Posted on 01/24/2011 11:09:07 AM PST by pissant
Something doesn’t add up here:
Back in June 2008, the Obama campaign released a digitally scanned short form of his Hawaii birth certificate. When people questioned the scanning, a few carefully chosen media types were invited to attest to the underlying long-form document’s authenticity, including FactCheck.org:
FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. We have posted high-resolution photographs of the document as “supporting documents” to this article. Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.
FactCheck included pictures of a real document purporting to be a genuine long-form Hawaiian “Barack Hussein Obama” birth certificate.
Recently, the new Hawaii governor announced that he’s now going to make publicly available to all Americans, not just a few media partisans, the original long form birth certificate. One problem: He says that he can’t find the darn thing. Fortunately for Abercrombie’s abortive effort, the New York Times has reminded him of the same law Obama relied on in 2008 to keep his originalbirth certificate out of sight: only the birth child himself can release a Hawaiian birth certificate.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsrealblog.com ...
Annenberg put Bill Ayers and Barak Obama in charge of “The Annenberg Challenge” to clean up education in Chicago. It was a huge waste of money.
It was not a huge waste of money. It was a fraudulent use of money. It was stated purposed was for improving school performance in Chicago inner city schools. Instead it was used to grease the cronies furthering the political agenda of these radicals. The various organizations dunded were basically training centers for students to became political activists. It had nothing to do with raising test scores.
Stanley Kurtz was the fellow who finally managed to get the files from the University of Illinois for the CAC, albeit much too late to have any influence on the 2008 election.
This thing stinks because an unknown, possible non eligable person got into the White House with all of his life records sealed. And that person has all the power of the US presidency. Meanwhile, we can’t go through our lives with any of our records hidden.
Jack Cashill’s new book “Deconstructing Obama” due out Feb. 15 will have more on this.
allmendream: A DNA relationship is not necessary for one to be the “legal father”. If Barrack 0bama Sr. is listed on 0bama’s BC; he is 0bama’s “legal father”.
If there is a dispute regarding one's claim to citizenship, a blood relationship is required.
7 FAM 1131.4 Blood Relationship EssentialYes, Senior is presumed to be Junior's legal father if his name is on the birth certificate. But that legal status wouldn't be the determinative factor in a citizenship claim. If FMD were Junior's biological father, which I am not suggesting is true, Senior's legal status as a parent would be disregarded if Junior could prove a blood relationship to FMD. In U.S. citizenship claims, a blood relationship trumps a legal relationship.
(7 FAM 1131.4-1 Establishing Blood Relationship)a. The laws on acquisition of U.S. citizenship through a parent have always contemplated the existence of a blood relationship between the child and the parent(s) through whom the citizenship is claimed. It is not enough that the child is presumed to be the issue of the parents' marriage by the laws of the jurisdiction where the child was born. Absent a blood relationship between the child and the parent on whose citizenship the child's own claim is based, U.S. citizenship is not acquired. The burden of proving a claim to U.S. citizenship, including blood relationship and legal relationship, where applicable, is on the person making such claim.
c. Children born in wedlock are generally presumed to be the issue of that marriage. This presumption is not determinative in citizenship cases, however, because an actual blood relationship to a U.S. citizen parent is required. (Snip)
They did, but the question I have is can a non-US citizen, non-permanent resident adopt a child in U.S. court? Even if he wanted to? Wouldn't he be more likely to adopt Obama in Indonesia where he could get citizenship for the kid?
“As for me, I’m not a Birther. I think the guy was born here. He’s toying with us. It’s not that he’s not a native born American; it’s that he’s a guy with a stupid secret who is using it to make the Right look even more stupid.”
Occam’s razor says the simplest explanation is the most accurate. The Kenyan doesn’t have a BC because he wasn’t born here.
As the Kenyan’s credibility shrinks, the birth issue will become more important.
I am a birther.
In other words, the foreign national woman (maternity rarely, if ever, being in doubt) who says her baby has an American daddy must establish a blood relationship if the American “daddy” disputes paternity.
In this case the blood relationship to an American citizen is with his mother.
In this case there was no dispute as to citizenship based upon paternity. He would be a US citizen at birth in Hawaii no matter who his father was.
And there was no dispute as to paternity. 0bama Sr. was apparently all for signing on that he was 0bama’s father.
10% of children are not related to the man they think is their father. I bring this up not just for the purposes of discussing 0bama, but also to impress upon each and every male FReeper out there to not EVER sign on as the father unless the DNA says you are the father (if you are married, DNA, again, doesn't matter - your wife's children are legally your children, even if they are not).
I don’t disagree with your position. I was originally responding to your comment that ...
“Who the ‘DNA father’ is doesn’t make on bit of difference according to the law. The law doesn’t care about biology, the law cares about legal paperwork.”
... by adding the caveat that DNA does matter in citizenship claims.
Yes, Obama is a U.S. citizen by virtue of his birth to an American citizen mother. Personally, I believe there is a legitimate argument for the requirement of two American citizen parents in order for a child to be a natural born citizen for Constitutional purposes. But that’s a discussion for another time and I could be convinced otherwise if the SCOTUS were to rule that only one citizen parent is required to be a NBC.
Here at the lab we try and discourage Uranus voyagers. However, I will notify Barney Frank about the BIG celebration.
It is OK to say, "Bastard." Perfectly good English word.
Barney Frank ? I’m sure he’s pitchin’ a big bash tonight!
Dr. Ben Dover and myself honor you as the seminal figure of Meta-Proctology. As you are the doyen in this small, but rapidly expanding field, any work done in the lab here is available to you as a professional courtesy. We look forward to having you as a guest aboard our corporate yacht, the Innuendo.
We already pierre-review your articles on Tuesdays and Thursdays, when Pierre is not playing hockey.
If there is no dispute, and both mother and father figure they are the parents, and the State Department doesn't suspect something, then there is no establishment of an actual blood relationship required and the names go on the BC and then they are the “legal” parents, even if later a DNA test shows that the father isn't really the father.
I believe a legitimate argument for two citizen parents AND born in the country could be made, but I am not a proponent.
In natural law, birth allegiance is through either soil or blood. In recognition of this natural law, US law gives citizenship at birth to all born on the soil, and almost all born to U.S. citizen parents. Now the most ironclad, no question about it, “natural born citizen” would meet both requirements - but is it necessary to qualify under both?
Well, in 2008 we had both major parties run candidates who only qualified for US citizenship at birth from ONE of the two categories. McCain only through blood, and 0bama only through place of birth (his mother being too young according to the law at the time).
I think that, as US law contemplates two, and only two - ways of becoming a citizen - that there are correspondingly only two types of US citizenship.
Either one is born a citizen and thus a natural born citizen (IMHO) or one is “naturalized” as a citizen.
As such a “natural born citizen” would be one who, according to natural law (which US law should manifest) was a citizen at birth.
That was my opinion from a long time ago, and have seen no legal reasoning yet that has convinced me otherwise.
But yes, that discussion is a bit tangential to the “Give us the Birth Certificate (Long Form)” argument. And most don't like them mentioned too close to each other because it steals the thunder from the .... “For $20 he could make this all go away” histrionics. Because most birthers have moved on from the BC arguments entirely and now argue that there is no possibility of him being a NBC because of who his father is.
Those people SHOULD like my argument (but probably don't), because even if a US citizen like Malcolm X or Franklin M. Davis are the father, it wouldn't matter because a foreign national was the “legal” father.
BTW, I wonder who developed the pics. You couldn't take photos like that to the local Fotomat back then.
I see. And he did run with The Chicago Mob. Very interesting. We will give him the acid test. Will he leave the gun and take the cannoli?
Frank Marshall Davis was a photographer himself, as well as an author. He worked for a newspaper. He could have developed them himself. When combined with the narrative of his later book, it tells quite a story. He, of course, would deny it, but he was being carefully watched by the FBI in those days and may have even been on probation. In any case, if he admitted the liaison, he would have been jailed. She was underage, etc.
He was her daddy’s friend — the only person they knew well in Hawaii at the time. I alwsys figured that they paid BO Sr. to claim the baby because it would seem less sordid to have a sham marriage between an exoctic foreign student (with a British accent) than to be knocked up by a married black man twice her age.
I’m seeing one ‘r’ and a ‘c’. I’m with you. However, I noticed that in this letter or memo Barack Obama, Sr. acknowledges his wife in Kenya, but does not mention Stanley Ann or Barack, Jr. Do you think that this could indicate that Sr. truly IS NOT the father? Why wouldn’t he mention his family in Hawaii?
age of sexual consent is 16 in Hawaii.
I agree with you on that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.