foundation (via the Annenberg Public Policy Center and factcheck.org). One of the arguments that some folks seem inclined to attempt to substitute for rationality here seems to be that the TV Guide mogul's widow's organizations' hired flacks said that X was true, so therefore X must be true. (Hey, whenever I need to do some analysis on an important issue, I always look to TV Guide to "guide" my analysis and "guide" which facts I take as premise-- doesn't everyone? (sarcasm off)).

Also, the Annenberg Foundation is a heavy proponent of increased gun control legislation, which says much of what one needs to know about who Obama's friends are and what kind of respect Obama and his friends at Annenberg have for the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and citizens who choose to exercise their Constitutional rights.

942 posted on 02/07/2009 8:52:51 PM PST by SteveH (First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they fight you. Then you win.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 783 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie
Frantzie, it is so obvious what they are about. Why are we having to be on the defensive? They are trolls, and this thread is really infested. (except for their little friend, ST. She's no doubt verybusy w/ her asterisks & spacey same old comments that hardly anybody reads anymore.)
943 posted on 02/07/2009 8:56:40 PM PST by luvadavi (Chinese curse: may you live in interesting times...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 669 | View Replies]

To: SteveH
It is my understanding that Indonesian law does not permit dual citizenship. Therefore, by Indonesian law, to become an Indonesian citizen, one must renounce one’s non-Indonesian citizenship, if any.

When Obama admitted on his website that he lost his Kenyan citizenship at the age of 21, I noticed tht he did not mention anything about his Indonesian citizenship.

I've assumed that Obama still retains his Indonesian citizenship since he remains mute on the issue. Oh, so many potential problems that may creep into Obama's future.

944 posted on 02/07/2009 8:57:10 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 932 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
"Don't change the subject, the conversation was about the power of Congress to determine how citizenship is conferred."

I don't think that was what the conversation is about. That branch of the discussion only applies to people born outside the US.

For people born in the US, the 14th Ammendment specifies that they are are citizens. So if Obama was born here, what does a discussion about the powers of Congress have to do with anything?

945 posted on 02/07/2009 9:00:51 PM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 912 | View Replies]

To: Michael Michael
However I find no substantiation by the Hawaii Department of Health regarding the claims you have been repeating.

You expect the Hawaii Department of Health Statistics to lay out their security provisions? Yea, right.

946 posted on 02/07/2009 9:02:12 PM PST by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 880 | View Replies]

To: luvadavi

I hear yeah. They are trolls and the place is infested with them always at the birth certif threads.

I am only avoiding getting banned getting into it with them because this is what they want. They hijack anoy of the borth certif threads. You never see them anywhere else. Have to keep fighting. ;-)


947 posted on 02/07/2009 9:02:41 PM PST by Frantzie (Boycott GE - they own NBC, MSNBC, CNBC & Universal. Boycott Disney - they own ABC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 943 | View Replies]

To: El Gato

If you read what I replied to, the claim is very specific. A doctor should remember the babies they deliver. But even doctors have chimed in and said that is bogus.

As for the race and name things, consider this:

1) Babies are named after delivery and doctors may never even know the baby’s name if they don’t pay attention to such things.

2) At birth, unless both parents are there, it could easily be unknown what race the father is. Many mixed race babies do not look mixed at birth but develop pigment later. Even with some pigment, the mix could have easily been assumed as white mother/Hawaiian father given Obama’s skin tones. That certainly would not have raised any eyebrows.

Lots of reasons to question Obama, but the doctor not coming forward is not one of them. Especially since he’s dead. We’re better served sticking to the real issues, like forged COLBs and the like.


948 posted on 02/07/2009 9:04:35 PM PST by SlapHappyPappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 940 | View Replies]

To: mlo
No case has reached the point of requiring evidence be produced. When and if that happens (a big IF) Obama may produce some.

You were trying to make something of the fact that no evidence has been offered to the court when no court has reached a point of needing any. Now that's illogicial.

Nothing was illogical about the question I posed to you.

If Obama has an honest man, on his own volition, with no order from the court, or demand from others, he would offer his birth certificate to a court of law to clarify to where he was born.

The question I want you to answer. Why has Obama not shown his Birth Certificate in court of law? Do you know? Do you have an opinion?

949 posted on 02/07/2009 9:04:43 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 682 | View Replies]

To: editor-surveyor
Parents have total descretion over their minor's legal affairs, especially citizenship.

The one spouting balderdash is you.

From the nationality act of 1952 (which was in effect at the time):

From and after the effective date of this Act a person who is a national of the United States whether by birth or naturalization, shall lose his nationality by -- (1) obtaining naturalization in a foreign state upon his own application, upon an application filed in his behalf by a parent, or duly authorized agent, or through the naturalization of a parent having legal custody of such person: Provided, That nationality shall not be lost by any person under this section as the result of the naturalization of a parent or parents while such person is under the age of twenty-one years, or as the result of naturalization obtained on behalf of a person under twenty-one years of age by a parent, guardian, or duly authorized agent, unless such person shall fail to enter the United States to establish a permanent residence prior to his twenty-fifth birthday: ...." You can read the full text here:

http://tesibria.typepad.com/whats_your_evidence/1952_Immigration_and_Nationality_Act_66Statxx_TitleIII_Chapter3.pdf

950 posted on 02/07/2009 9:05:01 PM PST by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 916 | View Replies]

To: luvadavi

I have no clue. I did not want to push the issue. Jim R here at FR is a good guy and he is flying to DC to fight PorkULus. I give him a lot of credit - he really cares.

I disagree with his policy but I do not want to get banned because I want to fight the O vermin. FMN is a creep.


951 posted on 02/07/2009 9:05:41 PM PST by Frantzie (Boycott GE - they own NBC, MSNBC, CNBC & Universal. Boycott Disney - they own ABC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 939 | View Replies]

To: Cyropaedia
They don't change the seal designs every other month.

Why do you keep throwing up obfuscations to divert from the fact that the assertions made are based only on assumptions which have not been substantiated?

Use some common sense.

Sure.

First, the claim that the borders change every year is simply false. The border on the 2006 certificate, as seen here, is the same border used on both Obama's 2007 certificate as well as another "real" 2007 certificate, as seen here

Also, it's clear that the seal didn't change with the change in the border pattern, because the seal on the 2006 certificate is different than the seal on the "real" 2007 certificate.

While it's obvious that different certificates issued in different years used different seals, there's nothing to indicate that any change in the seal necessarily took place on January 1.

The "real" 2007 certificate has a different seal than Obama's 2007 certificate, and was released in March, just a few months before Obama's. And Obama's 2007 certificate has the same seal as the "real" 2008 certificate, which was also issued in June of that year. And without any evidence that any change in the seals took place on January 1, there's nothing to say that the same seal wasn't used between mid-year 2007 and mid-year 2008.

The issue date of the "real" 2006 certificate is not evident. However if it were released in the earlier part of 2006, then there would be no evidence against the possibility of one seal being used from mid-year 2006 to mid-year 2007, and a different seal used from mid-year 2007 to mid-year 2008.

And since you offer absolutely no substantiation for your claims, the possible scenario I lay out here is no less credible than the claims you make.

Hey, I kind of like this common sense stuff.

They only way to legitimately resolve this issues is to release the long form B.C..

You really need to learn that saying the same thing over and over again doesn't make it any more true.


952 posted on 02/07/2009 9:06:44 PM PST by Michael Michael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 908 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
Why has Obama not shown his Birth Certificate in court of law? Do you know? Do you have an opinion?

"Never do what your enemy desires, for this reason alone - that he desires it" - Napoleon.

953 posted on 02/07/2009 9:08:06 PM PST by Jim Noble (Tom Daschle's favorite tune: "Baby you can drive my car")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 949 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

That text is in full agreement with what I said.

You must have comprehension problems.


954 posted on 02/07/2009 9:09:04 PM PST by editor-surveyor (The beginning of the O'Bummer administration looks a lot like the end of the Nixon administration)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 950 | View Replies]

To: Frantzie; Scanian

I try to look at these types of threads daily to keep up and appreciate all the information from everyone. On another thread (probably the one you are referencing) Frantzie pointed out to me the Alinsky methods used to confuse, rile up everyone, etc. I felt a little foolish about not being able to see this for myself. Guess I don’t get out much.

I know because of FReepers like yourselves I won’t make that mistake again!

A hearty Thank You!


955 posted on 02/07/2009 9:13:12 PM PST by azishot (I just joined the NRA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 663 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
Why is it that Obama has not shown his birth certificate to a court of law? Do you know why?

Yes. It's very simple. No court of law has asked him for it.

It one does, he will show it.

956 posted on 02/07/2009 9:15:10 PM PST by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 935 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
"I didn't just provide my opinion. I provided a decision by the United States Supreme Court that specified what was excluded by "under the jurisdiction".

"Is this correct? This is what the author of the 14th Amendment said:..."

"Congressman John Bingham v. mlo"

"Who to believe?"

Misrepresent things much?

It is not the congressman vs. me. As I clearly stated, I provided an opinion of the United States Supreme Court.

And as you also know because it has been pointed out many times, the quote from the congressman is not the law. It is simply a quote from a congressman's speech. The congressman was clearly wrong since what he says was clearly written in the constitution is not there. Most of us know that congressmen are not perfect. Not even old dead ones. Most also realize that things they say in speeches are not the same thing as laws.

As the Supreme Court wrote in the quote I already provided, those excluded by the "under the jurisdiction" phrase are the children of diplomats and of invading foreign armies. Anyone else, if born in the US, is a natural born citizen.

957 posted on 02/07/2009 9:15:34 PM PST by mlo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 938 | View Replies]

To: azishot

Maybe we will not get banned if we just respond to their drive:

“Save us the Alinsky-Obama doubletalk”

Just that to avoid wasing our time with their garbage. One of the morons writes paragraphs of doubletalk nonsense. His initials are ST.


958 posted on 02/07/2009 9:16:57 PM PST by Frantzie (Boycott GE - they own NBC, MSNBC, CNBC & Universal. Boycott Disney - they own ABC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 955 | View Replies]

To: LanaTurnerOverdrive
Not trying to be contentious, but....yeah right, I'd love to see those lawyers “minimal” bills for defending a leading presidential candidate, and then pres-elect, from on this issue through various trial courts and state appellate and the Supreme Court, even if the activity surrounds only a motion and not a trial. Even in the legal “standing” realm, the issue of “natural born citizen”, especially as it relates to a Presidential candidate and President-elect is not a common issue.

As for the certificate that was produced satisfying eligibility, we really don't knwo the answer to that question because (as far as I know), no court has addressed it - the cases were dismissed without addressing the merits (as far as I know). What I do know is that a picture on a website is pretty weak evidence of anything, if admissible at all, even with supporting statements from “Factcheck”. If any of these cases when forward, then that certificate would be examined by experts from both parties AND the “vault” would be opened. Then the courts would decide whether or not eligibility has been met.

Again, just pointing out that the issues are not so clear cut as some make them out to be. Enjoyed the discussion.

959 posted on 02/07/2009 9:17:11 PM PST by Yooper4Life (47% voted against him, and millions stayed home.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 623 | View Replies]

To: Yooper4Life

sorry for my typos - I posted in haste.


960 posted on 02/07/2009 9:18:47 PM PST by Yooper4Life (47% voted against him, and millions stayed home.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 959 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 921-940941-960961-980 ... 1,461-1,479 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson