Showing posts with label Birtherism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Birtherism. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 21, 2013
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Basil's Blog Skewers "Birtherism"
Basil's Blog.net has the best response and is below. Check out Ace of Spades (scroll down) and FOX NEWS. Fox actually had a real expert weigh in and authenticate it as opposed to some anonymous dufus making the rounds of the internet.
From: BasilsBlog.net Yes, The Birth Certificate Is Real:
"Now that Barack Obama has finally released his birth certificate, you would think that people would get back to more important things. But ybe wrong.
Not everyone is convinced it's real. But the evidence indicates that the birth certificate is real.
Decide for yourself.
First, here's the birth certificate
Now, let's look at the items that some are still questioning.
The background
From: BasilsBlog.net Yes, The Birth Certificate Is Real:
"Now that Barack Obama has finally released his birth certificate, you would think that people would get back to more important things. But ybe wrong.
Not everyone is convinced it's real. But the evidence indicates that the birth certificate is real.
Decide for yourself.
First, here's the birth certificate
Now, let's look at the items that some are still questioning.
The background
Thursday, April 28, 2011
What Part of the 14th Amendment Don't We Understand?
So, in the wake of Obama releasing his birth certificate and my total frustration with this as an issue, I thought I'd look over Article 2 and the 14th Amendment. The relevant part of Article II, Section I reads like this:
"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
The 14th Amendment reads like this:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
There are a couple fine, but lengthy articles from The Federalist Blog. The relevant articles articles are: What "Subject To The Jurisdiction" Means and Defining Natural Born Citizen. You should also consider an article published in 1916 by a partisan Democrat that GOP Presidential nominee Charles E Hughes was not eligible to serve because both of his parents were British citizens at his birth. It is The Case Against Charles E Hughes. That article, quite partisan tries to split hairs between native born and natural born citizen. Ironic because of all people, Mr. Hughes was a member of the Supreme Court prior to his nod for President. He would later, in 1930 be appointed by Herbert Hoover to be Chief Justice of that same court.
Article II is clear: "No Person except a natural born Citizen...."(see above) So what is the definition of a natural born citizen? The links provided above will suggest that "natural born" means both parents are citizens of the United States in order to be considered "natural born".
The problem with that point is that the 14th Amendment says this: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." This is where critics of Obama's eligibility fall apart. Citizenship is clearly defined as "born" in the United States. Nowhere in the Amendment is there a qualified definition of "naturalized", therefore "born" in the United States is sufficient to determine citizenship and eligibility for the office of President. The 14th Amendment to the Constitution prevails over Article II.
Critics will suggest that the 14th Amendment is relevant to the right of freed slaves, preventing the states from depriving them of their rights under the Constitution. There is a case for this and it has been rolled out against the "anchor babies" of illegal immigrants. It is true that the law will consider the history, "the spirit" in which the legislation was created. Prior to the 14th Amendment being passed, it was up to the states, not the Federal Government to determine citizenship. The authors of the 14th Amendment, however did not provide any criteria to distinguish the boundaries of "born" with qualifying distinctions of "natural" or "native". Lacking a clear definition embodying the "spirit", the "letter" must apply. The 14th Amendment is clear: Being "born" in the United States qualifies you as a citizen. To date, has there been a successful case that has sought and received clarity?
Why has no one ever challenged the eligibility of a candidate for President? Even in 1916, no one went to court over Hughes's eligibility. I'm pretty sure a Supreme Court Justice like Hughes would have been aware of the law to determine his qualifications. Is there any evidence that had he won as he was originally declared the winner that the Democrats were going to challenge his eligibility? Nope.
Barry Goldwater was born in Arizona when it was a territory, not a state. John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone. They were eligible to serve because they were born on US territory (the canal was ours), and we grant citizenship to children of American parents regardless of the place of birth. The 14th Amendment took the unprecedented step in the wake of Emancipation to also extend it to those "born" in the United States, regardless of parental citizenship. Of course the United States rejected dual citizenship and anyone born here would be expected to engage fully as a citizen and end any conflicting loyalties.
Barack Obama's mother was born in the United States. His father was born in Kenya. Some have argued that the "citizenship" of the father falls to the son. That is true, traditionally, but the 14th Amendment extends citizenship to the child physically born in the country. It is true that the amendment was inspired to aid freed slaves, but unfortunately that is not specified. Therefore, it applies to all. At least, it's arguable.
Obama by any reasonable measure was born in Hawaii when it was a state. He is a citizen therefore under the terms of the 14th Amendment. Under Article II, being "naturally born" in this country he is in fact eligible to serve as President. If you disagree you are free to file in Federal Court as to his eligibility. No one has succeeded in advancing such a case. In the meantime, he's the President. I'd rather he weren't but to my mind the Constitution is clear.
"No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."
The 14th Amendment reads like this:
Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.
There are a couple fine, but lengthy articles from The Federalist Blog. The relevant articles articles are: What "Subject To The Jurisdiction" Means and Defining Natural Born Citizen. You should also consider an article published in 1916 by a partisan Democrat that GOP Presidential nominee Charles E Hughes was not eligible to serve because both of his parents were British citizens at his birth. It is The Case Against Charles E Hughes. That article, quite partisan tries to split hairs between native born and natural born citizen. Ironic because of all people, Mr. Hughes was a member of the Supreme Court prior to his nod for President. He would later, in 1930 be appointed by Herbert Hoover to be Chief Justice of that same court.
Article II is clear: "No Person except a natural born Citizen...."(see above) So what is the definition of a natural born citizen? The links provided above will suggest that "natural born" means both parents are citizens of the United States in order to be considered "natural born".
The problem with that point is that the 14th Amendment says this: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." This is where critics of Obama's eligibility fall apart. Citizenship is clearly defined as "born" in the United States. Nowhere in the Amendment is there a qualified definition of "naturalized", therefore "born" in the United States is sufficient to determine citizenship and eligibility for the office of President. The 14th Amendment to the Constitution prevails over Article II.
Critics will suggest that the 14th Amendment is relevant to the right of freed slaves, preventing the states from depriving them of their rights under the Constitution. There is a case for this and it has been rolled out against the "anchor babies" of illegal immigrants. It is true that the law will consider the history, "the spirit" in which the legislation was created. Prior to the 14th Amendment being passed, it was up to the states, not the Federal Government to determine citizenship. The authors of the 14th Amendment, however did not provide any criteria to distinguish the boundaries of "born" with qualifying distinctions of "natural" or "native". Lacking a clear definition embodying the "spirit", the "letter" must apply. The 14th Amendment is clear: Being "born" in the United States qualifies you as a citizen. To date, has there been a successful case that has sought and received clarity?
Why has no one ever challenged the eligibility of a candidate for President? Even in 1916, no one went to court over Hughes's eligibility. I'm pretty sure a Supreme Court Justice like Hughes would have been aware of the law to determine his qualifications. Is there any evidence that had he won as he was originally declared the winner that the Democrats were going to challenge his eligibility? Nope.
Barry Goldwater was born in Arizona when it was a territory, not a state. John McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone. They were eligible to serve because they were born on US territory (the canal was ours), and we grant citizenship to children of American parents regardless of the place of birth. The 14th Amendment took the unprecedented step in the wake of Emancipation to also extend it to those "born" in the United States, regardless of parental citizenship. Of course the United States rejected dual citizenship and anyone born here would be expected to engage fully as a citizen and end any conflicting loyalties.
Barack Obama's mother was born in the United States. His father was born in Kenya. Some have argued that the "citizenship" of the father falls to the son. That is true, traditionally, but the 14th Amendment extends citizenship to the child physically born in the country. It is true that the amendment was inspired to aid freed slaves, but unfortunately that is not specified. Therefore, it applies to all. At least, it's arguable.
Obama by any reasonable measure was born in Hawaii when it was a state. He is a citizen therefore under the terms of the 14th Amendment. Under Article II, being "naturally born" in this country he is in fact eligible to serve as President. If you disagree you are free to file in Federal Court as to his eligibility. No one has succeeded in advancing such a case. In the meantime, he's the President. I'd rather he weren't but to my mind the Constitution is clear.
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
50 Reasons To Not To Care About A Birth Certificate
From: YID With LID
Can you believe it? President Obama released the long form birth certificate this morning, and it isn't over.
There still people who don't believe the released birth certificate is real. Apparently if you have Adobe Acrobat and look at the PDF of the long form certificate and right click, with your left foot off the ground, while chewing on a Ritz Cracker and whistling the theme song from the old Barney Miller TV show, the birth certificate will reveal that the real Paul McCartney was killed in a car accent in 1968 and for the past 43 years we have been rocking to Wayne Newton's unknown brother Fig.
Of course, Donald Trump took all the credit, “I am really honored and I am really proud, that I was able to do something that nobody else could do,” Of course he forgot to mention the fact that two days before he told Anderson Cooper that a believable source who he could not name told him that the birth certificate was missing. I guess it got "un-missing" Mr. Trump.
And like the person who wins the lottery but complains that his take was only a few hundred million Trump isn't done. In his next breath, Trump declared that Obama needs to release his Occidental College school records, to dispel rumors that he was a bad student who did not deserve a transfer to Columbia University,or his acceptance to Harvard Law School.
This nonsense is a losing issue that will do nothing but alienate the moderate voters who are needed to beat Obama in the 2012 election. That is the objective--Nobama!
But I want everyone to know that I can compromise, I am willing to join the side of the tin-foil hat crowd, but only after we are done bashing the president on the following real issues (in no particular order) which have a much more urgent priority:
Can you believe it? President Obama released the long form birth certificate this morning, and it isn't over.
There still people who don't believe the released birth certificate is real. Apparently if you have Adobe Acrobat and look at the PDF of the long form certificate and right click, with your left foot off the ground, while chewing on a Ritz Cracker and whistling the theme song from the old Barney Miller TV show, the birth certificate will reveal that the real Paul McCartney was killed in a car accent in 1968 and for the past 43 years we have been rocking to Wayne Newton's unknown brother Fig.
Of course, Donald Trump took all the credit, “I am really honored and I am really proud, that I was able to do something that nobody else could do,” Of course he forgot to mention the fact that two days before he told Anderson Cooper that a believable source who he could not name told him that the birth certificate was missing. I guess it got "un-missing" Mr. Trump.
And like the person who wins the lottery but complains that his take was only a few hundred million Trump isn't done. In his next breath, Trump declared that Obama needs to release his Occidental College school records, to dispel rumors that he was a bad student who did not deserve a transfer to Columbia University,or his acceptance to Harvard Law School.
“How do you get into Harvard if you are not a good student?” Trump said. “I don’t know why he doesn’t release his records.”Oh Puleeze. Who Gives a flying Frisbee!
This nonsense is a losing issue that will do nothing but alienate the moderate voters who are needed to beat Obama in the 2012 election. That is the objective--Nobama!
But I want everyone to know that I can compromise, I am willing to join the side of the tin-foil hat crowd, but only after we are done bashing the president on the following real issues (in no particular order) which have a much more urgent priority:
- Obamacare
- Drill Here Drill Now
- High Taxes
- High Deficit
- Gun Control
- Unemployment
- China our arses
- Oil Prices are too high
- Lousy Relationship With Europe
- Appeasing Terrorists
The Birther Thing
A short post from a good blog
From: Neptunas Lex
I just don’t get it.
I mean, I get the part where people who are – shall we say, “concerned”? – about our president’s political proclivities might have grasped at any straw once Hillary fell out and the Maverick fizzled. I do. But hope, as they say, is not a strategy.
But after a contemporaneous birth announcement was produced, along with the short form document that the state of Hawaii uses to certify live births after the fact, keeping the flame of hope alive required heroic doses of self-delusion.
I don’t really understand why President Obama – who today produced the long form document that ought to finally put this ridiculous issue to bed – waited until The Donald made it an issue, when he clearly could have done so years ago.
From: Neptunas Lex
I just don’t get it.
I mean, I get the part where people who are – shall we say, “concerned”? – about our president’s political proclivities might have grasped at any straw once Hillary fell out and the Maverick fizzled. I do. But hope, as they say, is not a strategy.
But after a contemporaneous birth announcement was produced, along with the short form document that the state of Hawaii uses to certify live births after the fact, keeping the flame of hope alive required heroic doses of self-delusion.
I don’t really understand why President Obama – who today produced the long form document that ought to finally put this ridiculous issue to bed – waited until The Donald made it an issue, when he clearly could have done so years ago.
Note To Obama (And Everyone Else): Conspiracy Theories Never Die or Fade Away
I utterly detest,loathe,hate,despise and any other word you can think of to express how I feel about conspiracy theories. I take history too seriously and know it well enough to discard conspiracy.
I would be sympathetic to Obama regarding his birth certificate if it weren't obvious to me that he let it fly under the radar because he believed it labeled all of his critics as crazy and detached from reality. Sadly, due to the efforts of the "Publicity In Chief" Donald Trump, "birtherism" had entered the mainstream and was sucking up all the oxygen while important were tossed aside. Obama's declining poll numbers and Trump's rising numbers made it necessary to end the debate, at least in the world of the rational. Pure politics drove the release as the fringe found mainstream outlets.
Sadly, as the President acknowledged it will not satisfy everyone. Par for the course as history goes. We have a film of a President being assassinated yet many dispute the assassin as Lee Harvey Oswald. Many have latched onto James Earl Ray's assertion that he did not kill MLK. Sirhan Sirhan? It had to be someone else.
Conspiracy theories are not confined to assassins. You have those who insist that "Gnostics" were the real Christians overwhelmed by the "phony" Christianity of the last 1800 years. The Knights Templar? What didn't they have their hand in? From protecting the bloodline of Jesus to inventing America as the Freemasons.
There are theories that are similar. FDR was accused of knowing about the attack on Pearl Harbor and of course plenty of people think George Bush knew about 9/11 and some think he orchestrated it. Or Dick Cheney. Then there's Edwin Stanton who some think was in on the assassination Lincoln. And who can forget Reagan making a deal with Iran not to release the hostages before the 1980 election or his bringing crack to the inner city? Yawn.
The more rational among us will let this rest, but of course the Orly Taitz's and Alex Jones's of the world will find "holes" in the certificate and feed Jerome Corsi's new book on the subject as the truth.
So,let me take a moment to predict the charges on why the long form is false in the eyes of hard core "birthers". In bullet format:
*It's printed on paper that wasn't invented in 1961
*The paper was too thick or too thin than was normal in 1961
*The ink is too dark or too faded
*The handwriting is not from the same hand
*The birth certificate did not identify him as a Muslim or have college transcripts.
*It wasn't written in Hawaiian
*It's a fraud because we know his parents were really Darth Vader and Alex Jones
*The flip side has a "Made In Kenya" stamp.
*Just Because (stick out your tongue while saying)
*Obama can't be telling the truth because he's never told the truth.
Just a little bit tongue in cheek, but as I'm typing this I'm betting the long awaited release of the long form has been torn to shreds as a fraud. Blah blah blah. Time,history and conspiracy theories keep rolling along.
I would be sympathetic to Obama regarding his birth certificate if it weren't obvious to me that he let it fly under the radar because he believed it labeled all of his critics as crazy and detached from reality. Sadly, due to the efforts of the "Publicity In Chief" Donald Trump, "birtherism" had entered the mainstream and was sucking up all the oxygen while important were tossed aside. Obama's declining poll numbers and Trump's rising numbers made it necessary to end the debate, at least in the world of the rational. Pure politics drove the release as the fringe found mainstream outlets.
Sadly, as the President acknowledged it will not satisfy everyone. Par for the course as history goes. We have a film of a President being assassinated yet many dispute the assassin as Lee Harvey Oswald. Many have latched onto James Earl Ray's assertion that he did not kill MLK. Sirhan Sirhan? It had to be someone else.
Conspiracy theories are not confined to assassins. You have those who insist that "Gnostics" were the real Christians overwhelmed by the "phony" Christianity of the last 1800 years. The Knights Templar? What didn't they have their hand in? From protecting the bloodline of Jesus to inventing America as the Freemasons.
There are theories that are similar. FDR was accused of knowing about the attack on Pearl Harbor and of course plenty of people think George Bush knew about 9/11 and some think he orchestrated it. Or Dick Cheney. Then there's Edwin Stanton who some think was in on the assassination Lincoln. And who can forget Reagan making a deal with Iran not to release the hostages before the 1980 election or his bringing crack to the inner city? Yawn.
The more rational among us will let this rest, but of course the Orly Taitz's and Alex Jones's of the world will find "holes" in the certificate and feed Jerome Corsi's new book on the subject as the truth.
So,let me take a moment to predict the charges on why the long form is false in the eyes of hard core "birthers". In bullet format:
*It's printed on paper that wasn't invented in 1961
*The paper was too thick or too thin than was normal in 1961
*The ink is too dark or too faded
*The handwriting is not from the same hand
*The birth certificate did not identify him as a Muslim or have college transcripts.
*It wasn't written in Hawaiian
*It's a fraud because we know his parents were really Darth Vader and Alex Jones
*The flip side has a "Made In Kenya" stamp.
*Just Because (stick out your tongue while saying)
*Obama can't be telling the truth because he's never told the truth.
Just a little bit tongue in cheek, but as I'm typing this I'm betting the long awaited release of the long form has been torn to shreds as a fraud. Blah blah blah. Time,history and conspiracy theories keep rolling along.
Tuesday, April 12, 2011
Ann Coulter Is Right About Trump and Birthers
Ann Coulter was being interviewed by Sean Hannity last night and she succinctly laid out the case against Trump and this resurgent interest in an Obama birth certificate. I've always thought this story was crap from day one. First, as Ann Coulter points out there is fundamentally no difference between the long form birth certificate and short form. They are both certified.
Personally, I think the Obama team is loving the attention being given to it because it gives them an opportunity to force each prospective GOP candidate for President to answer the question and take away vital time from important issues like oh.....the economy,gas prices,the national debt, etc. Trump is making a fool of himself and risks everyone being tarred with his foolishness. To all the "birthers", I ask this: Do you really think ruthless characters like Bill and Hillary Clinton could not have found the evidence and used it against him? The Clinton's of "war room" politics? Those liberal versions of Nixonian politics and paranoia?
If not the Clinton's then how about conservative iconic publications like "Human Events" and "The American Spectator" as Ann Coulter pointed out. I loathe and utterly detest conspiracy theories as they are the product of irrational supposition from incomplete portraits suggesting an inability to differentiate chance and order. The notion that everything is the product of planning is absurd.
The absurdity of this crackpot theory is rooted in the bizarre notion that the infant Obama was identified at birth as a future President and an intense cover up was implemented to shield the truth. All this over a man no one had ever heard of as recent as 2004 before his keynote address at the DNC. John Kerry chose him to deliver the speech, so maybe he was in on the plot, huh?
It's time to stop with the irrational and ignore desperate pleas for attention from media whores like Donald Trump. Our stake in the future of the nation is too important to waste placating the vanity of a man who will leave egg on all our faces. Sean's interview with Ann Coulter is below
Personally, I think the Obama team is loving the attention being given to it because it gives them an opportunity to force each prospective GOP candidate for President to answer the question and take away vital time from important issues like oh.....the economy,gas prices,the national debt, etc. Trump is making a fool of himself and risks everyone being tarred with his foolishness. To all the "birthers", I ask this: Do you really think ruthless characters like Bill and Hillary Clinton could not have found the evidence and used it against him? The Clinton's of "war room" politics? Those liberal versions of Nixonian politics and paranoia?
If not the Clinton's then how about conservative iconic publications like "Human Events" and "The American Spectator" as Ann Coulter pointed out. I loathe and utterly detest conspiracy theories as they are the product of irrational supposition from incomplete portraits suggesting an inability to differentiate chance and order. The notion that everything is the product of planning is absurd.
The absurdity of this crackpot theory is rooted in the bizarre notion that the infant Obama was identified at birth as a future President and an intense cover up was implemented to shield the truth. All this over a man no one had ever heard of as recent as 2004 before his keynote address at the DNC. John Kerry chose him to deliver the speech, so maybe he was in on the plot, huh?
It's time to stop with the irrational and ignore desperate pleas for attention from media whores like Donald Trump. Our stake in the future of the nation is too important to waste placating the vanity of a man who will leave egg on all our faces. Sean's interview with Ann Coulter is below
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
