Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

Curious Blue
Posts: 2462
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 7:42 am

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#1

Post by Curious Blue »



I don't know whether anyone else has noticed this - or posted on it -- but Factcheck has now posted higher resolution (between 1.2 & 2.1 meg) versions of all its photos of the birth certificate, in a list format on the left side of the page under "supporting documents" , at [/break1]factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html]http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008 ... e_usa.html(I'm pretty sure that these weren't there before, but I don't know when they went up )

Justin
Posts: 1360
Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 9:20 pm

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#2

Post by Justin »



Those are the same photos that have been there for several months.

Curious Blue
Posts: 2462
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 7:42 am

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#3

Post by Curious Blue »



OK -- I know the pictures were the same, but I thought the ones I had downloaded before were lower resolution.Factcheck has made some significant changes to its overall layout & its home page.

Curious Blue
Posts: 2462
Joined: Wed Feb 18, 2009 7:42 am

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#4

Post by Curious Blue »



I sent Andrew Sullivan an email. It goes like this:

You wrote:

"I want Obama to instruct the Hawaii officials to release the official original document they say they have in their hands. Why not?"



Because it is ILLEGAL.



The Department of Vital Records in Hawaii is required by law to keep the original ON FILE -- if they "release" the ORIGINAL then there is no longer any document on file, and the released document could be tampered with. So their job for ALL VITAL RECORDS is to keep the original in a very safe place and never, ever, ever let it go.



What they do is give people CERTIFIED COPIES of the original. "Certified' means an official puts a seal on a piece of paper, signs it, and verifies that all the information on the COPY is the same as on the ORIGINAL, which by law, they must never, ever, lose track of.



It USED to be that when someone needed their birth certificate, Hawaii would make a photocopy of the top half of the certificate. Then they would stamp a seal and signature on the photocopy and the person would have a "certified copy" of the top part of the first page of the birth certificate.



The actual certificate is a much longer document with all sorts of personal, private medical information -- it looks like this:

[/break1]cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/birth11-03final-ACC.pdf]http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/birth1 ... al-ACC.pdf



When you open that PDF if you look at the bottom half of the first page and at the 2nd and 3rd pages, I think you will quickly realize that isn't what you had in mind with idea of "birth certificate". But that's what the ORIGINAL looks like -- or at least it would be the 1961 version of that form. But that's what you would be expecting Hawaii to release.



Nowadays, Hawaii doesn't give people the photocopy any more. Instead they put all the important data in a computer and they print out the computer data, and certify that. So when Obama sent off for a birth certificate in 2007, thinking he might need one to run for President, this is what Hawaii sent him:

[/break1]factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_3.jpg]http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/ ... cate_3.jpg



Back when Obama had won enough votes to get the Democratic nomination, but many weeks before the actual convention, he made a scan of that piece of paper, called a "Certification of Live Birth" and posted that online, like this:

[/break1]files.wordpress.com/2008/12/birthcertobama.jpg]http://publicintellectual.files.wordpre ... tobama.jpg



But people weren't satisfied with what he posted, because they couldn't see the raised seal and stamp that meant it was "certified" (and hence official) -- so Obama's people invited ALL the press to come to Chicago to see the birth certificate. The only people who showed up were from Factcheck. (If you don't believe me, call Brooks Jackson at Factcheck and ask). That's when Factcheck took all of the photos of the paper, certified copy, that is the OFFICIAL birth certificate that Hawaii gives out. Legally, any court would have to accept that as proof of birth.



Now, because you obviously haven't bothered to check into the history, you've bought into the untrue and ridiculous claims that there is some sort of hidden document that hasn't been released.



Do your homework next time.



The Hawaii Department of Health has now TWICE issue public statements verifying that the certificate that was photographed on factcheck more than a year ago is authentic, and that they have the original records safely preserved and can verify that all the information in the original is the same as on the certificate, as required by law.



There is nothing more to be done.



And the original birth certificate on file with Hawaii really is private. How is it the public's right to know whether his mother smoked cigarettes during pregnancy, or ever had a miscarriage or abortion before he was born, or whether the doctor chose to use forceps while delivering him?



Lola_Getz
Posts: 2757
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:40 am

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#5

Post by Lola_Getz »



I sent Andrew Sullivan an email.You did a helluva good job on that e-mail too, CB. It should be required reading for every birther.

User avatar
neonzx
Posts: 6879
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:27 am

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#6

Post by neonzx »



It's pretty obvious Sullivan has not spent any time actually examining the birfer movement. He claims Obama should have the original B.C. released,Because it would make it go away and it's easily done.We know, however, that it won't "make it go away". They would not accept the signed, sealed, delivered COLB, nor formal statements from government officials... why would they accept the "long form" original?----As for Facecheck... The hi-rez images have been up almost the entire time since they examined the COLB. For a period of time, links to the hi-rez images were removed. However, after the birfers balked, the were put back online.
To which Trump replied, Fuck the law. I don't give a fuck about the law. I want my fucking money.

Patricia
Posts: 1271
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:28 pm

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#7

Post by Patricia »



There is no doubt in my mind that by "official original document" Sullivan did not mean the moth-eaten 48-year-old piece of paper but a high-quality official photocopy.

bogus info
Posts: 5592
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:19 pm

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#8

Post by bogus info »



Actually Patricia, most of them say the want Obama's "original vault copy." And, they do believe they have a right to all the information that is on that "original vault copy." Phil at RSOL believes this as we had a discussion concerning right to privacy. He doesn't believe that elected or appointed officials have any rights to privacy and "we, the people" have a right to know anything they decide they want.

bogus info
Posts: 5592
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:19 pm

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#9

Post by bogus info »



CB,Great comment. I'd like to bring your article to Dave Weigel's attention and several other Congressmen with your permission of course.

Patricia
Posts: 1271
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:28 pm

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#10

Post by Patricia »



Bogus, it is impossible for me to believe -- without specific confirmation from the person who says or writes that -- that anyone is calling for the release of the 48-year-old, moth-eaten piece of paper.

Lola_Getz
Posts: 2757
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:40 am

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#11

Post by Lola_Getz »



Actually Patricia, most of them say the want Obama's "original vault copy.Yes, and the reason they say that is because of their absolute certainty that anything less than that would be tampered with somehow, and information forged. What I don't understand is what they would expect Obama to do with his "original vault copy" BC if it were actually possible for him to have it. Do they want him to take it on the road so all the birfers can handle it individually? Do they want it displayed under glass in the White House? One of the constant refrains from the birthers is that no one has been able to see the COLB that was released (despite the Obama campaign's offering it up for examination, and the obvious fact that it has been looked at and handled). Birthers say they want to see the original, but I've never received an answer from a birther when I ask the question "if Obama got his original BC, what do you expect him to do with it?" One original birth certificate vs. 300 million Americans. How could the original be displayed in a way that would satisfy everybody? The birthers make it clear that seeing an image online isn't good enough for them and they won't accept a certified copy as legitimate, nor are they prepared to take the word of the people who have seen the original, so what, exactly, do they want to happen?

bogus info
Posts: 5592
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:19 pm

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#12

Post by bogus info »



Here is but one example of this. There are many.



[/break1]therightsideoflife.com/?p=6832#comment-18742]http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6832#comment-18742



Jack says:

July 29, 2009 at 10:33 am

Here’s Obama’s dilemma in a nutshell (READ VERY CAREFULLY AND DIGEST):



If BHO shows his original long form birth certificate, indeed showing he was born in Hawaii, it will also show his father was American citizen, Frank Marshall Davis, not the Kenyan/British citizen, Barack Obama Sr. While that would allow Barack Jr. to be POTUS eligible as BOTH a “citizen”/“native born citizen” AND an Article 2 “natural born citizen” — that is, born to two American citizens on American soil — it would simultaneously show he is a fraud hiding his real father — an unacceptable political debacle.



If, on the other hand, BHO keeps hiding his original long form birth certificate — while simply repeating, without showing, he was born in Hawaii — he can still CLAIM BOTH he was born in Hawaii AND his father was the Kenyan/British Barack Obama Sr. This would enable Barack Jr. to claim he’s a “citizen”/“native born citizen” but it would mean (if a federal court would ever get around to declaring and thus far no one has standing to bring the suit) that he’s NOT an Article 2 “natural born citizen” and thus not eligible to be POTUS — a legal/constitutional debacle since all acts under an illegal POTUS are void.



So it seems, BHO has elected option one until forced to go option two because for now it looks like no federal court will ever find a plaintiff with standing. (Of course, there’s the additional issue of BHO losing American citizen status if/when he became an Indonesian citizen — that is, IF he returned and was naturalized he would be a legal citizen, but would lose both native and natural born status, and, IF he returned and was not naturalized, he would be an illegal immigrant unlawfully in this country — but we’ll leave that for another day.)emphasis mine

User avatar
Butterfly Bilderberg
Posts: 7653
Joined: Sat Jan 24, 2009 2:26 pm

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#13

Post by Butterfly Bilderberg »



I'm with Lola on this one, Patricia. Numerous times the birthers have called for not only the original "long form vault certificate" but also have insisted that it should be made available for analysis by a forensic document examiner to determine that the paper and ink and typewriter font actually date to 1961. It is clear from these demands that the birthers are referring to the original paper document that was created when Obama was born, and not a certified copy of the original.
"Pity the nation that acclaims the bully as hero,
and that deems the glittering conqueror bountiful."
- Kahlil Gibran, The Garden of The Prophet

Lola_Getz
Posts: 2757
Joined: Tue Mar 03, 2009 5:40 am

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#14

Post by Lola_Getz »



Here is but one example of this. There are many.



Jack says:

July 29, 2009 at 10:33 am

Here’s Obama’s dilemma in a nutshell (READ VERY CAREFULLY AND DIGEST):



If BHO shows his original long form birth certificate, indeed showing he was born in Hawaii, it will also show his father was American citizen, Frank Marshall Davis, not the Kenyan/British citizen, Barack Obama Sr.Jeebus. Leaving aside all the other stupid things in that post, Davis was 38 years older than Stanley Ann Dunham, making it highly unlikely that he fathered Barack Obama. There is absolutely nothing to base this nonsense on.



Life in Birfistan is refreshingly logic-free.

User avatar
PatGund
Posts: 7767
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:41 pm
Location: Edmonds. WA
Contact:

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#15

Post by PatGund »



Here is but one example of this. There are many.



Jack says:

July 29, 2009 at 10:33 am

Here’s Obama’s dilemma in a nutshell (READ VERY CAREFULLY AND DIGEST):



If BHO shows his original long form birth certificate, indeed showing he was born in Hawaii, it will also show his father was American citizen, Frank Marshall Davis, not the Kenyan/British citizen, Barack Obama Sr.Jeebus. Leaving aside all the other stupid things in that post, Davis was 38 years older than Stanley Ann Dunham, making it highly unlikely that he fathered Barack Obama. There is absolutely nothing to base this nonsense on.



Life in Birfistan is refreshingly logic-free.That's Internet Outhouse Andy Martin's thing - believing that the "real" birth certificate has Davis' name on it.



Ironically, that WOULD mean Obama was born of two US citizens though........ )

bogus info
Posts: 5592
Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 8:19 pm

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#16

Post by bogus info »



I posted this comment at RSOL and also sent it to Dave Weigel which includes CB's email to Andrew Sullivan. I hope it meets with everyone's approval, especially CB's. I am also going to send it to the "birthers on the hill" with this added:Does Senator Inhofe believe that elected officials give up their “right to privacy?” And, is this going to eventually extend to elected officials family also? It appears that many individuals who call themselves “We, the people” believe our elected officials give up their “right to privacy.” I don’t happen to be one of them because when our elected officials give up their “right to privacy”, mine will probably be next on their list. However, these same individuals won’t even fill out a census form or provide a police officer with basic information because they consider this an "invasion of their right to privacy.”[/break1]therightsideoflife.com/?p=6841#comments]http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6841#commentsSue says: Your comment is awaiting moderation. July 30, 2009 at 10:48 amHere is an article published by Andrew Sullivan.[/break1]theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2009/07/on-the-birthers.html]http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/t ... thers.htmlBTW, Sarah Palin did not release her medical records. She only released a statment from her Doctor. See below.[/break1]latimes.com/washington/2008/11/sarah-palin-med.html]http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washing ... n-med.htmlHere is a response to Andrew Sullivan’s article emailed to him by a member of Politijab, Curious Blue.viewtopic.php?f=25&t=2061#p53066“by Curious Blue » Thu Jul 30, 2009 7:18 am I sent Andrew Sullivan an email. It goes like this:You wrote:“I want Obama to instruct the Hawaii officials to release the official original document they say they have in their hands. Why not?”Because it is ILLEGAL. The Department of Vital Records in Hawaii is required by law to keep the original ON FILE — if they “release” the ORIGINAL then there is no longer any document on file, and the released document could be tampered with. So their job for ALL VITAL RECORDS is to keep the original in a very safe place and never, ever, ever let it go. What they do is give people CERTIFIED COPIES of the original. “Certified’ means an official puts a seal on a piece of paper, signs it, and verifies that all the information on the COPY is the same as on the ORIGINAL, which by law, they must never, ever, lose track of. It USED to be that when someone needed their birth certificate, Hawaii would make a photocopy of the top half of the certificate. Then they would stamp a seal and signature on the photocopy and the person would have a “certified copy” of the top part of the first page of the birth certificate. The actual certificate is a much longer document with all sorts of personal, private medical information — it looks like this:[/break1]cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/birth1]http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/birth1 … al-ACC.pdfWhen you open that PDF if you look at the bottom half of the first page and at the 2nd and 3rd pages, I think you will quickly realize that isn’t what you had in mind with idea of “birth certificate”. But that’s what the ORIGINAL looks like — or at least it would be the 1961 version of that form. But that’s what you would be expecting Hawaii to release.Nowadays, Hawaii doesn’t give people the photocopy any more. Instead they put all the important data in a computer and they print out the computer data, and certify that. So when Obama sent off for a birth certificate in 2007, thinking he might need one to run for President, this is what Hawaii sent him:[/break1]factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/]http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/ … cate_3.jpgBack when Obama had won enough votes to get the Democratic nomination, but many weeks before the actual convention, he made a scan of that piece of paper, called a “Certification of Live Birth” and posted that online, like this:[/break1]files.wordpre]http://publicintellectual.files.wordpre … tobama.jpgBut people weren’t satisfied with what he posted, because they couldn’t see the raised seal and stamp that meant it was “certified” (and hence official) — so Obama’s people invited ALL the press to come to Chicago to see the birth certificate. The only people who showed up were from Factcheck. (If you don’t believe me, call Brooks Jackson at Factcheck and ask). That’s when Factcheck took all of the photos of the paper, certified copy, that is the OFFICIAL birth certificate that Hawaii gives out. Legally, any court would have to accept that as proof of birth. Now, because you obviously haven’t bothered to check into the history, you’ve bought into the untrue and ridiculous claims that there is some sort of hidden document that hasn’t been released. Do your homework next time. The Hawaii Department of Health has now TWICE issue public statements verifying that the certificate that was photographed on factcheck more than a year ago is authentic, and that they have the original records safely preserved and can verify that all the information in the original is the same as on the certificate, as required by law. There is nothing more to be done. And the original birth certificate on file with Hawaii really is private. How is it the public’s right to know whether his mother smoked cigarettes during pregnancy, or ever had a miscarriage or abortion before he was born, or whether the doctor chose to use forceps while delivering him?”I know Foggy, I exceeded the "paragraph law." Won't happen again. ;

User avatar
June bug
Posts: 6161
Joined: Wed Jul 01, 2009 3:29 pm
Location: Northern San Diego County

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#17

Post by June bug »



I sent Andrew Sullivan an email.You did a helluva good job on that e-mail too, CB. It should be required reading for every birther.No kidding - terrific job, CB!

Smithereens
Posts: 859
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 7:14 pm

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#18

Post by Smithereens »



I don't know whether anyone else has noticed this - or posted on it -- but Factcheck has now posted higher resolution (between 1.2 & 2.1 meg) versions of all its photos of the birth certificate, in a list format on the left side of the page under "supporting documents" , at

[/break1]factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html]http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008 ... e_usa.html



(I'm pretty sure that these weren't there before, but I don't know when they went up )Actually CB, those are NOT the high resolution photos they claim they are on the FactCheck page. You can't believe everything you read on the internet.



Factcheck actually has substituted highly compressed photos without the detail OR the EXIF data on the those photo links. They did this 1 day after Polarik put out his September report. It's the one thing I agree with Polarik/Polland with - if factcheck wants to be credible they should have not removed vital data from those photos, compressed them by 6 times, and then still label them as the high resolution original photos - it is a lie. I already posted about this here: [linkbtn]Factcheck Removes Evidence,http://www.politijab.com/phpBB3/viewtop ... eck#p41811[/linkbtn]



Here is what the actual file sizes look like if downloaded today or after September 19, 2008. Note I have included one original file, #3. I am still looking for the rest of them in the original size without the compression and with the EXIF data.
Factcheck BC sizes.jpg

Patricia
Posts: 1271
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:28 pm

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#19

Post by Patricia »



That's Internet Outhouse Andy Martin's thing - believing that the "real" birth certificate has Davis' name on it.Ironically, that WOULD mean Obama was born of two US citizens though........ )The issue isn't really where he was born; it's about telling the truth.[/break1]nationalreview.com/?q=ZmJhMzlmZWFhOTQ3YjUxMDE2YWY4ZDMzZjZlYTVmZmU=&w=MA==]http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Zm ... mU=&w=MA==

User avatar
PatGund
Posts: 7767
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2009 4:41 pm
Location: Edmonds. WA
Contact:

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#20

Post by PatGund »







That's Internet Outhouse Andy Martin's thing - believing that the "real" birth certificate has Davis' name on it.



Ironically, that WOULD mean Obama was born of two US citizens though........ )The issue isn't really where he was born; it's about telling the truth.

[/break1]nationalreview.com/?q=ZmJhMzlmZWFhOTQ3YjUxMDE2YWY4ZDMzZjZlYTVmZmU=&w=MA==]http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=Zm ... mU=&w=MA==That's an interesting article in so far as Andrew C. McCarthy claims not to be a birther and then manages to spit up just about every single birther claim about birthplace, Indonesian citizenship, etc. It's truly a model of dishonestly.



BTW, did you know that it was the National Review that started the birth certificate nonsense? 9 June 2008



[linkbtn]Obama Could Debunk Some Rumors By Releasing His Birth Certificate.,http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/ ... g2OWRmNzI=[/linkbtn]



"Having done some Obama-rumor debunking that got praise from Daily Kos (a sign of the apocalypse, no doubt), perhaps the Obama campaign could return the favor and help debunk a bunch of others with a simple step: Could they release a copy of his birth certificate?



Reporters have asked for it and been denied, and the state of Hawaii does not make such records public."And they quote three rumours:



Rumor one: Obama was born in Kenya

Rumor Two: Obama’s middle name is not “Hussein” but “Muhammad.”

Rumor Three: His mother did not want to name him after his father, and his birth certificate says “Barry.”



Sound familar??



On edit. Wow, he even cites Larry "Whitey Tape" Johnson!



"There’s speculation out there from the former CIA officer Larry Johnson — who is no right-winger and is convinced the president was born in Hawaii — that the full state records would probably show Obama was adopted by the Indonesian Muslim Lolo Soetoro and became formally known as “Barry Soetoro.” Obama may have wanted that suppressed for a host of reasons: issues about his citizenship, questions about his name (it’s been claimed that Obama represented in his application to the Illinois bar that he had never been known by any name other than Barack Obama), and the undermining of his (false) claim of remoteness from Islam. Is that true? I don’t know and neither do you. "Shades of TexasDarlin's Judah Benjamin !



McCarthy is using the same old tired lies about Obama to try and prove that Obama is being dishonest. It's a very classic "when did you stop beating your wife" argument, and shows a severe case of intellectual dishonesty on the part of McCarthy.

Patricia
Posts: 1271
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:28 pm

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#21

Post by Patricia »



Pat,While your observations are correct, McCarthy is not claiming them to be true. I hope you got the general thrust of his message, which is far different than that of the others. We simply do not know whether in fact he was adopted and acquired Indonesian citizenship under some heretofore unknown provision of the law that permitted him to retain his U.S. citizenship. McCarthy's whole point is that of the secrecy, well, if you've read it all, you've read it all. I don't disagree that he mentions issues that the others have made their anthem, but it is clear to me that he is not doing anything like that.

Patricia
Posts: 1271
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:28 pm

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#22

Post by Patricia »



Pat,



You quote McCarthy as writing: Is that true? I don’t know and neither do you.He's telling the truth. You don't know. You and others make perhaps a correct educated guess, but you still do not know the facts. There are many of them; McCarthy talks about and links to contemporaneous documentation.



I think he's reflecting precisely where my mind is at this point, although I am far less interested in calling for release of anything than he is. Again, the issue is not where he was born. The issue is his honesty. The discrepancies McCarthy cites are quite real.



I am disappointed in NR not having comments. On AT, you can comment and frequently will hear a response from the author. None of the AT authors are writers FOR the site, by the way.



Edit: And the issue of whether Davis is his father or not making him a NBC without question --- the issue is the man himself, not where he was born. McCarthy says well, in my opinion, what I've fumbled at PJ to say since I've been here. But I am in the mental and emotional place where I am inclined simply to sit and watch what happens. I really do hope that Obama will decide to think about things and conclude that it would be wise to fill in the blanks of his life and reconcile the discrepancies McCarthy points out. I really have to write McCarthy and thank him for that article today, because I feel as if he really spoke for me and others like me, reasonable people with curiosity about who Obama is and what his complete history is. If he lied about some things, how are we to know when he's told a lie when he's said other things that haven't yet been proven lies, either by his own words or the research of others? I don't think there's anything wrong at all in a person's wanting more complete information about who the president of the country is and whether he can be trusted. So far the verdict among many thoughtful conservatives is that he cannot be.

User avatar
Res Ipsa
Posts: 2646
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 1:31 am

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#23

Post by Res Ipsa »



We simply do not know whether in fact he was adopted and acquired Indonesian citizenship under some heretofore unknown provision of the law that permitted him to retain his U.S. citizenship.It is simply not up to Indonesia, or any country, to "permit" a minor born in the use to "retain his U.S citizenship".



The United States of America regards any child born in the US (with the minor diplomatic exception) to be a US citizen. Period. End of story. That is the Constitution, and can't be ignored.



Once born in the US, the ONLY - ONLY - ONLY way to lose US citizenship is to consciously renounce it under oath before a US consular official - and this CANNOT - CANNOT - CANNOT be done by a minor. Period. End of story. That is the law of the US.



We absolutely do know that there is NOTHING - NOTHING - NOTHING that Barack Obama, Stanley Dunham, or Lolo Soetoro could have possibly done in Indonesia that would have ANY effect on his US citizenship.



It really boggles the mind how deeply some of this nonsense is rooted - even in a "recovering" birther.



Aside from the additional complication of "when did Barack Obama Sr. surrender his parental rights to permit an adoption", the entire question of Indonesian adoption is entirely tangential and irrelevant to the continued US citizenship status of Barack Obama from birth to the present day.
Thanks pal.

Patricia
Posts: 1271
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 1:28 pm

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#24

Post by Patricia »



We simply do not know whether in fact he was adopted and acquired Indonesian citizenship under some heretofore unknown provision of the law that permitted him to retain his U.S. citizenship.It is simply not up to Indonesia, or any country, to "permit" a minor born in the use to "retain his U.S citizenship".



The United States of America regards any child born in the US (with the minor diplomatic exception) to be a US citizen. Period. End of story. That is the Constitution, and can't be ignored.



Once born in the US, the ONLY - ONLY - ONLY way to lose US citizenship is to consciously renounce it under oath before a US consular official - and this CANNOT - CANNOT - CANNOT be done by a minor. Period. End of story. That is the law of the US.



We absolutely do know that there is NOTHING - NOTHING - NOTHING that Barack Obama, Stanley Dunham, or Lolo Soetoro could have possibly done in Indonesia that would have ANY effect on his US citizenship.



It really boggles the mind how deeply some of this nonsense is rooted - even in a "recovering" birther.



Aside from the additional complication of "when did Barack Obama Sr. surrender his parental rights to permit an adoption", the entire question of Indonesian adoption is entirely tangential and irrelevant to the continued US citizenship status of Barack Obama from birth to the present day.You totally, completely, thoroughly, and in every other conceivable way possible misunderstood my meaning.



I was writing from the point of view of Indonesia, not the United States. Now read what I wrote again. The very words and syntax should have told you I was writing with reference to Indonesia's supposed forbidding of dual citizenship.



Edit: For me, like for Andrew McCarthy over at National Review, the issue is not where he was born. The issue is his honesty and trustworthiness.



Edit: And Obama's claim that you can keep your health plan if you like it? [highlight]That's a lie![/highlight]

User avatar
mimi
Posts: 31131
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 12:01 am

Obama birth certificate on Factcheck

#25

Post by mimi »



For me, like for Andrew McCarthy over at National Review, the issue is not where he was born. The issue is his honesty and trustworthiness.So far, you have not caught him lying about the questions you are concerned about. And it seems that neither you nor McCarthey will be satisfied unless you catch him in a lie. I don't think there is any way to appease either of you.He says, born in the USA. He writes about his time in Indonesia. He was honest about the citizenship of his father. You folks won't be happy unless something comes up to prove he is not a citizen. Where has he betrayed his honesty? No other birth certficate has been found. Nothing has been found to prove him wrong. And, we all know there have been some who have tried and tried to find something. I'd bet a lot of money was spent looking.Bottom line... you don't like him. I get it. We all get it. Doesn't make him a liar.

Post Reply

Return to “Miscellaneous”