Donald Trump made Obama release his birth certificate

[the_tyrant]

Barack:
http://news.ca.msn.com/canada/video.aspx?cp-documentid=c307e58b-c639-4444-9603-9416aa791383

Donald:
http://video.ca.msn.com/watch/video/trump-on-w-h-issuing-obama-birth-certificate/17yl9ikwj?src=CPSmall:shareBar:permalink:null

[Dowly]

Both are same link.

[Skybird]

For that lifetime acchievement, Trump really deserves a reward. Give this hero a cookie! He has slain the Obama and conquered the birth certificate he was hiding his treasure cave!

http://www.cookiestamp.com/files/3251561/uploaded/ChildPlateCookies72.gif

TRUMP FOR SU-PER-STAR! TRUMP FOR SU-PER-STAR!

Next battle: the Obama's hidden university papers. This fight will decide the fate of the nation and will show what stuff hero Trump is really made of!

[MaddogK]

This is a copy of the one the Hawaiian governor claimed didn't exist ?
...forced out of hiding by Trump (another George Soros business partner).

I don't believe it.

[MH]

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR0r6RJaqUGZlQq43nY-5pyqaN9PFUqB_BS5nclWGPk8ytMfkVM7A

[Tchocky]

http://www.theonion.com/articles/trump-unable-to-produce-certificate-proving-hes-no,20250/

[TarJak]

Wow! What a magnificent achievement! DT is the man of the hour. /sarcasm.

[Growler]

Somewhere, someone in some office in the Department of Homeland Security is watching this news and shaking their head in a state of shock and awe at the absolute idiocy of the entire campaign; the campaign that would have gained zero momentum whatsoever if anyone involved in it had taken the three tenths of a second to wonder if, maybe, the agencies charged with National Security hadn't already checked on the immigration status of the Chief...:hmmm:

[kraznyi_oktjabr]

DDT wins the first round! Waiting for sequel... /sarcasm involved

[longam]

Donald is suffering from the Sara Palin syndrome of needing to be seen on air.

[Penguin]

maybe now comes the time for Trump to focus on important issues...

What would be the difference anyway? Obama was born to an American mother, no matter if he was born on Pluto or in Iowa, he would still have his American citizenship, so the whole discussion is pointless.

[Lord_magerius]

The two posts above...

Yep :yeah:

[the_tyrant]

Both are same link.

thanks for pointing it out, fixed

[Fish In The Water]

Newsflash: The Donald 'is very proud of himself...' :haha:

[mookiemookie]

And the total number of people who believe Obama is a secret Muslim commie Manchurian Candidate remains unchanged.

[Torplexed]

So, now that this issue is settled when is "The Donald" planning to release the autopsy report on the thing that died on his head?

[Ducimus]

Donald is suffering from the Sara Palin syndrome of needing to be seen on air.

This.

[Ducimus]

Gotta love Fark.

"If you picked "a matter of hours" as to when the birther goalposts would move from the birth certificate to Obama's school records, then step forward and claim your prize."

Trump On Obama's Birth Certificate: I'm 'Honored' -- But Where Are His School Records? (http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/trump-on-obamas-birth-certificate-im-honored----but-where-are-his-school-records-video.php)

[Dowly]

Donald is suffering from the Sara Palin syndrome of needing to be seen on air.

I sincerely hope it doesn't go as far as with Palin. I'm not too keen to see the newest from Private- Donald Hump: Washington DP *Shivers* :x

[Torplexed]

Frankly, I'm not even sure if the goalposts have moved, after perusing most "birther" websites. They're inclined to think the Obama long form birth certificate is a Photoshopped fake or some sort of after the fact mockup at this point.

Most conspiracy theorists aren't interested in contrary evidence. Like the old X-Files movie tagline, it really comes down to I WANT to believe (or not believe). Facts don't enter into it.

[Growler]

And the total number of people who believe Obama is a secret Muslim commie Manchurian Candidate remains unchanged.

LOL... heck, it's probably gone UP based on some of the logic I've seen from those guys.

[Ducimus]

More fun.

Obama commented on it apparently.
And.. if i not mistaken, i think he just called Trump an "carnival barker". :haha:

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/04/27/remarks-president

edit:
Frankly, I'm not even sure if the goalposts have moved, after perusing most "birther" websites. They're inclined to think the Obama long form birth certificate is a Photoshopped fake or some sort of after the fact mockup at this point.

Most conspiracy theorists aren't interested in contrary evidence. Like the old X-Files movie tagline, it really comes down to I WANT to believe (or not believe). Facts don't enter into it.


Honestly, i think the whole birth issue, is veiled or coded racism. If he was a white guy, nobody would question his citizenship.

[AVGWarhawk]

Trump is a self serving and self promoting. I'm guessing he is bored with 'The Apprentice' and needed to fill the time. He is nothing but a distraction.

[Bilge_Rat]

looks fishy...it was recorded 4 days after he was born...more than enough time to fly him in from kenya...:ping:

[Ducimus]

I have to add, the top headline at cnn.com, should NOT be "Trump: I have done a great service".

Great, now hes going to short stroke this idiocy. You know.. he's not doing team R any great favors. All he's doing, is making them look even nuttier, and increasing the odds Obama gets reelected, which is precisely what they don't want, but they just can't quite gag the craziest of wingnuts.

[Torplexed]

I'm inclined to see as this as shameless self-promotion as I can't really see Donald Trump as any sort of serious presidential contender. Once you get him off the friendly talk shows and corner him on some subject he isn't educated on, he quickly gets rather peevish. When you bring up a ripped off creditor or anyone left holding the bag from one of his failed business schemes, he becomes outright hostile.

[TLAM Strike]

Honestly, i think the whole birth issue, is veiled or coded racism. If he was a white guy, nobody would question his citizenship.
I don't think its veiled or coded at all. You are 100% right, if he wasn't highly pigmented we would not be having this discussion.

This is all an excuse to get the Team R drones to have something to rally on and not pay attention to the screwed up mess that both parties have created.

[Fish In The Water]

And the total number of people who believe Obama is a secret Muslim commie Manchurian Candidate remains unchanged.

That's the consequence of approaching an issue with a closed mind, you'll continue to believe what you want to believe despite the evidence. :nope:

[mookiemookie]

That's the consequence of approaching an issue with a closed mind, you'll continue to believe what you want to believe despite the evidence. :nope:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/True-believer_syndrome

[Ducimus]

Mookie ought to like this link:

"Ideas, solutions and policy have been trumped (literally) by insults, demonization and teenage-like attitude and snark."

http://blog.cagle.com/2011/04/will-the-gop-drive-itself-and-the-u-s-over-a-cliff/

[August]

Y'know I've always believed that Obama was born in the US like he and the State of Hawaii have said he was, and I still do, but I have to wonder why he has at this late date finally decided to release the original?

It seems to me that this just shows a lack of good judgment on his part.

He could have put this whole thing to bed years ago, long before it became entrenched. That would have been the smartest thing to do. But now having allowed so much time to pass it serves no purpose except to make people doubt it's authenticity.

Imagine if the Bush administration had released film footage it had been sitting on for three years which showed without a doubt that it was Flight 77, and not a missile, that plowed into the Pentagon on 9-11. Think any of those inside job conspiracy theorists would believe it? Think it's possible that a few on the fencers might become suspicious at the tardiness of it's release?

I do NOT doubt that Obama is qualified to be President but I now have a little less confidence in his ability to be a good President.

[mookiemookie]

Mookie ought to like this link:

"Ideas, solutions and policy have been trumped (literally) by insults, demonization and teenage-like attitude and snark."

http://blog.cagle.com/2011/04/will-the-gop-drive-itself-and-the-u-s-over-a-cliff/

Reminds me of another article I read today. I don't completely buy into it, but it's an interesting thought experiment. Ezra Klein thinks that Obama is a early 1990s moderate Republican. (http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/obama-revealed-a-moderate-republican/2011/04/25/AFPrGfkE_story.html) The key part in that article is: Rather, it appears that as Democrats moved to the right to pick up Republican votes, Republicans moved to the right to oppose Democratic proposals I think that's what we're seeing. As the Democratic party drifts further right, you see these clowns like Bachman and Trump taking very extreme positions to differentiate themselves.

I like to read American Conservative (http://www.amconmag.com/) magazine. It's got a smart right wing view that's not completely bugf-k insane like the mainstream neocon voices (Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, et. al). Even they lament how the Republican party has turned into some unrecognizable extremist group.

Eventually the GOP is going to get so far right that they alienate all but their true believers, and the pendulum will swing back the other way.

[krashkart]

Y'know I've always believed that Obama was born in the US like he and the State of Hawaii have said he was, and I still do, but I have to wonder why he has at this late date finally decided to release the original?

It seems to me that this just shows a lack of good judgment on his part.

He could have put this whole thing to bed years ago, long before it became entrenched. That would have been the smartest thing to do. But now having allowed so much time to pass it serves no purpose except to make people doubt it's authenticity.

Imagine if the Bush administration had released film footage it had been sitting on for three years which showed without a doubt that it was Flight 77, and not a missile, that plowed into the Pentagon on 9-11. Think any of those inside job conspiracy theorists would believe it? Think it's possible that a few on the fencers might become suspicious at the tardiness of it's release?

I do NOT doubt that Obama is qualified to be President but I now have a little less confidence in his ability to be a good President.


He could have put it to bed years ago, but I think he probably hasn't worried about the truther issue nearly as much as he's been worried about everything he is tasked with. Man's got a job to do, why should he let something so personal get in his way? :)

[Torplexed]

Y'know I've always believed that Obama was born in the US like he and the State of Hawaii have said he was, and I still do, but I have to wonder why he has at this late date finally decided to release the original?

It seems to me that this just shows a lack of good judgment on his part.

He could have put this whole thing to bed years ago, long before it became entrenched.

Would have been the smart thing to do, but without a crystal ball, I doubt many would have seen that this issue would have been obsessed over for so long and then picked up and given new life by an attention addict like Trump. Just as on 9/11, I doubt many would have foreseen nutters espousing an inside job controlled demolition theory on the twin towers collapsing. You're dammed if you do, and damned if you don't with conspiracy theorists.

Last year, NASA released Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter pictures showing the old Apollo landing sites from lunar orbit. They were immediately dismissed by the Apollo deniers as Photoshop hoaxes. "NASA had forty years to make that crap up and the resolution is poor. They expect us to believe them now?"

Against some mindsets you can't win.

[August]

Eventually the GOP is going to get so far right that they alienate all but their true believers, and the pendulum will swing back the other way.

I thought the low point was reached in 2008 and the pendulum started swinging back last year.

[MaddogK]

:up:
I eagerly await the first presidential run of an anchor baby.

By some of your definitions of 'citizen' they'll be eligible because they were born on our side of some line on a map. Natural born by definition means born of 2 citizen parents.

[Ducimus]

:up:
I eagerly await the first presidential run of an anchor baby.

By some of your definitions of 'citizen' they'll be eligible because they were born on our side of some line on a map. Natural born by definition means born of 2 citizen parents.

I'm not feeling all that well right now, but i could swear you just contradicted yourself.

[Tribesman]

@TLAM
Originally Posted by Ducimus http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/smartdark/viewpost.gif (http://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?p=1652306#post1652306)
Honestly, i think the whole birth issue, is veiled or coded racism. If he was a white guy, nobody would question his citizenship.
I don't think its veiled or coded at all. You are 100% right, if he wasn't highly pigmented we would not be having this discussion.


Not really, there is an aspect to it of that but it is wrong to call all birther fools racists. Ducmius was wrong to an extent as well because McCain had already had people challenging his elegibility and he doesn't look that dark.

It seems to me that this just shows a lack of good judgment on his part.

I agree with Augusts words but disagree completely with their intent, releasing these documents does show a lack of judgement but for the opposite reason.
He should have left things as they were and left all the birthers ranting so he could gain political capital from their public idiocy and it would have provided more entertainment.

[krashkart]

He should have left things as they were and left all the birthers ranting so he could gain political capital from their public idiocy and it would have provided more entertainment.


I think he should have left things as they were simply for leaving things as they should be left. :p2:

[Sailor Steve]

Most conspiracy theorists aren't interested in contrary evidence. Like the old X-Files movie tagline, it really comes down to I WANT to believe (or not believe). Facts don't enter into it.
I'm always fascinated by the concept that if you show them a real conspiracy, proven beyond any doubt, they immediately lose interest.

Honestly, i think the whole birth issue, is veiled or coded racism. If he was a white guy, nobody would question his citizenship.
I have to disagree, but for a different reason than the others. I've been seeing the same crap for years now. The loudest criers from either side will use any slightest excuse to trash anyone from the other side. Yes, there is racism involved, but it's a lot more than that. If the only difference was that he was white they'd still be all over it, just on the off chance that something might stick.

The more I observe politics and political discussions the more convinced I become that pretty much anyone who politicizes any issue is a narrow-and-shallow-minded child looking for attention.

[Sailor Steve]

:up:
I eagerly await the first presidential run of an anchor baby.

By some of your definitions of 'citizen' they'll be eligible because they were born on our side of some line on a map. Natural born by definition means born of 2 citizen parents.
I suggest you read the law involving citizenship requirements before you tell people what's what. One parent is sufficient if that parent lived in the United States for the required period of time.
http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_5199.html

[joegrundman]

Y'know I've always believed that Obama was born in the US like he and the State of Hawaii have said he was, and I still do, but I have to wonder why he has at this late date finally decided to release the original?

It seems to me that this just shows a lack of good judgment on his part.

He could have put this whole thing to bed years ago, long before it became entrenched. That would have been the smartest thing to do. But now having allowed so much time to pass it serves no purpose except to make people doubt it's authenticity.

Imagine if the Bush administration had released film footage it had been sitting on for three years which showed without a doubt that it was Flight 77, and not a missile, that plowed into the Pentagon on 9-11. Think any of those inside job conspiracy theorists would believe it? Think it's possible that a few on the fencers might become suspicious at the tardiness of it's release?

I do NOT doubt that Obama is qualified to be President but I now have a little less confidence in his ability to be a good President.

The birther movement was a free gift for Obama and the democrats. The sheer looniness of them has tarnished the republicans as a whole.

What was it napoleon said? Never interrupt your enemy while he is making a mistake.

Furthermore it amounts to what in British politics is known as a Hefalump trap, after the whinny the pooh story. Which is an easily noticeable and with hindsight perfectly obvious trap intended to catch a blundering opponent.

That is, Trump should have seen this coming when he decided to so vocally join the birther bandwagon and simultaneously make a bid for president, and now the trap is sprung and Trump is standing with his pants down, so to speak.

Judge the effectiveness yourself. Would you say Trump's chance of getting nominated for presidential candidate (and then winning) is higher or lower than it was this time last week?

[August]

The birther movement was a free gift for Obama and the democrats. The sheer looniness of them has tarnished the republicans as a whole.

Yet apparently not enough to stop the GoP from regaining the House last year so i'm not too sure about that.

Judge the effectiveness yourself. Would you say Trump's chance of getting nominated for presidential candidate (and then winning) is higher or lower than it was this time last week?He never had a chance to get the nomination Joe. This didn't change anything one way or the other.

[joegrundman]

Yet apparently not enough to stop the GoP from regaining the House last year so i'm not too sure about that.

He never had a chance to get the nomination Joe. This didn't change anything one way or the other.
hah! well fair enough, specially the latter!

[August]

hah! well fair enough, specially the latter!


I will admit that the thought of "President Trump" scares the bejesus out of me!

[Bakkels]

I will admit that the thought of "President Trump" scares the bejesus out of me!

He would probably rename the White House the Trump House.
Airforce One would become Airforce Trump, New York would become New Trump; it would all become really confusing :rotfl2:

[Rockstar]

http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa408/jky242/binkyD-1.jpg

[Takeda Shingen]

http://i1196.photobucket.com/albums/aa408/jky242/binkyD.jpg

Hmm. Okay, I'll admit to finding that one even a bit too esoteric for me.

[Penguin]

He would probably rename the White House the Trump House.
Airforce One would become Airforce Trump, New York would become New Trump; it would all become really confusing :rotfl2:

:haha:
at least we would still be able to play card games and certain brass instruments...

[MaddogK]

I suggest you read the law involving citizenship requirements before you tell people what's what. One parent is sufficient if that parent lived in the United States for the required period of time.
http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_5199.html

Wrong link ?
"Acquisition of U.S. Citizenship by a Child Born Abroad"

:down:
Fail Steve.

[Armistead]

I think Obama was just waiting so Trump would look like a bigger idiot than he is. I doubt Trump or Palin would run, but wouldn't that be a ticket for the ages, Obama wouldn't even have to campaign.

[August]

:haha:
at least we would still be able to play card games and certain brass instruments...

"My President Trumps your President!" :D

[TLAM Strike]

"My President Trumps your President!" :D But a Full House and Senete will do nothing but Strait Flush your tax dollars down the drain. ;)

[Sailor Steve]

Wrong link ?
"Acquisition of U.S. Citizenship by a Child Born Abroad"

:down:
Fail Steve.
You said flatly that to be "natural born" requires two citizen parents. That link clearly shows that only one of them has to be a citizen. How exactly does you being wrong equal me failing?

[Growler]

Y'know I've always believed that Obama was born in the US like he and the State of Hawaii have said he was, and I still do, but I have to wonder why he has at this late date finally decided to release the original?

It seems to me that this just shows a lack of good judgment on his part.

He could have put this whole thing to bed years ago, long before it became entrenched. That would have been the smartest thing to do. But now having allowed so much time to pass it serves no purpose except to make people doubt it's authenticity.

Imagine if the Bush administration had released film footage it had been sitting on for three years which showed without a doubt that it was Flight 77, and not a missile, that plowed into the Pentagon on 9-11. Think any of those inside job conspiracy theorists would believe it? Think it's possible that a few on the fencers might become suspicious at the tardiness of it's release?

I do NOT doubt that Obama is qualified to be President but I now have a little less confidence in his ability to be a good President.

I can't speak for the White House, but my thought was this:

If a claim, in the minds of the White House, is so far out in left field that the guys making the claim are in a whole different ballpark, what do you have to gain by engaging them in the game?

In other words, why bother even lending the illusion of a token of credibility to an absurd claim by denying it? I'm not sure that rationale wasn't already in play; the whole, "We don't negotiate with terrorists," angle.

Either that, or they just didn't think it really was that important enough to enough people to warrant action; I'm not sure that it was this time, either, but with the Donald's hair behind this one, people were going to notice.

[MaddogK]

You said flatly that to be "natural born" requires two citizen parents. That link clearly shows that only one of them has to be a citizen. How exactly does you being wrong equal me failing?

Are you saying Barry was born abroad ?
:hmmm:

[nikimcbee]

I'm willing to risk it all on Trump, just for the part on the swearing in day, to have him sit in the chair, point at BHO and say:"You're fired!"

:haha:

[razark]

Are you saying Barry was born abroad ?
:hmmm:
So if one is born abroad, one must only have one US citizen parent, but if one is born in the US, both parents must be citizens?

Huh?

[MaddogK]

So if one is born abroad, one must only have one US citizen parent, but if one is born in the US, both parents must be citizens?

Huh?

The Constitution requires that a candidate for President of the United States be a "natural-born citizen". According to the US Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual: "the fact that someone is a natural born citizen (citizen at birth) pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes."[29]

The majority opinion by Justice Horace Gray in United States v. Wong Kim Ark observed that:

The constitution nowhere defines the meaning of these words ["citizen" and "natural born citizen"], either by way of inclusion or of exclusion, except in so far as this is done by the affirmative declaration that 'all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.'[4]



The original United States Naturalization Law of March 26, 1790 (1 Stat. 103) provided the first rules to be followed by the United States in the granting of national citizenship. This law limited naturalization to immigrants who were "free white persons" of "good moral character". It thus left out indentured servants, slaves, free blacks, and later Asians. While women were included in the act, the right of citizenship did "not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States...." Citizenship was inherited exclusively through the father. This was the only statute that ever purported to grant the status of natural born citizen.

John Bingham stated in the House of Representatives in 1862:

Who are natural-born citizens but those born in the Republic? […] [P]ersons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.[13]
notice the plural statement 'parents' ?
He reiterated his statement in 1866:

Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.[14]


This is the question the courts haven't answered. They've refused to hear the case 8 times so far. But as to SS post- I still havent seen the revelance of the rules regarding children born abroad to this discussion. please explain.

[August]

This is the question the courts haven't answered. They've refused to hear the case 8 times so far. But as to SS post- I still havent seen the revelance of the rules regarding children born abroad to this discussion. please explain.

He's not claiming that Obama was born abroad.

[MaddogK]

He's not claiming that Obama was born abroad.
So why'd he post the laws granting citizenship to children born abroad ?
And where in those posted laws does it say anything about 'natural born' citizenship ?

[razark]

So why'd he post the laws granting citizenship to children born abroad ?
Someone posted about needing two parents for "natural born citizenship".
Natural born by definition means born of 2 citizen parents.
The law mentioned shows only one is needed (for one born outside the US). If only one is needed for one born outside the US, I think we can dispense with needing two for someone born in the US.

And where in those posted laws does it say anything about 'natural born' citizenship ?
That phrase has not been defined in US law.

[August]

Razark answers it nicely.

[MaddogK]

Someone posted about needing two parents for "natural born citizenship".
yup- me

The law mentioned shows only one is needed (for one born outside the US). If only one is needed for one born outside the US, I think we can dispense with needing two for someone born in the US.
assumption that it applies here, BUT consider citizenship is granted to a child born here with ZERO citizen parents.(illegal aliens)

That phrase has not been defined in US law.
WILL have to be addressed per above

'natural born' has a specific meaning with regards to the constitution.

[razark]

'natural born' has a specific meaning with regards to the constitution.
Please state that meaning, and the source.

[MaddogK]

Please state that meaning, and the source.

At this time (I'm at work) I can only add to my previous examples:
The Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787
by James Madison

(5) 'Sect. 2. No person except a natural born citizen or a Citizen of the U. S. at the time of the adoption of this Constitution shall be eligible to the office of President; nor shall any person be elected to that office, who shall be under the age of thirty five years, and who has not been in the whole, at least fourteen years a resident within the U. S.'http://www.constitution.org/dfc/dfc_0904.htm



Vattel: The law of Nations, book 1

§ 212. Citizens and natives.

The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
http://www.constitution.org/vattel/vattel_01.htm

http://www.constitution.org/ussc/98-0097c.htm
Also, read the last paragraph in a dissent by Justice Thomas.

I'll pull out my Franklin and congressional congress quotes when I get home, but as SCOTUS hasn't directly addressed the 'natural born citizenship' requirement it's difficult to quote any caselaw. I'm feeling a bit like a baited rabbit who peeks out from behind a rock, while a dozen guns take aim.

[TorpX]

I don't think its veiled or coded at all. You are 100% right, if he wasn't highly pigmented we would not be having this discussion.

This is all an excuse to get the Team R drones to have something to rally on and not pay attention to the screwed up mess that both parties have created.

This is crap.

It is in no way illigitimate to expect Obama to answer questions about his background and citizenship, especially in regards to a Constitutional requirement. He could have done this in 15 minutes, 2 years ago, but chose to dance around the issue instead. Furthermore, few seem to grasp the reason so many question his citizenship, is the way he talks and behaves. He says he is a Christian, but seems to know less about Christian hollidays and customs than about Muslim hollidays and customs. The only churches he ever attends are those like the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, where anti-American diatribes are frequent. He travels to muslim countries and bows before their leaders. He shows little loyalty to, or concern for the United States. He is very secretive about his background and past associations. His thinking seems to be entirely the product of radical leftist, anti-american education. He has nearly spent the nation into oblivion. So yes, some people are starting to question his fitness for office. U.S. citizens have a right to expect that their President is honest, trustworthy and can faithfully execute the duties of office. This is hardly racism.

Do you think Obama is above question? Is he special?
Do you think that opponents are being mean and unfair?
When Ronald Reagan defeated Jimmy Carter in the 1980 election, the Democrats were very unhappy. Very, very unhappy. Democrats never loose an election, it seems. They decided that they must have lost because of Reagan and Bush conspiring with Iran to hold American hostages until after the election, so Carter would lose. The centerpiece of the conspiricy was that G. Bush had to fly to Paris in an SR-71 and back so nobody would know he left. This "theory", was considered credible by Democrats. I don't mean democrat wing-nuts and nobodies sitting at home by their computers. I mean Democrats in Congress. They actually conducted a formal investigation.


I also seem to remember, just days ago, where some of the lefties were making fun of Sarah Palin. Sarah Palin is a religious fanatic. Sarah Palin handles snakes. Sarah Palin is an idiot. Etc. Etc.
This line of criticism degenerated into pornographic areas. The moderators felt it necessary to cut the posts.

One can trash Sarah Palin all day long, but don't anyone DARE question King Obama.

[mookiemookie]

words
SUBMAN1/SteamWake/Bubblehead, is that you? Your rambling paint-by-numbers political diatribe sure sounds like it.

[razark]

At this time (I'm at work) I can only add to my previous examples:

Quotes and so forth are fine, but our nation is not run on quotes. It is run on laws.

I'll pull out my Franklin and congressional congress quotes when I get home, but as SCOTUS hasn't directly addressed the 'natural born citizenship' requirement it's difficult to quote any caselaw. I'm feeling a bit like a baited rabbit who peeks out from behind a rock, while a dozen guns take aim.
Until someone addresses the question with legislation or court decisions, the term will remain undefined. Until then, it's simply a lot of different people's opinions.

[gimpy117]

SUBMAN1/SteamWake/Bubblehead, is that you? Your rambling paint-by-numbers political diatribe sure sounds like it.

hopefully we don't have another one to deal with!!

[AVGWarhawk]

This is the first I have heard of the birth certificate debacle. :hmmm:






:O:

[Onkel Neal]

One thing is for sure, the media is really trying to take Trump apart. Every title I see about him tries desperately to slant him as a fringe candidate. Hey, maybe he has a real chance! :O: Now you may say, he is a fringe candidate. Yeah, but so was Obama, and he got elected.

Honestly, i think the whole birth issue, is veiled or coded racism. If he was a white guy, nobody would question his citizenship.

He's just as much white as he is black, my friend. It's old style racist to call someone black just because part of their ancestry is black.

[AVGWarhawk]

Trump has a snowballs chance in the desert. He will only prove to be a distraction.

[Sailor Steve]

Are you saying Barry was born abroad ?
:hmmm:
I said nothing of the kind. You said to be a natural born citizen takes two parents who are citizens. I showed you the law that proves you wrong. Now you're trying to change the subject.

[Sailor Steve]

At this time (I'm at work) I can only add to my previous examples:
The Debates in the Federal Convention of 1787
by James Madison
And by that Constitutional standard Obama fits the bill. It should be obvious that in that context 'Natural Born' meant born in this country.

The Vattel reference is interesting, but Vattel was writing an opinion based on common law. Unless you think something written by a Frenchman which is not even law in France should be binding in the United States. It is important to our thinking and certainly a basis for legal opinion, but it is not the law we live by.

I'll pull out my Franklin and congressional congress quotes when I get home, but as SCOTUS hasn't directly addressed the 'natural born citizenship' requirement it's difficult to quote any caselaw. I'm feeling a bit like a baited rabbit who peeks out from behind a rock, while a dozen guns take aim.
The very fact that you use the acronym favored by one side of the political spectrum shows your bias. And nobody's targetting you. You chose to take a stance different than some others, and they choose to disagree. The fact that you on one occasion use a dismissive tone to seemingly show superiority doesn't help. No one likes to be talked down to.

[Armistead]

He's just as much white as he is black, my friend. It's old style racist to call someone black just because part of their ancestry is black.

Really, history shows otherwise, anyone that was half black and white were always considered black and until recent years most were treated worse. In most cultures, including America, a half breed of any race was considered worse.

[Onkel Neal]

Yep, and like I pointed out, that was old style racism.

[MaddogK]

Quotes and so forth are fine, but our nation is not run on quotes. It is run on laws.


Until someone addresses the question with legislation or court decisions, the term will remain undefined. Until then, it's simply a lot of different people's opinions.

You are correct, as men continue to erode the spirit of the law and hide behind the letter of the law we will increasingly rely on the Supreme court to interpret the letter of the law that applies to us.

I do however believe that when the question is finally addressed by SCOTUS they will reaffirm the belief of the framer of the 14th amendment (congressman John Bingham) that a natural born citizen is that which is born of 2 citizen parents, as shown from the minutes of House of Representatives, 39th Congress, 1st Session, page 1291, col. 2, paragraph 2.
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=071/llcg071.db&recNum=332

[Ducimus]

Yep, and like I pointed out, that was old style racism.

So there's a new style racism? Honestly, you'll have to explain that one to me. Racism is racism as far as i know, there's only so many definitions of it in the English dictionary. So what's the difference between the new and the old?

[MaddogK]

I said nothing of the kind. You said to be a natural born citizen takes two parents who are citizens. I showed you the law that proves you wrong. Now you're trying to change the subject.

Ok SS, since you really want to claim your post of the rules regarding "Acquisition of U.S. citizenship by a child born abroad" proves me wrong, I'll go thru it paragraph by paragraph and you can tell me where the document applies to our conversation, ok ?

paragraph 1: Birth Abroad to Two U.S. Citizen Parents in Wedlock

Barry has 1 NON U.S. citizen parent- paragraph does NOT apply.

Paragraph 2:Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock

This one is interesting as it states "A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) of the INA provided the U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth."
...So here it further states: "For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen, is required for physical presence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.)" According to the released birth certificate (box #15) the age of the mother is 18. Basic math- 14 + 5 = 19. Seems Barry's mother is a year short of the requirement in your posted document to pass on citizenship to her child.

Paragraph 3:Birth Abroad Out-of-Wedlock to a U.S. Citizen Father – “New” Section 309(a)

This entire section pertains to a child born abroad to a citizen FATHER. Does NOT apply to our discussion as Barry's father is a kenyan citizen.

Paragraph 4:Birth Abroad Out-of-Wedlock to a U.S. Citizen Mother:

Doesn't apply as Barry's mother was married at the time of his birth.

So, again I ask you how does this document indicate that "I showed you the law that proves you wrong."

[razark]

So, again I ask you how does this document indicate that "I showed you the law that proves you wrong."
The part that states only one parent must be a US citizen.

"A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth... [provided certain conditions apply that aren't relevant to the discussion]."

That clearly states that two parents are not required to confer citizenship.

[Ducimus]

The part that states only one parent must be a US citizen.

"A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth... [provided certain conditions apply that aren't relevant to the discussion]."

That clearly states that two parents are not required to confer citizenship.

Well, you are correct, but missed the second part of the sentence where a caveat resides.

A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) of the INA provided the U.S. citizen parent was physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child's birth.

The outlying possesions is the catch all. That can be anything from a territory, to an Military base. So in the end, it's pretty open ended. Makes me glad i didn't contribute to the local orphanage population when stationed overseas. lol. err.... at least i think i didn't. :shifty:

Anywho, from the sounds of that, if obama's mother is an Alien, all that is required is for his birth to occur in any "outlying possession", with the US father present. But even then that's probably more strict then what is really required, otherwise we wouldn't have anchor babies would we?

[razark]

Well, you are correct, but missed the second part of the sentence where a caveat resides.
Not really. The caveat doesn't apply, and the law was only posted as an example to show a point.

The point under contention is that MaddogK claimed that TWO citizen parents were needed for citizenship. The law posted shows that only one would be needed IF the child was born overseas. If only one citizen parent is needed overseas, than only one citizen parent would be needed in the US (or, according to the 14th amendment, zero citizens are needed).

[Ducimus]

Not really. The caveat doesn't apply, and the law was only posted as an example to show a point.

The point under contention is that MaddogK claimed that TWO citizen parents were needed for citizenship. The law posted shows that only one would be needed IF the child was born overseas.

Yeah, thats true. Only one parent is needed. I thought this was common knowledge?

[MaddogK]

The part that states only one parent must be a US citizen.

"A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth... [provided certain conditions apply that aren't relevant to the discussion]."

That clearly states that two parents are not required to confer citizenship.


LOL, you can't cherry pick like that ! If you claim the paragraph revelant than the conditions are also relevant. Obama mama clearly didn't comply with the requirement.

[razark]

LOL, you can't cherry pick like that ! If you claim the paragraph revelant than the conditions are also relevant. Obama mama clearly didn't comply with the requirement.
The paragraph/conditional would only apply IF Obama was born outside the US.

The point is: Here is a case that shows only ONE parent needs to be a US citizen, as opposed to the TWO you stated.

It's a counter example of US law that points out the fact that...

You know what? If you haven't gotten it by now, it's pointless.
:damn:

[mookiemookie]

LOL, you can't cherry pick like that ! If you claim the paragraph revelant than the conditions are also relevant. Obama mama clearly didn't comply with the requirement.

If it were that simple and clear cut, do you think there would be a controversy at all?

As everyone else has said, it only takes one parent to be a citzen.

[Ducimus]

Ok, soooo apparently, common knowledge..... isn't. :O:

[Platapus]

If it were that simple and clear cut, do you think there would be a controversy at all?



If the "controversy" is politically motivated, then yes, despite it being clear, there would still be a "controversy"

[MaddogK]

Not really. The caveat doesn't apply, and the law was only posted as an example to show a point.

The point under contention is that MaddogK claimed that TWO citizen parents were needed for citizenship. The law posted shows that only one would be needed IF the child was born overseas. If only one citizen parent is needed overseas, than only one citizen parent would be needed in the US (or, according to the 14th amendment, zero citizens are needed).

NO ! Go back and re-read post #36. I argue
Natural born by definition means born of 2 citizen parents.You and I agree that the term is still undefined by the courts.
:timeout:
You now change MY wording to indicate a different meaning and claim I said it.

WRONG !

<expletive deleted>

[vienna]

In today's Los Angeles Times:


http://blogs.sites.post-gazette.com/images/stories/Rob_Rogers/042811_One_Of_Us.jpg

[Ducimus]

http://www.cagle.com/news/ObamaBirthCertificate/main.asp

[August]

http://www.cagle.com/news/ObamaBirthCertificate/images/lester.jpg

[Sailor Steve]

Ok SS, since you really want to claim your post of the rules regarding "Acquisition of U.S. citizenship by a child born abroad" proves me wrong, I'll go thru it paragraph by paragraph and you can tell me where the document applies to our conversation, ok ?
Okay. First I have to clear up what may be a misunderstanding on my part. When you said "By some of your definitions of 'citizen' they'll be eligible because they were born on our side of some line on a map. Natural born by definition means born of 2 citizen parents.", to what exactly were you referring? Obama? Are you of the opinion that he shouldn't have US citizenship because only one of his parents was born here? I agree that granting citizenship to a baby whose parents just happen to be visiting here might be going to far. But if two people are granted citizenship and their baby is born here, is he not "natural born"?

Perhaps I misunderstood you, so I'll ask for a clarification: Exactly what point were you trying to make in the first place.

[edit] Okay, now I'm more confused. I just read your reply to Razark: You and I agree that the term is still undefined by the courts.
But you say that immediately after quoting yourself as giving a definition. So, is your definition not an actual definition?

[TorpX]

SUBMAN1/SteamWake/Bubblehead, is that you? Your rambling paint-by-numbers political diatribe sure sounds like it.

Did you read my post?

Can you read?

[mookiemookie]

Can you read?
[/INDENT]

Where's the middle finger smiley?

[mookiemookie]

http://www.cagle.com/news/ObamaBirthCertificate/images/lester.jpg

I don't get it. Obama, accompanied by a confused looking, short red-headed guy (Danny Bonaduce?) is caught stealing Lady Liberty and Uncle Sam's XBox and TV and offers them a birth certificate? Why is Obama stealing XBoxes? Who's the redheaded guy and why is he carrying Obama's birth certificate?

That's....very odd.

[Tribesman]

You now change MY wording to indicate a different meaning and claim I said it.

WRONG !

<expletive deleted>

So the root of this is.
By some of your definitions of 'citizen' they'll be eligible because they were born on our side of some line on a map. Natural born by definition means born of 2 citizen parents.
A citizen due to being born on your side of a line on a map....that fits.
2 parents for natural born....thats bollox.
Then it diverges into being born on the other side of your line which is irrelevant unless you are a birther who believes it was kenya indonesia or krypton in which case it is really irrelevant.
then it comes to the conditions needed for the parents if the irrevant stuff happened top be real which it isn't so that is irrelevant unless you are a birther who thinks your president cmes from somewhere else.
So the initial claim by Maddog was indeed bollox and all the attempts since then are really irrelvant to the status of a person being born on your side of the line.
Hey do the math 14+5=19 or in reality look at the numbers...what was the date:rotfl2:

[Tribesman]

Did you read my post?

Can you read?

He can and I thought the very same after reading your post.
It was quite funny when you claimed the other topic degenerated into sexual territory when the Palin fans were the ones drooling for their darling right from the opening post.

[August]

I don't get it. Obama, accompanied by a confused looking, short red-headed guy (Danny Bonaduce?) is caught stealing Lady Liberty and Uncle Sam's XBox and TV and offers them a birth certificate? Why is Obama stealing XBoxes? Who's the redheaded guy and why is he carrying Obama's birth certificate?

That's....very odd.

Really? It seems to me that the metaphor of robbing and trashing the country while acting like a tardily produced document is going to make all that ok is pretty clear.

Oh and as for the redhead that is obviously White House Spokesman Jay Carney.

[mookiemookie]

Really? It seems to me that the metaphor of robbing and trashing the country while acting like a tardily produced document is going to make all that ok is pretty clear. Yeah but the birthers are the ones who were screaming for the document. It's not like he just out of the blue said "oh here's my birth certificate, now everyone opposed to my economic policies go out and vote for me!" I know I'm being a bit pedantic and editorial cartoons are usually very forced and stupid 99% of the time, but this one just struck me as very "out there." Ah well. Putting too much thought into this. :O:

Oh and as for the redhead that is obviously White House Spokesman Jay Carney. Oh...I didn't even know who that was until I googled him. I don't watch any of his press conferences or speeches. It's all hot air.

[vienna]

Really? It seems to me that the metaphor of robbing and trashing the country while acting like a tardily produced document is going to make all that ok is pretty clear.


It also can be read as Obama trashing the country in front of their eyes while they waste time with the triviality of the birth certificate. Sort of fiddling with the birther issue while USA burns. If only a portion of the effort expended on the birther nonsense were spent on trying to solve real problems, we might actually achieve some progress. This whole situation reminds me of the Clinton impeachment fiasco; a lot of wasted effort that came back to bite the Far Right big time.

As for Trump, Shakespeare said it best:

"...a poor player
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage
And then is heard no more: it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing."

Go ahead birthers, Far Righters, and the lot of you; go ahead until the public tires of you and you lose the Congress and, eventually, the White House again. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. And know that you will drag down the Republican Party with you. The Party is in danger of becoming like the Democrats in the 70's and 80's: embracing the unelectable issues of the extreme fringe of the party and embracing candidates either not qualified or so absurd the voting public will reject them in a sort of lesser of two evils situation. And pray the Tea Party or some other H. Ross Perot-like group doesn't field a candidate of their own like Trump or Palin and siphon off votes from the Republican candidate as happened in 1992.

[Biggles]

Only in America.

Quite honestly, I don't think I can imagine such a stupid "issue" arise in any other part of the world. No disrespect to America or its citizens, but I think John Cleese said it best: "It's a bizarre mixture of the best and the worst."

And Trump? "I am very proud of myself". I'm speechless. Thank God for smileys :haha::haha::haha::har:

[August]

Go ahead birthers, Far Righters, and the lot of you; go ahead until the public tires of you and you lose the Congress and, eventually, the White House again. Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. And know that you will drag down the Republican Party with you.

I'm sure there's a bunch of Democrats hoping for that very outcome but it ain't gonna happen.

[Biggles]

I'm sure there's a bunch of Democrats hoping for that very outcome but it ain't gonna happen.

Probably not, but I sure as hell can't see how these sorts of bickering can help the republican party in any way.

[Growler]

...I think John Cleese said it best: "It's a bizarre mixture of the best and the worst."


He's not wrong, and frankly, it's no disrespect. One of the great strengths of this country is that no two people march exactly to the same drumbeat, and it is, indeed, those who dance the strangest that get noticed first. Sometimes the strange ones are really just strange. Senator Joe McCarthy strangely saw Communists hiding everywhere, and ran right on over the Constitution in search of them. Other times, it's strange that leads to change. Rosa Parks acted strangely for a black woman in her time - and began a process that changed how blacks would be treated in America.

For every birther or conspiracy theorist in this land, there are dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of people who line up to give blood, give money, give time, and in many cases, give their lives - throughout its history. For every criminal we heard about in New Orleans following Katrina, there are dozens or more untold stories of people coming together to help each other. The same is true in the stories emerging this week from the tornado-blasted South.

Are we a perfect nation? By no means; far from it. But there are millions of us in this country who remain committed to keeping it a pretty nice place to be for everyone. Just because we may differ on what that means doesn't diminish that we do have that in common.

[August]

Probably not, but I sure as hell can't see how these sorts of bickering can help the republican party in any way.

What bickering? The Democrats like to make like the Birthers have a lot more influence on the GoP than they really do. It's a rather common political tactic. Define your opponent by the most radical fringe that you can find and hope folks will think it's their mainstream.

[Bakkels]

He's not wrong, and frankly, it's no disrespect. One of the great strengths of this country is that no two people march exactly to the same drumbeat, and it is, indeed, those who dance the strangest that get noticed first. Sometimes the strange ones are really just strange. Senator Joe McCarthy strangely saw Communists hiding everywhere, and ran right on over the Constitution in search of them. Other times, it's strange that leads to change. Rosa Parks acted strangely for a black woman in her time - and began a process that changed how blacks would be treated in America.

For every birther or conspiracy theorist in this land, there are dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of people who line up to give blood, give money, give time, and in many cases, give their lives - throughout its history. For every criminal we heard about in New Orleans following Katrina, there are dozens or more untold stories of people coming together to help each other. The same is true in the stories emerging this week from the tornado-blasted South.

Are we a perfect nation? By no means; far from it. But there are millions of us in this country who remain committed to keeping it a pretty nice place to be for everyone. Just because we may differ on what that means doesn't diminish that we do have that in common.

Well spoken. As a non American, I see the term 'only in America' being used more and more. This is because as you said, 'those who dance the strangest that get noticed first.'; and in a country with so many inhabitants, there are of course a hell of a lot of people that 'dance strange' that we get to hear about. But that's just numbers. Actually American people as a whole are pretty much the same as us Europeans, some slight cultural differences aside.

The main problem I see, is a tendency to polarization. Both here in Europe as well as in the US. People tend to think they are obliged to describe and express themselves as left or right. And in every discussion, it seems to me like nobody even listens to the arguments of the other.
If I see some reactions/posts in political topics, it seems like the only thing people are thinking of when reading it, is 'How can I come up with some argument against what he said', not even considering the possibility that the person you are arguing with might even have a point. Having a discussion only seems to be about winning or losing. (And yes, I'm sorry to say this completely applies to this forum when it comes to politics)
I guess that's the whole thing I'm trying to say; just consider that 'the other' side may have a point. Maybe they don't, but it sure helps to open up and ponder the possibility that they might. And that they might even have the best intentions, as was Growlers point if I understood him correctly.

/RANT MODE OFF

[Sailor Steve]

^ ^ ^

Also well said. The problem is that the only people who will actually follow that advice are the ones already doing so. The rest will nod their heads and then blame the other side for it, as always.

[Bakkels]

^ ^ ^

Also well said. The problem is that the only people who will actually follow that advice are the ones already doing so. The rest will nod their heads and then blame the other side for it, as always.

I understand what you're saying Steve, but there's still hope! Or at least, that's what I believe.
I can even summarize my previous post in one word: self-criticism. A lost art. As a matter of fact, here's the only commandment I live by: doubt yourself.

[Betonov]

For every birther or conspiracy theorist in this land, there are dozens, hundreds, or even thousands of people who line up to give blood, give money, give time, and in many cases, give their lives - throughout its history. For every criminal we heard about in New Orleans following Katrina, there are dozens or more untold stories of people coming together to help each other. The same is true in the stories emerging this week from the tornado-blasted South.

I blame the media

[Fish]

The site is Dutch , but click on de vid on the right.

http://nos.nl/artikel/236972-president-obama-bespot-donald-trump.html

President Obama answers Trump.

[DarkFish]

The site is Dutch , but click on de vid on the right.

http://nos.nl/artikel/236972-president-obama-bespot-donald-trump.html

President Obama answers Trump.awesome:har:

[Fish In The Water]

I blame the media

If it bleeds it leads...

It's all about ratings, advertising revenue and selling newspapers. If they could make money telling all the 'untold' stories of countless people volunteering, giving blood and being good citizens they'd be doing it.

[MaddogK]

So the root of this is.

A citizen due to being born on your side of a line on a map....that fits.
:)

2 parents for natural born....thats bollox.http://federalistblog.us/2008/11/natural-born_citizen_defined.html

Then it diverges into being born on the other side of your line which is irrelevant unless you are a birther who believes it was kenya indonesia or krypton in which case it is really irrelevant.
then it comes to the conditions needed for the parents if the irrevant stuff happened top be real which it isn't so that is irrelevant unless you are a birther who thinks your president cmes from somewhere else.
So the initial claim by Maddog was indeed bollox and all the attempts since then are really irrelvant to the status of a person being born on your side of the line.:()1:
Hey do the math 14+5=19 or in reality look at the numbers...what was the date:rotfl2:Stanley Ann Dunham (November 29, 1942 – November 7, 1995)
Barack Obama was born on August 4, 1961
:yep:

[DarkFish]

http://federalistblog.us/2008/11/natural-born_citizen_defined.html"might [...] imply"
"has always been obscure due to the lack of any single authoritative source"
"might have meant"
"Could"
"might"

All your source confirms is that it's something pretty much undefined, which makes all your claims bollox.

[Tribesman]

All your source confirms is that it's something pretty much undefined, which makes all your claims bollox.
You can't call a birthers claims bollox.
It doesn't matter that his "evidence" either contradicts his claims or refutes them, it is still convincing "evidence".
It is funny that he still is going in circles demolishing his own claims

Stanley Ann Dunham (November 29, 1942 – November 7, 1995)
Barack Obama was born on August 4, 1961

And what does that second date tell you?

[MaddogK]

You can't call a birthers claims bollox.
It doesn't matter that his "evidence" either contradicts his claims or refutes them, it is still convincing "evidence".
It is funny that he still is going in circles demolishing his own claims

It might help if you go back and read everything I submitted. I stated that I believe that a 'natural born citizen' is that which is born of 2 citizen parents, as per the opinion of congressman Bingham, and most likely the founders of the constitution (that most likely was referred to while drafting the constitution of the U.S.) The latest submission was to illustrate why it's believed to be important, as british common law (which also was referred to during the draft of the constitution) says that citizenship is traditionally transferred from the father (along with the name), but in the U.S. it was believed paramount that the elected leader be free of any foreign influence that may come from birthright citizenship to another country (NOT including the pre-constitution 'grandfathered' citizenship). As Obama has a Kenyan father (british citizenship) and a citizen mother I do NOT believe he fulfills the intent of the founding fathers idea of 'natural born' citizenship. This also the heart of the lawsuit filed for a supreme court decision. I have concluded during the conversation with another poster (many posts prior) in this thread that indeed, the term 'natural born' is ambiguous and needs to be defined at the highest judiciary level.

I am NOT convinced Obama has NO OTHER allegiances than to the U.S as he has a foreign parent, he's spent millions of his own money to keep his birth records (and school records) sealed, he attended a muslim school in Indonesia (open to Indonesian ONLY citizens), and IIRC a trip to Pakistan (or Afghanistan) when he was 19 when travel wasn't allowed for U.S. citizens (which could indicate a forged passport, or passport showing citizenship other than American).

For the record- I never had any doubt he was not born in Hawaii.

And what does that second date tell you?That Mom was 3 months shy of her 19th birthday.

[Tribesman]

It might help if you go back and read everything I submitted.
I have and it is contradictory.

I am NOT convinced Obama has NO OTHER allegiances than to the U.S as he has a foreign parent, he's spent millions of his own money to keep his birth records (and school records) sealed, he attended a muslim school in Indonesia (open to Indonesian ONLY citizens), and IIRC a trip to Pakistan (or Afghanistan) when he was 19 when travel wasn't allowed for U.S. citizens (which could indicate a forged passport, or passport showing citizenship other than American).


Common birther conspiracies...... Complete nonsense which has long been trashed. for example a trip to pakistan. it wasn't a ban on US citizens or any such thing at all, it was just the introduction of 30 day tourist visas unless they applied for an extension from the Pakistani govt:88)

That Mom was 3 months shy of her 19th birthday.
And what has that to do with the price of cheese?
Oh I get it you are still going on about something that is irrelevant and that you know is irrelevant and understand was always irrelevant because of the date which is all you needed to look at and the only maths you had to figure.

You can see a pattern here on your "beliefs". You work on conditions that don't exist, definitions that are fluid guesswork which morph each time you want to try and apply them, events that never happened and myths that were long since shown to be false.

For the record- I never had any doubt he was not born in Hawaii.

Is that a double or triple negative?

[MaddogK]

I have and it is contradictory.


Common birther conspiracies...... Complete nonsense which has long been trashed. for example a trip to pakistan. it wasn't a ban on US citizens or any such thing at all, it was just the introduction of 30 day tourist visas unless they applied for an extension from the Pakistani govt:88)
Agreed, but still adds to the 'mystery' of our :D leader

And what has that to do with the price of cheese?
Oh I get it you are still going on about something that is irrelevant and that you know is irrelevant and understand was always irrelevant because of the date which is all you needed to look at and the only maths you had to figure.
correct- absolutely irrelevant, but as a couple posters kept throwing it up as a legit example of why he is unquestionably a citizen 'because this document grants citizenship to single citizen parent giving birth abroad', I thought I counter with 'even if that rubbish applies to a child born domestically mom STILL wouldn't pass citizenship to her child'.
Utterly pointless example with an equally pointless reply.

You can see a pattern here on your "beliefs". You work on conditions that don't exist, definitions that are fluid guesswork which morph each time you want to try and apply them, events that never happened and myths that were long since shown to be false.


Is that a double or triple negative?
double (intentional)
:salute:

[Tribesman]

Agreed, but still adds to the 'mystery' of our :D leader

The only mystery is why someone would actually post that birther nonsense you posted.

[Growler]

If it bleeds it leads...

It's all about ratings, advertising revenue and selling newspapers. If they could make money telling all the 'untold' stories of countless people volunteering, giving blood and being good citizens they'd be doing it.

Ain't that the truth.

And it's shortsighted to exclusively blame the media: without the consumers (and the advertisers), the media product ceases to exist. So it's not exclusive;y the media's fault - we the consumers bear responsibility here, too.

[Onkel Neal]

Well, the conspiracies lives on! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s9StxsFllY)

[mookiemookie]

Well, the conspiracies lives on! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s9StxsFllY)

It just goes to show that proof and evidence is wasted on the true believers. Disconfirmation bias and cognitive dissonance at its finest.

[AVGWarhawk]

It just goes to show that proof and evidence is wasted on the true believers


Is it safe to say the same about the pictures of OBL?

[Growler]

Well, the conspiracies lives on! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s9StxsFllY)


Yup! Obama's smart enough to be part of a great conspiracy to defraud the American people and take over the country, but with all that conspiratorial power, can't manage to fake his birth certificate well enough to fool and barely post-pubescent kid with Illustrator.

[razark]

Well, the conspiracies lives on! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s9StxsFllY)
Did anyone really expect different?

[MH]

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread694949/pg1

:lurk:

If president of US cant forge his Birth certificate then its a proof that Americans are idiots.
Or is it that Obama is playing with you brains.
I mean if all was perfect...then you now....
Damn we live in a matrix.

[Ducimus]

Well, the conspiracies lives on! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7s9StxsFllY)

Narrator sounds young. Watched 30 seconds of it, and i've already gotten the impression this guy is some young college kid. Probably one of those Yellow Elephant types.

[joegrundman]

OK, i watched three of this guys videos.

the first is an analysis of the layers that went into making the pdf, as shown using Adobe Illustrator.

the second is a defense of his claim that scanning alone does not produce these layers

the third is a critique of the short form birth certificate released much earlier.

The analysis of the short form birth certificate focuses on its lack of creases, mint condition and typing anomalies comparing the apparent age of the certificate with the form of wording used then and now. All criticism of the short form certificate is invalid given that it was publicly claimed by the WH to be a recent official copy provided by State of Hawaii. It is therefore not surprising it is in mint condition, uses contemporary wording, and is uncreased.

The first two however provide compelling evidence that the pdf of the long form certificate is not exactly the same document as the official birth certificate.

The quality of the work gone into the changes is careless.

However the analysis is unable to show what was under the parts that were changed.

That is, it does not show if it was clearly an invented document, a substantially altered document, or simply an attempt to enhance the original to improve legibility without substantive changes.

[Onkel Neal]

It just goes to show that proof and evidence is wasted on the true believers. Disconfirmation bias and cognitive dissonance at its finest.

Hey, seriously, this whole thing is messed up. I know the birthers are sort of whacky, but the people who accept Obama on face value are exhibiting a certain level of faith and disbelief, just from the opposite direction. Come on, this is the Transparency President, what a load. Why so much drama over NOT producing a legit certificate?

A riding buddy of mine posted
I've confirmed this for myself. I downloaded the long-form "birth certificate" from the White House website, opened it with Adobe Illustrator CS2, and the file appears in clearly altered layers, just as in the video.

Here's the PDF as supplied from the White House. Try it with Illustrator for yourself:
http://www.timkreitz.com/clientproof...-long-form.pdf (http://www.timkreitz.com/clientproofs/birth-certificate-long-form.pdf)

After opening it with CS2, I saved it as a version 10 EPS:
http://www.timkreitz.com/clientproof...aBirthCert.eps (http://www.timkreitz.com/clientproofs/FakeObamaBirthCert.eps)

This is either the most inept attempt at forging a document I've ever seen, or it was done with blatant purpose. Either way, we're dealing with an absolute and unarguably altered document. I've seen a lot of OCR and digital anomalies in document scanning over the years, but nothing like what's in the birth certificate PDF.

I'm not necessarily saying info was changed, but elements were definitely altered digitally. The question is why.

Theories? I never was a birther. This makes me start to wonder. In fact, it staggers the imagination.


Followed by
I've worked in digital graphics for going on 20 years, having worked with Illustrator since its inception. Again, my question is why screw with the document digitally at all? Why the template? Why not just scan it correctly.

For example, here's a scan I did of an old motorcycle registration certificate I found inside a motorcycle jacket given to me by my uncle. This document was old and faded, but still scanned just fine, even in low-res, on my QMS:

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y158/TimKreitz/OSB/richreg1980small.jpg

So legible I had to blur things out. Like I said, I'm not a birther yet, but I have questions.

Now, I know you don't want to be proven wrong after a long and vigorous defense, and after heaping ridicule on the "birthers", but.... What if there is something to this? The "certificate" came straight from the White House, this isn't some crazy stuff dug up from nowhere.

I don't have a dog in this fight, I say fait acompli, he's already president. But this has a strong odor of Dan Rather's fake documents/Morton Downey Jr. backwards swastika. You know, a birth certificate is no big deal. Trump is right, why not kill the rumors and produce it? If you don't have anything to hide, why keep hiding? :arrgh!:

[Growler]

If you don't have anything to hide, why keep hiding? :arrgh!:

Conversely, if you don't have anything to hide - why bother lending any "credibility" (illusory or real) to the claims by responding at all?

I can't prove or disprove this one way or the other; in my own experience, I've used scanning software that will absolutely produce the "Layers" results seen here. It's been awhile, and I'm not 100% sure what software processes I used, since I'm not still in that business; I am 100% certain that I have done exactly what this person did in the video, and am also 100% certain that the chain of custody in doing so started when I was handed the paper document, and ended when I finished "disassembling" the final product.

(For the record, I believe the scanner I used was an HP, the platform was a Mac running OS 7.x, the software was Illustrator 4(?) & Acrobat Reader. I cannot recall the scanning software - might have been QuickPage(?) or something like that; it did OCR and image scanning. My memory may not be completely accurate on this, though.)

In my experience, the "deconstruction" of the scanned document is an absolute fabrication of "results" based on the desires of the presenter, and is not consistent with, nor indicative in any way of a fabricated document.

[mookiemookie]

but the people who accept Obama on face value are exhibiting a certain level of faith and disbelief, just from the opposite direction.

No, because there's a mountain of evidence to prove that everything's legit. Birth announcements in the newspaper from 1960 whatever, the entity that issued the original document saying "yes, this is a real and true document, shut up you birthers are crazy"...but that's all discounted because someone who opened up Photoshop didn't like what they saw? That's sketchy "evidence" at best. When you weigh the two against each other, there's really no contest. The birthers are asking someone to believe that there's a fraud on a massive scale, involving the deceased parents of the man who would be president, the hospital he was born in, the state of Hawaii all the way up to and including the entire U.S. government, and the evidence they have for that is the say-so of amateur Photoshop jockeys.

Grasping at shreds of dubious evidence and discounting every piece of evidence to the contrary, no matter what it is or how solid it is, highlights the cognitive bias in certain people and is the main reason why they should be ignored and discounted as loons.

[mookiemookie]

Let me know when you get around to analyzing Cap'n Crunch's naval commission documents. I have the sneaking suspicion he's not a real Cap'n. :har::har::har:

[frau kaleun]

as known and intended by the framers

http://www.leegibbs.co.uk/images/fqjTuKvlFa_Shopped.jpg

[MH]

Maybe Obama wasn't really born.
He is Superman.
What a better place to land out of space than a distant island of hawaii.

[mookiemookie]

The birthers are on to him. They've discovered a picture of Obama in his true form:

http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/obama-alien.jpg

[Sailor Steve]

http://www.leegibbs.co.uk/images/fqjTuKvlFa_Shopped.jpg
http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a325/SailorSteve/Tapestryshopped.jpg

[Penguin]

Wow...
I really feel sorry for the US: having one of the biggest budgets in the world for intelligence and not being able to hire a forger with skills that go beyond the ones of a middle-school kid... :haha:
With one click on "merge all visible layers" none of those conspiracy Illustrator "experts" would have been able to discover this "manipulation"...
And who the ---- would use a vector-based program to create a fake document, especially when you want to forge a typewriter?
Ans not starting with a blank document is also an unforgivable sin!

Working with digital gfx for 20 years can make you an expert on Photoshop, but it doesn't mean that this person has any knowledge about the technology behind it....
My mom drives a car since over 45 years, but she doesn't know ---- how a motor works, still she is a half-decent driver ;)

Here is a video which shows that these "amazing" discoveries are nothing more than bull: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Heci4OQrlYM

[August]

Let me know when you get around to analyzing Cap'n Crunch's naval commission documents. I have the sneaking suspicion he's not a real Cap'n. :har::har::har:

Aww man don't tell me I got the roof of my mouth torn to shreds for a fake! :dead::DL

[frau kaleun]

Aww man don't tell me I got the roof of my mouth torn to shreds for a fake! :dead::DL

I hate to be the bearer of even more bad news, but... those Crunch Berries? Not actual berries. :nope:

[the_tyrant]

I hate to be the bearer of even more bad news, but... those Crunch Berries? Not actual berries. :nope:
awwww come on

we were joking until you pointed out a true and sad fact

[frau kaleun]

They're actually the dead, shriveled testicles of every man who's ever questioned the Cap'n's service record. :yep: :arrgh!:

[August]

They're actually the dead, shriveled testicles of every man who's ever questioned the Cap'n's service record. :yep: :arrgh!:

:o Arrr!

[magic452]

Sure glad I gave up Cap'n Crunch for lent. :know:

Magic

[Ducimus]

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_1_dKaOsOwug/SQmfsIZo-aI/AAAAAAAAAe4/1rqFAtpl5vI/s320/crackpot.gif
The Birther's cup overflowth.

[Onkel Neal]

No, because there's a mountain of evidence to prove that everything's legit. Birth announcements in the newspaper from 1960 whatever, the entity that issued the original document saying "yes, this is a real and true document, shut up you birthers are crazy"...but that's all discounted because someone who opened up Photoshop didn't like what they saw? That's sketchy "evidence" at best. When you weigh the two against each other, there's really no contest. The birthers are asking someone to believe that there's a fraud on a massive scale, involving the deceased parents of the man who would be president, the hospital he was born in, the state of Hawaii all the way up to and including the entire U.S. government, and the evidence they have for that is the say-so of amateur Photoshop jockeys.

Grasping at shreds of dubious evidence and discounting every piece of evidence to the contrary, no matter what it is or how solid it is, highlights the cognitive bias in certain people and is the main reason why they should be ignored and discounted as loons.


I'm not saying he wasn't born wherever he says he was, but I am intruigued by the amount of faith you have in what you're told. You sound very certain. I do know that a birth certificate (as well as many documents stored in various courthouses around the country) are very easy targets for manipulation. I wouldn't think "fraud on a massive scale" would have been necessary 10 years ago for Obama to have his original birth certificate altered (before he was on the national stage). It would only take a small bribe to the right person. I'm not saying that's what happened, but I know it isn't anywhere near impossible. And ridiculing people who don't share your certainty over something you really no nothing about doesn't make your case stronger. :)

[mookiemookie]

I'm not saying he wasn't born wherever he says he was, but I am intruigued by the amount of faith you have in what you're told. You sound very certain.

It boils down to this - which scenario is more likely? Which scenario requires less of a leap of faith to believe? What the birthers say is certainly possible but to believe it, in my mind, would be to discount some pretty heavy evidence to the contrary. One's sense of reason has to kick in at some point. I enjoy making fun of people who suppress that sense in the name of partisan politics.

[August]

What the birthers say is certainly possible but to believe it, in my mind, would be to discount some pretty heavy evidence to the contrary.

Just curious, what heavy evidence to the contrary?

[mookiemookie]

Just curious, what heavy evidence to the contrary?

The certificates themselves, contemporary birth announcements in both of the local papers back in 1961, the testimony of the Hawaiian director of the Dept of Health, the registrar of vital statistics and the Hawaiian governor et al. You can say that there was a huge conspiracy to fake documents, bribe officials, travel back in time to place the birth announcements in the paper...but then you gotta say to yourself, maybe it's easier and more likely to think that the stuff is legit.

[MH]

Obama should realise now another document where underneath layer leaves letters that add to word "muslim" or "communism" and keep smiling.
It doesn't matter what the evidence people simply don't like to touch and associate themselves with issues like that because it makes them look stupid and most importantly unintelligent-PC Factor vs O'Rally Factor.
O'Rally as much as he may have some good points looks like old punk fart that STFU every body that says somthing he dont like.
He looks Da Man though.
GB common this guy would be star in ME.
Even if he has some very sober view of some issues the packaging is bad and other stuff too scary but not impossible...or crazy.

Look at Obama-the more conservatives wave with this crap the more bold and charismatic speeches he gives.
How great and inteligent nation you are and how all will be sunny and well.
He is looking smart but maybe naive while right wing is looking bully stupid.
Whom would you vote for?
If economy doesn't crash or something other happens Obama can keep smiling.
Calling him socialist?
People live very good live in socialist countries like Sweden for example.
Its not cold war any more....find new strategy or die.


I don't really know much about American politics but that's how it looks from outside.

[Onkel Neal]

The birth announcements are compelling evidence, but certainly not conclusive. Those type of registrations are not verified in any way, someone simply needs to mail a form to the state health dept. I'm not suggesting that Papa Obama did that with an eye on the White House in 1961, but he or his wife may have been thinking about the issue of citizenship. (http://www.legalzoom.com/marriage-divorce-family-law/family-law-basics/is-your-child-us)

I agree 100% with the simplest scenario makes the most sense, I really don't think Obama was born in Kenya (and even if he was, with an American mother, he would still be a US citizen, right?). His mother moved around a lot but is there any evidence she went to Kenya around 1960-61?

All that aside, the delay over producing a legit birth certificate was stupid. Why bother lending any "credibility" (illusory or real) to the claims by responding at all? Well, if you can debunk some crazy with ease, it's dumb not to. Complicating the situation is Obama's decision to spend sums estimated in the hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees to fight releasing a state birth certificate that could put to rest the questions.


This suspicious birth certificate with its edits even caught my attention, and until now I never paid any attention to the birthers and the true believers.

[razark]

The birth announcements are compelling evidence, but certainly not conclusive. Those type of registrations are not verified in any way, someone simply needs to mail a form to the state health dept. I'm not suggesting that Papa Obama did that with an eye on the White House in 1961, but he or his wife may have been thinking about the issue of citizenship. (http://www.legalzoom.com/marriage-divorce-family-law/family-law-basics/is-your-child-us)
From what I've read (and I don't remember where right now), the information was sent to the papers directly from the hospital. The parents didn't have anything to do with it.

[Onkel Neal]

Well, I did say it came from the state. Wonder where the state got the information....? (http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/vol06_ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0017_0008.HTM) :hmmm:

[August]

I can't help but think that throughout this whole thing Obama has acted suspiciously. Like Neal said if you can easily debunk something you do it. You certainly DON'T spend hundreds of thousands of dollars stonewalling it only to just reverse course years later because some chump who has absolutely no chance at winning his parties nomination is trying to make political hay with the issue.

[joegrundman]

Look, i'm only semi-computer literate, so when i saw that you tube vid linked by Neal, i was Zomg it's been tampered with. I've made stuff with photoshop and recognise layer after layer as a sign of handiwork.

But i don't know all that much.

This you tube posted by Penguin:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Heci4OQrlYM

this shows very clearly that one tiny lack of foresight by th people scanning the document accounts for all of the layers.

that is when scanned with the full version of Adobe Acrobat, there is a small checkbox for Make Searchable(Run OCR). This obviously is a useful feature in many cases. But the process of running OCR (optical character recognition) lifts words and characters it recognizes, leaving the rest.

This can obviously account for the layers phenomenon.

Close but no banana.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WwlWgMTCp8w

[joegrundman]

no, it's not a mystery.

[MH]

So why would OCR be needed to simply post a previously scanned image ?

To be able to manipulate written context for example.
You sort of cant do that with jpeg.
It could be posted this way by default or for fun(which is conspiracy theory by itself)

[DarkFish]

The question is why would the document have to be tampered with AT ALL ?very valid question, why do you think the document is tampered with at all?

It's accepted that the current BC is an image of the electronically stored version of the original, as the original paper document no longer exists in the Hawaiian state archives. It's a mystery as to WHY it's layered as posted, and why it's created with a very recent version of Adobe software.ehm, sorry to burst your bubble, but it isn't. It's layered as posted because of the version of Adobe Acrobat, and it's the latest version of Acrobat because it's an offical government business.
I mean, even a STUDENT like me can get the FULL, LEGAL, LATEST version of Acrobat for FREE from my university. I hope you don't seriously believe the white house can't afford what the average European university can?

...the pixel patterns of the zero's kill me- the chances of that happening once between 2 characters are astronomical, this document has MULTIPLE occurrences of this.ehm, no, they aren't:doh:

[MH]

:har:

To be able to manipulate written context for example. Why would he want to ?

Well...maybe he did not want to edit it.
Simply when you want to turn a fax or or any sort of scanned document into let say MS office editable document(for convenience)you have to use some sort of OCR .

just for fun
It just can be that Obama to make sure that no body will find out that his BC was forged stored it in OCR format because it naturally looks forged but it can be explained by simple office technicality.

[joegrundman]

Well...maybe he did not want to edit it.
Simply when you want to turn a fax or or any sort of scanned document into let say MS office editable document(for convenience)you have to use some sort of OCR .

just for fun
It just can be that Obama to make sure that no body will find out that his BC was forged stored it in OCR format because it naturally looks forged but it can be explained by simple office technicality.

ooh you are mischievous !:haha: