Where Is The Trust?

The WaPo and ABC News teamed up to poll the Great Unwashed on the question of where Obama was born.  Their plaintive gist - why don't people trust us on an issue we are willfully mis-reporting?

From ABC: 

Poll: Half of 'Birthers' Call it 'Suspicion'; A Third Approve of Obama Anyway

Obama's Birthplace Has Been Subject of Controversy Since Election

Fourteen percent of Americans say without prompting that they think Barack Obama was born in another country, rising to one in five when those with no opinion are offered that as a possibility. But for many it's not a firm belief – and some appear not to hold it against him.

I am just looking for two or three sentences explaining that although Obama has released the sort of summary birth certification that would qualify an ordinary Hawaiian for a driver's license or passport, there is a more complete file held by the State of Hawaii and available to Obama (or amateur genealogists in the Obama family tree) which the White House will not release.

Instead, I get this:

Obama's birthplace has been the subject of some controversy since the election campaign, given the Constitution's requirement that the president be a "natural born citizen." The debate has persisted despite research by organizations such as Factcheck.org, which in November 2008 reproduced his birth announcement, published in the Honolulu Advertiser in 1961, and said members of its staff had personally examined his birth certificate. It declared: "The evidence is clear: Barack Obama was born in the U.S.A."

What is clear is that the State of Hawaii is looking at a more complete file and offering us their conclusion.  What is in that file, and why won't Obama release it?  Who knows?  (Some guesses include the notion that something embarrassing, e.g., a legal name change to "Barack" from "Barry", are part of the file.)

The WaPo has this explanation of the controversy:

Sizing up the "birthers"

Asked an open-ended question about where President Obama was born, 14 percent of Americans say he was born abroad - giving an incorrect answer that shows how widespread the misunderstanding of his birthplace is nearly a year and a half into his presidency.

It's a misunderstanding!  Source documents are for rubes - the true sophisticates understand that when Hawaii speaks, we should listen.

I have a news-making idea - instead of hiring a pollster to ask 1,000 citizens about the circumstances of Obama's birth, why doesn't the Wasington Post or Jake Tapper ask the White House to authorize the release of the full file held in Hawaii?  Or do we have to wait for Obama to request it for his memoirs?  Hmm, he will want to break some news to justify his inevitable 7 figure deal...

SINCE YOU ASKED:  As to Obama's eligibility for office, it is up to Congressmen, sworn to uphold the Constitution, to accept or reject the results of the Electoral College.  They accepted him, so he is the legitimate President.  Come January 2013 I presume they would accept him again, although the question may not matter - Obama will be running on, or away from his record.

And why is Obama so coy about his birth records?  He may be hiding something embarrassing there, but I think he has a simpler idea - an even better plan than hiding a needle in a haystack is to hide it with multiple haystacks.  We are talking about a guy who won't deliver his college transcripts, his academic financial aid information (who bankrolled him?), his college paper on Soviet nuclear disarmament, his law firm billing records, or an honest account of his history with Bill Ayers.  What is he hiding?  Who knows?  But he is hiding so much that the press doesn't even know where to not look.

Finally, digging through the archives I see that, although I presume Obama was born in Hawaii the contemporaneous birth announcements don't impress me much.  The local papers just base those on whatever weekly list is produced by the state Vital Records people.  The contemporaneous records quash the idea that Team Obama ginned up some fake records in 2006, but it is still plausible (not likely!) that the parents and concerned maternal grandparents wanted to document their son as American back in 1961. 

Comments

[Black Hat]

I think the reason that Obama doesn't release the whole Hawaii file is that the existence of the place of birth issue benefits him. He tries to marginalize opposition by saying that opponents don't even believe he was born in the U.S.

[It's not the birthplace, it's the cover-up. And it's a high crime or misdemeanor.]

As I said to a fine commenter a few weeks ago, I'm a modified, limited, hang-out sort of birther. I suspect Obama was born in Honolulu; I have no proof. I suspect he's used an Indonesian passport; I have no proof. I believe he's ineligible for this office because of his father's loyalties, but also believe that the issue is not yet settled.
================

[nathan hale]

"Birthers" have to be smarter at this, and not answer that question. So what if he is born in Hawaii, his attitudes toward capitalism, American culture and values are alien, to what one would expect from a president. It's all those things they didn't care to investigate during the campaign. Why don't you ask about that, instead of this
inane roundrobin that doesn't go anywhere

[It's from his hubris and the 'bubble'.]

It's all part and parcel of the same thing, n; the phoniness and the lies. It will eventually meet the threshold for high crimes or misdemeanors. We knew all this two years ago. This is almost greek tragedic for him. Instead of round robin, think of the ball of yarn he's winding himself up into.

His policies will continue to make him more unpopular. His lies and phoniness will catch up and surpass him.
==================

[Tear down this wall. Pull aside the green curtain.]

What's the 'bubble'? He got support despite a shady background with the knowledge that our free press would roll over and play dead. But many truths were never unknown, and they are simply becoming more widely known, now.

This explains why Ayers hasn't 'come out'. They are all still vulnerable, and they know it.
==================

[JM Hanes]

Ordinarily, one would think the fact that Hawaii explicitly OK'd keeping Obama's primary birth certificate under wraps 10 days ago might make it crystal clear that it has never actually been released:

Tuesday Hawaii's Legislature approved a bill that would allow state officials to make a surgical exception in the state's public records law allowing the state to ignore any such repeated requests, meaning, of course, those for the sitting Democratic president. Since not too many other Hawaiian babies have been involved in such stubborn situations.

The idea that state officials might have made an illegal, "surgical" exception for FactCheck.org, was risibile on its face even before the bill was passed.

[Danube of Thought]

I decline to participate. It's all I can do.

[daddy]

I think Obama was born where his grandmother said he was born.

[nathan hale]

btw, daddy, hear Walter Hickel has passed on this day,

[daddy]

If anyone cares, Ken Salazar and the Administration have put ">http://www.adn.com/2010/05/07/1268019/feds-tell-shell-to-defend-arctic.html"> Shell's Exploratory drilling in the Chukchi temporarily on hold.

Not unexpected, but for Shell exploratory drilling is a time sensitive logistics problem of moving men and equipment on up at great expense, so if permission continues to get delayed a few months, then the summer drilling Season is missed and the project is delayed for at least another year.

[Linda Lingle lies]

1. Even if you believe wholeheartedly that BHO was born exactly where he says he was, the fact remains that the MSM and pols have consistently lied, misled, and engaged in sloppy thinking about this issue. And, they've done that about easily understand, indisputable facts. I.e., they've said X happened when X in fact did not happen. It's extremely dangerous to allow that to go on. It's also an opportunity to discredit dozens of MSM reporters and pols, as I've been trying to do for over a year without any help from the "birthers". I'll say, "X lied about Y", and they'll reply with, "X lied about Y, and BHO was BORN IN KENYA!!!" That kinda makes it difficult to discredit MSM hacks over this issue.

2. HI's governor just recently lied about one of those facts, claiming that a statement from HI's DOH said one thing when it actually said something different. Details at my name's link.

[Janet]

Great point JM Hanes. The linked article mixes up certificate & certification too. Only a certification has been released. It has minimal info on it.
a comment from the article -

"Chiyome Fukino, has issued official statements that she has personally and with....her very own official eyes seen the "original vital records" regarding Obama's birth in Honolulu's Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital on Aug. 4, 1961.

Highly misleading. Fukino has never said anything about seeing documents that name the actual hospital. Neither has the Los Angeles Times, or anyone for that matter. Why do you insist it was Kapio'lani? Do you have some documentation no one else does?

It's also misleading to say that the "birth certificate" is under lock and key. All that Fukino has confirmed is that there are some "vital records" which she has interpreted. Those could be an affidavit from an relative, rather than a certificate. The public should be entitled to examine the basis for Fukino's claim of Obama's citizenship."

[MikeS]

I don't really care about Obama's birth records. It's a mystery that he doesn't just release the complete records of his birth and of his college education. It seems that other recent presidents and candidates for the office have been more open and honest about their pasts.

Suspicions are no doubt exacerbated by this president's streak of mendacity. The guy exaggerates, misrepresents the facts, and sometimes just plain makes sh!t up.

[AGuy From Jersey]

Can you get a passport with a Hawaii's Certificate of Live Birth? You can't get a driver's license in New Jersey with that. You can't get a driver's license in New Jersey with a Birth Certificate issued by Hudson County between 1950 & 1965 (I'm not sure of the date). Porto Rico just canceled all of their Birth Certificates issued in the last 25 years.
I think we should be able to see the long form (but I'm not a birther, just and inquiring mind)

[daddy]

Just saw that Nate,

Had been perusing the paper and reading a story on our new idiotic $565,000 Taxpayer funded "Habitat Statue." Local Attorney thinks it's a joke by the British Artist and that it is actually simply ">http://www.adn.com/2010/05/07/1268706/artist-who-left-us-habitat-getting.html"> a massive Lego statue of a man pooping.

In the comments someone mentioned how much more appropriate would have been a statue of Hickel.

Whats interesting to me is that I've just spent 15 minutes trying to get a clean, clear photo I can post of the Habitat Statue erected, but can't find one. It's as if somehow this Taxpayer erected monstrosity is deliberately being prevented from letting folks see it in all its ugly stupidity.

Closest I can come to it is this">http://community.adn.com/sites/community.adn.com/files/images/manleft.preview.JPG">this model. Sadly, I think the Local Attorney is correct.

And it also depressingly makes me think back to how our City Officials (Begich Included) thought ">http://www.acponline.org/about_acp/chapters/ak/photoalbum/neubauer/snowzilla.jpg"> Snowzilla a snowman erected in a private citizens yard in Alaskan Midwinter, was criminal and should be against the Law, yet spending more than half a million Taxpayer bucks on ">http://www.adn.com/2010/04/25/1249789/habitat-statue.html"> this 24 foot tall, permanently pooping Lego Statue by some British twerp is a good idea.

We're nuts.

[nathan hale]

Speaking out outhouses, it seems a methane bubble was at fault for the Deep Horizon's
demise

[JM Hanes]

DoT:

I admit to some surprise that, as a lawyer, you are so dismissive of what seem to me to be significant legal questions about who has the burden of establishing a Presidential candidate's Constitutional bona fides, and who has the standing to challenge those credentials in a timely fashion.

Whether or not Obama, specifically, was born in the U.S. (which I don't actually doubt), and whether or not "birthers" are a histrionic fringe, seem like the side issues here.

I understand that the Electoral College has the nominal power to vote down the winner of the popular election. How does that preclude the possibility of any and all legal challenges at an earlier point? Considering the systemic chaos that such an Electoral College rejection would engender, I should think we would have a compelling interest in making a determination as early as possible in the process.

It is also worrying to me that none of the rulings about jurisdiction, venue and standing which were issued in this case addressed the central issue of whether or not an appropriate venue actually does or does not exist at all. While some declined jurisdiction, no one asserted that resolution was the exclusive purview of the Electoral College. When the Supreme Court did, in fact, entertain the question of Bush v Gore, prior to the Electoral College proceedings, does that not suggest that adjudication on Constitutional qualifications is appropriate? The fact that SCOTUS denied a hearing to the particular petitioners who actually arrived on their doorstep does nothing to establish the contrary, does it?

To my profound disappointment, unrelenting derision of the birthers has unfortunately consigned attendant, legitimate, concerns to the dust bin of public discourse.

[DrJ]

it seems a methane bubble was at fault for the Deep Horizon's demise

I heard that, but it would seem that methane is a very common component of crude oil formations, and that the design should have accounted for that. Why didn't it?

Also, I heard that the blast happened some distance below the platform. What was the ignition source? Where did the oxygen come from?

[Janet]

I don't really care about Obama's birth records

I care because of the whole sneaky feeling, the "trust us" exclamations, and the mocking of anyone that asks questions. My experience has been that when the name calling begins, something is not right.
Tea partiers become racists. AGW skeptics become deniers. Creationists become science haters & Bible thumping flat-earthers. People that question Obama's past become birthers.

[nathan hale]

Alright we really know what is behind the Deep Horizon, obviously they are trying to hide it, think a moment, very deep depths,
enigmatic forces, it's the tentacled one,
Ctuhuthu's revenge, it's so obvious, (sarc)

[daddy]

Story says ">http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6470MB20100508"> Volcanic Ash Cloud has caused Spain to close 19 Airports. Surely Lisbon must be next.

This means Jane and Caro might get stuck Tapas Hopping in Lisbon and the Med for who knows how long. Darn the bad luck.

Anyone know if Mark Steyn or Dick Cheney is over there?

[nathan hale]

Now this makes the general point, more broadly, Janet, the Nation can put together
a compendium of the most outrageously lies
about a certain public figure, but you can't
look behind the 'whited sepulcre' that is the Obama facade

[seollars]

gas bubble. Same thing they said about the ship. Gas bubbles.

Space torpedoes.

We all know that legally you don't have to be born in Hawaii to be born in Hawaii. 2 years and it's okay. O's rescinded before and now he's going to assert his Indonesian while he's there. No difference. No one will complain becuse he'll keep it quiet like his faked(CIA) Hawaiian informality.

[rls]

The obvious answer to eligibility is simply that he is not eligible as he is not a "natural Born" citizen. At the time of his birth his biological father (according to him) was a British subject, making him subject to the British Sovereign.

We may get an answer to this if more states enact laws requiring proof of eligibility to be placed on the ballot in those states. He'll either have to pony up that proof or decline to run for reelection.

[MarkO]

I continue to believe that Obama is a liar, a fake, a fraud and a construct without any authenticity. His refusal to permit any investigation into his academic record or his recorded past means something. I conclude the meaning would be negative to Obama. I draw the only responsible inference to his behavior.

The birth certificate is simply one part of the whole darkness. I have to wonder why it would be of concern to anyone to release a birth record. Of all things. One's grades or writings might be used against one's claims of intellectual grandiosity, as with Kerry, but a birth certificate?

There is, however, no legal case available today and discussing this as anything more than the plainest of hypocrisy for a "transparent" president results only in scorn and the tag of "birther."

My long experience in seeking information from liars suggests to me, however, that there is a reason for the stonewall.

Again, I ask, where are the big money men in the Republican party who can find someone to bribe to get this? What about the Israelis? It can't really be that hard if someone cared to use the usual methods. And, maybe that just means that someone has done so with no significant result.

This secrecy is an odd and troubling character quirk in anyone, much less the President of the USA. I would have a difficult time letting my daughter date such a cipher.

[Gary Ogletree]

Trying to establish Lord Obama's birthplace is a dead end, waste of time. Better we focus on evicting the fraud from the White House by way of the ballot box.

[OldTimer]

"DrRJP" has a YouTube play-list depicting how the online birth cert is a fraud. Doctor RJP has a PhD in Instructional Systems. The videos are very professional and informative.

My question has always been, why showcase a fraudulent document when the real thing would have been so much simpler and 'transparent'. And why should the citizens of our country be expected to never question their president's credentials?

Play-List:
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=C2281523DF8C0230

[Extraneus]

Democrats do seem to love their phonies and dissemblers. Remember, their last president was born William Jefferson Blythe III. Also, does anyone doubt that Clinton dyed his hair gray? At any rate, I agree that the behavior suggests that Barry is hiding something.

Me, I'd rather see the SAT scores than the birth certificate. Was Barry an A, or an AA student? I think I know.

[Anderson Cooper lies]

Gary Ogletree: The idea that many think this issue is a "waste of time" shows just how incompetent much of the opposition to BHO is. The MSM has consistently lied, misled, and shaded the truth about this issue. That's extremely dangerous for the U.S. It's extremely dangerous to have public officials lie, knowing that they won't get called on it (my name's link in the previous comment). The whole "trust us" (see someone else's comment above) is extremely dangerous.

P.S. ACooper lied and misled about this issue just yesterday; see my name's link. Why do those who claim this is a "distraction" and the like want to let him and all the others like him off the hook?

[BR]

Wouldn't it be funny if one of Obama's disenchanted relatives goes to Hawaii and demands to see the records. Hee, they'd probably ask him or her for I.D. to prove familial relationship. This could get hilarious - passez vous, non, passez vous, non non, passez vous!

Like that brother who was denied entry to the UK after being caught harassing a 13-yr-old girl. He could be offered a vacation package at a Waikiki hotel during his stay.

[Janet]

Thanks for the link OldTimer.

[scott]

It has already been requested by a blood relative that is active duty Army, BR. He was told it can not be released due to pending litigation. I beleive he was told it would take up to 2 years. This was about a yr ago, I think, when the request was made.

[Threadkiller]

TM wrote:"SINCE YOU ASKED: As to Obama's eligibility for office, it is up to Congressmen, sworn to uphold the Constitution, to accept or reject the results of the Electoral College. They accepted him, so he is the legitimate President."

Did Dick Cheney's failure to ask for any objections, of congress, defeat this notion?

You won't find him ask.
Cspan 2009

.

Al Gore seems to know the question. He asked it to all delegates in 2001.

Cspan 2001.

Bryan

ps.
Clarice, will you get back to me on how you defined "natural born" to include "dual citizen?"

[Clarice]

There's no ruling that I can see barring a person born a dual citizen or made one by his parents before he reached adulthood from being considered a natural born citizen of the US.

The term was defined by Statute retroactively to cover the child born of a US citizen mother who fits Stanley Ann's situation.

[Kellie]

The bloggers at Hillbuzz make an interesting suggestion. They believe BO's birth certificate reflects that his father identified himself as Arab instead of African, and under religious identification: Muslim. BO's handlers would have considered this as radioative. Interesting speculation anyway.

[Threadkiller]

Old timer said: My question has always been, why showcase a fraudulent document when the real thing would have been so much simpler and 'transparent'."

A magician shows you his hat not the rabbit. As long as we are bothered as to how the hat can hide a rabbit we don't concern ourselves with the rabbit at all.

Bryan

[Clarice]

By "who fits Stanley Ann's situation" I mean assuming he was not born in the U.S.
If he was, the statute doesn't come into play. He was born here of a US mother.

[Threadkiller]

The term was defined by Statute retroactively to cover the child born of a US citizen mother who fits Stanley Ann's situation.

This is the statute I need to see. All I have found refers to "citizen" and not "natural born citizen." This is the nuance that I focus on.

Bryan

[Clarice]

The statute probably does say citizen as you note. The question of "natural born citizen" applies only to presidents and as far as I know has never been challenged in court or defined by one.

As you recall, when McCain and Romney (the elder) ran ths issue arose. as McCain had been born in Panama where his father was serving in the armed forces and Congress resolved he fit the definition.
Romney's case was discussed in Congress, too, as I recall.

[Threadkiller]

Thanks Clarice,

I believe that the lack of challenge in court allows this to be a troublesome topic.

McCain's issue was resolved by a non-binding resolution and since he and Romney both lost, they could never be accused of taking the office fraudently.

"...dual nationals owe allegiance to both the United States and the foreign country..."

US State Department

Bryan

[Threadkiller]

fraudulently; not "fraudently"

Sorry

[Clarice]

Well, you see Obama has said his dad was the Kenyan born man he is named after so whether or not we see the birth certificate, the factual issue was out there at the time he ran.

Therefore, it's hard to see why the birth certificate would make any difference on that score.

[Threadkiller]

Clarice, you are the best!

This is why nobody should have ever cared about the cert. This is slight of hand. Please see my post to Oldtimer above.

Bryan. I hope this means a smile. :)

[Janet]

Our MSM has lost their skepticism. They really are journalists - writing up journal entries for the left - instead of reporters - reporting facts and inconsistencies. Why would ALL of the MSM be so mocking and dismissive of the questions being raised about Obama's past? You'd think there would be some that would dig a little.

[Clarice]

You'd think, wouldn't you?

[fdcol63]

Pravda was forced to propagandize for the Politburo.

Our MSM do it willingly for the Dems ... and for free.

[rCI]

Obama may be three nations. Dual nationality doesn't go away. The US doesn't acknowledge it. So, when O goes back to Indonesia he is,in fact, asserting his citizenship. The US will just say he isn't unless he makes a statement like the birth certificate. Kenya is the same. He can also cause a recension.

The real thing is a fake.

[BR]

Great last line, rCI :)

Scott, that's really interesting about the Army relative and HI citing pending legal action as excuse not to release it for up to two years. Would that be the County Clerk?

This leads to more plot thickeners:
(1) Aren't they violating their own rules?
(2) Is there really a Judge's Order sealing the records or just Obama's attorneys putting pressure on the Clerk?
(3) Are HI official(s) in collusion?

[Ellen]

The reason that Hawaii will not show the original document is that it has a policy of not sending out anything but the new official birth certificate, the Certification of Live Birth. That is all that it sends out. It does not send out the original anymore to anyone (http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html)

It is highly unlikely that the two officials of the Department of Health of Hawaii and the governor of Hawaii are in collusion with Obama. And they have repeatedly confirmed the facts on Obama's official birth certificate, that he was born in Hawaii in 1961. And by the way, Obama's Kenyan grandmother did NOT say that he was born in Kenya. She said that he was born in Hawaii.

Obama's mother did not even have a passport in 1961.

Obama was never a citizen of Indonesia, as the Indonesian embassy will tell you. Just give them a call. And, by the way, the US State Department has said the same thing, Obama was never a citizen of Indonesia.

Re Obama's dad being a Kenyan. Yes that is true. It has no effect on Natural Born Citizen status. All citizens who were born in the USA, and Obama was one of them, are Natural Born Citizens (except for the children of foreign diplomats).

[BR]

Hmmm, I see the WCSNSMSB (Water Carriers' Saturday Night Sunday Morning Shift Brigade). Dominoes are falling.

[Xenos]

Ellen- well said. Unfortunately simple facts and legal certainties do not have much impact on people who are invested in creating an alternate reality.

Here is why Obama will not release the 'long form' birth certificate: he does not have to. Whatever 'bad' information that might be there, like Islam or Animism or Zoroastrianism or Historical Materialism that might be listed as the religion of the parents does not relate to who Obama is or what he believes. It is all out there in his books in any case.

And the legal theories that he is not a 'Natural Born Citizen' are pure bunk. You people are being had. You should be embarrassed for yourselves.

[Pofarmer]

According to what I've read, you had to be an Indonesian citizen to go to public school in Indonesia. How'd they get around that one?

[BR]

Ellen and Xenos, how do you explain the million-dollar-legal-fees coverup? What could be that important to hide?

[BR]

And is part of that million dollars hush money?

[BR]

Ellen: "The reason that Hawaii will not show the original document is that it has a policy of not sending out anything but the new official birth certificate, the Certification of Live Birth. That is all that it sends out. It does not send out the original anymore to anyone (http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606"

*****

Do you mean they changed the policy in 2009 to accommodate Obama? Wonder how much that policy change cost. Local policy cannot override HI law or the Constitution. What does HI law say about public records, availability of.

[BR]

I just love the international flavor of JOM. This morning when I came on, we had visitors from DC, Hong Kong, Korea, Curacao and even Hawaii :)

[ignatz]

--Re Obama's dad being a Kenyan. Yes that is true. It has no effect on Natural Born Citizen status. All citizens who were born in the USA, and Obama was one of them, are Natural Born Citizens--

--And the legal theories that he is not a 'Natural Born Citizen' are pure bunk.--

Thanks guys. Those two well reasoned and dispositive legal arguments certainly answered my questions on the issue.

--Here is why Obama will not release the 'long form' birth certificate: he does not have to.--

So hope and change means he only does what he wants to and is less transparent about his past than any recent president?

-- Whatever 'bad' information that might be there, like Islam or Animism or Zoroastrianism or Historical Materialism that might be listed as the religion of the parents does not relate to who Obama is or what he believes. It is all out there in his books in any case.--

And no one has ever embellished, concealed or otherwise manipulated their past in an autobiography have they?
Perhaps rather than being a Zoroastrian it shows that he had a different father, you know the one about whom it's all out there in his book and whom he supposedly got his dreams from. That, according to his own words, would certainly relate to who he is.

[Clarice]

ignatz, the different father is my thought, too.

[Pagar]

"You should be embarrassed "

IMO, any one who believes that in a nation where you have to show a birth certificate to get in to the military, the Commander in Chief doesn't have to show his should be embarrassed. The insanity of such a position is beyond belief.

[JM Hanes]

"Ellen- well said."

Concern trolls must be using the buddy system now. It's amazing how predictably they show up every time TM mentions the birth certificate issue. You'd almost think OfA has got a special crew of trackers.

I think it's clear that I have serious legal and political concerns about how this whole affair has played out. It's been curiously difficult, however, to decide whether Obama is trying to tamp the story down or keep it alive. It could be both! The Ellen/Xenos script above has been refined since last we saw it, so I'm guessing the birth certificate is not good for Obama. If so, it ironically gives him a compelling interest in perpetuating the nutty birther fringe meme.

I doubt he's worried about an embarrassing detail or a Presidential disqualifier. Any incontrovertible evidence that Obama has outright lied about his bio, not just taken poetic license, is plenty problematic. The fact that his birth certificate is legally protected is actually a double edged sword; it's one piece of the puzzle he has been unable to erase. Elsewhere, the prospect of a friend, or an enemy, in the White House would be incentive enough for almost anyone in Obama's past to help clean up the record. Add in money and favors the Chicago Way, et voilá, tabula rasa.

Even so, it's not impossible to spin off isolated fabrications here and there. And even if the maze of Obama's history could be negotiated, the real story could easily be too complex for immediate public consumption. If there's a singular revelation which could poison the Obama well on its own, I suspect that anything other than youthfully superficial Pakistani connections would do it. If I were to wade deep into the conspiratorial weeds, I'd suggest that drone attacks are waving more than one dog.

In the final analysis, however, we've passed the bill and we're going to find out what's in it too late to matter much. The story is certainly worth pursuing, but I don't think the search for the real Obama will bear much fruit till he no longer has the built in protections of high office. The sooner we bring that chapter of his life to a close, the better.

[Your a useful moran.]

Naw, Ellen, wrong on 'Natural Born Citizen', and besides, why don't you show me all the rest of the stuff you assert?
===============

[Your both useful morans.]

What a scream, Xeno; 'invested in creating an alternate reality'. Two words, 'Bill Ayers'.
===================

[Threadkiller]

"The story is certainly worth pursuing, but I don't think the search for the real Obama will bear much fruit till he no longer has the built in protections of high office. The sooner we bring that chapter of his life to a close, the better."

I agree that this search will not produce a satisfactory result for finding the real Obama. I just want something definitive for the future of this country.

We have not defined "natural born" and as long as 1/3 of the requirements to run this country are vague, what does the future hold?

As an employer, I find the firing of an employee difficult only when the job description is loosely composed. If I am not clear on the position I want filled I have a 50/50 chance of getting someone better as well as someone worse.

I will fight for "natural born" to be defined because I wish to improve our odds.

We thought Carter was the worst, but when we loosened up the requirements we were taught how bad it can be.

To me it is no small coincidence that the founders worried about someone, whose split loyalties happen at birth, and the fact that the president with the most conflicting background is the most destructive to this nation.

Bryan.

[bgates]

Here is why Obama will not release the 'long form' birth certificate: he does not have to.

Same reason he doesn't give much to charity, treat his political opponents or the nation's allies with any respect, tell the truth about myriad other details of his background, etc.

To think just 16 months ago the President was a man whose actions were governed by what he thought he should do rather than what he had to do.

[The margin is widening.]

JMH, I suspect that whatever flaw in the story would be revealed by the birth certificate, or other documentation, is actually fairly minor, but some nervous Norvis thought it would be fatal, so the subterfuge, from Stop the Smears on, was chosen instead. Now, even though a way around the difficulty could be found, it is too late, because of all the stonewalling and the marginalization of 'birthers'.

It isn't the birthplace, it's the cover-up. And since 'Natural Born Citizen' is not nailed down, it may yet be used to nail him. The problem, as TK explains repeatedly, is the allegiance. To what, or who, is Obama's allegiance?
==================

[The ma'gin is widening.]

Whom, whom, whom. Sorry Ma, and Happy's Ma's Day.
===================

[PD Quig]

Never mind where he was born. I want to know where he dies.

[Clarice]

bingo, bgates.

[nathan hale]

He will probably follow the denizen of the Peachtree state, and harangue us for another quarter century or more

[rse]

"Peachtree state"?

I think you must have gotten lost in ATL at some point. Very frustrating for visitors to have so many road with a variation of the same name.

Wait until they discover there are Roswell roads that run North-South and different ones running east-west. How's a visitor to know?

[cathyf]

I've said this before -- I wonder if there is some "fake but accurate" problem with Obama's birth record. This is simple, straightforward and plausible. Suppose there is some error in the original birth record, and its absence on the certificate that FactCheck.org looked at makes it obvious that the FactCheck paper was fake.

(Just for an example... My son's birth certificate had my first name and middle name reversed. What if some clerk in the records office of the hospital or the state way back in 1961 decided that "Stanley Ann Dunham" was a mistake and "fixed" it to be "Ann Stanley Dunham"?)

Maybe what they are trying to hide is that Obama is a narcissistic compulsive liar who lies just because he can even when the lie doesn't do him any good? The notion that he would invent some elaborate lie over something totally trivial is pretty scary.

We comment all of the time about how hard it is to get anything longer than a bumper sticker through the MSM smokescreen. But a chant of "liar liar pants on fire" is short and understandable even to people who don't care about politics.

[sylvia]

Yes I saw the Anderson Cooper CNN show recently too. I was very surprised at Anderson. I usually thought of him as a pretty fair guy. But they had a military guy and his lawyer on who is suing Obama to look at his birth cert.

And when Anderson challenged the lawyer why he wanted to look at the bc and what was his reasoning, when the lawyer started to answer, Anderson jumped all over him and literally prevented him from getting a word out. Over and over. It was sad. It's amazing what effect this issue has on the MSM.

The lawyer was trying to explain the difference between the long and short bc, and every time he got close to it, Anderson jumped in, with vim and vigour.

Andersdon keept asking him, why this President, why not the other ones, implying it's racist.

Well my answer to that is, Obama is the first candidate with a foreign born parent, especially one that was only here in the US such a short time. Thus Obama would be the only one who had a chance of not being a natural born citizen. It's not racist. Just factual.

[Pagar]

"We comment all of the time about how hard it is to get anything longer than a bumper sticker through the MSM smokescreen."

Just look at this list of journalists who won't review a book about Obama.

[Ellen]

Someone said: "The obvious answer to eligibility is simply that he is not eligible as he is not a "natural Born" citizen. At the time of his birth his biological father (according to him) was a British subject, making him subject to the British Sovereign.'

Answer: ALL US citizens who were born in the United States are Natural Born Citizens. "Natural Born" means born in the country (with the exception of the children of foreign diplomats). This is as simple and as sweeping as Ohio-born.

If you were born in Ohio, you are Ohio-born. The citizenship of your father cannot make you not Ohio-born, and dual nationality cannot make you not Ohio-born. So, the citizenship of your parents (either or both of them) cannot take away the Natural Born Citizen status of a US-born child.

There have been numerous federal lawsuits in which the judges have ruled that US-born children of foreign parents are Natural Born Citizens, for example:

Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, 179 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 1999) (children born in US to two Romanian citizens described as “natural born citizens” of the US):

Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States.

Diaz-Salazar v. INS, 700 F.2d 1156 (7th Cir. 1983) (child born in US to Mexican citizen is “natural born citizen” of US):

Petitioner, Sebastian Diaz-Salazar, entered the United States illegally [from Mexico] in 1974 and has been living and working in Chicago since that time. *** The relevant facts which have been placed before the INS, BIA, and this court can be summarized as follows: The petitioner has a wife and two children under the age of three in Chicago; the children are natural-born citizens of the United States.

Nwankpa v. Kissinger, 376 F. Supp. 122 (M.D. Ala. 1974) (child born in US to two Biafra citizens described as “natural born citizen” of the US):

The Plaintiff was a native of Biafra, now a part of the Republic of Nigeria. His wife and two older children are also natives of that country, but his third child, a daughter, is a natural-born citizen of the United States.

What makes the third child a natural born citizen when the other children were not? She was born in the United States.

You also said: "We may get an answer to this if more states enact laws requiring proof of eligibility to be placed on the ballot in those states. He'll either have to pony up that proof or decline to run for reelection."

Answer: It will be easy for him to "pony up the proof," all the proposed legislation simply requires a candidate to show the OFFICIAL birth certificate, not the original birth certificate. Obama has already shown the official birth certificate, the Certification of Live Birth of Hawaii, and the facts on it--that he was born in Hawaii in 1961--were confirmed twice by the two top officials in the Department of Health of Hawaii and at least once by the governor of Hawaii.

And, by the way, notice that all the proposed state and federal birther legislation focuses merely on the place of birth. There has not been a single bill asking candidates for president to prove that their parents were US citizens or to prove that they were not dual nationals at birth.

[Ellen]

Re: The allegation that Obama became an Indonesian citizen.

It is false. All you have to do is call up the Indonesian Embassy and ask ((202) 775-5200, ask for the press officer). The US State Department also has said that Obama was never an Indonesian citizen in a legal filing, and it also said that Obama was not adopted.

Re the passport Obama used to visit Pakistan. It was a US passport. He had a US passport from the time that he left Hawaii to go to Indonesia with his mother. He never had either a British passport or an Indonesian passport, as both embassies will tell you.

[Ellen]

You said: "The lawyer was trying to explain the difference between the long and short bc, and every time he got close to it, Anderson jumped in, with vim and vigour."

We all know the difference between a long-form and a short-form BC. The fact is that Hawaii ONLY issues the short form now. It no longer sends out copies of the long-form (http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html).

That is Hawaii's decision, and it has been in place since about 2001. It means that Hawaii would not send a copy of the long-form birth certificate to Obama even if he asked for it because it does not send the long form to anyone. However, Hawaii does not and did not in 1961 allow a birth certificate of any kind to be issued that says on it 'born in Hawaii' unless there was proof that the child was born in Hawaii, and Obama's says 'born in Hawaii,' and the officials have repeatedly confirmed that fact.

[Rob Crawford]

But, "Ellen", shouldn't we demand proof of eligibility in future elections? Including 2012?

Bammers should have had to demonstrate he was eligible for the office before running. That he didn't -- while McCain, curiously, did -- and continues to treat the whole matter as a joke reveals a degree of contempt for the rule of law that, well, doesn't bode well.

[Your excuses are like the Emperor's clothes.]

Ellen, you are confounding 'native born citizen' and 'natural born citizen'. Find out the distinction; it's probably in threadkiller's links.

And we still can't see his documents. Why won't he show them? Your excuses wear thinner and thinner. Pretend I'm from Missouri, and show me.
============

[Ellen]

As for his documents, he HAS shown the official birth certificate of Hawaii, which is the only one that Hawaii sends out. As for college records, no president has ever shown them, and there is no law that says that a president or a candidate has to show them.

As for confounding native born citizen with Natural Born Citizen, no. There is no confounding, ALL native born citizens are natural born citizens. just as all persons born in Ohio are Ohio-born.

ALL citizens who were born in the USA are Natural Born Citizens. The only kind of a citizen who is not a natural born citizen is a naturalized citizen.

As this example shows "Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States." What makes the children natural born citizens? The fact that they were born in the USA.

[You are unpersuasive, Ellen. Show me.]

Ellen, I said show me. Instead we get useful idiots like yourself miming the same old crap all the time. It's not convincing.

Nope, 'natural born citizen' is undefined as threadkiller has it. It is likely that having a parent with divided allegiance precludes the 'natural born citizen' status. Read threadkiller's links; repetition of your point is unconvincing.

Remember, it's not the grades, it's the cover-up. It's not the birthplace, it's the cover-up. And you are covering up, not explaining, so you are as much a part of the problem as his intransigence.

This is government by the will of the people. You don't gain the will of the people by dodging about your bona fides.

Show me Obama's bona fides. I've looked everywhere for them and all I can find are mala fides.
===============

[Ellen]

No cover up. Obama was born in Hawaii, as his official birth certificate from Hawaii shows, and it was repeatedly confirmed by the officials in Hawaii. His Kenyan grandmother did not say that he was born in Kenya. She said that he was born in Hawaii.

"Natural born' was defined in the Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court case. It says that EVERY child born in the USA is Natural Born. Obama was born in the USA, and that is why he was confirmed UNANIMOUSLY by the congress and sworn in by the Chief Justice of the United States.

ALL US citizens who were born in the USA are Natural Born Citizens. The only kind of a US citizen who is not a Natural Born Citizen is a naturalized citizen.

“Natural born citizen. Persons who are born within the jurisdiction of a national government, i.e. in its territorial limits, or those born of citizens temporarily residing abroad.” — Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), said:

“Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.” (December 11, 2008 letter to constituent)

Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT), said:

“What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)

[Ellen]

You said: ""Ellen", shouldn't we demand proof of eligibility in future elections? Including 2012?"

First, you should notice that not a single bill has been introduced to make a candidate for president show that his parents were US citizens or that he was not a dual national. Not one.

So even birther supporters do not believe the two-fer case.

Second, if you would like to see proof of birth in the USA, no problem because Obama has shown that. All the birther bills require is the official birth certificate, and Obama has already shown the official birth certificate. Yes, the Certification of Live Birth is the official birth certificate of Hawaii.

As the Wall Street Journal put it: "Further, if Congress were to pass the so-called birther bill, Obama would be able to comply easily. The bill would require presidential campaigns to submit “a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate” to the Federal Election Commission. The certificate Obama has released publicly would meet this requirement."

So no problem with Obama. However, I have been told that some hundreds of thousands of original birth certificates in government files were lost in the Katrina floods, so there might be a problem for these people. Still, in principle I favor such legislation if it deals with the Katrina problem. Unfortunately, not a single bill does.

[ignatz]

--"Natural born' was defined in the Wong Kim Ark Supreme Court case. It says that EVERY child born in the USA is Natural Born. Obama was born in the USA, and that is why he was confirmed UNANIMOUSLY by the congress and sworn in by the Chief Justice of the United States.--

Yes that is the crux of the matter. WKA was contrary to previous precedent and seems to me and many others factually and legally wrongly decided.
If so, then the defense that 'natural born citizen' means what you say it means should carry as much weight as Lester Maddux declaring seperate but equal fine and dandy because Plessey said it was.

[Ellen]

The Wong Kim Ark case was decided six justices for Wong to two against (with one justice not voting). It is a clear precedent. It will not be reversed, especially not with two of the nine current justices having fathers who were born in Italy.

And it is clear from the writings of the framers of the Constitution and the other American leaders at the time that they NEVER used Natural Born Citizen to mean "two citizen parents." Nor did they think that dual nationality could affect loyalty, since Madison clearly said that the one criterion of allegiance in the United States is the PLACE of birth.

So, what they were worried about was naturalized citizens becoming president. A foreigner cannot become president and a naturalized citizen cannot become president. But there is not a shred of evidence that the writers of the Constitution wanted to ban the US-born children of foreigners from becoming president.

And there are numerous federal law cases in which the judges rule that the US-born children of foreigners are Natural Born Citizens. For example:

Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, 179 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 1999) (children born in US to two Romanian citizens described as “natural born citizens” of the US):

Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States.

Diaz-Salazar v. INS, 700 F.2d 1156 (7th Cir. 1983) (child born in US to Mexican citizen is “natural born citizen” of US):

Petitioner, Sebastian Diaz-Salazar, entered the United States illegally [from Mexico] in 1974 and has been living and working in Chicago since that time. *** The relevant facts which have been placed before the INS, BIA, and this court can be summarized as follows: The petitioner has a wife and two children under the age of three in Chicago; the children are natural-born citizens of the United States.

[Show me. Remember? Everything else is ultimately unpersuasive.]

Ellen, you seem to have a cynical opinion about how justices decide cases.

Ignatz has it, and your opinion that WKA is precedent that will not be overturned is merely that, your opinion. Legal historical scholarship is instructive on the meaning of the framers on this question.
======================

[It's simple really, Ellen. Not much nuance in it. He isn't trusted, and by his own actions.]

Check this lovely irony, Ellen. Obama's intransigence on this issue may well force a more formal and exclusive definition of 'natural born citizen' thus excluding some who might have otherwise passed muster.

You keep missing the point. It is the fact that he is not forthcoming with his bona fides which prevents people from trusting him. This is not something you can win with sophistry. Ya' got it or you ain't.
====================

[Ellen]

YOU said: "he is not forthcoming with his bona fides "

He is far more forthcoming than any other president has been. He has shown his birth certificate. No other president did. McCain DIDN'T (The birth certificate that is online claiming that he was born in Colon Hospital is a forgery. It certainly was not posted by him or by his campaign).

Since no other president has shown college transcripts (some have released grade-point averages, but that is not the same thing) or passports or (as some birthers demand) high school and Kindergarten records, then Obama does not have to either.

You said: "may well force a more formal and exclusive definition of 'natural born citizen' thus excluding some who might have otherwise passed muster. "

Dream on. The Supreme Court will never call the case, and Congress will not act on the issue. Obama IS a Natural Born Citizen according to virtually every constitutional and legal scholar.

“Natural born citizen. Persons who are born within the jurisdiction of a national government, i.e. in its territorial limits, or those born of citizens temporarily residing abroad.” — Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition.

He falls under the first of those categories. He is a person who was born in the jurisdiction of the United States.

[ignatz]

--The Wong Kim Ark case was decided six justices for Wong to two against (with one justice not voting).--

I see your 6 to 2 and raise you, since Plessy was 7 to 1.

--It is a clear precedent. It will not be reversed.--

If I understand you correctly you would now be defending not only Plessy but Dred Scott if neither of them had been overturned. Or do I not understand your argument?

--And it is clear from the writings of the framers of the Constitution and the other American leaders at the time that they NEVER used Natural Born Citizen to mean "two citizen parents."--

More argument by assertion is less than helpful.

--Nor did they think that dual nationality could affect loyalty, since Madison clearly said that the one criterion of allegiance in the United States is the PLACE of birth.--

The dispute isn't that PLACE of birth is one criterion of allegience nor is it even your contention. You contend it is the ONLY one, which even you admit was not Madison's position. Provide a citation wherein Madison says dual citizenship was not a concern, except in the explicit case of those born before the founding, or drop the assertion.

--It will not be reversed, especially not with two of the nine current justices having fathers who were born in Italy.--

Not only is that statement bordeline libelous, if true it rather bolsters the argument about the great concern dual loyalties should engender doesn't it?

The rest of your post is a recitation of modern cases relying on a precedent I claim is flawed. Defend the actual WKA decision ably with cites or you're just shooting your mouth off.

[Clarice]

I think I figured out the birth certificate thingy.
Obama is really twins. Think about it. He's always saying two things about everything.

He's down on ipads and fancy communication gizmos but gives one as a present to the Queen of England and insists on using a blackberry himself.

He urges black kids to work for higher intellectual achievements but cuts out the voucher program which let less fortunate black kids attend the school his kids attend.

He says Americans should learn to speak more than one language but he doesn't even speak his own well, for example consistently pronouncing a cimple word "corps" as "corpse".

He's twins, damnit.

[Clarice]

**Simple word**

[Ellen]

YOu said: "Madison's position.'

Madison said that the place of birth was the SOLE criterion of allegiance.

There is nothing wrong with justices who have Italian or other foreign parents voting to retain the same definition of Natural Born Status as laid down in Wong Kim Ark. I am saying that they are likely to do so. You have to believe that they would not do so, or you would lose the case. You have no evidence for this.

The fundamental thinking behind the Wong Kim Ark decision has been widely accepted. It is mere speculation, based on nothing but your feelings, that the current court would reverse the Wong ruling, or even call the case. You can continue to fantasize about the Wong case being wrong, but it is all in your mind. The reason that the Chief Justice swore in Obama is that he did not have a shred of doubt that Obama is a Natural Born Citizen. YOu cannot win a case without his vote, or that of Scalia and Alito, and Scalia has already been talking about the importance of jus soli and mentioned the Wong Kim Ark ruling favorably.

At the time of the writing of the Constitution, the writers of that document and the other leaders of America at the time used the phrase "Natural Born" to mean "born in the country with the exception of the children of foreign diplomats." They never used it to mean "requires two US citizen parents."

[Sue]

At one point the officials in HI said the documents being requested were not available because they had been destroyed. I called bunk on that and was proven right. The documents were not destroyed.

The officials in HI have contributed to the story not going away. They don't all seem to be playing on the same page.

[Sue]

That's funny Clarice. That is why he won't release the original BC. It tells, even ones issued today, if you are a multiple birth baby. Good guess.

[boris]

Well the problem is we can't ask them what they meant.

So if there is such a thing as natural born citizen ... then born in the US to married US citizens would qualify.

A child born to a Russian and his Chinese girlfriend while visiting Italy would certainly NOT be a natural born US citizen. (and never could become one)

Anything in between is just fuel for argument. So one could argue (honestly) that the term should be interpreted in the widest possible sense because it would be unfair to restrict candidates to the first category, ... and thus exclude ONLY the second.

Or (honestly) claim that the consitution did not specify who to EXCLUDE but rather who could apply. In which case NBC should be used for people in the first category and only others that everybody agrees to.

Personally IMO the idea that an anchor baby, born deliberately during a brief US visit, and raised in an ME madrassa would be NBC is preposterous.

[Pofarmer]

Personally IMO the idea that an anchor baby, born deliberately during a brief US visit, and raised in an ME madrassa would be NBC is preposterous.

That would be Indonesian Madrassa.

[Ellen]

YOu said: "the officials in HI said the documents being requested were not available because they had been destroyed. I called bunk on that and was proven right. The documents were not destroyed. "

It was NOT the officials in Hawaii who said that the original had been destroyed. It was a member of the press.

The original exists and it has never been claimed by the officials not to exist. Then why don't they send it out? Because that is their policy. They do not send out the original anymore for anyone ANYONE. That is because the new Certification of Live Birth is the official birth certificate (http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html).

The new official birth certificate is what Hawaii sent to Obama in 2007. So that is all that he can post. He probably lost the original that was sent to his family when he was born. If Hawaii were to change its policy and show the original, what would it show? It would show that he was born in Hawaii, as the officials in Hawaii have repeatedly said.

[Now why was it again that we can't see it?]

So, Ellen, show me what else it would say.
====================

[Ellen]

Re: "So, Ellen, show me what else it would say. "

Why not petition the governor of Hawaii to release it? The officials in Hawaii have decided not to make an exception in their policy of note sending out the original birth certificate anymore to anyone (http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html).

The Certification of Live Birth is the official birth certificate, and the facts on it -- that Obama was born in Hawaii in 1961 -- were confirmed twice by the officials in Hawaii and at least once by the governor of Hawaii.

[ignatz]

--Madison said that the place of birth was the SOLE criterion of allegiance.--

Citation.

[ignatz]

Off please