The American Spectator : Birtherdämmerung

Text Size

Birtherdämmerung

By Robert Stacy McCain on 4.28.11 @ 6:09AM

The tragic twilight of an anti-Obama conspiracy theory.

Scarcely had the White House released President Obama’s birth certificate than the “Birther” skeptics issued statements expressing their continued doubts about other aspects of Obama’s biography. One oft-heard refrain was that the president had waited too long to release the document. Others moved on to demanding to see Obama’s academic transcripts. Donald Trump congratulated himself on having pressured the White House into finally putting an end to many months of mystery.

What will be the political impact of this? In the long term, likely none at all. Americans who don’t like Obama will continue not to like him. The president gave a sanctimonious press conference lecture — the nation was being “distracted by sideshows and carnival barkers,” he said — but Obama’s opponents have long since ceded his superlative gifts at delivering sanctimonious lectures. Where he fails is in delivering effective policies to address our nation’s manifold problems. By the time the 2012 election arrives, the Birther controversy will be long forgotten, while Obama’s failed policies will (or at least should be) front and center of the campaign debate.

Many people on the Left, and even certain Republicans (e.g., David Frum), have treated Birtherism as a proxy for latent racism. And one may grant that this is to some extent true, without granting either of the implicit premises of such claims: (a) that all opposition to Obama is essentially racist; or (b) that this reveals the fundamentally racist nature of the Republican Party. Both leftists and embarrassed GOP elitists are guilty of conflating categories in ways that fit their own preconceived notions of the political landscape. However, there are racists who aren’t Birthers, and racists who aren’t Republicans; most Republicans are not racists and never doubted that Obama was born in Hawaii. (Not to encourage anyone to go off on another paranoid tangent, but some people have noticed that Donald Trump has given a good bit of money to Democrats over the years, and therefore wonder if Trump could be some sort of Democratic mole. Conspiracy theories are everywhere nowadays.)

Leaving aside irrelevant and implausible accusations of racism — which are also everywhere nowadays — the whole Birther phenomenon reminded me of certain conspiracy theories that swirled around Bill Clinton during his first term in the White House. The real tragedy of conspiracy-theory politics is that it is a waste of time, energy and resources. Too much effort was spent chasing phantom rumors back in the 1990s, when there were those who alleged that Clinton’s career as governor of Arkansas rivaled the tenure of John Gotti in its bloody criminality.

Of course, as it turned out, there was indeed a conspiracy to hide Bill Clinton’s womanizing ways, a conspiracy that followed the former Arkansas governor into the White House in the form of a federal civil-rights lawsuit charging him with the sexual harassment of former state employee Paula Jones. The president perjured himself, and arguably conspired to obstruct justice and suborn perjury from Monica Lewinsky — and those startling revelations of high crimes and misdemeanors had nothing to do with kooky crackpot theories about people being killed because “they knew too much.” (What did Kathleen Willey’s cat know, and when did he know it?)

Allegations of shady wrongdoing in the past, especially in the distant past, rarely prove decisive in politics. Candidates for office are sometimes forced to drop out of a campaign by the exposure of previously unknown malfeasance. However, once a person is elected to high public office, he is unlikely to be defeated for re-election due to the belated discovery of something he did wrong before he was first elected. Once they’re elected, officials are judged by their performance in office. While Bill Clinton’s “performance” was in many ways disgraceful and indeed criminal, even his impeachment by the House of Representatives — and the undeniable DNA evidence of his Oval Office trysts — proved insufficient to destroy him altogether.

No serious person could ever have imagined that Obama’s birth certificate would be the silver bullet that would lead to his political defeat. And those who promoted “Birtherism” as a means of beating Obama have, at best, succeeded in compelling the White House to prove a fact that was never really in doubt. This is a minor humiliation to Team Obama, even if it leaves the Birthers with egg on their faces. Yet it is difficult to see how this denouement could affect the political battle going forward.

Having concluded the Wagnerian saga of Obama’s Hawaiian origins, his opponents are now left to pursue the more mundane mission of convincing a majority of their fellow Americans that the president’s policies are harmful and destructive. That’s neither a conspiracy nor a theory, but a fact.

About the Author

Robert Stacy McCain is co-author (with Lynn Vincent) of Donkey Cons: Sex, Crime, and Corruption in the Democratic Party (Nelson Current). He blogs at The Other McCain.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (179) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.28.11 @ 6:17AM

One thing you left out of the article is that the birther issue started during the Democratic primaries. Hillary Clinton had one of her staffers question Obama's birth place and that alone started the entire series of events.

Obama then played into it by stubbornly refusing to release his long form birth certificate.

That lends to the credence that he thinks he's better than anyone else, and I think he will receive more damage from this event then you believe.

The public will interpret his delay at clearing up the issue as a form of weakness and many others will see it for what it is, grand arrogance.

If you look at the date at the bottom it was issued on April 25th, 2011, the day before it was released.

Ironically, while the Department of Homeland Security demands the rest of us produce birth certificates for driver's licenses and employment, Obama did not have to produce one to join the U.S. Senate. That's the real irony.

Alan Brooks| 4.28.11 @ 7:29AM

"While Bill Clinton's "performance" was in many ways disgraceful and indeed criminal, even his impeachment by the House of Representatives -- and the undeniable DNA evidence of his Oval Office trysts -- proved insufficient to destroy him altogether."

Voters were still relieved in 1998 that 'Father Time' Dole had been defeated two years before.

Frisbee| 4.29.11 @ 8:39PM

The real birth certificate has these details:

Coast Province General Hospital Mombasa, British Protectorate of Kenya, 7lbs,1 ounce 18 inches long, 6 inches between shoulders. 7;24 p.m. 4th august ,1961 .
Birth place of father; Kanyadriang vill, Kyanza. Supervisor of Obstetrics: John Kwame Odongo
etc etc

http://www.thepowerhour.com/ne.....ficate.htm

MissouriDavid| 5.2.11 @ 3:19PM

The President is out to destroy America and should be impeached. Americans stood for real change when thru the TeaParty, real change, with real morality led to 64 new reps. Let us Hope Fresh blood in the senate continues to revitalize America as the Demo process works. Fed Reserve is KILLING America, along with Evil Obama. Private Bank IMF , Rothchild are seeking one world! Thanks and Merry Christmas!

INstigator| 4.28.11 @ 6:39AM

Anybody recall the "Modified Limited Hangout"? Did not work for Nixon...

Robbins Mitchell| 4.28.11 @ 6:49AM

Geez,Stacy...no wonder you're a 'Bama fan....this latest BC only raises more legitimate questions,and confirms that Barokeydoke's father was in fact a foreign national and as a consequence Barokeydoke is not now and never was a 'natural born American citizen'....disingenuous much?

Tevi| 4.28.11 @ 8:43AM

It doesn't make him a fan, just because he rejects conspiracy theories based on nothing other than hatred.

You can think what you like about Bill Clinton, but acknowledging he didn't murder scores of people for trivial reasons doesn't make you a supporter.
Just makes a sane person. Give it a try.

Dai Alanye | 4.28.11 @ 9:42AM

The fact that Obama has managed to fabricate another birth certificate shouldn't put this issue to rest. We have only seen a facsimile, a scan printed on security paper---not a photo of the original.

Still, the main question has never been whether Obama is a "natural born" citizen. The questions are WHY has he attempted to hide all his records, and WHAT is he attempting to hide.Why did he consider it necessary upon taking office to immediately seal all his records?

Releasing another questionable piece of paper does almost nothing to qnswer the important questions.

SoBeConservative| 4.28.11 @ 8:05PM

That is an excellent point THAT I HAVE NOT SEEN YET - he had "released" his birth certificate before - during the 2008 election if I remember. It sure didn't look anything like this one so why should this be the real thing this time?

Robbins Mitchell| 4.28.11 @ 1:24PM

But Clinton DID murder scores of people for a trivial reason....or have you forgotten Waco?...and don't try and tell me it was Janet Reno's decision...she wouldn't dare to even take a pee without Clinton telling her to

SuzyQ| 4.28.11 @ 1:24PM

And let's not forget Bill Clinton was offered Saddam Hussein a couple of times and he didn't take advantage. And let's also not forget that during HIS administration there was a call for change of regime in Iraq. Rag on all you may want to over George Bush, Clinton without his republican congress was nothing more than a soiled blue dress and this new guy stinks even more. He is a fraud, not a natural born citizen.

SuzyQ| 4.28.11 @ 1:29PM

Waiting impatiently for Jerome Corsi's new book due out in a couple of weeks.......perhaps that's another reason why this "so called" long form BC came out now.

bohemian| 4.28.11 @ 2:20PM

SuzyQ – also waiting impatiently. No doubt that's why he printed one up now; wants to distract from the upcoming buzz, thinking people will say, "Oh, that's old news." BTW – the title of the doc just released is 'Certificate Of Live Birth' – it's nothing different than that other thing(s) (remember, it was so bad they made some fixes along the way) his henchmen posted 3 years ago. It's just on a different form. It is NOT a birth certificate. Also – nobody has ever seen either of the the actual documents, just these computer-generated images. Ø was so sure nobody would question the first image that he got some if-he-had-a-brain-cell-it-would-be-lonely thug who put 'African' as BO Sr.'s race, 'Kenya, East Africa' as birthplace, etc., and now they're stuck with those terms. Can't wait for Corsi's book!

WJ| 4.28.11 @ 8:42PM

You are confusing Saddam Hussein with Osama Bin Laden. Clinton had opportunities to kill him but never did it.

Confusing Saddam with Osama is something that George the Less also did, after 9/11.

russel| 4.28.11 @ 9:00AM

No McCain fan either . But who cares if the issue may have fizzled . We who still think zero's a fake have every right ask whatever we please according to what the Constitution requires . I always say , do what the socialist would do - throw every plate in the room and see if anything sticks . This business of getting along with , or caring about what they may think , has got to end very soon . Start kicking zero's butt full time , just like Trump is doing .

Tevi| 4.28.11 @ 9:08AM

"We who still think zero's a fake have every right ask whatever we please according to what the Constitution requires ."

Yeah, the only problem being, you haven't the faintest clue what the constitution requires.

The most prevalent thing I see referenced is that both his parents weren't US citizens, which means he can't be a "natural born citizen".

Never have so many people come together to express their thorough ignorance and/or creative fan-fiction about a particular law, while professing they care so much about it..... but not enough to read about 20 lines of a single bill and stop them looking like failed 5th graders.

russel| 4.28.11 @ 9:16AM

If I don't have a clue , then neither does Sean Hannity or Fox news . What the Constitution requires has been reported for anyone who bothers to listen .

mames| 4.28.11 @ 9:46AM

Birthers are not conspiracy nuts. He in fact screwed around on delivering his BC. Why? He is just a prick? Is the bc authentic? His transparancy is a joke and in the end to decry his lack of delivery of the bc does not detract from his Marxist heart it simply highlights his arrogance. One can be a birther and also attack him on other substantive issues as well. He simply is a liar, he doesn't just lie he IS a LIAR,

Alan Brooks| 4.28.11 @ 9:58AM

And the GOP candidate you run next year will be a liar, too; he will say "I will reduce government", but he will not.

Teaghan| 4.28.11 @ 10:25AM

Wow, talk about changing the subject! Alan, aren't you the least bit curious why obama didn't release this 2 and half years ago when the questions first started? Or doesn't it matter to you that you might have an imposter in our White House? Personally, I wish we could get off of this subject. It was pointed out this morning that while the GOP was going after Slick Willy for oral sex with an intern, muslim terroists were planning attacks on America. Let's move on folks to something worthwhile. Like finding a candidate who will beat the pants of obamas skinny behind. There wouldn't be anything more wonderful than seeing him, his wife and brats move out of 1600 Pen. Ave.

canuckistani| 4.28.11 @ 11:47AM

Teaghan, you would like to get off this subject, but you can't. Why would you preamble your plea with "aren't you at least bit curious...." if you truly wanted to move on? Thinking men moved on about 1 nanosecond after the first caucus/primary put his name on the ballot.

You also reference the impeachable BJ.
The Common denominator: crybaby GOPers that have zero ideas that are not fantastical and resorted to defamation as their way to wrest control of the country. They calculate the messy democratic method is problematic without a winning candidate nor platform in sight.

Larry| 4.29.11 @ 5:06AM

Lying in politics these days is a matter of degree. Some do it far more often and egregiously, like, for example, Obama and yourself. Either way, if people in this country think they can continue on this course without reducing government, they are lying to themselves.

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 7:34AM

"If I don't have a clue , then neither does Sean Hannity or Fox news"

This is comedy gold.

"What the Constitution requires has been reported for anyone who bothers to listen ."

Yeah, why read a single section of the US code which would fill you in, the wikipedia article for "natural born citizen" for scores of explanations or any other reference material, when instead you could rely on a talking hairdo for your education.

Working out a treat so far, ain't it pal.

da monk| 4.28.11 @ 11:44AM

Doesn't his mother, born in , count as a natural American citizen? I guess, according to, now former birthers, now where the school transcripts vendors, she doesn't count in this matter?

canuckistani| 4.28.11 @ 11:53AM

McCain graduated near dead last at the academy, spent three years in the hanoi hilton and born in Panama. He was mediocre scholastically and likely messed up mentally and no one questioned his suitability on this site. They rightfully questioned his conservative cred and did not resort to gutter insinuations about his right to be a candidate.

Hypocrisy is a challenge sometimes.

Dustoff| 4.28.11 @ 1:19PM

Ok his grades were not that great, but PLEASE tell us all. How was O-bummer's?

alyeska| 5.2.11 @ 9:58PM

obama was elected president of the "harvard law review" and graduated "magna sum laude" stick that in your pipe and smoke it!

but, please, continue on with your insanity you are turning of independents in droves and we'll be glad to take their votes.

rant on!!

Scott| 4.29.11 @ 12:01AM

My copy of the Constitution doesn't list "good grades" as a prerequisite to being POTUS. It does, however, mention something about being a natural born citizen. Being born in Panama to US citizen parents -- a military father on active duty and a mother who was authorized by lawful orders to accompany her husband to his duty station -- does not negate McCain's natural born citizen status.

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 7:41AM

I'd like to see you substantiate that claim.

See the problem is, being born in Panama DOES make you ineligible to be President, unless you read article 1401.

The problem there being.....
Part A of 1401 makes Obama eligible.
Part C of 1401 makes McCain eligible.

So go ahead and try to tell us how McCain's birth in Panama made him eligible without using this section to also validate Obama's.
Go for it LOL.

BackToBasics| 5.1.11 @ 3:12AM

At the time the Panama Canal Zone was actually a designated area WITH BOUNDARIES that was an American protectorate and NOT part of Panama.

McCain's parents were both OF AGE and American citizens living within the boudaries of an American protectorate. And McCain provided ALL of his documents up front, including a long form birth certificate. And I defend him in this even though I voted third party.

Scott| 4.28.11 @ 11:56PM

To be a natural born citizen, BOTH parents need to be citizens at the time of a person's birth. Obama Sr. wasn't a US citizen. Obama II is a citizen. Obama II is not a natural born citizen. Obama II is not eligible to be POTUS.

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 7:45AM

Scott, the 2 citizen parents requirement applies to those born outside of the US. Hawaii is a US state, hence this doesn't apply.

This is the requirement for citizenship. There is no separate requirement for "natural born citizen", since it has no other meaning than "citizen, no matter what you invent for it.

Darin| 4.28.11 @ 6:59AM

It's not and never has been about race. It's about law and the Constitution. In 2000, Congress took up the question of whether John McCain was eligible to be President since McCain was born in the Panama Canal zone where his father was stationed. Congress determined McCain was eligible.

There were questions surrounding Obama a year before the election. There are still questions. Is a person born of parents who are not US citizens considered a "natural born citizen"? Was Indonesian citizenship obtained? What do his college transcripts show? What passport did he use to travel to Pakistan when such travel was banned by the state department? Normally, the life history of a president is very well documented. Obama's would fit on a single piece of paper, and a small piece at that. Why is there such a lack of curiousity? Is there something embarrassing in his past (Bush did not hide his past problem with alcohol)? The questions are multiple, and the silence is deafening.

Alex K.| 4.28.11 @ 8:00AM

'Is a person born of parents who are not US citizens considered a "natural born citizen"?'

I sure hope so. My parents emigrated from Greece and were not U.S. citizens when I was born in Chicago. Many kids in my neighborhood were born of ethnic parents who hadn't yet been naturalized. Want to send us all back?

Sean| 4.28.11 @ 9:26AM

It has nothing to do with whether or not to send you back. It has to do with if you would be qualified to be President. You maybe a citizen, but maybe not a natural born one.

da monk| 4.28.11 @ 11:49AM

Sean, read what Alex K said, "I was born in Chicago" Look at your map, Chicago is in Illinois as State in the Union. Alex, is eligible to run and be president. Now, tell me, what's your lineage?

Sean| 4.28.11 @ 6:36PM

He said his parents were not citizens. What is the law on a natural born citizen? Now my lineage is my family goes back to the 1600's in what is now the USA. On the other side they are more recent.

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 7:49AM

Settled law, confirmed by the US Supreme Court, is that even if your parents were both subjects of the Emperor of China, not eligible to become citizens themselves and were only here on business, you being born in the US still makes you a "natural born citizen".

United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)

I take it that settles your questions.

crooked wren| 4.28.11 @ 9:27AM

Okay. He's a citizen -- or was when he was born. According to some sources, he would have had to have given up his citizenship to live in Indonesia when he lived there as Barry Soetoro and/or when he traveled to Pakistan (at a time when US citizens were unable to go there).

There is also the issue of the meaning of the term "natural born citizens." There was a Justice who defined that term (for the presidency) as both parents being U.S. citizens -- SO THAT NEITHER PARENT HAD ALLEGIANCES TO OTHER COUNTRIES. Barak Sr. was not a U.S. citizen; therefore, he held allegiances to a country that was NOT the US.

That leads me to MY real concern: Obama's political proclivities.

I've been concerned about the "birth" issue, not because I didn't believe that he most likely was born in Hawaii. (His mother was in school in Washington State about three weeks after his birth, so that seems likely. Why Michelle Obama referred to Kenya as her husband's "home" just poured fuel on the fire -- which the two of them were obviously glad to do. Obama said all this birther stuff he found amusing. Nice of him to find it amusing that commanding officers who went to court asking for proof of his eligibility were denied that proof -- and lost their careers. Amusing to Obama, no?)

But the REAL roots here of my concern are the known proclivities of his parents and grandparents. His father was a Marxist. His mentor Frank Marshall Davis (a mentor sought by Obama's grandfather) was a self-proclaimed Marxist/Communist. His mother was seen as a fellow traveler. His grandparents moved so Stanley Ann could go to a school reviled for its Marxist teachings. They attended the "little red church." Lolo Soetoro wasn't nearly the Marxist that Barak Sr. had been, so things were stormy there and she sent her son Barry Soetoro back to her Mom and Dad.

How many presidents have we had that spent there time living in another country under another name?

Only One.

Any surprise that there would be concerns????

And, by the way, my concern has everything to do with his socialist policies and friendships -- and NOTHING to do with his race.

The only political contribution I've EVER made was to Allen West -- and I don't even live in Florida.

crooked wren| 4.28.11 @ 9:27AM

That leads me to MY real concern: Obama's political proclivities.

How many presidents have we had that spent there time living in another country under another name?

Only One.

Any surprise that there would be concerns????

And, by the way, my concern has everything to do with his socialist policies and friendships -- and NOTHING to do with his race.

The only political contribution I've EVER made was to Allen West -- and I don't even live in Florida.

russel| 4.28.11 @ 10:21AM

Yes , Soetoro may be a citizen legally , but it stops there . He's a fake American in every sense of the word . His father hated the English empire ( ditto America ) , colonialism . Dreams About Dad wasn't honoring a brave man who served in the European or Pacific theatre's . Our Founders specifically stated in the Constitution no one should be president who might be partial to another country or it's principles , morals , laws , whatever . Well , look what we've got . A marxist socialist who loathes Israel and Britain , yet sure seems to have a soft spot for Muslim countries and their ' religion ' . He's dead set on " changing " our country to fit his twisted psyche . Throw in his attitudes on race for good measure . Nope Wren , I'm not surprised one bit we're concerned . More like downright scared .

da monk| 4.28.11 @ 11:56AM

Crooked Wren: Please name the Justice you paraphrased "both parents have to be born in the U.S." to be eligible to be President? Regarding his parents and grand-parents and your claim of Communist/Socialist backgrounds. Are you saying, if so, "The sins of the parents are the sins of the son" I would say you are a hypocrit.

Scott| 4.29.11 @ 12:25AM

Why must you be so obtuse? There are 4 classes of citizenship. Naturalized citizen: a person born in a foreign country who immigrates to the US legally and goes through the prescribed process to become a US citizen, at which time they revoke claims of previous citizenship / allegiance to any other country than the US. Native-born citizen: a person born in the US regardless of the citizenship of his parents. Citizen: a person born outside the US to parents, at least one of whom is a US citizen. Natural born citizen: both parents do not have to be born in the US. Both parents have to be US citizens at the time of the child's birth within the US or territory under US jurisdiction. Put DeVattel's "Law of Nations" into your search engine and do some reading on the likely source of John Jay's thinking related to including "natural born citizen" language in the Constitution. It has everything to do with avoiding conflicting alliances and nothing to do with the skin color of people seeking the presidency.

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 7:51AM

"Natural born citizen: both parents do not have to be born in the US. Both parents have to be US citizens at the time of the child's birth within the US or territory under US jurisdiction."

This is fiction. Back to you.

Tevi| 4.28.11 @ 9:02AM

"Normally, the life history of a president is very well documented. Obama's would fit on a single piece of paper, and a small piece at that"

This is the Obama with the 2 biographies you're talking about or a different one?

Dai Alanye | 4.28.11 @ 10:15AM

You've got to be a genuine nitwit to believe Obama's memoir, Dreams From My Father, is a truthful documentation of his life. Indeed, only someone deliberately naive could believe Obama actually wrote it, since his only known other writing consists of two painfully bad poems conceived while at Occidental College.

The single question of merit regarding Dreams From My Father is whether it was penned by Bill Ayers or (more likely) by some obscure editorial assistant at his publisher. We shouldn't be surprised at this, since we know John Kennedy wasn't the actual author of his books, and we can be reasonably sure neither Hillary nor Bill wrote their leaden tomes. Sarah Palin is one of the few honest political celebrities, giving full credit to her co-author.

Autobiographies and memoirs are a form of "faction," the only critical factor being the degree of truth. In the case of Ulysses Grant's memoir the truth likely makes up 98+% of the volumes. In the case of Dreams the percentage is south of fifty. Steve Sailer has a good survey of this in his book, America's Half-Blood Prince.

Put not your faith in Barack---the man is unworthy of trust.

Butch | 4.28.11 @ 2:44PM

"I normally don't read autobiographies because I don't particularly care for fiction."

---Thomas Sowell

Larry| 4.29.11 @ 5:11AM

Hey Tevi, you mean that novel called "Dreams of my Father," ghost written by Bill Ayers? I actually think the amount of information that Obama has admitted about his life as being true is what would fit on a single piece of paper. What he has accomplished in his life, including his current occupation, would fit on even less paper.

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 7:54AM

Hey Larry, nobody cares what you think.

Teaghan| 4.28.11 @ 10:28AM

And remember Dan Rather and his investigations? The media was digging up and making up information and leaving no stone unturned when it came to GW. Why not for Barry? Cause of his skin color, that's why. And they call the GOP racist.

da monk| 4.28.11 @ 11:45AM

But he hid his phony military service

canuckistani| 4.28.11 @ 11:57AM

By this litmus test, Romney is also out.
Buh-bye.

The lack of curiosity is yours alone. Why would you want someone who has no international life experience becoming the leader of the free world?

Seeing passport-free zones between the ears of Bachmann and Palin and Huckabee scares me more than the exotic in the WH.

Mike Hawk| 4.28.11 @ 7:04AM

They did not release a Birth Certificate, it was another recently generated Certificate off Live Birth. This too is all full of BS. BTW, this was done to pre-empt Corsi's book, not to defuse The Donald (another ego driven phony).

figusja| 4.28.11 @ 7:13AM

These exceptions to the rules is what is fundamentally wrong with our Government. This must be changed!

Ken (Old Texican)| 4.28.11 @ 7:39AM

Anyone anywhere can be fired with just cause after submitting a false resume'.

canuckistani| 4.28.11 @ 12:05PM

...and the only way to fire the exotic is to impeach him.
Question: how many in the GOP have spotless CV's? Possibly zero.

After the Newtie/Hyde fiasco in 97, the media would be on full hypocrite alert for every rep shouting righteous indignation and quickly defuse any play on BHO.

It's rich coming from Texas, which spawned LBJ and Junior, to suggest a president's CV should be scrutinized any further than it normally is.

Dustoff| 4.28.11 @ 1:23PM

Impeach............ LOL
Why... Just look at way he's messed up.
Jobs..... heck no.
Spending like crazy with zero results. yep
Fuel cost hitting hte roof..... yeah that won't work
Food racing right behind fuel... remember the poor.

So what is this fool going to run on for 2012.
I'm stupid...... yeah works for me.

Frisbee| 4.28.11 @ 9:46PM

From "Hope and Change" to "I'm stupid" in 4 years.

Hey, has anybody watched the Eddie Murphy movie "The Distinguished Gentleman" recently? He campaigned on "Change for the Future".

martin j smith| 4.28.11 @ 8:01AM

I maintain that the birther isssues is a distraction from the issues that the vast majority of voters will base their decision. And, the theatrics of Obama-Trump show how such issues can truly cloud the landscape for the 2012 election.

Let me put it to the birthers in this was: If there is no ironclad evidence that contradicts what is now out there--and YOU PERSIST in bringing this up in the campaign I will bet you that Obama will win because more people with be sympathetic to him. Thus, either you are being self destructive or.....

Louis Jenkins| 4.28.11 @ 8:20AM

Even the pedigree is meaningless. Obama is still a charlatan, a hoax, a fake, and does not know what the nation is in dire need of. He is a Kenyian, by nature, and if he was born in Hawaii, it still doesn't change his manners.

canuckistani| 4.28.11 @ 12:06PM

So as a fervent anticolonialist, is he not closer to Jefferson and Franklin than you and me?

Harry Flashman| 4.28.11 @ 8:44AM

Astute observers in corridors of power and other quarters have always taken Obama at his word, that he was indeed born somewhere in Hawaii. Most serious people in public life have never considered that he was born anywhere else.

Whether his actual birth mother was in fact the late Stanley Ann Dunham and his biological father the late Kenyan Barack Obama "Sr." is quite another matter, one that has long been a subject of international speculation that is rapidly growing with the approach of the 2012 presidential election.

The controversy over the true origins of the man of mystery known as Barack Hussein Obama is fast becoming less a matter of "Where?" and more a matter of "Who?"

Whether the current president's actual birth mother was the late Stanley Ann Dunham or some other female, and whether his actual biological father was in fact the late Kenyan Barack Obama "Sr." or his childhood mentor the late CPUSA Member Frank Marshall Davis or his late "grandfather" Stanley Armour Dunham (arguably the likeliest candidate - see cashill.com among numerous other sources) or some other man, is all far less relevant to the future of the United States than the facts about his past associations and ideological convictions and behavioral influences and ongoing relationships.

This is the sort of information about their presidential candidates that American voters believe they have the need, and the right, to know.

The sort of information that Obama and his handlers are determined to keep from them.

Quite apart from the issue of any sort of birth certificates, real or imagined, genuine or forged, is the fact that Barack Obama's school records, SAT and LSAT scores, college and law school admission records and scholarship paperwork and grade transcripts and thesis papers, medical records, Illinois state senate tenure records, presidential campaign foreign donor lists, complete White House visitor logs and many other relevant records and documents have all never been released or allowed to be subjected to any sort of scrutiny, despite several years of repeated requests for disclosure by numerous individuals and non-traditional media organizations.

The Obama 2008 campaign and subsequent administration have to date spent a substantial sum on legal fees, estimated in the millions of dollars, to fight Freedom of Information Act filings and other requests to examine this material. The powerful international law firm Perkins Coie, the counsel of record to the Democratic National Committee, has been their primary provider of these services and continues in that role.

It had become customary in postwar modern times for presidential candidates to allow for the release and scrutiny of the substantive body of their personal records and credentials, indeed up until 2008 largely because of a strong interest from the mainstream media.

The appearance of Barack Obama upon the national political scene changed that tradition, and he was given an astonishingly egregious special exception from this unofficial practice that American voters had come to expect.

In their eagerness to "make history" by helping to elect The Chosen One as the first black president, the mainstream media failed in their essential national responsibility to report with thorough impartial objectivity. They ignored their duty to search for the truth and should be regarded with disdain by all people who value information in a free society.

Barack Obama was presented in 2008 as a brilliant intellectual with stellar Ivy League credentials whose cool low key style would transform the culture of Washington, leading America into a new harmonious postracial era with an administration of great transparency, all while achieving miracles of bipartisan cooperation.

Hope and Change, remember?

It has become quite obvious to rational people of all political persuasions how that ridiculously naive wishful fantasy has really played out.

There exists a widespread and growing international speculation that an objective examination of Barack Obama's extensive hidden paper trail would clearly reveal that his meteoric rise up the educational and career ladders was largely the result of multiple affirmative action preferences and an adoring and uncritical mainstream media.

Barack Obama is just another left-posing big city machine politician, with more than a touch of narcissism and a proven record of ruthless self-serving dealmaking, who has clearly proven his allegiance to international corporate and financial interests.

Obama and his handlers were able to hide his past and explain away and minimize his relationships with highly controversial individuals and groups during their 2008 campaign.

Will they be able to effectively repeat this deception between now and 6 November 2012?

Only if you let them.

Tevi| 4.28.11 @ 9:17AM

"It had become customary in postwar modern times..."

Dude, blogger accounts are free, just start your own.

Teaghan| 4.28.11 @ 10:42AM

Great post Harry! Very informative, so much so that Tevi is becoming nervous.

Frisbee| 4.28.11 @ 9:52PM

Yes, well stated Harry. Obama was raised on anti-establishment activism. Now that he IS the establishment, and the utopia hasn't arrived, he doesn't know what to do.

da monk| 4.28.11 @ 12:01PM

Harry Flashman: You're flashing your ignorance.

George True| 4.28.11 @ 4:12PM

Don't think so.

Scott| 4.29.11 @ 12:37AM

Wow! Now that is some penetrating analysis. Rather it is you who has been flashing his ignorance throughout this thread.

Hillel| 4.28.11 @ 8:47AM

Good Grief read the 14th amendment. It is of minor interest to see Obama's college grades. Why is he so secretive? Why did Clinton Pardon Mark Rich? Puerto Rican Terrorists? As a historian I'd like some answers though I can wait.

NeilBJ| 4.28.11 @ 12:09PM

The 14th amendment as currently interpreted makes Obama a "birthright" citizen. It does not make him a natural born citizen, a category distinct from citizen and unique to the qualifications for the office of president.

Obama has admitted that by virtue of his Kenyan born father he was subject to the British Nationality Act of 1948 and therefore was a British citizen at birth (see fightthesmears.com).

That is the real issue with natural born citizenship. Is someone who is born a citzen of another country a natural born citizen according to the Constitution? That is the question that needs to be answered.

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 8:03AM

"It does not make him a natural born citizen, a category distinct from citizen and unique to the qualifications for the office of president."

Yeah, and where is that distinction made again?
That one detail that is ALWAYS missing whenever this nonsense is claimed. That one little reference you can never, ever point to for this definition that will somehow trump the US Supreme Court's rulings to the contrary.

Yeah, let's all wonder together why that could be while I go tinker with my cold fusion machine.

Dixie Pixie| 4.28.11 @ 8:52AM

At last, our long national tragedy is over.
Obama has finally released his Birth Certificate.
Thus he has proved he is not a foreign born alien, space alien, media clone or a Disney animatronic puppet.

Obama has finally produced the most mundane of documents routinely required by normal citizens.
As usual for this administration it was years late, incompetently handled, transparent as river bottom mud and reeks of political machinations.

Is there anyone left who still believes Obama's political rhetoric now?

Roy| 4.28.11 @ 8:57AM

I think, in the end, this will hurt Obama.

Obama fans ALWAYS, when wanting to assert their ineffable superiority, point to the presence of "Birtherism" among his opponents. It strains belief that Obama was unaware of this talking point or the advantages of maintaining it. So-act in a vaguely suspicious manner and don't take obvious steps, and make huge masses of other people who would never really give a hoot in the first place wonder what he might be covering up, all allowing his spokesmen, Keith Olbermann and Chris Matthews, to endlessly blather on about "Birtherism".

Now that he has put an end to it, he's taken a talking point away from his spokesmen. Will they ever forgive him? They may now have to discuss substance or something.

Comenius| 4.28.11 @ 8:58AM

Of course, the conspiracy theories abound. There is an information vacuum around this man like nothing we've ever seen from a president of the United States. Every other president before him has laid all the information out on the table and what they didn't voluntarily put out there, the media went out and got it. Remember how Dan Rather got fired? Why is he so secretive? This is human nature. Not liberal, not conservative, but HUMAN nature to fill in the blanks. And by the way, let's not forget the "inside job" people who claim George Bush had something to do with the 9/11 attack. As some of you critics of the "berthers" write your articles, you would do well to remind everyone of what the left is doing (and not just the extreme end), with regard to conspiracy theories. At least the "berthers" aren't accusing him of mass murder. Is it any wonder that we suspect this man is sinister given what we DO know about him?

Tevi| 4.28.11 @ 9:19AM

"At least the "berthers" aren't accusing him of mass murder."

No, that was the previous Democrat President that was accused of mass murder of inconvenient political associates.

Comenius| 4.29.11 @ 5:49AM

You need to read (or have someone read it to you) the May 5, 2000 article in the Arkansas Times, the "Body Count" of the Clintons. It's a FACT, not even disputed by liberals, that a number of Clinton friends and associates have died, many under suspicious circumstances and many while under investigation and/or indictment. The conclusions in each circumstance are arguable. On the other hand, George Bush had NOTHING to do with 9/11--You're a "truther".

Tevi| 4.28.11 @ 9:19AM

"At least the "berthers" aren't accusing him of mass murder."

No, that was the previous Democrat President that was accused of mass murder of inconvenient political associates.

Comenius| 4.29.11 @ 6:01AM

Truther

Melvin| 4.28.11 @ 9:02AM

a person can get any degree, birth certificate, driver's license from the addresses in the back of those Detective Magazines.

Pecos Pete| 4.28.11 @ 9:22AM

Watch my left hand. Whoa now, don't you dare look at my right hand.

Anthony| 4.28.11 @ 9:23AM

If there is one argument against Obama that drives me up a wall, it's this constant questioning about whether his opponents are racist. Who cares? Whether an individual is racist or ethnocentric or whatever, why should that matter? As we know, the only racism officially protected in the USA by both the legislative and judicial branches of government is anti-white racism in the form of the myriad "affirmative action" programs that abound in this country. I can't speak to the so-called "Jim Crow" era, that was a long time ago, but look around at minority advancement and you see unqualified people promoted into positions they can't handle because someone somewhere feels guilty about what someone elses ancestors did to someone elses ancestors. When is enough enough?

Teaghan| 4.28.11 @ 10:47AM

Tony, the screaming and whining of "RACISM" is all they have left. And what is sad is that it's lost it's sting. Yawn..........go ahead, call me a racist again and again and again. blah blah blah Folks of color get preferential treatment daily. In California, they are considering getting rid of affirmative action because whites are becoming a minority. Now, talk abour racism!

Comenius| 4.29.11 @ 5:58AM

Yeah, it must be nice being a liberal. You never have to think up a cogent argument or even speak in complete sentences. He only have to cover your ears and keep shouting at the top of your lungs, "racism!", "racism!", "racism!".... But alas, it's finally starting to wear out because of overuse in the drive-by media.

WeMustResist| 4.28.11 @ 9:24AM

He said in public that he was born in Kenya. Why don't you believe him? The evidence just released by the White House is so artificial (ie computerised) that it does not take us anywhere. It simply means we have to ask again for a copy of the birth certificate. What we have been given is something any computer literate graphic designer could do in a few minutes with false data, without copying a genuine document. I am not saying it is a false document, but it obviously cannot be trusted as a copy of the original, or a copy of the copy of the original. There is also the matter of the lies and time-buying that led us to this point. They need to be followed through. For example the false statements made by the Hawaii Govenor. The military doctor serving time because Obama did not release the document in time. It is still very fishy. It smells bad because something is rotten. These points are not trivial, any more than Watergate was trivial. We should engage the enemy on all fronts where success is guaranteed, and this is one of them. There is something very wrong here and we have only just started to make progress. If you have a sense of justice then don't give up just because it suits Obama for you to give up.

Barry| 4.28.11 @ 10:52AM

I'll mail you a copy.

Mimi| 4.28.11 @ 2:50PM

The document provided is now known to be FORGED. The fake, is a very poor job! The question now being asked IS....why ??? Check out American Thinker and the referals to U-Tube.

PolishKnight| 4.28.11 @ 9:27AM

The term "racist" in American politics has an Orwellian doublespeak nature about it. What the left means by "racism" is when white people don't bend over backwards to please non-whites. When whites are discriminated against, that isn't racism in their view. Yet, this blatantly hypocritical viewpoint exists alongside the leftist worshipping Sweden as the future model utopia for the states to aspire to even as the population is nearly entirely white.

The explanation for this policy from the left is simple: During the 1950's, the left recognized that most white voters were anti-communist and pro-American and needed to create a political demographic that would be loyal to the socialist state. In an instant, they began abandoning their white union working-class white men (Archie Bunker would be a typical supporter back in the 1930's) and started demonizing such men while courting everyone they could, a "minority" who could be counted upon to share their distaste with the status quo. Then they sought to grow this "minority" into a majority via immigration and welfare policies that rewarded such women for having multiple children.

What's amazing is that many whites, especially white males, continue to support this regime. What's in it for them? They aren't going to make America into another Sweden (the goal is to merely take the states down to free up world socialism). They're taking one for the team. With a Marxist religion that doesn't provide for a heaven, they are true martyrs for the cause.

But that's not an excuse for the right to continue looking the other way at this problem. We're living in an era of Jim Crow for white males most of whom were Northerners who either had nothing to do with original Jim Crow or even fought in the civil war on the Union side.

Perhaps with a half-black president in office, there may be Republican candidates willing to address the issue. But sadly I'm not getting my hopes up.

Teaghan| 4.28.11 @ 10:52AM

White guilt is what drives this idiocy. IMHO of course.

PolishKnight| 4.28.11 @ 3:55PM

In the states, white guilt is mixed with a volatile substance known as chivalry. Women were added to so-called "minorities" as oppressed groups. During the 80's, college campuses were full of women who griped about their ancestors (at least the womens' side) being denied voting rights and oftentimes employment rights. (But notice how quiet they were about those comfy lifeboat seats on the Titanic and not wanting those jobs in the coal mines to support their spouse.)

Targeting white males as a "privileged" group is like Marxist class warfare on crack. EVERYONE who is not a white heterosexual male sees some goodie for themselves at the expense of the guy behind the tree. Who doesn't support a big brother sugar daddy when someone else is footing the tab?

Larry| 4.29.11 @ 5:15AM

Yeah, PolishKnight, even my own college-attending son has fallen into the trap of using the term "racist" when I send him stuff that criticizes Islam, African-Americans, or other causes celebre of the Left. It's the Kultursmog, let's face it. And we have to reverse that first, even though it will be the hardest thing to do.

Dan Hirsch| 4.28.11 @ 9:37AM

How does a President stand up in front of the TOTUS and proclaim his as the most transparent administration ever and then spend years and hundreds of thousands of dollars to hide his birth certificate?

How?

Only with the help of compliant media, that's how.

The American in the street gets this.

Anyone who misses it is either not paying attention or too busy ingratiating themselves with the 'ruling class.'

Don't tread on me!!!!

Dee See| 4.28.11 @ 9:59AM

---Nice article.

NOW, putting the antics of the capstone creeps
aside

DO get the REAL DEAL on the unfolding
'eugenics friendly' Fukishima and world
radiation disaster.

It's awesome and unparalleled.

Seems the reactors will be spewing at this
rate for the next 10 months ----AT LEAST!

As national monitoring sites have been taken
down worldwide --and as our sources report
Vancouver's radiation level is 99X the
acceptable limit -----(remember a single
molocule of plutonium IS cancer, and a pound
of the stuff is enough to kill everyone on the
planet).

DO CHECK OUT 'NWO Japan Disaster/Heavier Censoring News' on Youtube for the REAL DEAL
a.s.a.p..

REALLLLLLLLLY --------------!

Dan Hirsch| 4.28.11 @ 11:19AM

Dee See;

Did you know that older smoke detectors have a microcurie of Radium in them?

Better go check!

And if you're in Alabama, the sky IS falling.

Grow up!

canuckistani| 4.28.11 @ 12:10PM

Gays in the air, commies in the water........

WickedDickie--Virginia| 4.28.11 @ 10:30AM

Maybe the evil creature who infests our White House was born in the U.S.A. and maybe he released the certificate to take the wind out of the sails of Dr. Corsi's book or he caved to Trump. How does that make up for the railroading and jailing of Lt. Col. Lakin who dared to question the legal standing of the erstwhile Commander-in-Chief? Is there a pardon in his future? Hah!

martin j smith| 4.28.11 @ 10:35AM

When people vote they will vote to the question : are you better or worse off now ? Are you safer or less safe now ? That will determine the election

Teaghan| 4.28.11 @ 11:13AM

Let's hope so Martin. But DWTS is on and I don't have time to fill my head with such things as "am I safer or better off" than 4 years ago!

Sam Vaughn| 4.28.11 @ 11:24AM

when liberals ask tough, embarassing questions of their opponents they're; insightful, thoughtful, bold,,,, When conservtives do the same they're immediately denigrated, racist, ignorant, contributing to the "climate of hate". This article is obfuscation at it's best. Can you spell RINO?

Tim the Enchanter| 4.28.11 @ 11:46AM

There is strong evidence that this "new" COLB has been electronically tampered with. A mere photocopy that was converted to a pdf would be "flat". This one has EIGHT layers (a "flat" document would have only one), "cutting" marks, and other artifacts, that, using the right tool, will reveal. Transparency, indeed!

9th ID| 4.28.11 @ 12:01PM

Let's try and simplify this as much as we can for the uniformed and ignorant Statists and the RINOs: There are Naturalized Citizens, Citizens, and Natural Born Citizens. The Constitution specifies that the President must meet the higher qualification of Natural Born status. Obama doesn't meet this test having a father who was a British/Kenyan citizen. John McCain had to present his long form, and be grilled by Congress since he was born to two American citizens, but on U.S. territory (at the time) of Panama Canal Zone. Arnold Swartzenegger is a Naturalized Citizen and as such can be governor of California, but NOT president. Even if Obama is proven to be a Citizen, he cannot be president because he is not Natural Born. So, the fight to uphold our Constitution and the rule of law must continue even as we battle the ignorant neo-Marxists and the RINOs...

RCV| 4.28.11 @ 12:11PM

Your ignorance on this subject is simply breathtaking. Why the President even bothered to have lawyers go to Hawaii, seek waivers so that they could photograph his birth certificate, in order to try to satisfy paranoid ignoramouses like you is beyond me.

DC| 4.28.11 @ 1:03PM

RCV, Brooks, and the rest of the socialist trolls poisoning this website: Read what the poster from Idaho has to say, below. With this "birth certificate," your Dear Leader couldn't get a job as a bus driver, much less a job at a law firm, or within one of his own Executive Branch departments. IF you trolls could stop masturbating in front of his picture and praying to Gaia for the destruction of all productive, taxpaying citizens (our military included), or if you'd ever hired anyone (or were capable of reviewing someone's resume objectively, without insisting on a Leninist ideological purity test), you'd be able to step back and realize what Dear Leader's lawyers have done here. And it's pretty simple. They've produced a document that beats the "hearsay" rule. As a purportedly official document of a U.S. state, it is presumed to be valid and "not hearsay," therefore, admissible in court. And that is all the current Black House (don't start with the racism horseshit, which comes stronger from the left and black leaders than from anyone else) knows that it needs in order to keep up the charade.
Now, was Dear Leader born in the U.S. and is he eligible to be president? I don't know, and I don't really care. What I know is that he's an anti-American, anti-capitalist, totalitarian bastard who is undermining everything that this country once stood for, and to which millions of immigrants once came, hoping and expecting freedom rather than tyranny. Our brilliant military and the 2nd Amendment are the only things standing in his way. Birth certificate issues really are irrelevant at this point (they should have been relevant in 2008). What's relevant is what this fiendish bastard is capable of doing, permanently, to this country--remaking it in his and his dirtbag father's image.
But for the RCVs and Brookses of the world, none of the above matters. They think they'll be the guards at the concentration camps. Good luck with that, and I'd suggest getting some practice with your favorite firearm at a local range. Since those of us you'll be trying to kill practice--a lot. Just some friendly advice.

RCV| 4.28.11 @ 1:51PM

I don't know what world you inhabit in your mind, DC, but your fantasies of living in a totalitarian nightmare are so far from reality as to be laughable. Here you are, living in the most prosperous nation in history, the world's greatest country blessed with a 200 year old stable constitutional republic, at a time when you can sit freely at your computer and express your rambling political thoughts to millions of people, unhampered -- a right others on the planet would and do die for as we speak. And what do you do? Sit around and whine like a little child! It's pathetic, really. Neither I nor anyone I know wants to guard any concentration camps or shoot you or anyone else. We'd just like you to grow up and get a grip on reality. Really....its embarrassing.

DC| 4.28.11 @ 3:30PM

Such a reliably pompous jackass you are, RCV, lecturing the (mostly) good folk here on how great the country is (was), when your messiah is employing every power at the disposal of the Executive Branch to tear down the stability of our Constitutional republic. He mocks and wastes the lives of our military on "kinetic military actions" that he has no intention of winning, and in fact, would prefer that our enemies win (read his books, assmonkey--he's pretty damn clear about which side he's always been on). He spends more in one budget cycle, and incurs more debt, than all presidents, combined, who preceded him. Two non-trivial examples of what your Dear Leader is doing, right now, to ensure that this country as constituted ceases to exist.
I notice that you don't, because you can't, rebut the fact of his latent, virulent, and simmering totalitarianism (right now, it's pure Fascism, but as Mussolini himself said once, he and Lenin were philosophical brothers--the leap to Bolshevism is short), nor do you seem to care what might stand in its way. It is for that reason that I assume that you would stand with the totalitarians, who would crush what remains of freedom in this bankrupt society. Do you deny that you'd stand next to Dear Leader as one of the executors of his pure, wonderful Will of the People? Do you deny that you'd like to exterminate uppity folk like me who believe that spitting on our Constitution, mocking our institutions, and recklessly sending American soldiers to die with no intention of victory is wrong, bad, and ought to be stopped? Of course not. Just admit what you want and good luck in trying to achieve it. I think you have a decent chance, frankly, but there are some obstacles, and it's hardly paranoid or crazy to point those out. Nor is it paranoid or crazy to prepare myself and my family to fight and kill people like you, and hopefully find some use for your spare parts.
And by the way, I'm at work. It doesn't take much time and effort to rebut the dope-addled yammerings of simpletons like yourself.
Get a job yourself, try to (once in a while) talk to someone who isn't part of your leftist bubble-world. And please stop pretending that you aren't who you are: a pathetic, repressed little totalitarian, hoping Dear Leader will fulfill all of your fantasies.

Jack London| 4.28.11 @ 4:06PM

Good God man - as a great singer once said, your brain is squirming like a toad.

OK - here's an idea for you. Pick a year when you think America was truly great in your view and we'll take it from there.

Pete| 4.28.11 @ 4:30PM

1776. Go.

RCV| 4.28.11 @ 5:05PM

DC, I've been working full-time for more than 40 years. And I've been educated enough to know what a totalitarian is. I, for one, don't want to exterminate anyone, love and cherish our Constitution, proudly support our men and women in uniform, would give my life for my country in a heartbeat, and ... strongly support our President. Unlike you, I don't believe America is a "bankrupt society".

Frisbee| 4.28.11 @ 10:01PM

Good going DC.

W| 4.28.11 @ 3:37PM

rcv. you are an attorney, why didnt obama produce this long form in all the lawsuits challenging his birth location, which would have ended those suits quickly? do you really think it was that difficult to get a waiver and photo the birth record

RCV| 4.28.11 @ 5:10PM

He had what every Hawaiin citizen gets when they seek a birth certificate from the state - the certified short form. I'm sure he thought that would be fine, as it was for most Americans. Frankly, until the carnival barker Trump revived the issue, interest was fairly limited to a small fringe group, many of whom are regulars on this site. Nor would producing it have satisfied those confirmed birthers, as you can see from the comments above. Each of the suits, by the way, has in fact been disposed of as quickly and easily as suits ever do. The courts have all given them the short shrift they deserved.

W| 4.28.11 @ 6:28PM

No, i read obama has spent over 2 million to defend these suits, dont know who paid the fees. the suit in pennsylvania was filed by philip berg, a democrat liberal lawyer who once ran for governor or senator. it was dismissed on lack of standing, as i believe the others were. obama could have easily filed the long form, and moved to dismiss. instead he argued lack of standing, and the suits did not reach the merits.
why fight and spend money when you have the evidence to easily win?

RCV| 4.28.11 @ 6:35PM

The fees were paid by you and I, as are the fees for all lawsuits brought against the President. You have to fight any suit that's brought by moving to dismiss unless you want to litigate it on the merits. Since the Berg suit was so plainly invalid for lack of standing, a motion to dismiss was made on that ground because it's the fastest way to dispose of the case.

W| 4.29.11 @ 1:41PM

In pa he could have filed an answer with the certificate, as an exhibit, then filed a motion to dismiss/summary judgment, and won on the merits. it would have ended all these questions two years ago, he chose to fight on a "technicality" and keep the merits issue alive. as an attorney you know that

RCV| 4.29.11 @ 8:01PM

A summary judgment motion, as every civil litigator knows, is a massive undertaking, which does not evaluate or weigh facts or credibility -- only decides if there is no contested issue of fact to be decided. Cases in which the plaintiff clearly has no standing are always adjudicated quickly and easily on that grounds. Indeed, if the plaintiff has no constitutional standing, the federal court is without jurisdiction to adjudicate the case on the merits.

usfrog | 4.29.11 @ 3:28AM

@9th ID
You are 100% correct. Unfortunately many people cannot associate words and ideas in order to understand a text. It is quite simple, really. BHO's father was a British citizen giving him dual citizenship, therefore not natural born. Therefore INELIGIBLE. By consiously disregarding this item, we are scrapping the Constitution and being disdainful for the rule of law. The way Obama regards that as "silliness" speaks volumes of what he thinks of the United States, Americans and Freedom.

skedaddle| 4.28.11 @ 12:28PM

"Many people on the Left, and even certain Republicans (e.g., David Frum), have treated Birtherism as a proxy for latent racism. And one may grant that this is to some extent true..."

Really, I don't grant that racism is involved at all. Where's your proof of racism, McCain? Name me one example of anyone's criticism of 0bama being racist critisism. Decent people really are fighting a 2-front war - Rino's on 1 side and Donkey's on the other.

Vstarrider in Idaho| 4.28.11 @ 12:45PM

I am suprised that no one has noticed that the document is not "official".
If you look at the whole document you will notice that there is no "official seal" from the State of Hawaii as required in the Federal Department of Homeland Security form I-9, Employment Eligibility Verification, used to prove citizenship. That form states, under the Documents that Establish Employment Eleigilibility column:
"Original certified copy of a birth certificate issued by a state, county, municipal authority or outlying possession of the United States BEARING AND OFFICIAL SEAL. (caps are mine).
My occupation includes interviewing and hiring school bus drivers for our local district and I could not accept this copy as is it presented, to hire him because it lacks the seal making if official. The seal should appear down on the bottom of the page next to the signers signature.
The question is: Why would the State of Hawaii issue a certificate and "forget" to place the official seal on it making it authentic. Or did they?

RCV| 4.28.11 @ 2:37PM

You dolts just don't get it, do you. Hawaii only issues certified short form birth certificates. The President produced that years ago. Hawaii doesn't issue certified long form certificates - its law prohibits that. The President got a waiver allowing his attorney to photograph the long form the state produced. Give it up.

Vstarrider in Idaho| 4.28.11 @ 5:00PM

Hate to tell you Bucko, but my wife is fron Hawaii and she has a certified copy of her birth certificate WITH an official seal.

RCV| 4.28.11 @ 5:11PM

Obama already produced the certified copy with the seal.

ONTIME| 4.28.11 @ 12:49PM

I listen to the MSM call you names if you demand a BC instead of a COLB but it is they who will not make the distinguishing differences and yet demand that everyone accept this Elite Snobs attempt to foist off another of his insults. I have began to look at the MSM as a place where even idiots can work and get paid.....

martin j smith| 4.28.11 @ 1:38PM

Forget the MSM--those people who do not recognize the political value Obama could use for this issue are making a big mistake. Let me demonstrate why:
When people vote in 2012 which of these issues
will make the greatest influence on their choice:
a) Being employed or unemployed
b)the cost of fuel
c)The cost of food
d)the deficit
e) Big government
f) Obama's birth certifcate
g) Obama's grades
h) Obama Care

Well guys--which of these will have the greater influence on the vote ?

The right answer is all but f, and g unless something really big changes this issue.

Those people who think these choices are more significan( f and g ) I have little respect for their views

martin j smith| 4.28.11 @ 1:38PM

Well guys--which of these will have the greater influence on the vote ?

The right answer is all but f, and g unless something really big changes this issue.

Those people who think these choices are more significan( f and g ) I have little respect for their views

martin j smith| 4.28.11 @ 1:39PM

And one more thing: Please explain why Trum goes after of all issues the birth certificate and grades and not the economic and national security issue. Reason: He is phony.

Ranald Hay| 4.28.11 @ 1:41PM

Mr. McCain,
You've missed an important point: The LFBC issue was for many of us completely unrelated to "birfer" myth... Rather it had and has still everything to do with a candidate's responsibility to the Constitution and to the people served to make good on disclosing one's eligibility beforehand.

The sheer arrogance of the president as candidate and CinC that he, unique amongst men, is above such petty "distraction" speaks volumes of the man himself and the party machine responsible for vetting him. The man is four years late on the meanest of his bona fides.

Many of us didn't give a flying [-] where precisely he was physically born, what mattered and remains still is the attitude and belief of the man behind the documents. In this case, we have but one. It's mighty thin fare: Won't get you a position as a Scoutmaster and yet without it one can rise to the Office of President?

Anthony| 4.28.11 @ 2:48PM

There you go again, Mr. McCain. By that I mean to say you are another member of the right that continues to fall into the trap of the left's narrative.
After some 3 years, and a day after his press hack called the B.C. issue a "distraction", Obozo holds a stop the presses presser, and delivers one of his most santimonious speeches ever. Sickning I call it.
Racism?? How about finally doing what the Constitution requires and that all other candidates have had to produce when asked?
Obozo smugly calls the entire issue silly, (although he has done more to keep the issue alive) and a distraction, pronounces that we have more important things to do, then he goes off to be on the Oprah show and to NY to raise his $ ONE BILLION war chest. Yep, that's focusing like a laser on the more importrant things allright.
The gall of this con man getting away with such hutspah, but only accomplished with the help of the likes of Robert McCain, who fail to see how this con man sets things up with the help of a duped media.
No Mr. McCain, Obozo did not steal the show. The so called "birthers" were not delt a death blow. All that was done was that this pathetic excuse of a president did what he did not want to do, but was forced to, yet morons in the media allow for the narrative that Obozo was the big winner.
What a crock!!! Now back to 10% unemployment, $5.00 a gal gas, and the financial meltdown.

kerry| 4.28.11 @ 2:55PM

Is the author a RINO? I am not, never was, won't ever be racist. I have had serious doubts about Obama's past. I'm very offended this guy, "the real McCain" is implying I"m racist because Mr.Obama has not produced a certified long form birth certificate, and has also hidden his college records from public viewing. I think Mr.Obama is extremely arrogant in his whole approach to the issue, that is the key. BO is very, very arrogant, and the majority of people are starting to see it. Thanks, Trump! Keep it up!!! Inquiring, NON RACIST minds want to know!

Mr. Hipp| 4.28.11 @ 2:58PM

At the heart of the birther thing is that we know so little about Obama's past. Any reasonable person would be curious as to why Obama has kept his past so secret. The LFBC should not and will not end that yearning for answers. But regardless of his birthplace, school and passport records and Connecticut social security number, many Americans feel that he is not one of us. And it has nothing to do with race. It has to do with an American President bad mouthing his own country, criticizing our Constitution and, I'm not being sarcastic here, throwing a baseball like a girl.

john| 4.28.11 @ 3:23PM

Why is the number on o's BC , aug., 4 higher (10641) than the Nordyk children born the next (10637) day Aug. 5. As you can see on today's American Thinker site??? bloody strange.

Anthony| 4.28.11 @ 4:01PM

P.S. Mr. McCain. By doing what he did, Obozo insured that another Dan Rather,Bill Burkett, fake document argument will never get a foothold.
Obozo knows if this is a fake, he now has that covered with the media and the dupes.
Questions are already being raised, and just as quickly dismissed by the intelligencia "let it go" they're screaming.
Yep, the con man has committed a con on top of a con, all out in the open for all to see. Question is, did he also take the wind out of Corsi and his soon to be released book?
Obozo and his pals are the most vile of men, with plenty of suckers to fleece.

Kearney| 4.28.11 @ 4:21PM

The fundamental question is "Does Obama and Congress have to obey the Constitution and the laws of the land?" Congress exempts itself from ObamaCare. Obama exempts himself from enforcing immigration laws and from obeying the Constitution. This issue is more important than the state of the economy, the price of oil, or foreign wars.
McCain is in this piece is helping the DC crowd think that it is above the laws and the land and above the Constitution.

Ozzy| 4.28.11 @ 4:52PM

I used to be a virulent anti racist.
Now I am simply a student of rhetoric and reason.
As I understand it, regardless of the moral associations and lack of reason concomitant with Racism, nothing forbids a voter from making choices based on any process they so desire...
The democrats have effectively trivialized the issue and one can wonder what ethnicity they shall chose for their next candidate so as to be all inclusive, or that is, to exclude a White Male.

George True| 4.28.11 @ 5:09PM

This newly released long form birth certificate is every bit as much of a forgery as the Certification of Live Birth (short form) birth certificate issued by the Obama campaign in 2008. Data in a number of the blanks has OBVIOUSLY been altered. The background has been purposely fuzzed up to make it less apparent. This is not my conclusion, but that of half a dozen individuals who have worked with Photoshop and Adobe Illustrator every day for the last 20 years. I repeat, this new "birth certificate" is a FAKE, and not a particularly good one either.

It is entirely predictable that the de facto propaganda arm of the Democrat party (the mainstream media) would pretend that this obvious forgery of a birth certificate settles everything. Unfortunately the GOP elite is also pretending that the issue is now settled.

Besides this forged certificate, there is the matter of Obama using a known fraudulent social security number, the matter of the missing school records from grade school, high school, Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard Law. (Might some of them show that he was attending as a foreign student?) There is also the matter of the bogus selective service registration, which has also been exposed as a forgery.

There are also the missing passport records. (Did Obama travel to Pakistan in 1981 on an Indonesian passport?) There are also the missing marriage records of his mother, the missing adoption records, the missing law practice records for both he and his wife, and the missing records of when he was an Illinois state senator.

Finally, there is the matter of the DNC and the Hawaii Democrat party signing a form certifying Obama's eligibility, but leaving out the sentence that says they certify that he is eligible ACCORDING TO THE US CONSTITUTION, unlike the forms for the other 49 states which DO certify that he is eligible under the constitution. Looks like they knew something was bogus and thus didn't want to sign something that could later land them in federal prison if it was ever discovered that Obama is not eligible.

It is quite obvious that this guy is hiding something. What, I do not know, but probably something that would show he is not constitutionally eligible to be president. Obama and his handlers have pulled off the greatest deception and fraud in the history of the United States, maybe in the history of the world, and the elite, including the GOP elites, pretend the issue does not exist. They just continue to tell us sheep, "Nothing to see here, move along".

This issue is not a distraction or a sideshow, It is THE core issue of the 2012 campaign, as it goes directly to Obama's fundamental corruption and criminality. It is shattering to realize that we have NO ONE among the GOP who will fight for us. We have no champion. I now have some inkling how Lincoln must have felt when he could not get any of his generals to actually take the war to the enemy.

And make no mistake, these people, Obama and all his Marxist handlers and enablers are our swornn and mortal enemy. They seek to destroy our country as we know it. And they will not hesitate to destroy any of us who get in their way. (Obama allowed Lt Colonel Terry Lakin to go to prison rather than release even a bogus birth certificate. What kind of a POS would do that?) They are sociopaths and criminals. They represent a clear and present danger to all of us collectively, and each of us individually.

RCV| 4.28.11 @ 5:12PM

The twilight zone continues.....do do do, do do do do..........

George True| 4.28.11 @ 5:54PM

Any rational person with half a functioning brain would conclude that he is hiding something. You know it too, even if your leftist ideology will not let you admit it.

RCV| 4.29.11 @ 8:04PM

You're right, George -- any person with a half a functioning brain would believe what you do.

George True| 4.30.11 @ 6:07AM

You know exactly what I meant. Interesting that you are unable to rebut even ONE of the points I made. You are weak and pathetic. Also gullible.

Radioman777| 4.28.11 @ 6:05PM

I don't know whether the birth certificate presented is real or not. What I do know is he presented what can best be described as a facsimile of a document without proof of authenticity, chain of custody, or nonrepudiation. On a daily basis, drivers throughout the US present false proof of insurance to obtain license plates and inspection stickers; false social security cards are presented in order to obtain employment and state benefits; and fake driver licenses are presented so that youthful miscreants can buy liquor and cigarettes. So why the rush to believe this document is real? it may not be. It might be that a great many are once again victims of their own preconceived notions, believing that which they are inclined to, without applying critical thinking or analysis.

George True| 4.28.11 @ 6:20PM

You make a good point that I failed to make. The document presented as the "real" birth certificate is not a direct photocopy of the original (if such exists in this case). At best, it is a copy of a copy, and there is no documented chain of custody, even if there were a real and direct photocopy of an original, which this is not.

It is simply not logical that this twice-removed facsimile of a birth certificate, apparently cobbled together from several birth certificates, should be accepted as genuine. Even if one were inclined to give someone the benefit of the doubt, the particular individual in question has a long and well documented history of lying.

RCV| 4.28.11 @ 6:43PM

Reminds me of the current article in The Onion: "Afterbirthers Demand to See Placenta From Obama's Supposed Birth."

Wally| 4.28.11 @ 6:16PM

What a thread! Any of you posters here actually partake in any democratic enterprise, like say a City Council race or a Planning Commission hearing? Unless there is a briber y allegation, participants simply don't bother with accusations of ulterior motives, conspiracies, father's s viewpoints. You know, the stuff here.

The only exceptions are the gadflies who lecture, bully, rant and accuse the lowly paid or volunteer commission members of OUTRAGEOUS and illicit purposes. But they are crazy.

You guys (and you are all white, older guys) here are like that. Except you don't have the ability or the courage to participate in such live forums. You all remind me of that obese game player character on a South Park episode who just eats chips and soda pop all day obsessively trying to destroy some enemy created for them.

rongordo | 4.29.11 @ 9:40AM

How do old white guys remind you of the South Park gamer? You maybe didn't see all the un-able and un-courageous old white folks town-hallers demonized on the MSN last summer? Before you give lessons on who's bullying who, consider Sarah Palin and her family. Consider Arizona.

George True| 4.28.11 @ 6:32PM

Way to go slick. Just ignore all the evidence and pronounce everyone who doesn't buy the lie as old, racist white guys. Well here's a couple of news flashes for ya, Mr Wizard. First, he who pulls the race card IS the racist. When all you see is race, and you ascribe any and all disagreement with your position as racism, guess what? YOU are the racist.

Second, if it were just a matter of one or two documents that were questionable, that would be one thing. But considering the extensive list of fraudulent, forged, bogus, and missing documents, any logical person would conclude that Obama is most likely hiding something. Occam's Razor.

RCV| 4.28.11 @ 6:38PM

George, there is no "evidence" other than the paranoid conspiracies dreamed up in your and other disturbed minds.

George True| 4.28.11 @ 7:41PM

What you call "paranoid conspiracies" is merely simple logic. It is truly amazing how many convoluted twists of thought and ignoring of irrefutable facts you go through to avoid the obvious. There IS an obvious coverup. I am sure you see it too, but your extreme leftist ideology will not allow you to publicly admit it. Or perhaps you are so far down the rabbit hole you cannot even admit it to yourself. Or is it just that to a leftist like you the end justifies the means, so it is okay with you that Obama is most likely lying about his background?

What will you do if (when) one day it becomes known that Obama was hiding an eligibility issue? Will you then admit, at least to yourself, that you were lied to? Or will that be okay with you too?

RCV| 4.29.11 @ 8:06PM

George, read my lips carefully: There is no "eligibility issue" to hide. The ... man ... was ... born ... in ... Hawaii.

George True| 4.30.11 @ 6:12AM

He. Is. Obviously. Hiding. Something. The man erases the entire paper trail of his whole life, and you apparently think there is nothing unusual about that. It must be blissful to be so gullible. I'm beginning to realize that gullibility must be why you and your ilk are leftists.

Thomas Hart| 4.28.11 @ 6:45PM

The Birth Certificate Prooves He is NOT Eligible:

The founders wanted to prevent dual citizenship (dual allegiance) from anyone occupying the White House, especially as Commander in Chief. Hence they used the term "natural born citizen" which was defined in the "Law of Nations" which they used and often referred to. Read Vattel's treatise about native and natural born citizens.
One must be born on a Country's soil by parents (Plural) who are citizens of that country. His father was a Kenyan, which was a British Crown Colony at the time. So Obama's father was a British subject, totally disqualifying him for the Presidency. NOTE: He was also later adopted and in order for him to attend school in Indonesia he had to be a citizen of Indonesia, which he was by virtue of the adoption. So at that point he lost any claim to American citizenship as well as his British citizenship. That alone would disqualify him as well. How did he get back his American citizenship??

It has never been about the Birth Certificate....it is not even about Obama...
It has always been about the CONSTITUTION. The Constitution either means what it says or it means nothing at all. If you choose to ignore one part of it then you can throw the thing away because nothing will matter.. Call me what you will: Birther, Racist, whatever. I know that I am a "Patriot". I believe in the Constitution. I have sworn an oath on 4 occasions to protect and defend the Constitution from all enemies both foreign and domestic. I am trying to do just that. We have a Usurper in the White House as Commander in Chief who is actively working to destroy America. He has no allegiance to America. He did not grow up with an American experience. Instead he grew up and has surrounded himself ever since with people who hate America, who want us to become part of a One World Government who is socialistic in nature. He does not believe in Free Enterprise or American exceptionalism. He chastises the US abroad and bows before our enemies. Yes, I am a Patriot and I will fight for this Country and against the Usurper until my last breath. He is NOT Eligible...period.

usfrog | 4.29.11 @ 3:04AM

100 % correct !

RCV| 4.29.11 @ 8:07PM

100% wrong, The US Supreme Court decided in a 19th century case that people born in the United States were "natural born citizens."

George True| 4.30.11 @ 6:14AM

Not hardly. Nice try, though. It must be really blissful to worship at the altar of Obama. Reminds me of the Jim Jones followers.

RCV| 4.30.11 @ 3:54PM

Your problem, George, is that you simply accept any drivel you read on right-wing internet sites as gospel, instead of doing your own independent research.

In Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94, 101 (1884), the United States Supreme Court held the following about the very clause in the Constitution we are addressing:

“The distinction between citizenship by birth and citizenship by naturalization is clearly marked in the provisions of the Constitution, by which 'no person, except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President.' … This section contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two sources only: birth and naturalization.”

Thus, as the Supreme Court has held, a person who is a citizen at birth -- such as a person born within the United States -- as opposed to a person whose citizenship is obtained by naturalization, is a "natural born citizen" and eligible under the Constitution for the Presidency.

Winston| 4.28.11 @ 8:49PM

Can we just say it? He is an enemy. Enemy of the state. President?! Hah. He should be in Guantanamo! With every other quisling, socialist member of the Democratic Party (except Ben Nelson.)

The proof is in the birth certificate. In Pelosi's witchiness. In Kerry's hairdo and Frenchness. In Hillary's ball busting. In Bill Clinton's affairs. Illegitimate. That is what they all are. They are not good Americans. In fact, they all hate America. If we could just establish a few more Guantanamo bases and work farms in Alaska, North Dakota and Montana, I think we could find a place for these illegitimates.

RCV| 4.29.11 @ 8:08PM

Ah, the believers in "liberty" and the Constitution, and their solution for political disagreements.

George True| 4.30.11 @ 6:16AM

And your solution is that everybody must worship Obama.....or else. No one is allowed to disagree.

RCV| 4.30.11 @ 3:56PM

No, George, I don't expect and would not want, anyone to "worship Obama". Only God is deserving of our worship. You are free under our wonderful Constitution to disagree all you want. Just stop making things up.

Volare| 4.28.11 @ 9:07PM

One of the biggest winners here is Michele Bachmann. Although not widely reported, she took GOP kingpin Karl Rove`s advice last week, and ditched birtherism, leaving Trump to wallow in it by himself, with Sarah Palin egging him on.

Earl Stanowicz| 4.29.11 @ 12:05AM

Apparently the author does not believe in reading more recent things on the web - like the point by point dissection of the multi-layered, forged document offered - and eagerly sucked up - by the media of the left, and yes, that includes the author of this excremental offering on behalf of 'the one'.
It would seem that a person would have to be either willingly ignorant or maliciously disingenuous to avoid seeing any of the posts which often include videos, showing the multiple layering process used in the Adobe Illustrator program used to commit the fraud. If you would like a couple of quick links to see the truth :
http://iowntheworld.com/blog/?p=73096
http://barnhardt.biz/

What is interesting to me, is how rapidly the so-called "conservative" media, like the author of this article, instantly toady-up to the sycophant line in order to trumpet the latest lie from the liar-in-chief. If such writers do not want us to think that they are owned by the Obama Ministry if Propaganda, then why do they disseminate the lie and turn away from the truth? And further, they join in with the leftists by branding anyone who does NOT fall for the lie, as being mentally deranged... reminds one of Pravda.

Morgan| 4.29.11 @ 12:57AM

We have gained a tremendous political advantage, and I don't know why it is so hard for you to see that. Trump got into Obama's head (put him "on tilt" in poker terms); Obama, having tried to ignore it all, finally bursts and gives us a copy of a copy, and an incomplete copy at that.

And along the way he displays his prickly, thin-skinned arrogance. He could easily have said "I have not thought this was a serious issue, but I have become aware that there are a number of Americans who do, and so I'm producing the document in hopes we can put this all to rest". That's what a statesman would have done. Instead we get "silliness" and "sideshows and carnival barkers".

In "Lion in Winter," Henry II says to Phillip: ""Henry II: I found out the way your mind works and the kind of man you are. I know your plans and expectations - you've burbled every bit of strategy you've got. I know exactly what you will do, and exactly what you won't, and I've told you exactly nothing. To these aged eyes, boy, that's what winning looks like!"

Not to seem like I'm pulling a Charlie Sheen here, but all of this looks like us winning to me. And it certainly will carry over, if only as "background". More and more Americans are coming to see Obama for who and what he is, and fewer and fewer Americans like what they see.

usfrog | 4.29.11 @ 3:01AM

I am always amazed at how unknowledgeable people are when it comes to the requirements of running for POTUS. One requirement is being "natural born". That is, being born on US soil, of US citizen parentS. Obama's father was a British citizen. Obama never was and never will be a natural born citizen. He is ineligible. People who continue treating this Constitutional crises as a nutcase delusion are helping the destruction of the Constitution and the downfall of the USA.

axbucxdu| 4.29.11 @ 10:49PM

"...People who continue treating this Constitutional crises as a nutcase delusion are helping the destruction of the Constitution and the downfall of the USA."

100% right. They're boiling the frogs...that's US!

Dee See| 4.29.11 @ 6:15AM

AGAIN, for the reality challenged serfs

Just months ago David Rockefeller called
publicly for MASSIVE and RAPID 'depopulation'
worldwide.

Yesterday

"And now it's a certainty. Fukishima is not only
worse, but MANY times worse than Chernobyl
and so is being covered up by the corporate
media worldwide. Cancer afterall is the perfect
tool for 'depopulation' (ie genocide). Utterly
untraceable, and easily brushed aside by the brain
dead."
-ALAN WATT
(essential and devastating coverage online)

NOW, turn off your surveillance tool PC,
the noise of your TV, radio and i-pod ---and
listen!

Beyond the hiss of the enhanced microwaves

-------------------LISTEN!

Yuppie giggles!

TOLD YA' SO!-------------------

rongordo | 4.29.11 @ 9:20AM

Judging Obama by his record while in office DOES include his fostering of this conspiracy. What kind of American leader purposely keeps the a large portion of the electorate in a mode ranging between suspicion and derangement? And for what? A possible trump card for a future campaign? A distraction? Whatever the reason, it's not the kind of "transparency" he promised, nor the honesty and goodwill toward ALL of the nation that should be expected of the President of the United States. Besides his wrong-headedness on nearly EVERY issue for the past 2 years, he has demeaned the office in a multitude of ways from working outside the Constitution to suing Arizona to being the dude on the John Stewart Show, etc, to this lame prankishness. Barrack Obama and his hidden past is a terrible President and represents what's worst about this country from his unapreciative wife to octomom

Controse| 4.29.11 @ 11:24AM

Mr. President, show us your papers.

Winston| 4.29.11 @ 4:07PM

Thin skinned elitist affirmative action baby is what he is. He does not deserve to live in this great nation of ours, much less be its leader.

We are victims, is what we are here. Victims. Of a scam pulled over much of America by an usurping foreigner. Put a real American like Donald Trump or Newt Grigrich in the White House.

oft | 4.29.11 @ 5:18PM

Hasn't Obama illegally assumed the Presidency, as his dad was not a citizen? It's the same as an illegal coming across the border and having a son who becomes President. The 14th amendment says there is jurisdiction in becoming President. Both your parents have be citizens, nothing less. His dad came here legally, had Obama, but he wasn't a citizen. His parents have to both be citizens for Obama to be eligible.

RCV| 4.29.11 @ 8:10PM

Not sure what Constitution you're reading oft, but it isn't the US. The 14th Amendment says absolutely nothing on the subject. You folks just make up facts out of thin air!

George True| 4.30.11 @ 6:19AM

"...you folks just make up facts out of thin air."

Pot calling the kettle black.

Anna Keppa| 4.29.11 @ 11:33PM

"It has always been about the CONSTITUTION. The Constitution either means what it says or it means nothing at all."

The problem, of course, is that the Constitution does not say what it means when it uses the term "natural born citizen", a term it seemingly adopted from the English common law phrase "natural born subject".

No, there's no requirement -- statutory, constitutional or otherwise, that BOTH parents be US citizens for an American-born child to be a "national born citizen", based on the specious reasoning that the non-citizen parent conveys dual -citizenship and thus "dual allegiance".

Does anyone think George III would say to a person who argued he wasn't a natural born subject because his father was French?

"Well, all right then!"

And of course there's that nasty problem of who gets to interpret what the Constitution means.

Legal interpretation side, Mark Steyn put paid today to the ludicrous idea that a new, restrictive interpretation of "natural born citizen" would ever get political traction in SCOTUS or the congress.

John McCain, born a Panamanian AND a US ctizen at birth (retroactvely declared so), would also be ineligible , tainted by that "dual allegiance" thingy, even though both his parents were Americans. so why, as a matter of law and politics, should American-born Obama be given any less standing?

The children of single moms today, many with unknown fathers, would also be ineligible under the crabbed "both parents" interpretation. Ditto Nikki Haley, Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindall, all born here to immigrants, some not naturalized when they were born.

Does anyone really think that in "A Nation of Immigrants", and after the 14th Amendment and many statutes broadening the requirements and definitions of citizenship, the government would NOW adopt a restrictive reading that would cut out millions of legal immigrant children? There goes the Hispanic vote!!

I've made these arguments at American Thinker --- and I've been banned for my pains. Shame!, Mr. Lifson, for allowing your formerly outstanding website be reduced to fascistic censorship long practiced by DU and Daily Kos.

TA's moderators must be birthers. Bitter birthers.

Anna Keppa| 4.29.11 @ 11:35PM

"Being born in Panama to US citizen parents -- a military father on active duty and a mother who was authorized by lawful orders to accompany her husband to his duty station -- does not negate McCain's natural born citizen status."

But it doesn't negate Panama's laws making McCain a Panamanian citizen at birth, either!!!!

Where's your "dual allegiance" argument now??

George True| 4.30.11 @ 6:21AM

You're wrong.

Anna Keppa| 4.29.11 @ 11:43PM

Thomas Hart said : One must be born on a Country's soil by parents (Plural) who are citizens of that country.

>>>then why not McCain??? Not born on American soil?

>>>>>and where' s your evidence for the "both parents" nonsense?
what if the father is unknown? What if the
father is unknown or dead, and the mom dies
ten minutes before the baby is born in NYC?

See how flimsy your assertion is?

" His father was a Kenyan, which was a British Crown Colony at the time. So Obama's father was a British subject, totally disqualifying him for the Presidency."
>>>> See further Mike Dukakis, Nikki Haley, bobby Jindall. (See further "children of millions of American legal immigrants".)

" NOTE: He was also later adopted and in order for him to attend school in Indonesia he had to be a citizen of Indonesia, which he was by virtue of the adoption. "

>>>>Even if true, that would make him a naturalized citizen of Indonesia

But no: ask yourself, where did the children of diplomats and ex-pats in Indonesia go to school?

"So at that point he lost any claim to American citizenship as well as his British citizenship."

>>>>>Bollock!!! Your parents, your adoptive parents , guardians, cannot take away your American citizenship by any act! That's well-established American law. It is your birthright! (get it? Your right at birth)

George True| 4.30.11 @ 6:22AM

Actually, no. The opposite of what you contend is established American law.

Anna Keppa| 4.29.11 @ 11:48PM

"Radioman777| 4.28.11 @ 6:05PM

Snork! It has a stamp bearing the authentication statement of a CURRENT Hawaii official!!!

Anna Keppa| 4.30.11 @ 12:04AM

"Put DeVattel's "Law of Nations" into your search engine and do some reading on the likely source of John Jay's thinking related to including "natural born citizen" language in the Constitution. It has everything to do with avoiding conflicting alliances and nothing to do with the skin color of people seeking the presidency."

This might be an argument except that DeVattell and the world at the time didn't make a distinction between a child born to two citizens, to one a citizen and the other an alien, and to two aliens.

De Vattel talks about the relationship between individuals and government in Book 1 of The Law of Nations. He describes two types of citizen. In § 212. Citizens and natives. He says: “The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens.” When de Vattel’s translator uses the phrase “natural-born citizens” (this phrase is not literally in the French language original) he is invoking a principle of natural law, as he shows when saying: “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.” And finally, to emphasize what was said before, de Vattel concludes: “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.”

This last sentence, that discounts place of birth entirely is somewhat in contradiction to the first which asserts “born in the country” in addition to citizen parents. Note that parents (plural) does not imply two citizen parents, since clearly it is only the father who is considered. Parents is in parallel to citizens (also plural).

Anna Keppa| 4.30.11 @ 12:04AM

This might be an argument except that DeVattell and the world at the time didn't make a distinction between a child born to two citizens, to one a citizen and the other an alien, and to two aliens.

Anna Keppa| 4.30.11 @ 12:08AM

Sorry, that last post wasn't complete. It came from a book excerpt.

see:

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org.....r-dummies/

Any of you who would like to argue that an American- born child's citizenship (natural or otherwise) comes only through his father.....

BE....MY....GUEST!!!

p.s. lest my position be misinterpreted as that of an Obama supporter, I want, and I will be working for, the sumbitch's CRUSHING DEFEAT in 2012.

investorcs| 5.1.11 @ 9:00AM

For anyone who has expertise with Photoshop, it is now apparent that the vile Obama's long form birth certificate he just released is a fake. As but one example, see Tickerguy: 1, ObaBots: 0.

Obama has presented a forged document and claimed it is genuine. In other words, he has lied. As a matter of fact, he has lied all along for almost two years about previously provided information being the long-form birth certificate, which as per this latest release proves he was making false statements. Clinton was impeached not over his sexual escapades per se, but because he lied. In the same way, Obama must be impeached for lying incessantly and repeatedly about this issue.

Creative Recreation | 8.10.11 @ 9:39PM

is good

The American Spectator

A Further Perspective

Birtherdämmerung

About the Author

Letter to the Editor View all comments (179) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Bill Hussein O'Stalin| 4.28.11 @ 6:17AM

Alan Brooks| 4.28.11 @ 7:29AM

Frisbee| 4.29.11 @ 8:39PM

MissouriDavid| 5.2.11 @ 3:19PM

INstigator| 4.28.11 @ 6:39AM

Robbins Mitchell| 4.28.11 @ 6:49AM

Tevi| 4.28.11 @ 8:43AM

Dai Alanye | 4.28.11 @ 9:42AM

SoBeConservative| 4.28.11 @ 8:05PM

Robbins Mitchell| 4.28.11 @ 1:24PM

SuzyQ| 4.28.11 @ 1:24PM

SuzyQ| 4.28.11 @ 1:29PM

bohemian| 4.28.11 @ 2:20PM

WJ| 4.28.11 @ 8:42PM

russel| 4.28.11 @ 9:00AM

Tevi| 4.28.11 @ 9:08AM

russel| 4.28.11 @ 9:16AM

mames| 4.28.11 @ 9:46AM

Alan Brooks| 4.28.11 @ 9:58AM

Teaghan| 4.28.11 @ 10:25AM

canuckistani| 4.28.11 @ 11:47AM

Larry| 4.29.11 @ 5:06AM

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 7:34AM

da monk| 4.28.11 @ 11:44AM

canuckistani| 4.28.11 @ 11:53AM

Dustoff| 4.28.11 @ 1:19PM

alyeska| 5.2.11 @ 9:58PM

Scott| 4.29.11 @ 12:01AM

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 7:41AM

BackToBasics| 5.1.11 @ 3:12AM

Scott| 4.28.11 @ 11:56PM

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 7:45AM

Darin| 4.28.11 @ 6:59AM

Alex K.| 4.28.11 @ 8:00AM

Sean| 4.28.11 @ 9:26AM

da monk| 4.28.11 @ 11:49AM

Sean| 4.28.11 @ 6:36PM

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 7:49AM

crooked wren| 4.28.11 @ 9:27AM

crooked wren| 4.28.11 @ 9:27AM

russel| 4.28.11 @ 10:21AM

da monk| 4.28.11 @ 11:56AM

Scott| 4.29.11 @ 12:25AM

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 7:51AM

Tevi| 4.28.11 @ 9:02AM

Dai Alanye | 4.28.11 @ 10:15AM

Butch | 4.28.11 @ 2:44PM

Larry| 4.29.11 @ 5:11AM

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 7:54AM

Teaghan| 4.28.11 @ 10:28AM

da monk| 4.28.11 @ 11:45AM

canuckistani| 4.28.11 @ 11:57AM

Mike Hawk| 4.28.11 @ 7:04AM

figusja| 4.28.11 @ 7:13AM

Ken (Old Texican)| 4.28.11 @ 7:39AM

canuckistani| 4.28.11 @ 12:05PM

Dustoff| 4.28.11 @ 1:23PM

Frisbee| 4.28.11 @ 9:46PM

martin j smith| 4.28.11 @ 8:01AM

Louis Jenkins| 4.28.11 @ 8:20AM

canuckistani| 4.28.11 @ 12:06PM

Harry Flashman| 4.28.11 @ 8:44AM

Tevi| 4.28.11 @ 9:17AM

Teaghan| 4.28.11 @ 10:42AM

Frisbee| 4.28.11 @ 9:52PM

da monk| 4.28.11 @ 12:01PM

George True| 4.28.11 @ 4:12PM

Scott| 4.29.11 @ 12:37AM

Hillel| 4.28.11 @ 8:47AM

NeilBJ| 4.28.11 @ 12:09PM

Tevi| 4.29.11 @ 8:03AM

Dixie Pixie| 4.28.11 @ 8:52AM

Roy| 4.28.11 @ 8:57AM

Comenius| 4.28.11 @ 8:58AM

Tevi| 4.28.11 @ 9:19AM