Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

A Further Inquiry into Obama's Origins
The American Thinker ^ | April 27, 2010 | Jack Cashill

Posted on 04/27/2010 5:22:36 PM PDT by as1001

Last week I contributed an article to American Thinker on Obama's origins that evoked a good deal of informed response. In it, I argued that the failure of the mainstream media to document the first year of Barack Obama's life has rendered the media accounts of the year before his birth suspect.

Here is what we know about Obama's first year. On August 19, 1961, fifteen days after Obama's presumed birth, his mother, "Stanley Ann Dunham," enrolled for classes at the University of Washington at Seattle.

The apolitical Washington State historical blog HistoryLink confirms Ann's arrival in August 1961, identifies her Capitol Hill apartment in Seattle, names the courses she took, and documents an extended stay by Ann and little Obama into the summer of 1962.

Incredibly, not one of the mainstream media accounts I consulted -- including four book-length biographies, several long-form magazine and newspaper bios, Obama's official campaign biography, and Obama's 1995 memoir Dreams From My Father -- places Ann and Obama anywhere other than in Hawaii during that first year.

Given this collective failure and the Obama camp's squirrelly response to questions about his birth certificate, another look at the circumstances leading up to that birth is warranted. To restore logic and order to this investigation, I turn to a structure we know as Occam's Razor: "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine neccesitate.'' This translates roughly as "Multiple variables are not to be posited without necessity." Let me start with the timeline and cast of characters...

(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; birthers; certifigate; naturalborncitizen; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 last
To: West Texas Chuck
-- Let's say a couple is visiting here from Garbanzola and the female is preggars. She spits out the progeny while in-country here. Is that baby an American, or a Garbanzolian? --

There is a branch of the tourism industry that is designed to obtain US citizenship for the babies of well to do foreigners, typically Asian. "Delivery vacation." The child is taken back to the home country (say, Japan) and is raised there.

Most lawyers will tell you that this child qualifies for the presidency, as being a natural born US citizen. They'll point to the Wong Kim ark case, and the 14th amendment. AND, they'll do all of that with a straight face - IOW, they actually believe the conclusion is the correct read of the case law.

61 posted on 04/28/2010 8:01:41 AM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: calex59; SatinDoll; Cboldt

Thanx you guys. Since I made that posting I did some reading and discovered we have this little marvel called “jus soli” that makes this whole anchor baby thing work.

I always wondered what was the legal basis for this concept, now I know more.


62 posted on 04/28/2010 8:38:13 AM PDT by West Texas Chuck (US out of the UN - UN out of the US)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: as1001
From what I have seen, there is no proof Mama Obama was in Seattle by mid August.

All anyone has proven is that she enrolled at the UW extension for the Fall quarter, 1961. Fall quarter classes don't start at the University of Washington until the last week of September.

So there's no reason to believe she was in Seattle 15 days after his birth. It's perfectly plausible that she moved in early September, about a month after his birth, which is plenty of recovery time for an 18 year old mother who experienced no complications when giving birth.

As to caring for a newborn, it is well known that she had friends in Seattle. She went to high school in Mercer Island. I don't see why it's so implausible, or strange, to suppose her friends helped her out with childcare.

As to why she up and left Hawaii so quickly, the obvious explanation is that she wanted to get away from her husband and, possibly, her parents. She wouldn't be the first teen mom to have a falling out with the father of her child shortly after birth. Nor would she be the first teen mom not to get along so well with her parents.

I don't see why everyone thinks this is such a big deal.

63 posted on 04/28/2010 9:38:07 AM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Abby4116
BUT, I cannot imagine many new mothers, of any age, being able to undertake caring for a newborn without lots of help early on.

She had plenty of friends in the area. She went to high school in the Seattle area (Mercer Island, to be exact), which is about 10 minutes from the Seattle neighborhood (Capital Hill) in which she settled.

64 posted on 04/28/2010 9:40:40 AM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: fightinJAG
Why would a girl who grew up in Seattle have her heart set on going to the University of Chicago of all places?

Same reason someone from Seattle might want to go to Harvard, or Columbia, or Stanford.

The University of Chicago is a world-renouned institution, and in some areas, especially the social sciences, is considered by many to be the best in the world.

One of those areas happens to be anthropology, which just happened to turn out becoming Stanley Ann's major.

65 posted on 04/28/2010 9:46:56 AM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: bjorn14

“Also, for the record, Hamilton was born in the British Virgin Islands, if I recall correctly.”

“Hamilton was born in Charlestown, the capital of Nevis in the British West Indies. He was born out of wedlock to Rachel Faucett Lavien, of partial French Huguenot descent, and James A. Hamilton, the fourth son of Scottish laird Alexander Hamilton of Grange, Ayrshire. (Wiki)”

The conservative British historian Paul Johnson (who authored ‘A History of the American People) believed that Hamilton would not have been eligible to run for President. I think he misread or misunderstood the ‘grandfather clause” in Article II, i.e: “ citizens at the time of adoption.” My American history teacher at college believed the clause was written with Hamilton in mind.


66 posted on 04/28/2010 10:09:08 AM PDT by shadowland
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: relictele
stopped by your post. funny.

Would love to hear the reaction to 2 photos side-by-side on a BIG billboard.

67 posted on 04/28/2010 12:56:53 PM PDT by urtax$@work (The best kind of memorial is a Burning Memorial.........)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Sola Veritas
"Find a male Obama relative that is a child of Obama Sr"

Maybe someone can get some DNA from his half brother Mark Ndesandjo. Of course that would require a trip to China so that won't be easily done.


68 posted on 04/28/2010 1:37:32 PM PDT by Mila
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Mila

As to the above, Mark seems like a good choice for DNA because he bears a certain resemblance to BO.


69 posted on 04/28/2010 1:40:23 PM PDT by Mila
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: as1001

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/d29d0cb8-5314-11df-813e-00144feab49a.html

The law has made Arizona the butt of jokes on America’s late night talk and comedy shows, with the comedian Jon Stewart saying on The Daily Show this week that the state had become “the meth lab of democracy”.

The anti-immigration bill was passed in the same week Arizona sanctioned the so-called “birther law”, which requires that presidential candidates prove their citizenship by producing their birth certificates.

The state also recently passed another controversial law, which allows people to carry concealed firearms without a permit or background check.

But Arizona has often been prepared to go against the grain.


70 posted on 04/28/2010 4:30:07 PM PDT by rosettasister
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: curiosity

All true, but it seems like quite a coinkydink with all her family’s other connections with Chicago!


71 posted on 04/29/2010 9:23:28 AM PDT by fightinJAG (Sic semper tyrannis! Stop spending. Starve the beast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-71 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson