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

Skip to comments.

Why Obama's Birth Certificate Matters, Especially Now
American Thinker ^ | March 14, 2012 | Selwyn Duke

Posted on 04/09/2012 7:47:30 PM PDT by neverdem

There was a time when someone could perhaps justify sitting on the fence on the matter of Barack Obama's birth certificate. There were those on the left who could chalk doubts about its authenticity up to conspiratorial internet paranoia. As for the right, there was every reason to worry about being the victims of an Alinsky-style setup designed to marginalize opponents. In other words, let the other side double down on an incredible claim, and then, at the most opportune time (October surprise?), provide irrefutable evidence to the contrary and make them look like deluded wackos. So, for a long time, there might have been reason to watch, wait, and let the wheels of investigation render their judgment.

That judgment is in, and the time for waiting is over.

With the results of Maricopa County, AZ sheriff Joe Arpaio's "Cold Case Posse," an incredible claim has become an incredible situation: a team of professional investigators, commissioned by a major law-enforcement agency, has determined that the alleged birth certificate produced by the president of the United States is a probable forgery.

Process that for a moment. The regime of the world's most powerful nation -- a republic that prides itself on adherence to the rule of law -- is likely peddling a forged document. What say you, citizen?

Note that I didn't claim that the president isn't natural-born. Rather, I claim nothing but am only stating a fact: there is now no denying that the birth-certificate matter warrants further investigation, and it is time for other law-enforcement agencies and the media to show due diligence. And I will spell out the possibilities here:

The Arizona investigators are correct. They are mistaken. They are lying.

For the record, I don't believe the last for a moment, but I do want to cover...

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; certifigate; naturalborncitizen; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next last
I've heard that the certificate of live birth from the White House states something other than Negro for the race of the father. Can anybody confirm that?
1 posted on 04/09/2012 7:47:42 PM PDT by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: neverdem
Whitehouse website copy has fathers race as African,

Mother as Caucasian.

2 posted on 04/09/2012 7:52:19 PM PDT by I am bigjohn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I believe it says “African” which to me could be plausible for the time as his father was from Africa whereas an American would have been referred to as a “Negro” although at the time, 1962, the only terms I heard were Negro or Colored.


3 posted on 04/09/2012 7:56:11 PM PDT by Inyo-Mono (My greatest fear is that when I'm gone my wife will sell my guns for what I told her I paid for them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

it states “african” which is a term that was never used in those days

Africa is a continent. People from all the countries on that continent with negroid skin and characteristics were call “Negroes” - It was Not a term of derision, as some think it is today.

A birth certificate in that year would have said Negro. I bet you can not find one birth certificate from anywhere in the world that lists race as African (except Obama’s)

It wasn’t until the 1970’s that the word ‘negro’ was replace by “african american”

American are stupid enough to go to Africa and STILL call black people “african amercians” over there


4 posted on 04/09/2012 7:57:53 PM PDT by Mr. K (If Romney wins the primary, I am writing-in PALIN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The problem as I see it is that due in large part to media malfeasance it became unfashionable even to be skeptical of President Obama's status under Article II of the Constitution -- much as it became unfashionable to be a climate change skeptic or, gasp, denier. There are reasons for this and all of them are discomforting.

Try this little experiment (the second of two suggested in the linked article):

Belief in President Obama’s presidential eligibility is fashionable, “birtherism” is unfashionable. At a properly fashionable cocktail party, perhaps in Washington, D.C., try this experiment: deny — or merely express skepticism — that there is global warming or that man is its principal cause. Deny — or merely express skepticism — that President Obama is constitutionally qualified under Article II of the Constitution as a “natural born citizen.” This too should perhaps just be a thought experiment for anyone desiring to be invited again.
How do we overcome this sort of problem?
5 posted on 04/09/2012 7:59:41 PM PDT by DanMiller (Dan Miller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

On one hand one might say “give it a rest” since
Obama is now running for a second term. On the ot-
her hand it surely didn’t bother the ‘Rats to re-
hash the military record of GW when he was running
for re-election..............


6 posted on 04/09/2012 8:01:49 PM PDT by Sivad (NorCal Red Turf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sivad
I assume you wouldn't give a bank robber a pass on subsequent bank robberies if he got away with his first.

This is much more serious and has far reaching repercussions.

The reason no one will address this issue higher up is due to the chaos this country would be thrown into if a sitting president were proven to be an imposter.

Think about it.

7 posted on 04/09/2012 8:08:53 PM PDT by I am bigjohn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Sivad
On one hand one might say “give it a rest” since Obama is now running for a second term. On the ot- her hand it surely didn’t bother the ‘Rats to re- hash the military record of GW when he was running for re-election..............

The question is whether it hurts us more than it hurts Obama. If a whisper campaign questioning Obama's citizenship could really damage him, I'd be all for it (even though I think it is likely bunk). Unfortunately, I think just being associated with birthers stains otherwise good conservatives credibility and is to be avoided at all costs - much like the left tucked their truthers away in forum dungeons (and they are still there).

Birtherism is never going to amount to anything, and is in danger of completely beclowning itself (to the extent it hasn't already) if these people start claiming Rubio and Romney aren't eligible either - but if they'd just stick with mounting a quiet whisper campaign against Hussein I'd be a whole lot more sympathetic because they just might do some good. Just don't try to put any of our elected officials in positions of having to defend this stuff. It would be better if they could play dumb and act unaware of the birthers operating behind the scenes to raise questions about who Hussein really is.

8 posted on 04/09/2012 8:11:03 PM PDT by Longbow1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Sivad

It’s never too late to vet. Since vetting never happened for The Won, why not start now? Let’s treat it as ne novo information and pretend we never heard any of it bfore - Oh? Please tell me more....


9 posted on 04/09/2012 8:11:03 PM PDT by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

It does not matter.

Solyndra fleeced us a half-billion $$$ and Barky’s bro is still in a mud hut in Kenya.


10 posted on 04/09/2012 8:13:36 PM PDT by quantim (Obama = #theoccupier on twitter.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Here is how you get this issue front and center, and make a little money while doing it.

Have town meetings in large auditoriums around the country. Have 5 star communicators with all the facts succinctly stated and skillfully presented. Sell reasonably priced tickets, with advance publicity. Move the presentation to major metro areas around the country and the local media will cover it even if the national media will not.

If is done right, the national media will eventually have report the facts they seem to want to ignore.


11 posted on 04/09/2012 8:20:59 PM PDT by The_Media_never_lie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quantim
This is why it matters
12 posted on 04/09/2012 8:21:34 PM PDT by al baby (Hi Mom)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: LucyT; Brown Deer; advertising guy; little jeremiah
LEGS,,,,,Millipede coming soon
13 posted on 04/09/2012 8:25:17 PM PDT by hoosiermama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

regardless of where he was born, he is not natural born as required by article II section 1 clause 5. the USSupreme Court in 1874 defined NATURAL BORN AS BEING BORN OF TWO U.S. CITIZENS.


14 posted on 04/09/2012 8:30:11 PM PDT by spookie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

regardless of where he was born, he is not natural born as required by article II section 1 clause 5. the USSupreme Court in 1874 defined NATURAL BORN AS BEING BORN OF TWO U.S. CITIZENS.


15 posted on 04/09/2012 8:30:11 PM PDT by spookie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

regardless of where he was born, he is not natural born as required by article II section 1 clause 5. the USSupreme Court in 1874 defined NATURAL BORN AS BEING BORN OF TWO U.S. CITIZENS.


16 posted on 04/09/2012 8:30:27 PM PDT by spookie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

It comes down whether we are a nation of laws or a nation of men.

Postmodernists believe that law is nothing more than one of a number of tools used by the powerful to oppress and exploit those with less power. So, there is not much respect for the law qua law for men of the Left like Obama.

In some ways it is like the Clinton legal transgressions relating to Paula Jones. A sitting president was given a pass by the US Senate on perjury and obstruction of justice. The legal system was perverted for the personal benefit of Bill Clinton (although he was ultimately disbarred and it was reported that Paula Jones received a large settlement.)

With respect to Obama situation, in the case of an ordinary US citizen who was caught presenting documents that appear forged in order to obtain or qualify for some important benefit, that citizen would be held to account under the law. But for Obama, it is more important that he be allowed to run for president than it is that he have to comply with legal requirements.

Historians may look back and point to the Clinton and Obama cases where, like in the age of kings, leaders of the Left were held to be above the law and this was one of the important markers in the effective loss of a constitutional republic and a nation of laws.


17 posted on 04/09/2012 8:31:41 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Foreign governments like Russia and China probably have the goods on Obama and use it as leverage.

This is an important reason why presidents should be required to be transparent and not allowed to hide so much of their personal records, so that America is not subject to the consequences of blackmail.


18 posted on 04/09/2012 8:33:51 PM PDT by Meet the New Boss
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: al baby

This, too, is why it matters.

19 posted on 04/09/2012 8:35:44 PM PDT by Eccl 10:2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Obama was born in Kenya.


20 posted on 04/09/2012 8:36:55 PM PDT by ILS21R (John Locke: When the social contract is broken, the people must revolt.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Bookmark


21 posted on 04/09/2012 8:37:11 PM PDT by conservativebabe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

” - - - we already are in a constitutional crisis. The only question now is whether we’re going to fight the fire or continue to fiddle while the Constitution burns. “

Well said.


22 posted on 04/09/2012 8:39:01 PM PDT by Graewoulf ((Dictator Baby-Doc Barack's obama"care" violates Sherman Anti-Trust Law, AND U.S. Constitution.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DanMiller

” This too should perhaps just be a thought experiment for anyone desiring to be invited again.

How do we overcome this sort of problem? “

Term limits for idiot and traitorous politicians.

I don’t give a good G*d-damn if they are invited to parties or not. Put them on a short leash, and they won’t give a damn about parties, either.


23 posted on 04/09/2012 8:39:53 PM PDT by Mortrey (Impeach President Soros)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: I am bigjohn

The reason no one will address this issue higher up is due to the chaos this country would be thrown into if a sitting president were proven to be an imposter.


That’s their excuse for being chickens. THe country is already being thrown into chaos and it will only get worse, esp. if those who know that he’s an imposter keep playing charades.


24 posted on 04/09/2012 8:41:14 PM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell. Signed, a fanatic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

On government forms? Most certainly.

The breakdown was pretty simple and all government forms used the same terms. Even in 1976, “black” was not allowed on government forms. The box said “negro”. It was not a pejorative and was not treated as such, although the n-word was already taboo.

“African”? On a birth certificate from that time?

Not. A. Chance.

Correct forms are in the government blood. Admin clerks freak if the wrong colored ink is used to sign documents.

That word wouldn’t make it past the first chain of editors before being corrected back to the government approved term.


25 posted on 04/09/2012 8:42:49 PM PDT by Ronin (Sarah.... We really need you now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; All

26 posted on 04/09/2012 8:44:22 PM PDT by Zakeet (Obozo is to competent as an Etch-A-Sketch is to art)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: I am bigjohn

The reason no one will address this issue higher up is due to the chaos this country would be thrown into if a sitting president were proven to be an imposter.


The country is already in chaos. The evil bastard needs to

be in Leavenworth...or Gitmo.


27 posted on 04/09/2012 8:49:42 PM PDT by unkus (Silence Is Consent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama

Who is the guy with 0bastar*?

Thanks for the pings even if I don’t make comments...too busy lately.


28 posted on 04/09/2012 8:50:23 PM PDT by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell. Signed, a fanatic)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Meet the New Boss
Maybe. I hadn't thought of it that way, but going back to the "off-mic" episode, didn't Obama really sound like some mark explaining to a loan-shark's flunky why he couldn't cover the vig this week?

Well, didn't he just?

"Yo dude! Don't you dare blow the whistle now! Let me get in again next time and I'll really kick ass." That's what he really meant. He was practically whining...

I don't know whether to laugh or cry...

29 posted on 04/09/2012 8:51:56 PM PDT by Ronin (Sarah.... We really need you now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: DanMiller

Obama’s birth certificate matters only to us who are in no position to do anything about it. We didn’t vote for him and that’s all we could do then and can do now.


30 posted on 04/09/2012 10:03:53 PM PDT by luvbach1 (Stop the destruction in 2012 or continue the decline)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
What say you, citizen?

What's for dinner?

31 posted on 04/09/2012 10:21:04 PM PDT by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Eccl 10:2; al baby; quantim
This, too, is why it matters."

To both:


32 posted on 04/09/2012 10:36:19 PM PDT by Flotsam_Jetsome (If not you, who? If not now, when?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

One things for sure.... We simply cannot afford to suffer this clown for another 4 years.


33 posted on 04/09/2012 10:47:41 PM PDT by Bullish
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ILS21R

Why? Just because his grandmother says she was there and says so?.../s


34 posted on 04/09/2012 11:00:28 PM PDT by samadams2000 (Someone important make......The Call!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

I’m afraid the American people have spoken on this, and they do not want any truth contrary to their decision of 2008.


35 posted on 04/10/2012 3:51:30 AM PDT by Theodore R. (Past is prologue: The American people again let us down in this election cycle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

“..look like deluded wackos “

there has always been plenty here on FR that wanted to make anyone claiming his BC was fake look like ‘wackos’


36 posted on 04/10/2012 4:10:53 AM PDT by SF_Redux (Sarah stands for accountablility and personal responsiblity, democrats can't live with that)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Inyo-Mono
I believe it says “African” which to me could be plausible for the time as his father was from Africa whereas an American would have been referred to as a “Negro” although at the time, 1962, the only terms I heard were Negro or Colored.

No, "African" would not have been plausible as race in 1961 or any other time. There are millions of people who are not black who are African and whose ancestors have been for hundreds to thousands of years. In 1962 the term used for black as race was Negro. "African" on a document purporting to be official is pretty much clear evidence of something being wrong with that document. It would be like someone offering you an ancient coin with the date of 7 BC.
37 posted on 04/10/2012 4:17:11 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: aruanan; Inyo-Mono
At the time the BC was released freeper did quite a bit of research, Many countries in Africa have both Dutch and British heritage. Three terms were used in those countries to denote race. “Afrikan” was used for the aboriginal race that had no European blood. There were also terms for mulattoes and Caucasians. IIRC South Africa still uses all three terms.

I suspect that when the Kenyan BC was viewed in HI someone thought they were correcting the spelling. That transfer of information could have even been done at adoption, nullification of adoption or when a grandmother registered his birth.

38 posted on 04/10/2012 4:42:53 AM PDT by hoosiermama
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: hoosiermama
At the time the BC was released freeper did quite a bit of research, Many countries in Africa have both Dutch and British heritage. Three terms were used in those countries to denote race. “Afrikan” was used for the aboriginal race that had no European blood. There were also terms for mulattoes and Caucasians. IIRC South Africa still uses all three terms. I suspect that when the Kenyan BC was viewed in HI someone thought they were correcting the spelling. That transfer of information could have even been done at adoption, nullification of adoption or when a grandmother registered his birth.

That's an interesting take, but coming into the U.S., I think the relevant department would "translate" whatever they see on a foreign BC into whatever the equivalent and legal term is here. In Barry's case, it would have been Negro. I think "African" on the purported birth certificate is an artifact of 1. the forger's relative ignorance of things before his birth and 2. the modern, liberal forger's almost unconscious shying away from the politically-incorrect "Negro." Remember that school that characterized the photographer's exhibit of black South Africans as "African-American South Africans"? I think the same level of brain stem "thought" was at work in this forgery.
39 posted on 04/10/2012 4:54:34 AM PDT by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

My arguments with non birthers relate to this point. They use the fact that the Nordyke long form states they’re “white” when the required term is Caucasian.


40 posted on 04/10/2012 5:42:22 AM PDT by STJPII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: STJPII

It says the Nordyke parents are Caucasian. Here is a link to Susan Nordyke’s birth certificate.

http://www.wnd.com/images/090728birthcert.gif


41 posted on 04/10/2012 5:59:08 AM PDT by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: STJPII

“They use the fact that the Nordyke long form states they’re “white”

It says Caucasian not white.

http://www.wnd.com/images/090728birthcert.gif


42 posted on 04/10/2012 6:01:29 AM PDT by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

!


43 posted on 04/10/2012 6:09:45 AM PDT by skinkinthegrass (Kill all the terrorists; protect all the borders, ridicule all the (surviving) Liberals :^)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

OK.....maybe I have it reversed. What did the Census Bureau require at the time “whites” or “caucasion”?


44 posted on 04/10/2012 8:40:36 AM PDT by STJPII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: STJPII

“What did the Census Bureau require at the time “whites” or “caucasion”?”

It really does not matter. The birth certificates are what we are talking about here and whites were and still are listed as Caucasian.

“White” has NEVER been a race classification. Caucasian is the classification.


45 posted on 04/10/2012 8:57:29 AM PDT by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: STJPII

I take back part of my post from above.

It looks like the Census Bureau has changed classifications to include “white” in at least the 1990s and later.

But my original point stands. The Nordyke twins birth certificates use caucasian not white.


46 posted on 04/10/2012 9:10:04 AM PDT by Smokeyblue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: STJPII

White for Cucasian is far more plausible than Afrikan (bak in the 50’s 60’s) but I agree that is a point that needs to be proven

I would like to see how many birth certificates say White as opposed to Caucasian for that year

I am guessin no others say African


47 posted on 04/10/2012 11:39:32 AM PDT by Mr. K (If Romney wins the primary, I am writing-in PALIN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Longbow1969

“The question is whether it hurts us more more than it
hurts Obama.”

That is the right question. Unfortunately, the answer
is it will hurt us more than it will hurt Obama due
to media double standards. Recall the term ‘swift boat-
ing’? Hell, it was Kerry and his minions who regurgi-
tated the military record issue to try to unseat a
president who had already been subjected to that
stuff in his first presidential campaign. The MSM was
game for it and when Nam vets set the record straight
regarding Kerry’s own military record all of the
sudden Kerry is portrayed as a victim by the MSM.
And, he continues to be portrayed a victim to this
day.....’swift boating’ indeed! Kerry started it and
whined when the military record issue was turned on
him.

My point is that if it was fair to re-hash GW’s
military record then it is certainly fair to revisit
Obama’s birth record status. However, I realize
that the MSM’s definition of “fair” is not the
same as yours and mine.

As to a whisper campaign I think that the vast major-
ity of those who are susceptible to it are already
anti-BO to a degree. If such a campaign were to sprout
it would come out in polls eventually and the MSM would
do their best to squash it. The best thing IMO would
be to keep it all on the down-low until the bodies
are found. None of this “We THINK the live birth
document is a forgery”. They have to KNOW it.
And, beyond that, they need to prove he was born in
Kenya, Moscow (USSR), Indonesia, Oslo, or wherever be-
cause a forged document just won’t be enough by
itself.


48 posted on 04/10/2012 6:27:30 PM PDT by Sivad (NorCal Red Turf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: I am bigjohn

“I assume you wouldn’t give a bank robber a pass on
subsequent bank robberies if he got away with his
first.”

Right. And, I wouldn’t give an unqualified person
the keys to the white house if I could stop it.
Unfortunately, there are too many people both in and
out of the media who fail to see the similarities.


49 posted on 04/10/2012 6:43:27 PM PDT by Sivad (NorCal Red Turf)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

OK, so Nordyke’s LFBC says “caucasion” when the form should have said “white” It appears Hawaiian officials were at least inconsistent on this issue.

“Beginning in 1960, the Census Bureau began to use forms similar to the ones in use today, with a single form for an entire household rather than having multiple households included on the form completed by an enumerator. Census forms were mailed to most people, but census-takers picked them up. The data item is called “Color or race” with categories for “White, Negro, American Indian, Japanese, Chinese, Filipino, Hawaiian, Part Hawaiian, Aleut, Eskimo, (etc.)” Note that “black” did not appear on the form.”

http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2010/01/21/race-and-the-census-the-%E2%80%9Cnegro%E2%80%9D-controversy/


50 posted on 04/11/2012 8:52:00 AM PDT by STJPII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051 next 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