Obama Was Born in Hawaii - Get Over it

I welcome their psychosis. I really believe their psychotic behavior is having an impact on independents who see them for the whiners they are. When you have NO argument, resort to outlandish accusations.

exactly :)

The GOP is so discombobulated so Rude does make a good point.

I love the word "discombobulated" !

I'd like to know why his grandmother said she watched his birth in Kenya then?

Actually, Heather. His grandmother did *not* say that.

You are referring to a commonly used "birther" piece of misinformation regarding a deposition filed by a street preacher in which Obama's STEP grandmother on his father's side gave an interview that was mis-interpreted. Literally.

Might want to check out some things such as snopes, politifact and other myth-busting sources before repeating the regurgitated nonsense the tea party types like to repeat.

In other words:

It simply didn't happen. :)

You know we live in an instant information society. There is no excuse to be ignorant.

Lori -- exactly. With "google" at your fingertips in most households I really don't have patience when someone flat-out spouts off falsities and myth. It's like wallowing in ignorance.

I just happened to make a comment.
Your comments were not what I expected... but I am not surprised by them.

I only heard this in the last week. Oh, and I'm a registered Democrat by the way...and not a tea bagger at all. I just wondered why his grandmother would say that.... I believe Donald Trump said that not too long ago.

Extremists on both sides seem to like to insult, not give facts... just like in the election...

Heather, Trump did say it. And he got your attention, didn't he? It shows that he's not only parroting birther rhetoric, he's not even bringing anything new to the table.

That's his MO, getting attention. He's about as legitimate a candidate as Mark Foley.

Heather no one is insulting you.

This is such a ridiculous distraction, but as Rude D. points out, it only makes the people with tea bags on their hats and other birthers look even more incredulous.

Independents and regular Republicans are finally seeing these people for what they really are. Keep it up!

They really should put this to rest. IF Obama were an illegal then the whole of the Republican party would end up looking pretty stupid since they have had since 1997 when he first assumed public office to out him.

So either he is the most wiley person on the face of the planet or they are the most ignorant and couldnt find a needle in a stack of needles.

Now who do you want to govern you? The smart guy or the bumbling idiots?

He was not required to be a "natural born citizen" to hold office in a State or Congressional capacity. So it would not have been an issue then.

... And more generally, it does not take a "wiley" person to hide a problem in his citizenship record, because we hardly ever take any interest in such things.

Young Obama had many years before he became important enough for anyone to do a background check on him, during which he could 'tend' to any irregularities in his history.

And Obama is well-known for his fine intelligence.

Lori,

Been saying the same thing for months.

Obama would have been found out, years ago, if his birth origins were false.

And that is an obvious and devastating caveat for the irrational extremists.

It ought to make the doubters-in-the-middle perk their ears up--so that they, in the future, become even better fertilizer detectors.

However--even though Trump has about as much chance of becoming President of the United States as Netanyahu does of being elected President of Iran, we might as well allow The Donald (or The Rug?) prattle on, so that he can shoot himself in the foot even more.

For a smart guy, he sounds pretty stupid. And so, if we do not challenge him, we can simply wallow in the glee of being entertained by his Media-Blitz Idiocy.

Right on.

As if "Hillary's People" wouldn't have found out if it was true. Geeze.

As if the Koch Brothers wouldn't have found out, or John McCain, or any of the legions of Republicans and their operatives all over the world, not to mention the CIA, the NSA, and the FBI.

You can't fix crazy.

Excellent additions to the point!

Who knows.

Who cares? Consider the source, or rather the lack of source.

Hate Speech??????????

As if logic, truth, or facts would work on birthers...yeah, right.

ahh write an article and the bigots come crawling out with the other insects and vermin

It is just so strange that he took so long and spent so much money trying to keep from producing the documentation (which I don't believe is technically an offical state document since it had no official stamp or signature) for so long. I don't care one way or another since he's already President, not much to do about it now. But when people are not immediately forthright, it does raise suspicions.

I remember Clinton getting on TV and basically raking Ken Starr over the coals for his "witch" hunt and Hillary's claim it was a right wing conspiracy. Then, come to find out, it was true - He perjured himself and had sex with "that woman." So if the birthers want to continue to raise the issue, let them. It's not hurting anyone - unless you truely believe that their arguements might actually convince people not to vote for Obama.

It is just so strange that he took so long and spent so much money trying to keep from producing the documentation (which I don't believe is technically an offical state document

In reality he produced the document before he was even elected president. It has been on several sites since 2008.

Even the Fact check website has his birth certificate and the date being 2008..so not sure how long is too long for you.

And looking over the fact check website it would appear that he produced the document prior to his even being the Democratic nominee.

So if the birthers want to continue to raise the issue, let them

And I am assuming along with all that they are also going to foot the entire bill that this has caused including the judge salaries, the room use at the courthouse, the electricity used, and every other expense that goes along with filing suits.

If thats the case and the taxpayers dont have to pick up a dime for it I say more power to them.

Taxpayers had to foot the bill for the investigation into Clinton. If he just would have admitted it at first, he could have saved the country a lot of money and time. If Clinton or the Democrats don't have to reimburse the government, why should the birther? Seems like a double standard?

1. Why are we talking about Clinton when he hasn't been in office for more than a decade?

2. When Clinton left office the US was in a budget SURPLUS.

3. Who cares if he got a blow job. Really? And who WOULD admit to getting one from Lewinski. The man did his job where it counted and did it well according to the stats and the #s

Good question Chelsea.

But I will answer you. Yes that pissed me off. I still remember writing to my congressman several times over the 42 million dollars that was spent.

Frankly I dont care where Clinton kept or put either his cigars and/or his weiner.

He should have just cowboyed up, and told the truth but then I thought the impeachment issue was stupid.

The difference is Clinton didnt instigate his own impeachment. It wasnt a government matter it was a personal vendetta between Clinton, Starr and Gingrich.

But I am all for Gingrich and Starr paying the largest part of the bill with Clinton chipping in.

But then as you pointed out there is a factual basis to that issue.

there is no basis to the birther issue other than racism and sour grapes.

Now please respond to my comments and I did provide proof as to when the birth certificate showed up on the website mentioned.

Chelsea - this isn't about Clinton, it's about politics. Clinton was the closest example in time regarding the the "Pursuit of irrelevant issues." The President of the United States gets sued all the time on friviolus matters, for the war, for the default of Fannie Mae, etc. Other Presidents have been sued too. The point is, this is a free country, and if the birthers are passionate about their position, they have the right to pursue it. If it becomes friviolus - the judge can throw the case out and prevent cases from being filed in the future. For the life of me, I think it is hysterical that you claim the birthers are movitvated by racism. What to you say to the blacks who question his birth? They may be odd, they may be silly for pursing an issue that seems to be resolved. But to call them racisit with no other fact is as silly as them saying he wasn't born in the US. Gingrich and Starr are in now way responsible for the cost of the investigation - that's all Clinton. I don't care what he did either. But he lied and caused an investigation to be made and he was ultimately disbarred for perjury.

even our immigration laws do not support this. When Reagan passed the immigration and naturalization laws after he gave millons of illegals amnesty and we employers were told which proof of identity was acceptable and someone presented questionable documents the employers could do more than call INS.

The president gave the document in question and the governor of Hawaii along with the other officials in Hawaii have certified it.

Now tell me where there is one ounce of evidence to warrant the continuation of this?

Lori,

I never said I was a birther or that I even questioned where he was born. In my very first comment I said I didn't care. I just don't think birthers should be required to stop because you think the matter is settled. Just like I don't think the PP should give up on abortions, or the EPA on off-shore drilling - It is their right.

And still my questions dont get answered.

And yes this is a free country but we are also a country of laws.

Much like you cannot yell FIRE in a crowded movie theatre how long do we let this birther nonsense continue? Til he is done with his second term?

So then what Michael you just decided to be an ass for a day or what?

I provided proof and asked you simple questions and you refuse to answer me.

By your reasoning we should allow all those people that are passionate that Martians perpatrated 911 and that we should allow the people that think we didnt land on the moon or that the CIA killed Kennedy equal time in the courts.

So sorry that you found someone who actually disagrees with you. Not about whether Obama was born in the US, but whether the birthers should be able to continue to argue the point. Yes, we should let them continue to pursue that theory.

Under your reasoning, we would still believe the earth is flat because everyone knew that it was flat and only a few crazy people thought it was round. It was the contiual pursuit of truth that changed the worlds mine. As long as they are trying confirming what's true, I'm okay with them pursing it. Sorry you feel that way, but what a great country where we can agree to disagree.

I support birthers having the right to be crazy, but I think they'll have an easier time finding the lochness monster before they can prove that Obama wasn't born here.

So sorry that you found someone who actually disagrees with you.

Sad attempt to redirect onto me. As you can perfectly well see there are many people who disagree with me.

But I will drop it sense you dont seem to have the capacity to answer my questions and we would probably just banter back and forth like this.

Your assigning me blame to overcompensate for your lack of answers or basis in fact.

Under your reasoning, we would still believe the earth is flat because everyone knew that it was flat and only a few crazy people thought it was round.

Umm no under my reasoning I would look at the facts and determine that the earth was indeed round and refuse to accept nonsense conspiracy theories and conjecture not based on any type of reality.

i dont care if they think it or express it tying up the court and using taxpayer money on the other hand I do have problems with.

"It is just so strange that he took so long and spent so much money trying to keep from producing the documentation (which I don't believe is technically an offical state document since it had no official stamp or signature) for so long."

You can't prove that he spent a dime. And so, like the birthers, you're just promulgating hearsay. I wonder why?

"It is just so strange that he took so long and spent so much money trying to keep from producing the documentation..."

Absolutely, Michael. Strange, verging into the bizarre.

And as we see over & over with "scandals", the real crisis doesn't arise over the original 'offense' - which like as not is rather forgettable - but instead with the lying & conniving & manipulation of evidence that folks engage in, trying to force their story to fly.

This issue has now advanced to the point where I think it could end up disrupting if not endangering Obama's Presidency.

"Absolutely, Michael. Strange, verging into the bizarre."

What's really bizarre is the willingness of otherwise seemingly reasonable people to parrot this BS without gagging.

Ali I agree. Stupid is as stupid does.

"Never underestimate the enemy."

Go ahead. Test it. Please. :)

From what I understand, Donald Trump is rather a media whore. I'm not siding with the President on too many issues lately, but I gotta say it's a little strange for Trump to start an investigation like this right when the President is under so much scrutiny. Then again, that might be what sparked him. But either way, it's kind of a moot point. Obama is president, it's done. He could be impeached I guess, but I seriously doubt it. Obama isn't even acknowledging Trump at the moment. To start an investigation like this just seems to be a cry for attention on Trump's side.

Had he not started right away with the birther nonsense I doubt if he would be getting much attention at all.

What is his vision for America does anyone know? What would he do if he were elected? Does anyone have a clue?

Answer to all the above is NO. He has done nothing but fuel the flames of this and is this really what we want in a president?

will he spend 4 years trying to out Obama?

You can leave the rather out, Cora.

"What is his vision for America does anyone know?"

Oh yeah, you can piece together a decent collection of statements he's made.

Here's a few from a single interview:

Donald Trump: If I Run For President ‘This Country Will Be Respected Again’

“I’m pro-life. I’m against gun control, and I will fight to end Obamacare and replace it with something that makes sense for people in business and not bankrupt the country.”

“If I decide to run, I will not be raising taxes.”

"He also pledged to help America re-gain a competitive advantage with China and other countries that he said “are screwing us.” "

Trump's vision for America isn't that mysterious.

Wow I could throw a couple buzz words and talking points together would you elect me president?

What does he want to replace HCR with? What are the main points of his proposal?

He is pro life does that mean he will work to make abortion illegal?

What is his plan to help America regain a competative edge with China? Will he impose stricter tarrifs?

You tried to paint him as this great mystery, Lori.

He's not a mystery. His vision is easier to infer than most. He blabs about himself all the time. ;)

His real weakness is lack of experience. Not lack of vision.

You tried to paint him as this great mystery, Lori.

No that wasnt my intent.

Apparently Lori, like Garfield Goose, Trump is running for King of the United States.

I dont remember that Ali but nothing would surprise me out of Trump.

"I respect his wealth, but I only demand him to respect us -- And I challenge him. Let him call me and we'll talk."

Ok ... but will she be able to do her brother any good?

Will she be able to take Trump down a peg or two?

It remains to be seen whether she is pleased with her media-experience, and continues & builds on it.

I guess the most likely thing is - assuming this is a just one shot deal - that Trump 'pretty much' lets it slid. If she wants to keep at it, then he'd probably have to come up with a 'strategy' or 'policy' for her.

Bascically, I think she was on solid ground, up through the 'put it to bed' part, but the 'challenge' part probably took her a little far on the limb.

I'm calling it a blip - nothing comes of it.

The reason this issue dose not go away is because direct and implied statements have been made on the record long before the 2008 campaign. There are African newspapers that describe him as Kenyan-born.

June 27, 2004 The Kenya Sunday Standard
"Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations"

An article in The African Travel Magazine During his travels to Kenya in 2006 said:
"As Kenyan born US senator Barrack Obama jets into Kenya today as part of his African tour ..."

Nov. 4, 2008 The Nigerian Observer
"Americans will today go to the polls to elect their next president with Democratic Party candidate, Senator Barrack Obama largely favored to win. The Kenyan-born Senator will, however, face a stiff competition from his Republican counterpart "


Even Michelle Obama has implied on two separate occasions that he was born in Kenya.

While addressing a Tampa, Fla. audience at a fundraiser in Dec. of 2007 she said:
"What it reminded me of was our trip to Africa, two years ago, and the level of excitement that we felt in that country-- the hope that people saw just in the sheer presence of somebody like Barrack Obama -- a Kenyan, a black man, a man of great statesmanship who they believe could change the fate of the world."

June 2008 speaking to the Gay & Lesbian Leadership Council of Democratic National Committee
"Barrack has led by example. When we took our trip to Africa and visited his home country in Kenya, we took a public HIV test -- for the very point of showing folks in Kenya that there is nothing to be embarrassed about in getting tested."


Much of this documentation has been removed from the web (which is why the web can be reliable and not reliable, what can go up can also come down) but there is some that remains, as well as documentation that was recorded and saved by people around the world.

The point to this is that as a State Legislator and as a member of Congress, he was not required to be a "natural born citizen". Being simply a citizen was sufficient to hold these offices. For President he MUST be a "natural born citizen". No one would have asked for such documentation for these positions.

This, as well as having a Kenyan Father which would create a duel citizenship if he was born in Kenya, is what makes his legitimacy as a President in question.

For those who feel that "natural born citizen" is not defined in the constitution it actually is.

United States citizenship is acquired either at birth or through naturalization and United States laws governing the attainment of citizenship at birth include two legal principals.

Jus soli (the law of the soil) where the place of birth determines citizenship. This is this principle embraced in the Constitution as a natural born citizenship and also in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution.

Jus sanguinis (the law of bloodline) secures citizenship (but not natural born) of children born to current citizens of the United States who are not residing in one of the 50 States. It is granted through statute and is called "citizenship by decent" or "derivative citizenship"

The original version of the 12th Amendment included Congress Members also be only natural born citizens. However, the revision ratified on June 15th of 1804 limited it to the office of President, Vice President and any succeeding member of the House, Senate or Cabinet had to be a natural born citizen.

The intent of the concept of a natural born citizen was made very clear in John Jay's letter to George Washington on July 25th of 1787 in which he wrote "Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, and but a natural born Citizen."

As these were the original crafters of the Constitution and the 12th and 14th Amendments their outlooks, perspectives and written words hold the truth of what was intended by the term "natural born citizen".

lol Amber. You poor thing...

"As these were the original crafters of the Constitution and the 12th and 14th Amendments their outlooks, perspectives and written words hold the truth of what was intended by the term "natural born citizen".

The Supreme Court decision in DC v. Heller dwells on the 'theory & practice' of applying (or ignoring) the 18th C viewpoints of the authors of our Constitution, at some length & detail.

They had to include this tutorial on the "Founding Fathers" issue, because the Second Amendment had long been claimed to mean different things ... ALL of them based on differing interpretations of the "Original Intent".

It seems fair to suspect - as in the case of Firearms - that many do hope that "Natural Born" can be swept aside as something that pertains to a by-gone day.

However, recent judicial decisions clearly indicate the "Original Intent" is on a roll.

Laws can't be enforced retroactively Ted, not that it matters in this case.

I'm not tracking on what you're saying, Ali.

Please expand/clarify.

I wanted to mention here, that Wikipedia has good article for both:

Jus soli

and

Jus sanguinis

How the authors of our Constitution were influenced by these could be at the center of possible legal action.