Skip to comments.Is There Legitimate Doubt About Obama's Eligibility to be President?
Posted on 07/06/2008 10:47:57 AM PDT by Aria
I had not caught up until today with this apparent controversy over whether the Hawaii birth certificate proffered by Obama's campaign is a forgery and whether there are legitimate questions about whether he was born in the United States if he wasn't, he almost certainly would not be qualified under the Constitution and relevant immigration statutes to be president. Our Jim Geraghty seemed to pooh-pooh the birth certificate controversy about a week ago, but according to the above cited report (at a site called DougRoss@Journal) and a new one from Israeli Insider, there are new developments, and the Obama campaign appears to be stonewalling. Shouldn't it be a fairly easy matter to prove he was born in Hawaii if he really was? Why wouldn't Obama just end this quickly?
Is there anything to this?
ADDENDUM: I should add to the above that I am not a conspiracy theorist. My predisposition on the many stories floating around about Obama and his circle is to ignore them on the following theory: If there was really anything to this or that, the Clintons would have found it and gotten their media friends all over it. This story about Obama's eligibility puzzles me because (a) it is so basic, (b) it should be so easy to prove the relevant facts of his birth, (c) the Obama campaign's response to the story is bizarre, and (d) it seems to be getting worse rather than resolved.
07/06 12:09 PM
“I certainly mean that disqualifying Obama on these grounds at this time would tear the country apart and shouldn’t be attempted.....”
Seems to be an Obama MO..
Obama meanwhile walked into a state legislature seat for a position handed over to him by his mentor. When she decided she wanted to run anyway, Obama’s lawyers disqualified her and the other candidates by invalidating their ballot signatures. Not exactly democracy in action, but it was the way Obama preferred to win.
In the Senate race, Obama was a long shot with no real chance of winning. Then suddenly his Democratic primary opponent and the front runner Dan Hynes’s campaign imploded when allegations emerged by his ex-wife that he had abused her.
Obama won the Democratic party nomination but looked unlikely to defeat the Republican candidate Jack Ryan. Then Jack Ryan’s ex-wife suddenly alleged that he led a perverted lifestyle. (are you seeing the pattern here?) Jack Ryan pulled out, the GOP insanely threw in Allan Keyes at the last minute. Obama won. Allan Keyes lost.
Not one is considered a “natural born citizen,” and despite the fact that they are all brilliant, charming and conservative, none can ever be President of these United States, unless the Constitution is changed.
“should he win the presidency, he will be our first legal bastard president”
Well, technically, Bill Clinton’s father still was married to another woman when he married Clinton’s mother, hence technically the marriage was no more legal than the marriage of Obama’s mother and Senior (if such an event occurred). Therefore, TECHNICALLY, you could argue Obama would be the second bastard president.
Look, I’ve stated my position. If you don’t agree, then disregard it.
**Is There Legitimate Doubt About Obama’s Eligibility to be President?**
The Constitution is the Constitution, if he isn’t qualified (even if it is this late in the election cycle), then that’s too bad we have to follow it..
OK,I’ll give the crown to you,buddy!
Obama can’t be responsible for everything his idiot cousin in Kenya says or thinks!
Thats not fair at all.I have a couple of cousins myself who are complete jerks.All we have in common is blood ties.
“Disqualifying him on those grounds now - even if legitimate - would tear the country apart.”
So we should just disregard one of only TWO constitutional requirements because segments of the country don’t respect it?
He's got a few holes in his "analysis".
And Polarik, he prominently mentions you throughout his the "Obama BC is real" speel.
“At any rate, the Obama campaign could simply resolve this by producing an authentic, non-forged document. At his point, I simply cannot see any advantage as to why they would allow this to drag out if such a BC existed.”
Indeed. Makes you wonder if a Hawaiian birth record exists at all, doesn’t it?
Somewhere, buried in the flood of earlier postings on this subject, I recall reading that - in one of his books - Obama said that he HAS his [original?] birth certificate. Not the phony “Certification of Live Birth” that has been posted at the KOS and “Fight the Smears” web sites, but the ORIGINAL.
I would like to pose a question to you, and to any other Freepers reading this:
What information could possibly appear upon the original that might be so “embarassing” to Obama that he could not release it to quell the growing controversy?
The religion of his father being “Islam”?
His OWN religion being “Islam” (if that even appeared on original Hawaiian birth certificates from 1961)?
His race as “white”?
His parents being unmarried?
No father listed?
His name listed as “Barry Dunham”?
Sit back and think for a moment. Who at birth can control what information is entered on their birth certificate? Not you. Not I. Not Obama. Not ANYone.
And - if that’s the case - should he be blamed for information entered upon it, that he could not control?
As a conservative, I would not hold it against Obama if the birth certificate said “white”, yet he identifies with the black race instead.
I would not hold it against him if the name he currently uses differs from that on the birth document.
I would not even hold it against him if the birth certificate listed him as a “Muslim”, yet he had made an honest converstion to Christianity.
Nor do I believe that any reasonable conservative would claim that information on that document - no matter how “embarassing” - disqualified him from becoming who he is today. This is America, where people make their own dreams.
There is nothing on the original Obama birth certificate that could possibly be “embarassing” enough to discredit Obama, force him from the race, or cause his supporters to turn away from him.
What appears on the certificate must be something more serious, more damning, than having the potential to simply “embarass” him.
I’m wondering if the “birth certificate” that Obama has in his personal possession (assuming that his claim to have it is truthful) is indeed a “birth certificate”, but NOT one from Hawaii?
If not from there, from where?
I’d forgotten that bit of info. I read that somewhere that clinton’s father may not have had time for his divorce in Tx was complete before he began the process of siring bill.
Larry, HA HA to you back! You’re the one who seems to like riots enough to predict their occurrence at the drop of a hat if any effoprt is made to uphold the Constitution, If angry adolescents - and I’m certain you’re not among them - decide to act up and act out as they did in the sixties, lawful authority WILL act as it did then with whatever force is needed to put them down.....and if you live in Denver, the problems will be right in your back yard. Have a peaceful evening while you can.
I 100% agree - as with any naturally born American citizen, there is nothing whatsoever on a legit U.S birth certificate that BHO would have to be embarrassed of or apologize for.
If he does posses a state of HI BC, and it does mention one or more of the items you listed, what WILL look completely scandalous would be the truth of who he really is in contrast to just the opposite he has been advertising himself to be - from his autobiographies, his speeches, and his other quoted statements. Such a coming out of the truth would stink of deception, manipulation and fraud upon the electorate to high heaven - why? Because he would appear guilty as hell for trying to cover up something for some “unknown agenda”. Why would he lie? What is he trying to hide? What on the range of possible motives would this mean? What would independent and moderate democrats think of his character being caught in a lie of such proportion?
What is idiotic, is your proposal that America be threatened by an unruly and criminally predisposed minority to accept an unqualified candidate as specified by the Constitution....
At what point do YOU take a stand?
I would hope that the next riots - are met with the level of force called for in riots against the LAWFUL implementation of CONSTITUTIONAL requirements...
If there be blood in the streets - let it come now.
It's long overdue....that bad things SHOULD happen to folks doing bad things....
So far -- failing to react to riots, mayhem, wilding, looting and professional crime gangs on our streets --- has not served society's best interest.
I can assure you -- I will not be cowered by rioting mobs in my street, I will be firing for effect.
Where will you be? In your closet sucking your thumb?
I find the race of the father being stated as AFRICAN, is the most questionable...
African is not a race..
African is a person from the continent of Africa - and not all are black.
In that era — I suspect Colored, Black or Negro would have been used...
In this era — “African” is politically correct and would ONLY be used by someone “producing” the Birth Certificate in the currect politically correct era.
I'm all for taking a really strong stand against criminals and street thugs. I saw first hand what Giuliani accomplished in New York. It should be repeated everywhere.
But this is different. If Obama is disqualified on this kind of technicality blacks will see it as an action of white racists trying to pull the same shit they did in the days of segregation, hiding behind the rule of law, states rights, the Constitution.
And they'll be right.
I don't know where you live but your bluster sounds to me like that of a monumental fool, someone who's never actually experienced street riots and burning cities.