Skip to comments.Birther Questions & Answers
Posted on 04/25/2011 9:19:23 PM PDT by MrTim29
This past weekend millions of Americans celebrated Easter, a day filled with colored eggs and chocolate bunny rabbits otherwise known as the day that Jesus rose from the dead. Something else that rose from the dead this weekend was the issue of President Obamas birth certificate. On Saturday morning, the Associated Press released an article titled, In Hawaii, Accessing Some Obama Birth Info Is Easy, in which the author suggests that that just about anyone can walk into Hawaiis vital records office and see Obamas birth certificate information, or someone with a tangible interest could pay $10 to receive a copy of the Obamas certification of live birth. According to the author of the article, problem solved everyone who suggests otherwise is a crazy birther, right? Well, not so fast there Associated Press
I am so tired of arguing with uneducated people on the facts of this topic, that I decide that I would compile the information in an easy to use format.
TOPIC: Who are Birthers? WHAT THE LEFT SAYS: Conspiracy theorists, Tea Party activists, crazy Republicans WHAT THE RIGHT SAYS: Skeptics over President Barack Obamas citizenship FACT: People, of all political backgrounds, who believe that Barack Obama is ineligible for the Presidency of the United States based on questions surrounding his citizenship
TOPIC: Where did the Birther movement begin? WHAT THE LEFT SAYS: From rumormongers, prior to the 2008 election, who were disappointed that Americans were not buying that Obama was Muslim, so they assigned his place of birth as questionable in order to sway the election. WHAT THE RIGHT SAYS: They cant necessarily point to where the movement began. According to polling data, Republicans initially did not question Obamas birth status; however, as time has marched on more Republicans are beginning to question his status. The latest New York Times-CBS News poll found that 45% of adult Republicans said they believe Obama was born in another country, and 22% said they dont know. Only one-third of Republicans said they believe the president is native born. The same poll a year ago found that a plurality of Republicans believed the president was born in the U.S. FACT: Obamas birth certificate initially became an issue during the Democratic Primary in early 2008 when Hillary Clinton supporters, from a blog called The Blue State, began questioning Obamas eligibility to be President.
TOPIC: Obama has made public his birth certificate. WHAT THE LEFT SAYS: Obama said, I cant spend all of my time with my birth certificate plastered on my forehead. WHAT THE RIGHT SAYS: Obama is not showing his real birth certificate FACT: Hawaii has two ways to prove citizenship. One way is by producing the CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH, which is the short form computer-generated printout that provides specific details of a persons birth that can be printed out at any time. The other way of proving citizenship is by producing a CERTIFICATE OF LIVE BIRTH, which is the long form original birth certificate document produced at the time of birth with the name of the hospital, hand written dates, signatures of the doctor, the registrar, the director of health, and the state registrar. Obama has not produced his Certificate of Live Birth.
TOPIC: Why does Obamas birth place even matter? WHAT THE LEFT SAYS: The question is moot because he was born in Hawaii. WHAT THE RIGHT SAYS: Obama is not qualified for the presidency because he is not a natural-born citizen. Furthermore, his father had British/Kenyan citizenship. FACT: As per Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution it states, 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 A naturalized citizen, whether naturalized at birth or after birth, is not so eligible. In other words, anyone who is born in the United States, of parents who are U.S. citizens, is definitely, without doubt, a natural born citizen. Therefore, Obama would 100% be required to be born in the United States in order to be eligible for President.
TOPIC: Obamas true birthplace WHAT THE LEFT SAYS: Obama was born in Hawaii WHAT THE RIGHT SAYS: Obama was born in Kenya or Indonesia FACT: According to the Certification of Live Birth, Hawaii has Obama in their system as being born in Honolulu. Because of Hawaiis permeable system, many foreign born people and/or relatives of foreign born people sought and received U.S. citizenship via Hawaiian birth certificates up until 1972. Until the actual Certificate of Live Birth is produced and inspected, nobody can say with 100% certainty they know where Obama was born not even Barack himself.
TOPIC: The Nordyke Twins born a day later than Obama, received lower file numbers WHAT THE LEFT SAYS: The Nordyke twins got lower lower number because they possibly took longer to deliver than Obama. WHAT THE RIGHT SAYS: Birth Certificates issued to the Nordyke twins shows their registrations number precedes the number given to Obama, even though Obama was born a day earlier. FACT: The birth certificates issued by Kapiolani shows Susan Nordyke was born at 2:12 p.m. and was given No. 151 61 10637, which was filed with the Hawaii registrar Aug. 11, 1961. Gretchen Nordyke followed at 2:17 p.m. and was given No. 151 61 10638, which was also filed with the Hawaii registrar Aug. 11, 1961. However, Obama was given a higher registration number, No. 151 1961 10641, than the Nordyke twins, even though he was born Aug. 4, 1961, the day before the twins, and his birth was registered with the Hawaii registrar three days earlier, Aug. 8, 1961. Although born a day later, Obama was entered into the system on August 8th whereas those born a day later were entered in the system on August 11th.
TOPIC: How did Obama get in Hawaiis system? WHAT THE LEFT SAYS: Obama was born in Honolulu and a birth certificate was issued upon birth and entered into their system three days later. WHAT THE RIGHT SAYS: Upon learning of his birth, Obamas grandparents, who were living in Hawaii at the time, filled out an application, presented it to a representative to the Secretary of Hawaii and swore a witness testimony that he was born in the Honolulu. It was entered on August 8th. FACT: Due to the fact that the Hawaiian Islands are home to many Polynesian indigenous people whose customs and traditions did not include western medicine and hospitals, and the fact that many did not live in close proximity to hospitals, the state made it possible for those born in Hawaii to later obtain birth certificates. Unfortunately, this made it was possible for foreign born people to obtain a Hawaiian birth certificate simply by submitting an Affidavit to the Office of the Secretary stating they were born in Hawaii. This was most famously done by Chinese born Sun Yat-Sen, who would later become the Founding Father of Republican China. This practice evolved and in 1911 became a law that allowed foreign born person to be registered as though they were born in Hawaii. All that was required was to simply fill out an application, be presented to a representative to the Secretary of Hawaii and have a witness testimony that could include family and friends. The practice continued until 1972. Obama is in the system either because he was actually born in Hawaii or his grandparents submitted an application on his behalf to the Secretary of Hawaii and swore a witness testimony that he was born in the Honolulu. Since Obama refuses to produce his Certificate of Live Birth for inspection, nobody can say with 100% certainty they know why Obama is in the system not even Barack himself.
TOPIC: The two birth announcements in the newspapers WHAT THE LEFT SAYS: Both of Honolulus manor newspapers, the Advertiser and the Star-Bulletin, published announcements in August 1961 documenting Obamas birth in Hawaii WHAT THE RIGHT SAYS: Birth announcements were probably submitted by Obamas grandparents who knew that he would have a better life as a U.S. citizen than as a citizen of another country FACT: The Advertiser and the Star-Bulletin did publish announcements in August 1961 documenting Obamas birth in Hawaii; however, these announcements were not submitted by the family, they were automatically issued whenever a certification of live birth was issued. Once Obamas name was in the system, the birth announcement was issued, usually the same day by the Health Department via a news service. Additionally, the address for the birth announcement, which occurred three days later, was 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy., an address that belonged to Obama grandparents.
TOPIC: A statement by the former Hawaii Health Director, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, confirms she has seen Obamas birth certificate WHAT THE LEFT SAYS: The director of Hawaiis Department of Health confirmed that Obama was born in Honolulu WHAT THE RIGHT SAYS: Dr. Chiyome Fukino is biased. Also, she is a medical doctor and does not have any forensic or legal experience. She issued a legal and factual opinion based on a document that may or may not be accurate FACT: The actual statement was, I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago . Dr. Fukino did not attest to seeing the actual Certificate of Live Birth, but rather Obamas vital records. According to Governor Abercrombie in January 2011, the definition of vital records was reduced to an unspecified listing or notation of Obamas birth that someone had made in the state archives and not any type of birth certificate at all.
TOPIC: Snopes, FactCheck and FightSmears WHAT THE LEFT SAYS: Fact checking websites like Snopes, FactCheck and FightSmears state Obama has proved his citizenship WHAT THE RIGHT SAYS: Snopes, FactCheck and FightSmears have a left wing bias FACT: The only thing Snopes, FactCheck and FightSmears have proven is that Obama has produced a Certification of Live Birth, not the Certificate of Live Birth
TOPIC: Obamas social security number, 042-68-4425 WHAT THE LEFT SAYS: The zip code for Obamas address in Honolulu was 96814. Danbury, CT is 06814. Keypunch error is a much more plausible explanation. Also, looking at the actual database entry for the 1890 date shows it associated with the building Obama lived in while at Harvard. Its a building in Somerville built in 1890 WHAT THE RIGHT SAYS: Obama has never visited or been in Connecticut prior to campaigning for President, and as such it is impossible for him to have that social security number. If Obama was Hawaiian born, his social security number should start with 575 or 576 FACT: Obama social security number is in deed 042-68-4425. Other than the 1980 Selective Service registration, the first time Obama used the 042 number was in 1986 in Chicago. Barack Obama had been using a Social Security number issued in Connecticut between 1977 and 1979, a state in which he never lived or even visited at that time in his life. There is no record of Obama visiting the east coast until he was 20, in 1981
What can be derived from the facts? Certainly one thing nobody knows where Obama was actually born. Anyone who says they know, whether they assert he was born in Kenya or whether they assert he was born in Hawaii, cannot with 100% certainty. Obama himself only knows what hes told. What we do know with 100% certainty is that he is in Hawaiis system. Thats it. End of story.
Is it plausible that Obama was born in a foreign country and his grandparents knew that he could attain a better life as an American citizen so they submitted an application on his behalf to the Secretary of Hawaii and swore a witness testimony that he was born in the Honolulu? Absolutely. Is it plausible that Obama was actually born in Honolulu and his stubbornness for not releasing his Certificate of Live Birth is for no good reason? Absolutely. The only thing that is certain is that until that Certificate of Live Birth is produced and inspected anything is plausible.
So, thanks to the Associated Press, real estate tycoon Donald Trump, Governor Jan Brewer of Arizona, Governor Abercrombie of Hawaii, MSNBCs Chris Matthews, several state legislatures all across the country and Obamas continued refusal to produce his Certificate of Live Birth the issue isnt going away. In fact, it is gaining legitimacy. A book due out on May 17, 2011, titled Wheres the Birth Certificate?: The Case that Barack Obama is not Eligible to be President by Jerome R. Corsi promises blockbuster information based on years of research and digging by the nations top private investigators that will be devastating to those who believe Obama was born in Hawaii.
Its the issue raised from the dead, and it might just give people something more to celebrate than colored eggs and chocolate bunnies in 2012.
Nice, orderly summary.
Thanks for producing it.
When Jerry Corsi’s book comes out in May, it may contain some more information on this question.
We will just have to wait and see.
The Connecticut Social Security Number issue is both interesting and troubling. Has the Social Security Administration said anything about it?
Easy summarized points to use when talking to your idiot drooling ‘friends” who still drink the Obama Kool Aid...like Robert De Niro.
Missed an important tidbit
In order to be a natural born citizen, not only must the person be born on US soil, but BOTH parents MUST be US citizens at the time of his birth.
Although it is common knowledge 0bama’s father was a Kenyan, thereby British, citizen at the time of his birth, there is no formal documentation of this.
Not without the long form.
So, everything would be OK if The Kenyan's daddy was a U.S.A. citizen. Say, a Mr. Davis?
One word of caution to all of us who have been long time “birthers”.
I have noticed that “newbies” - the sincere ones - are sometimes treated like obots just because they come lately to this issue.
We have spent three years earning our spurs, we should not hack the newbie to bits.
I ain’t easy teaching people facts that we know by rout.
We were all there once with all the same questions - so, “get them educated.”
If I had been bashed about the way some of the newbies are now.........well, I wouldn’t have gone on to uncover some enormous anomalies that occurred with the obama newspaper birth announcements, and most especially- the Birth Index books in the Honolulu Dept. of Health.
You might want to add "...or Canada" to this.
Welcome to FR.
This is absolutely false.
This house belonged to Orland LaFarge & Thelma Young, who died recently.
My father lives three blocks from there.
You look geared up and ready to rumble. Something rare among most newbies.
That has never been tested in the courts. Currently, if someone is born on US soil, they are automatically a citizen regardless of who the parents are (with a few exceptions such as diplomats accredited to the US.) We have birthright citizenship based on jus solis.
“Additionally, the address for the birth announcement, which occurred three days later, was 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy., an address that belonged to Obama grandparents.”
“”This is absolutely false.
This house belonged to Orland LaFarge & Thelma Young, who died recently.””
Please don’t overlook the fact that OBAMA SR. never lived at the address listed as his own in that birth announcement.
Citizenship by statute is NOT the exact same thing as natural born Citizenship.
A created citizen is not the same as a natural born citizen.
Fantastic and thorough research. Question re the birth announcements: Have you considered looking at other repositories for the Hawaian newspapers beyond the LOC and Hawaii? For example, large university libraries?
Currently, we have three ways to acquire citizenship: (1) jus solis or birthright citizenship; (2) jus sanguinis or by blood, i.e., being born to two US citizens overseas or to an unmarried US woman citizen abroad (and now there are new regulations governing US citizen fathers for births abroad;) and (3) naturalization. The first two are automatic citizenship. Some could call it natural born citizenship.
All Presidents since and including Martin Van Buren were born in the United States subsequent to the Declaration of Independence. The only issue with regard to the qualifications set out in this clause, which appears to be susceptible of argument, is whether a child born abroad of American parents is ''a natural born citizen'' in the sense of the clause. Such a child is a citizen as a consequence of statute. Whatever the term ''natural born'' means, it no doubt does not include a person who is ''naturalized.''
Thus, the answer to the question might be seen to turn on the interpretation of the first sentence of the first section of the Fourteenth Amendment, providing that ''[a]ll persons born or naturalized in the United States'' are citizens. Significantly, however, Congress, in which a number of Framers sat, provided in the Naturalization act of 1790 that ''the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond the sea, . . . shall be considered as natural born citizens. . . .'' This phrasing followed the literal terms of British statutes, beginning in 1350, under which persons born abroad, whose parents were both British subjects, would enjoy the same rights of inheritance as those born in England; beginning with laws in 1709 and 1731, these statutes expressly provided that such persons were natural-born subjects of the crown.
There is reason to believe, therefore, that the phrase includes persons who become citizens at birth by statute because of their status in being born abroad of American citizens. Whether the Supreme Court would decide the issue should it ever arise in a ''case or controversy'' as well as how it might decide it can only be speculated about.
While some have suggested that perhaps a "natural born citizen" must have been born on US territory (i.e., in keeping with the definition of a citizen given in the 14th Amendment) -- and news reports dealing with presidential eligibility almost invariably misstate the rule in this manner -- the majority opinion of legal experts seems to be that the term refers to anyone who has US citizenship from the moment of his or her birth -- i.e., someone who did not have to be "naturalized" because he/she was born "natural" (i.e., born a citizen).
The first Congress enacted a citizenship law which stated that "the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens". [Act of Mar. 26, 1790, ch. 3, 1 Stat. 104.] This strongly suggests that the phrase was understood by the framers of the Constitution to refer to citizenship by birth.
Whenever I see this cite of the 1790 Act, without being followed by a recognition that the Act was repealed and replaced with that of 1795, I'm dubious. The "natural born citizens" language was removed, with just "citizens" in its place.
The enumerated powers of Congress do not allow such an Act. Congress is limited to enacting "an uniform rule of naturalization." Statute law, in other words.
One thing a natural born citizen isn't, is naturalized. Or a citizen created via statute.
That the first Congress believed the matter to require addressing via the 1790 Act indicates that they understood the term natural born citizen not to cover individuals born "beyond the sea." Their attempt to address the matter collided with the separation of powers and enumerated powers under the Constitution, however.
The 1790 Act was unconstitutional and was recognized as such, having been repealed and replaced with language that did comport to enumerated powers.
Discussion of Orland and Thelma:
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.