Okay, now things are going to get ugly… no matter what the book says…
**Exclusive** This year’s high stakes publishing project quietly went to press this week, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.
After years of research and digging by the nation’s top private investigators, here it comes:
The street date is a LONG month away, and author Jerome Corsi, the man who torpedoed John Kerry’s presidential dreams with SWIFT BOAT, has gone underground and is holding his new findings thisclose.“It’s utterly devastating,” reveals a source close to the publisher. “Obama may learn things he didn’t even know about himself!”Does Corsi definitively declare the location of Obama’s birth?Will the president’s attorneys attempt to interfere with the book’s distribution? [The publisher vows to vigorously fight any legal action that may be taken.]
Will the book finally — once and for all — put an end to the growing controversy?
Or will it just ignite new ones!?
“When Donald Trump said he sent PIs to Hawaii to get to the bottom of all this, he meant this book,” declares an insider.
THE CASE ranked #1,341 on AMAZON’s hitparade
Developing…
Oh my……
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
And speaking of “oh my…”
I guess any further proof of the existence of the “new civility” is no longer required, no?
The book is now #6 on Amazon.
And as for the Trig Palin post that Wonkette did – horribly disgusting. But then again, all that education doesn’t buy you class.
I do have to wonder what all the obfuscation is about from the Obama camp…
It would be too-huge a conspiracy for Barry Dunham, as he was known growing up, not to be from Hawaii and born there. There’s no-percentage in faking the birth announcement since the boy would be an American citizen anyway since his mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, was an American citizen.
But what if there’s something else in the hospital records and/or and birth registry? A different blood type? Something that would call into questions his paternity or heritage…or even his biological identity? That would be embarrassing….
Here in NJ your actual “official birth certificate – bureau of vital statistics” states only your name, place of birth, sex and birth date. There’s no identifiers that you-are-you, just that it happened and it was recorded in the Registrar’s Office and the date issued. For that matter, a Social Security card also doesn’t have any biological identifiers either….I haven’t actually had a physical SSI card in over 30-years since I lost my wallet in college.
Am I, me?
….Other than Rene Descartes’ solution to the question, can I prove it?
This is not good.
First, Jerome Corsi was basically the bad part of the Swift Vets. He wasn’t a Swift Vet. He was just the college roommate of the top one, John McNeill who is a very solid guy. They wrote the Swift Vets’ book together as separate halves, and it is obvious whose half is whose: McNeill’s half is devastatingly careful and accurate and credible, while Corsi’s is a mess. Corsi has a history of shoddy analysis and association with nutball claims; for example, a few years back he accused the Bush administration of a secret plot to create an “Amero” (uniting our currency with Mexico’s). Uh-huh.
Second, birtherism as an issue is just a very, very bad one for you conservatives/Republicans. What’s that you always say about Democrats with their recounts and their court decisions / judicial activism? – That they are trying to overturn the results of elections. You’re right about that. Birtherism is, sadly, the conservative equivalent. Obama was elected. You can’t overturn that election, and it isn’t going to help you if you give an appearance of trying. And the culture Obama represents – which is Big Government, somewhere between socialism and fascism – isn’t going to disappear just because it’s discovered that Obama shouldn’t have been elected.
Birtherism, EVEN IF IT TURNS OUT TO BE RIGHT AND TRUE, is a massive distraction from the issues and discussions that matter: the discussions about why Big Government is wrong (and why America must reject it). Birtherism also reinforces the old – unfair – stereotype of conservatives-as-nutjobs-and-possibly-racists. Birtherism is exactly what left-liberals want. Left-liberals *WANT* the Tea Party, fiscal-conservative movement to be lost – or drowned – in birtherism. Please don’t oblige them.
Slight correction, of course I meant John O’Neill. (I get my Mc’s and my O’s mixed up sometimes.)
Me too, so I don’t blame you. But you know what? It doesn’t matter. Ending ObamaCare and bailouts and $1.6T in spending that the country cannot afford, is what matters.
P.S. The answer is that Obama’s birth religion was listed as Muslim. (I don’t know that, just a prediction.)
We know Barack Obama has gone by different names. But is it really possible he wasn’t born here.
I only get suspicious when the MSM, like GMA and George Steffy, and Matthews on MSNBC go nutts and nutts on this topic. I recall when the media literally spit denouncements about Clinton’s mistresses until the blue dress was produced.
I agree, I think the birth was here but his religion is prolly listed as
Muslim or his father was listed as UNKNOWN (or maybe Jesse Jackson)
Swell. It’s beginning to look even more like 1996 for the GOP, at least as far as the presidential race goes. Democrat activists are undoubtedly giddy about the release of this book. It’s not just the subject matter and the controversial past of the author, but to release it through WND Books??? Are you freakin’ kidding me??? Yeah, tie yourself so closely to the World Nut Daily crowd. That’ll make non-social con Republicans and Independents just thrilled! This will not end well, especially for the Republicans.
Oh man, this is going to piss off a lot of collage students. I pray that he and his family will be safe.
Oh man, this is going to piss off a lot of collage students
Oh isn’t that precious!
Yes!!!Eleventy!!!! Because it’s ever more important to ignore the subject and completely destroy the messenger, RIGHT?!?!?!?!?!??????
Saul is totally coming in his grave right now.
I’ve gotten to the point where i just shake my head at this birther idiocy. It really doesn’t matter if he was born in Hawaii because – as was correctly pointed out above – his mother was an American citizen and he met the criteria under established law at the time of birth to be a citizen. It really is making people start to look a little crazy. But then again, the left side of the media looks crazy over some things, too. So maybe it balances it out.
Some of us are rightly more concerned about the other 12 records he’s managed to seal, Neptune.
Like his GRADES.
We know more about Sarkozy and Merkel then we do this colossal prick occupying the White House right now,. Just sayin…
Damn grammar Nazis. It’s like typos don’t exist in their minds.
Typos are indeed for the mind. Spellcheck is for the literate. Look into it. 🙂
Cool.
Because it’s ever more important to ignore the subject and completely destroy the messenger, RIGHT?!?!?!?!?!??????
Whether it’s “more important” or not isn’t very relevant except to political junkies and WND fanboys. Let’s talk about the political reality with the average voter: the credibility of the messenger IS a factor as is what is perceived to be their extreme partisanship. Democrats and liberals in general will jump all over Corsi’s past controversies as well as his connections to World Nut Daily, which will drown out much of whatever this book “exposes”. I’ll betcha that because of the messenger that this all works in Obama’s favor and not to his detriment.
Whether it’s “more important” or not isn’t very relevant except to political junkies and WND fanboys. Let’s talk about the political reality with the average voter: the credibility of the messenger IS a factor as is what is perceived to be their extreme partisanship. Democrats and liberals in general will jump all over Corsi’s past controversies as well as his connections to World Nut Daily, which will drown out much of whatever this book “exposes”. I’ll betcha that because of the messenger that this all works in Obama’s favor and not to his detriment.
So John has folded….
Ok….anyone else still in the game, or do we just call it a night and walk away?
If the slimiest guy I can think of walks up to me and tells me my best friend is a felon, then maybe I might wanna think about questioning the slimy guy.
Some people prefer doubting their friends, but that’s just them.
There is a reason why he or other backers have spent over a million dollars to hide his birth certificate. There is something significant on his certificate that he doesn’t want us to know….something that is probably very damaging. I’m betting that his father is not Barry Sr.
Or it just keeps a good distraction going which may be worth whatever they’re are spending. Lord only knows what their endgame is. Whatever, I think ILC and John have it right.
Even if that’s the case the political reality is that I am in very good company, i.e. an overwhelming majority of the electorate who views this subject matter with disdain. As I said, this will undoubtedly please a certain segment of the GOP as well as WND fanboys but that’s it. Instead of being a plus for the GOP it will be a detriment if it’s still an issue being strongly pushed a year from now. Show me I’m wrong.
This will be a big negative for the GOP. Sorry.
Cas, can you explain why Obama has not released his college records & why he is keeping up in lock & key? Every other presidential candidate released his records. What does Obama have to hide; therefore, why is this a big negative for the GOP? The negatives are all on Obama.
It will be interesting to know what, if anything at all, Corsi finds. I’ve never thought much of WND.
That being said, I think the GOP ought to stay away from this. If there is a smoking gun, the fault lies with the lamestream media that completely failed in its duty. If the story has any legs, it can walk without GOP help.
On the left, there’s more interest in Trig’s birth certificate than there is in POTUS’ bc. Weird, no?
Because even if Birtherism is right, it won’t be accepted by a big enough majority to mean anything. Because even if Birtherism is right, it’s still the wrong conversation at the wrong time. Because Obama really won the election in 2008. Because trying to taint Obama’s legitimacy now is backward-looking, perhaps even petty. Because the winning conversation to have, NOW, is the one about Obama’s reckless and destructive policies, and what other policies we need to fix them. Because liberty-minded people ought to be more forward-looking and to show more respect for the results of past elections. Because liberty-minded people need to stay with a winning conversation about where the nation is now in 2011, if we are to win the next major election in 2012.
There are very few requirements to become President (other than winning the election, of course): a candidate must be over thirty-five years of age, not a felon… and a natural-born citizen of the United States.
Given the fact that birth citizenship is one of the terribly few requirements, I hold that not only does Obama (or any other Presidential candidate) have an actual duty to disclose his original birth certificate… but that he has no right to withold it.
Barry O. can solve this whole issue at will, just like John Kerry could’ve ended the whole Swift Bat Veterans controversy with the stroke of a pen by releasing his military records. The fact that he won’t- just as Kerry never has and never will- tells you all you need to know about the contents of those records.
Finally, if we refuse to pursue the truth about the fitness of office of the highest public servant in the land- and the coverup surrounding his past- for political reasons, aren’t we no better than the Democrats, who translate the concept of “truth” to be, “whatever we want it to be at the time”?
Hold that view all you want, but the Constitution contains no such requirement.
As you point out: it requires the person to be a natural-born citizen. But, that does not require a birth certificate to exist; remember, there was a time once when not everyone had them – including today when an older person’s certificate might have been lost in some way.
Neither does the Constitution require the disclosure of the birth certificate, if one exists. The Constitution is silent as to the means of proof, and silent as to the mechanism of enforcement. Apparently, it is one of those things left to the States to certify. And Hawaii has, in fact, certified it for Obama and made its certification public (the Certification of Live Birth). Whether or not Obama is hiding something by hiding his actual/long-form certificate, the principle of federalism requires us to accept the key fact (that Obama is natural-born) as certified by the State of Hawaii.
Very true – if you’re talking about the issue of, “What information might be lurking on Obama’s real birth certificate?” Again, the related-but-nonetheless-different issue of “Is there some State that will certify Obama’s natural-born status?” was already settled, when the State of Hawaii provided that certification (not the same as the original birth certificate) to the public.
I’m not a birther. As a practical matter, it makes no difference right now. No court will touch it, and he was elected in a free and fair election (everywhere but Chicago, that is). He is our president. IMNSHO, he has committed no impeachable offense, and will remain our president at least until the next election.
BUT
The stubborn refusal to release not only his long-form birth certificate but also his college/law school records and his medical records are circumstantial evidence that he is hiding something that he and his handlers perceive to be very negative. Whatever those things are, I hope someone is able to reveal what is being hidden. I’m for using any and every LEGAL means to insure that he does not get a second term.
Well what the shit does it take to run? The rest of us, when applying for work, have to have a truthful application and prove our citizenship. Why doesn’t the highest office in the land require more than plunking down some cash?
On another note: one of the Amazon commenters stated that Chairman Obama will be reelected based on this “racist” book. Shall I take that to mean that the liberal position is that he’ll be reelected out of pity because he’s (half) black?
Yikes.
Yeah, I don’t get the birthers’ obsession. It has been proved that Obama was born in the U.S. and is constitutionally qualified to be president. Even if this is some grand conspiracy, the effort is futile.
So why doesn’t Obama release the original birth certificate? Could be a variety of reasons. They include something embarassing information such as unknown father, indication of a religion that is less popular than atheism, or something that no one has even thought of. Or also, it could be nothing, and Obama is purposely not releasing it for political reasons, because it shows some of his opponents foaming at the mouth, and by extension believes it will reduce credibility of Republicans in general.
As for his college records, there could be some private information that also would be embarrassing, or maybe his grades just sucked.
FWIW: There is far more documented evidence of Bush’s honorable service in the Texas ANG than there is of Obama’s college years.
This whole thing about college records is new to me. Why does anyone care? The schools gave him a degree. Who cares?
As I said: the State of Hawaii certified that Obama is a natural-born citizen of Hawaii, hence of the U.S.
Wiki on birth certification:
If Hawaii certified Obama’s birth status falsely in the 2008 campaign – fine, let’s uncover the scandal. But I highly doubt it.
If there is something on Obama’s long-form certificate that should have been made known in the 2008 campaign – well fine, uncover that too, but it’s water under the bridge. I mean, we already know that the media screwed the country in 2008 by not vetting Obama and giving him ridiculous amounts of cover. It’s done.
(continued) Uncovering the truth is one thing, getting excited about it is another thing. I’m saying, pick your battles. Even if Birtherism turns out to be right, pushing it still won’t be a good or inspiring issue for the GOP in 2012. Ryan’s budget plan, maybe.
OK. The House is trying to determine how to handle raising the debt ceiling. The “conventional wisdom” tells Republicans that they will crash and burn if they do not raise the debt ceiling. Just like they would crash and burn if the government shut down.
I have never known where to go to examine the “conventional wisdom.” But it is always there scolding away and predicting disaster.
The birther sideshow “conventional wisdom” is that it will chase the independents away from the “nutter” Republicans and cause the democrats to unite like never before.
Therefore, conservatives should stick to past successes and failures and let the Democrats frame the issues. After all, every once in a while, the Republicans get the White House and they get to snuggle with the Democrat Congress. That is the “conventional wisdom” also.
Personally, perhaps unconventionally, I favor tarring and feathering Obama in every way possible so that if he is reelected, at least he got vetted.
If Obama was born with dual citizenship and did not formally deny the second citizenship at age 18, the laws of jus sanguinis become problematic in terms of the Presidency. Furthermore, Hawaii in 1960 was bridging the gap from territorial citizenship protocol to statehood citizenship protocol and that mess continued until 1972.
Not being a “birther” I am not up on all of the theories which doubtlessly range from compelling to whacko.
What I do know is that Obama swore to uphold the Constitution. A true and faithful President would clear up any dispute about his qualifications to hold the office. However, that concept is predicated on people caring about bedrock ethics.
I am left underwhelmed underwhelmed with making this all about politics and whether the “birthers” are damaging the Republicans. I rather enjoy Donald Trump chipping away at Obama’s styrofoam columns. Obama is getting really testy and his untelepromted thin skin is beginning to split open. Since he is his own worst enemy (think Joe the Plumber) I prefer to have him go off half-cocked as often as possible. The more he goes off script the more his clean up crew looks like the Key Stone Kops.
The Main Stream Fantasy Media ignores nearly all conservative writers. Corsi will be ignored like he has Beck’s Syndrome in triplicate. But Corsi will feed the blogs and eventually enough will leak out into the mainstream that the topic will be discussed. Will the girls walk off The View on Donald Trump? I seriously doubt it.
You know, maybe Obama carried a second passport which he used in his trip to Pakistan. Maybe Obama got into a school or two based on foreign citizenship. Maybe Obama has a lot of complicated stuff in all those records that are sealed. Maybe he was born in Hawaii and never held dual citizenship and just rode affirmative action for all it is worth and even he has no proven knowledge of who donated the sperm to his mother’s womb.
But what a series of questions there are about “where did you come from and who’s your daddy?”
And, it should not go without saying, that if this man is not Constitutionally qualified, we have an unbelievable crisis on our hands.
Hi SS,
“Cas, can you explain why Obama has not released his college records & why he is keeping up in lock & key? Every other presidential candidate released his records. What does Obama have to hide; therefore, why is this a big negative for the GOP? The negatives are all on Obama.”
No, I can’t. Maybe he doesn’t want his private stuff splashed around. And because someone doesn’t want to discuss something of their private life, doesn’t necessarily mean that “they have something to hid.” Maybe they just like their privacy–what little there is of it. What surprises me is that these records haven’t leaked at all. And the fact they haven’t leaked might imply that Obama’s transcript isn’t that exciting, or that they have good security procedures at the educational institutions he went to through his life. I have no idea.
The negative is about perception. As I see it, its a bit like the Bush “did he or didn’t he serve” kerfuffle. It was dragged up, examined, argued over to death, and left to compost. Left me (and many others I suspect) feeling pretty irritated. Conspiracy minded Dems could have have dragged it up again, but it would have looked obsessional, and have done the Dems no good, even if they had had some new evidence. More argument, blah, blah, confusion, he said, she said, and most Americans I think would have switched off, and being irritated enough at the Dems to more likely vote for Repubs. So, I think something similar would happen here, as well.
Pat @#34:
Oh.
And the proof is? Really. If it were so simple as this, then Trump really would be a total idiot.
Please direct me to the proof. I very much want to see it. Why would anyone running this site spend a nano-second on the “birther” stuff in the face of proof?
This will be exciting. An easy end to a runaway train.
Is “gave” the operative word here? What did he do to earn it and on whose dime?
FWIW: We know more about Iraq’s WMDs and weapons labs than we know of Chairman Obama’s background.
Heliotrope, this will have to do: http://msgboard.snopes.com/politics/graphics/birth.jpg
Now is when we discuss shades of proof. I will be the first to admit, a government document is not absolute proof. But, under our Constitutional system of leaving these certifications to the States, and allowing that any certified natural-born State citizen is a natural-born U.S. citizen and hence eligible to be President, it suffices.
Shockingly, I agree with ILC.
TGC, are Universities really in the habit of giving out degrees to people who don’t meet the requirements? I mean, besides athletes?
Tongue in cheek aside, it just doesn’t seem to me that this information is useful for any purpose whatsoever. I assume George W. paid for his education at Yale with family money. I assume Obama paid for his some other way. I could be wrong in both cases, but I just don’t really think it matters in either case. Guess it does to some. For me this is the sort of personal information that really doesn’t bear on a candidate’s ability to be President. College financing and grades are sort of irrelevant IMHO.
And the proof is? Really. If it were so simple as this, then Trump really would be a total idiot.
Well… Actually, I’m guessing that it’s more of Trump trying to be an opportunist, or something.
The proof is the birth certificate, Heliotrope. I believe I also saw the Snopes piece that ILC linked. Is it 100% proof? Probably not. My birth certificate says I was born in NJ. But maybe I was really born in the Panama Canal Zone or Kenya, or something.
Even so, I don’t see how this would be a big constitutional crisis. A pretty minor one compared to the many times the Constitution has been subverted. If Obama is able to become president for life without any elections, we might have a problem.
According to Amazon.com Corsi’s book is now #1 in all books.
My problem is not with Obama being born in the USA, he probably was.
But lately I have seen three completely different definitions of what is a ”natural born citizen.”
There seems to be wild variants of what that means.
As long as there is not a settled definition, how can it be said that Obama does or does not satisfy it?
Pat,
The short form live birth certificate released has problems that do not satisfy “proof” enough to close the issue.
Your reference to “proof” and then your admission that it is not 100% proof is much the same as calling an established theory to be fact.
If Obama were not Constitutionally qualified, it would negate every action he took as “President.” That would be a mare’s nest of legal complications that would constitute a crisis.
I have no compulsion to sweep this under the rug. I am no fan of Obama, but if he is legitimately qualified to be President, I support the Constitutional system that made it so. If he is not Constitutionally qualified, I want him out of there and, possibly, in prison. I would say the same for any President.
Heliotrope, of course you would already understand that something can be proven legally (or to the satisfaction of the courts) without it being proven to the Nth degree of my satisfaction, Pat’s or yours.
Obama was proven *for legal purposes* to be a natural born citizen, when the State of Hawaii chose to certify him as such. And under Full Faith and Credit, the other States have to buy it. That is legal system’s view of the game: Obama is a natural-born citizen, until and unless somebody can prove the negative – i.e., that he is not, and that Hawaii accordingly perpetrated a terrible mistake (or fraud).
(continued) Now maybe Corsi thinks he powerful legal proof that Obama is *not*. It’s theoretically possible. I’m not going to lay down in the railroad tracks. But based on Corsi’s past track record (discussed up at #4), I’ll believe it after I see it.
ILC,
I am with you 100% on you #49 and #50 comments. The issue is whether the certification was flawed. After all, in the grand scheme of things, no state governor or sidekick is going to walk into the firestorm of questioning a sitting Senator’s birth documentation. That is not to imply that the governor or sidekick really did anything more than check off a box based on “common knowledge.” If Hawaii has a short form, that would suffice for “government purposes” if your role were mostly ceremonial.
I am not an avid birther. But those who are have uncovered some amazing dirt on the Obama birth mystery. I referred recently to Jack Cashill’s book and suggested everyone should read it. What I might have made clear is that I recommend it so everyone has a clear idea of what serious “birthers” are passing around.
If you are anti-birther, then you really should know the enemy. Sun Tzu would say the same. Birthers are drawing up a list of particulars that are remarkably fact based. They are playing with Rumsfeld’s: “There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don’t know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don’t know we don’t know.”
Conspiracy theories always unsettle me because they depend on too much collusion to fit general human nature. However, with so many asking “Who is Barack Obama,” and the clear mystery of why his two books are so vastly different in writing style, competence and content, it is intriguing, at least, to wonder if this megalomaniac has pulled off a stunner.
One reason I applaud Trump is because he has the voice that can not be silenced. Until the long form appears and the matter is settled, Obama is forced to skate on thin ice and his supporters are welded to uphold the Dear Leader. That is not comfortable territory for “independents” who supposedly choose based on objective analysis.
Clearly, some “independents” would be irked by the birthers and vote for poor, beset Obama. But, if the Republicans can field a candidate who will take the issues to Obama, the “independents” will choose between saving the nation or further fiscal lunacy. The birther stuff will just be so much more mud on Obama’s shoes.
As to Corsi, if he has laid out his case, fact checking and rebuttal should be fairly simple. Certainly, his publisher’s lawyers have combed through this thing in every conceivable way.
The Democrats have traded on “the seriousness of the charge” for many of their show trials. Scooter Libby is a perfect example. The state of Illinois seems incapable of jailing a Mayor of Chicago or keeping a governor, Democrat or Republican, out of jail. Crook County elected Kennedy by the necessary number of discovered ballots. Daley, Jr. was the head of the team to make the Florida votes elect Gore in 2000. (They failed to kneecap the SCOTUS and couldn’t finish the game.) Obama’s Senate seat, Blago, Daley, Rahm, Axlerod, Jarrett, and the Chicago machine have reminded us that Illinois may be the land of Lincoln, but it is also the home of the most vastly corrupt political machinery in the nation. Since Obama learned his craft there, why would anyone confuse him with Joan of Arc?
Obama has been a street fighter from the get go and the birthers are taking it to him in his own style. That pleases my sense of punitive justice.
However, I am not nearly skilled enough to weigh the potential pluses against the potential minuses.
Heliotrope, I’m a mathematician by trade, and would never use the expression “proved” in such an environment unless it was 100%. That’s usually not the case in the real world, such as a situation like this. Just like we have a standard of proof in criminal justice that is not 100%. So we have to act on the next best thing.
Now if it does somehow turn out that Obama is not constitutionally qualified, then we have an issue as to how to deal with this. The Constitution does not specifically say what to do in this situation. Is he immediately removed as president? Is a deal made in which Obama serves out his term and does not run for re-election? Something else?
Whatever happens in this case, two things I’m fairly certain will happen. His acts as president are not nullified. And we move on like we usually do when the Constitution is subverted.
As for Obama himself, we would have to see if he is criminally liable. In other words, we would need proof beyond a reasonable doubt, not 100% proof, that he knew that he was not constitutionally qualified, and yet ran for president knowing that was the case.
Pat,
You have missed the boat on the Constitution. If Obama is not qualified by Constitutional standards, he is not President. If he knowingly practiced a deception, he is criminally liable. The inescapable fact would be that no document he signed could have the force of law.
Suppose you were sold stolen goods without your knowledge. To whom do the stolen goods belong? That is the great mess of history being played out by people who bought art in good faith that was stolen by the Nazis.
The Constitution was silent on a vacancy in the Vice-Presidency. When Kennedy was assassinated and there was a brief period where the country believed Johnson was in Parkland Hospital with a massive heart attack and the Speaker of the House was a winded octogenarian, we decided we had best plug that hole.
The Constitution presumes that the President has qualified for the office. That presumption means that an “unqualified” person is not President and all his orders and acts are therefore null and void. Perhaps Joe Biden would be elevated immediately to President and by some fangle-dangle fancy smoke and mirrors legal voodoo he could simply validate all of Obama’s work. That is at least one suggestion for the Kabuki Theatre that could take place.
I’m not out of my league or in over my head here. I would never state “facts” about this huge unknown. Since power abhors a vacuum, you may rest assured that power politics would cause a thousand cherry bombs to explode every tenth of a second if this unknown were to be played out.
I said that if Obama knowingly ……. I can imagine that if his peripatetic mother and screwy grandparents created an unknown mess, that somehow there could be a legal decision that both Obama and the country were hoaxed by dead people. I have seen cases turn on less viable arguments.
None of this, however, means the “birthers” are trying to defy the law of gravity.
Heliotrope, as usual, I can respect your reasons even if I don’t entirely agree.
What’s that traditional saying – something about, when you are going to kill the king, you better get it right? If the birthers are going to have the nation spend time on this – time that could be spent valuably on, say, Ryan’s budget plan and other serious issues of Big Government – then they had better be right. The beauty of the Swift Vets in 2004 is that they were right.
But again: until either Obama is impeached or the Hawaii certification as such is withdrawn/overturned, Obama is legally qualified.
You have missed the boat on the Constitution. If Obama is not qualified by Constitutional standards, he is not President. If he knowingly practiced a deception, he is criminally liable. The inescapable fact would be that no document he signed could have the force of law.
Heliotrope, I have never claimed to be a constitutional scholar, so you may well be right. And you may well be right about what theoritically should happen if Obama is found to not constitutionally qualify as president. Nonetheless, I would be quite surprised if all of Obama’s actions as president, “president,” or whatever, would become null and void. For one thing it would be quite impractical. And how far would we go? Would we all have to redo our income taxes for the past two or so years? Would all agencies that received money have to give it all back? I just don’t see how this can happen.
And as I said, the Constitution simply does not state what would happen in such a situation. You provided a possible or perhaps, sensible, interpretation, but that’s all it is. And I get your analogy about stolen goods, but that’s all it is.
Perhaps, another hole in the Constitution will be plugged in as a result of all this, especially if it has been found that Obama is not constitutionally qualified to be president. But unless that happens before Obama is found out, I doubt that any of his actions will be voided.
But again: until either Obama is impeached or the Hawaii certification as such is withdrawn/overturned, Obama is legally qualified.
ILC, this is only a guess, but what would happen is that the Supreme Court would probably rule that Obama qualified as president until the moment that proof existed that he didn’t qualify. As such, none of his actions will be voided. Such a ruling may be unconstitutional, but practicality and sense would take over in this situation, to avoid a serious constitutional crisis.
Pat,
Moral relativity and Constitutional relativity and situation ethics are all the same: escape hatches when the going gets rough.
I hear you about possible Constitutional chaos should Obama be cancelled for non-qualification. Sort of like a race horse on drugs who bumped three horses on his way through. You can’t unscramble eggs.
I doubt any of this is worth considering, as I doubt the birthers will get us to that point. But, my doubts and spare change can buy you some donut holes.
ILC,
I do not see the birthers as a distraction. They are not drowning out any messages. The people doing back and forth with the birthers have no interest in headier issues.
Name one Progressive who has visited this site with thought provoking ideas about taxing our way to prosperity or ramping up deficit spending to cure inflation and lower the deficit.
They are bankrupt in the sane ideas department. They prefer to babble about birthers, because it gives them some sense of power. But in the final analysis, they are never going to abandon state socialism no matter what points enlightened people might make. They have already forfeited common sense for feelings. I know you love a good debate with opposing ideas. When has a Progressive treated us to such an exercise?
I tend to be more of the mind that if Obama were found to be constitutionally unqualified, the ruling would be that any law he had signed or regulation he had promulgated would not be voided, per se, but it would be unenforceable.
The net effect, then, would be that those of us who had complied with the law would be ruled to have done so voluntarily, and those of us who had not and were being prosecuted or had been convicted would have indictments and punishments voided. We could then stop complying with the law without penalty, of course.
My thought on the matter is this: what is on Obama’s birth certificate is less about proving his citizenship than it is maintaining his mystique. I am of the distinct mind that, if and when Obama’s birth certificate is ever shown, the end result will be “Dreams From My Father” and “The Audacity of Hope” being moved to the fiction section of the library, and the country will be stuck with a President who, it has been demonstrated, essentially built his entire life story and mystique on a lie.
This, indeed, is why I think the Obama administration continues to conceal his records. They run a sort of false-flag operation with the extreme Kenya birthers mainly to discredit the whole thing and to try to exploit the “Republicans are crazy racist people who believe this about Obama because he’s black”, but the ugly truth of the matter in my opinion is that Obama’s claimed father is not in fact his father.
Heliotrope, I love the Constitution as much as anyone, but as great as the document is, it does have a lot of holes in it, such as the one we are discussing. So there are plenty of interpretations, with each side calling the other constitutional relativists, when something is not specifically spelled out. In fairness to it authors and ratifiers, I think it would have been a monumental task to come up with a constitution that could cover all situations. So it’s incumbent upon us to plug in the holes when we find one.
But, my doubts and spare change can buy you some donut holes.
Same here.
In 1961, birth notices for Barack Obama were published in both the Honolulu Advertiser and the Honolulu Star-Bulletin on August 13 and August 14, 1961, respectively, listing the home address of Obama’s parents as 6085 Kalanianaole Highway in Honolulu. On November 9, 2008, in response to the persistent rumors, the Advertiser posted on its web site a screenshot of the announcement taken from its microfilmed archives. Such notices were sent to newspapers routinely by the Hawaii Department of Health.
In an editorial published on July 29, 2009, the Star-Bulletin pointed out that both newspapers’ vital-statistics columns are available on microfilm in the main state library. “Were the state Department of Health and Obama’s parents really in cahoots to give false information to the newspapers, perhaps intending to clear the way for the baby to someday be elected president of the United States?” the newspaper asked. wiki
Rusty:
I am not going to get into the trenches with the birthers. Cashill is the guy you need to ask. He dealt with it in his book. I suspect Corsi will as well. This is such an obvious point that the birthers would have been shot down a long time ago, had it been so easy to knock them out. However, I am not carrying the torch, so take the time to read Cashill. You will learn that the whole public notification thing was very sloppy and that all manner of people were slipping in for citizenship through the certificate of live birth route. Not something that would have likely escaped the attention of radical activists like Obama’s white side of the family.
NDT,
Obama has thrown a lot of “executive orders” at the bureaucracy and I doubt “unenforceable” negates direct orders. Even his appointments of military officers would be in jeopardy. (Here the Constitution is specific.)
Pat,
There are not a lot of holes in the Constitution and this is certainly not one of the few. The holes have been plugged by the remarkably few amendments. When the President is sworn in, he promises to uphold the Constitution which outlines whether he is qualified. We don’t need to think about what to do about an unqualified President. We need to be more careful about our presumptions. I do believe that Congress could pass legislation to appoint the Archivist of the United States to receive and verify all documents relating to Constitutional qualifications for candidates to the office of President.
THANKS Heliotrope. . .no need to get into the trenches, there already overrun.
As for Cashill’s book, I will just wait for movie: there might something either from Cashill or Corsi. If Obama makes it past 2012, I will wait for his memoir.
they’re already overrun. oops!
Okay, Heliotrope. We agree on two things here. That presidents should uphold the Constitution. And that Obama is criminally liable if he knows he is not constitutionally qualified, yet continues to hold office as president. As a side note, I’m not a fan of hypocrites who hide behind the Fifth Amendment when the amendment does NOT force anyone to not implicate himself.
But it still looks like we disagree on 1) the sufficiency of the (short form) birth certificate, together with birth announcements, as proof; 2) whether the Constitution is clear as to what would happen if Obama is found constitutionally unqualified; 3) what would actually happen; 4) the amount of holes in the Constitution.
In any case, I appreciate the discussion.
59.In 1961, birth notices for Barack Obama were published in both the Honolulu Advertiser and the Honolulu Star-Bulletin on August 13 and August 14, 1961, respectively, listing the home address of Obama’s parents as 6085 Kalanianaole Highway in Honolulu.
Rusty, it looks like there’s more proof that Obama was born in the U.S., than I was. I only have a birth certificate as proof. I won’t be running for president any time soon, so I guess I’m safe.
Pat,
You should look into why the “Short Form Certificate of Birth” is considered inadequate. I am not a lawyer or a birther. But I have read about the problems with the “short form” and I concur that it is insufficient for a passport and other documents. Just today, the AP posted a piece that the Long Form is carefully guarded and available only to the actual person and a few selected others. Fine. However, if a person must present a Bb>copy of the long form, I would be next to certain that the state must provide it. The AP, in its editorial wisdom, skipped over that little detail.
Here is another conundrum: Suppose Barack Hussein Obama shows up at the Hawaiian agency and asks to examine his Long Form Birth Certificate that is so very, very tightly guarded. How do they know it is him? Will he have to produce his short form certificate of live birth?
Do you understand all of the folly in this?
I have a copy of my birth certificate which gives the details of my birth in 1942. When I haul it before a minion of the State Department for my passport purposes, how is that stranger to know if I am the infant named on the copy of a state birth certificate?
Infants who were born at home get “birth certificates” that contain affidavits of known individuals who testify and vouch for the details of the birth. Infants who are discarded in restrooms and discovered are given birth certificates that detail how they came into the world as is best known by the state at the time.
To pass over whether Obama has a clear American birth is moral and Constitutional relativism of the worst nature. This is such a tempest in a teapot, that Obama has the obligation to release the real document. What would Washington, Lincoln, Kennedy, or even Bill Clinton do?
In fact, if anyone has a checkered, embarrassing story of “who’s your daddy” it is Bill Clinton. But what did he do about? Faced it like a man, shrugged it off and sure as heck made a lot more of himself than any other known relative in his scraggily family.
And think of what an ancient DUI almost did to George Bush who immediately stepped forward and set the record straight.
Please do not fall into the trap of thinking this is all so easily settled. If that were so, all the geniuses in the media would have cut it off at the knees when the Hillary people launched it.
The main issue pivoting on common sense is why Obama does not just get the matter resolved.
To pass over whether Obama has a clear American birth is moral and Constitutional relativism of the worst nature.
It’s not something I’m passing over. It’s more of a case that I believe that his American birth has been sufficiently proved. But if enough people disagree, perhaps Obama will be compelled, by the Supreme Court, say, to produce the long form document.
Maybe I’m just too cynical, a constitutional relativist, or whatever, but I’ve seen shadier things by the past few administrations that were passed over, and the partisan bickering that ensued.
The main issue pivoting on common sense is why Obama does not just get the matter resolved.
From where I stand, it’s not because the birth certificate will show that Obama was not born in America. It’s that there is other information that might not be politically favorable, e.g., religion at birth Muslim, or some other private issue that is no one’s business.
What doubts do you have about the birth announcements published shortly after his birth?
Pat,
http://thedailypen.blogspot.com/2011/04/final-report-obamas-birth-announcements.html
I can not vouch for this or dismiss it. But here it is.
Heliotrope, thanks for the link. Does seem to muddy the waters a bit. The author claims that about 1200 people not born in Hawaii between 1960 and 1965 had similar announcements in the paper. But as noted in the comments, the author did not prove his claims. Anyway, we’ll have to see how this plays out.
For the record, I’m not passing over it. I’m noticing, rather, that Hawaii already settled the question (at least as a legal question) when they certified Obama as a natural-born citizen of Hawaii.
To pass over Hawaii’s certification is Constitutional relativism, as it ignores (thus denies) the Full Faith and Credit clause. It’s an insult, both to the State of Hawaii and to the Constitution. Now, maybe Hawaii’s procedures are shoddy, so they might deserve the insult. But the Constitution does not.