Hannity: If Chester A. Arthur Had To Produce A Birth Certificate, Why Not Obama?

audio

by Frances Martel | 10:24 pm, March 24th, 2011

» 106 comments

It’s been nearly three years since President Obama took office, and yet doubt apparently remains over his eligibility to be president. On his radio show, Sean Hannity stood up for the “crucified and beat up and smeared and besmirched” birther groups with guests Joseph Farah of WorldNetDaily and Hamas attorney Stanley Cohen suggesting that, if Chester A. Arthur had to prove he wasn’t Canadian, why shouldn’t Obama have to do the same?

Farah, a leader in the birther movement since its inception, began his discussion by noting that, “as an investigative reporter,” he had a sense that something was amiss as the President refused to show his birth certificate (in fact, President Obama published a short-form birth certificate on his site several years ago). Calling it an “issue that touches on national security,” he also highlights rumors that Sen. John McCain was born in Panama, quashed by the production of that document. He also thanked Donald Trump for his recent comments suggesting the President should lay the issue to rest. Hannity, not typically one to be passionate about the birth certificate issue, took to Farah’s side, noting that, while it’s “not been my number one issue,” he didn’t understand why birthers “are crucified and beat up and smeared and besmirched the way they are.”

After all, Hannity argues, this is not the first president to face this sort of scrutiny. The original birther movement was led by the Orly Taitz of the late 19th century, attorney Arthur Hinman, against President Chester A. Arthur, who was initially rumored to have been born in Ireland before later being declared an undercover Canadian. Like the current birther movement, neither theory really panned out, but the internet is still laden with comical Arthur-birther websites declaring there is undeniable proof that Arthur was a Canadian infiltrate.

Attorney Cohen was slightly less gung-ho about the birther movement, noting that he doesn’t even know where his birth certificate is, though he believes he was born in New York. “I’m not a fan of Barack Obama,” he noted, but argued that, if there was a case there, “bring an action against him in court. All you have to do,” he explained, “is make a prima facie showing, then the burden shifts, and then the question isn’t whether Obama wants to show it or not.” This, of course, ignores that the reasons so many birther suits are thrown out of court is that no one in the movement has been able to produce prima facie evidence that the President may not have been born in America.

The continued presence of the birther movement is not particularly surprising in the margins of the right– exemplified by someone like Farah, who has gotten into verbal tiffs with people like Andrew Breitbart before over this very issue. But a prominent conservative like Hannity bringing the birther movement back– and bringing back the Arthur birtherism of the 1800s– is a bit more of a shock.

The radio segment below:

[h/t]

Chester A Arthur, Hamas, John McCain, Joseph Farah, Sean Hannity, Stanley Cohen, WorldNetDaily

snatchax

francis., it’s barely been two years. i know, i feel your pain. but it’s almost three years like it’s almost christmas.
http://TheDividedStatesBlog.com Publius219

Here’s the real question: Is the Constitution a flawless document? Clearly no. Should being physically born here be a requirement for President when it isn’t for any other office? Clearly no. I, for one, don’t give a shit if he was born here or not.

I also haven’t seen Chester Arthur’s birth certificate.
Jelperman

Sean “Haditha” Hannity, a white supremacist? Say it ain’t so!
catfishjuggling

Jesus.

How can you call yourself a news organization when he HAS produced one, Fox??

Have all the opinions you want.

You don’t get your own facts.

Here is factcheck.org looking at HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE:

http://factcheck.org/2008/08/born-in-the-usa/

Jesus freaking monkey christ already. Let this die.

Please. Let’s have a real debate. Maybe we elect someone else next time. Maybe we don’t. I don’t care.

Just please shut up about this already!!!!
catfishjuggling

Just re-read and saw this was on Hannity’s radio show. So, I withdraw the Fox ppart. Rest stands as is.
Sprocket

Oh goody. Another birther makes his voice heard. Is it any wonder the GOP is floundering about with the likes of Bachmann and Palin?

Wasn’t there a “Know Nothing” party long ago? Is is back in fashion?
GJPinks

catfishjuggling said:
Jesus.

How can you call yourself a news organization when he HAS produced one, Fox??

Have all the opinions you want.

You don’t get your own facts.

Here is factcheck.org looking at HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE:

http://factcheck.org/2008/08/born-in-the-usa/

Jesus freaking monkey christ already. Let this die.

Please. Let’s have a real debate. Maybe we elect someone else next time. Maybe we don’t. I don’t care.

Just please shut up about this already!!!!

Sorry, Your wrong. He has never produced an official birth certificate from the State of Hawaii. What they have provided are several versions of the Certificate of Live Birth. You could go to Hawaii and get one even though you were not born there.
There are many unanswered questions about Barry. If he and his mother spent their first years living in Hawaii, how did his mother attend the University of Washington 2 weeks after his birth?
Why does BHO have a Social Security Card issued in Conn where he never worked?
How much of Obama’s biography was written by admitted terrorist Bill Ayers?
The law is the law. If you believe it to be wrong, misguided or out of date, change it.
It would be a shame if all the bills signed into law by Obama were to be null because he is found to be fraudulently serving.
Release the birth certificate
Release the SAT scores
Release the College transcripts

BTW, this whole ‘birther’ thing was started by a Democrat Hillary supporter.
leigh39

My question isn’t whether or not he was born in this country, I believe he was. However, why does he have a bunch of lawyers fighting against showing the damn thing? His school records are sealed, as well. Most people have to cough up whatever prospective employers want to see when interviewing for a job. Why not him? It’s just curious, like the fact that his social security number is from Connecticut.
catfishjuggling

@GJPinks: No you are wrong.

I am sick of your morons.

Just go back to crazyville.
roxsteady

Ugh! The President’s birth certificate is available on line for any idiot to go and see it and that includes that ass wipe Hannity. Also, can any of you inbreds explain the birth announcement in the newspaper? I see that the baggers who got their asses kicked by Obama in 2008 are still here, still bitter and unable to deal with the fac that he’s President and will be again after 2012. Suck on it and swallow hard losers because that parade of morons known as the GOP baggers have already squandered their House majority and the corporate whoring govenors have all fostered buyer’s remorse according to the polls. Ha!
catfishjuggling

Again, to be clear.

These are all statements made by rational people:

1. I do not like the President.
2. I think the President is doing a bad job,
3. The President’s personal values are different from mine.
4. I think his policies are wrong.
5. He is not telling us the whole truth about (fill in subject).

And this is what a crazy person says:

The President has not produced his birth certificate.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Joseph-Glackin/100000892011713 Joseph Glackin

This is the same Hannity who was decrying the lack of civility to Larry King, right?
Rush Gingrich

GJPinks said:
Sorry, Your wrong. He has never produced an official birth certificate from the State of Hawaii. What they have provided are several versions of the Certificate of Live Birth. You could go to Hawaii and get one even though you were not born there.
There are many unanswered questions about Barry. If he and his mother spent their first years living in Hawaii, how did his mother attend the University of Washington 2 weeks after his birth?
Why does BHO have a Social Security Card issued in Conn where he never worked?
How much of Obama’s biography was written by admitted terrorist Bill Ayers?
The law is the law. If you believe it to be wrong, misguided or out of date, change it.
It would be a shame if all the bills signed into law by Obama were to be null because he is found to be fraudulently serving.
Release the birth certificate
Release the SAT scores
Release the College transcripts

BTW, this whole ‘birther’ thing was started by a Democrat Hillary supporter.

My little brother used to have a saying…….

Sucks being you.
borderraven

Article 1 Section 2 Clause 2 & Article 1 Section 3 Clause 3 require
“a Citizen of the United States”

Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 The Executive
“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.”

Obama was born a dual citizen. He is ineligible to be a US President.
borderraven

Publius219, What is your education level? Any US citizen can run or election in any office except the US President. Do you want to know why? Because the US President, a civilian, is also the Commander in Chief of the military. That’s right, our military is under civilian control. If you want to live under military control, then look for a military nation, like Libya. The USA is a uniquely designed government form by men who wanted “to form a more perfect union.” Now I sorta like having a Natural-Born Citizen as the president. A Natural-Born Citizen is born in the USA to two US citizens parents. Barack Obama is a US Citizen. He was born a dual-citizen, but lost the foreign citizenships, However he was not born a Natural-Born Citizen and cannot be converted into a Natural-Born Citizen. See the chart below.

1. A US citizen, eligible to serve in the Legislative Branch, and Judicial Branch, but not the Executive Branch, is:
a. any naturalized US Citizen
b. A US-born US citizen using the formula: (SOIL)+(MOM)+(DAD) = BABY CITIZENSHIP
Thus:
i. (USA)+(USA)+(ALIEN) = US NATIVE BORN DUAL CITIZEN
ii. (USA)+(ALIEN)+(USA) = US NATIVE BORN DUAL CITIZEN
c. A foreign-born US citizen using the formula:
i. (FOREIGN)+(USA)+(ALIEN) = FOREIGN BORN US DUAL CITIZEN
ii. (FOREIGN)+(ALIEN)+(USA) = FOREIGN BORN US DUAL CITIZEN

2. US Natural Born Citizen, eligible to serve in the Legislative Branch, the Executive Branch, and the Judicial Branch, is:
a. Using the formula: (SOIL)+(MOM)+(DAD) = BABY CITIZENSHIP
Thus:
i. (USA)+(USA)+(USA) = US NATURAL BORN CITIZEN

3. Also, applying common sense and logic prior to the 14th Amendment, and USA v Wong Kim Ark, an alien, is:
a. Using the formula: (SOIL)+(MOM)+(DAD) = BABY CITIZENSHIP
Thus:
i. (USA)+(ALIEN)+(ALIEN) = US BORN ALIEN
ii. (FOREIGN)+(ALIEN)+(ALIEN) = ALIEN
Nacho

Hannitty has to push this stuff because its what the right wing nut jobs that listen to him want to hear.

Hannitty is a puppet master that has carved out his special niche in broadcasting as a right wing fringe propaganda merchant.
OxyCon

Hamas attorney Stanley Cohen

Wasn’t it just the other day that the Liberals were saying that David Corn couldn’t be antisemitic because he was Jewish?
Bill Huggins

If you’re a PROLIFE conservative: then you must believe OBAMA IS A CITIZEN.

Let me explain:

Obama’s parents were married in Hawaii on Feb. 2, 1961

Obama was born on August 4 of the same year, making his mother three months pregnant with him in Hawaii when she was married.

So: either Obama’s a citizen or fetuses don’t count as people.
da-wdc

Is there really a birther movement or is it just the same bunch of cranks who find a new BS story to latch on to every election cycle, in order to get the same bunch of fools to buy their books?
Nacho

OxyCon said:
Hamas attorney Stanley Cohen

Wasn’t it just the other day that the Liberals were saying that David Corn couldn’t be antisemitic because he was Jewish?

Just the other day reasonable people were saying David Corn’s comments were not antisemitic. Do you think Stanley Cohen is antisemitic because he is an attorney that provides services to a Hamas leader?
Nacho

da-wdc said:
Is there really a birther movement or is it just the same bunch of cranks who find a new BS story to latch on to every election cycle, in order to get the same bunch of fools to buy their books?

Yes.

I am pretty sure there is a movement. I don’t think somebody with the class, education, and respectability of one such as Donald Trump would just make comments willy nilly if he didn’t actually stand for something, a movement, bigger than himself. We are talking about a possible GOP Presidential candidate here. Someone who wants the represents the best intrest of the American people and bring our glorious country back to its all mighty greatness.

God Bless Sean Hannitty for being a Great American.
borderraven

The so-called “birthers” are in fact the Guardians of the US Constitution, who are dedicated to defending the US Constitution. No body is more important than the US Constitution. Barack Hussein Obama II is a US Citizen, and eligible to be a US Senator, but since he was born a dual-citizen, born to a United Kingdom Citizen, then he was born with foreign allegiance, therefore he is not constitutionally eligible to be a US President — regardless of how good a leader he might be.

LURIA v. U S, 231 U.S. 9 (1913)
Citizenship is membership in a political society, and implies a duty of allegiance on the part of the member and a duty of protection on the part of the society. These are reciprocal obligations, one being a compensation for the other. Under our Constitution, a naturalized citizen stands on an equal footing with the native citizen in all respects, save that of eligibility to the Presidency. Minor v. Happersett, 21 Wall. 162, 165, 22 L. ed. 627; Elk v. Wilkins, 112 U.S. 94, 101 , 28 S. L. ed. 643, 645, 5 Sup. Ct. Rep. 41; Osborn v. Bank of United States, 9 Wheat. 738, 827, 6 L. ed. 204, 225.
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=231&invol=9#22

John Bingham in the 37th Congress 2nd Session House of Representatives 1862
“All persons born within the Republic, OF PARENTS OWING ALLEGIANCE TO NO OTHER SOVEREIGNTY, ARE NATURAL BORN CITIZENS.”
http://i642.photobucket.com/albums/uu149/SilverBull8/03331291-hi1.gif
http://www.scribd.com/doc/20621020/John-Bingham-Quote-About-Natural-Born-Citizen-Not-About-14th-Amendment
Newsjunky

LMAO! This is all they got? The whole birther thing? Awesome.
OxyCon

Nacho said:
Just the other day reasonable people were saying David Corn’s comments were not antisemitic. Do you think Stanley Cohen is antisemitic because he is an attorney that provides services to a Hamas leader?

Let’s just say that from what I know of him, he’s an anti-American, terrorist sympathizing, far-left radical, traitor to his race, which means you must be a big fan, and leave it at that.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Joseph-Glackin/100000892011713 Joseph Glackin

borderraven–”Luria” is not on point.
Foreign-born, naturalized, then ex-pat to a third country is hardly germane.
Bingham? Pre-14th Amendment.
No cigar. Drop back ten and punt.
Barack Must Go

Do you really want the truth? Sadly, it’s simply because Barack Obama is black. Bizzarly this not only allowed him to become the 44th president of the United States without producing a legitimate, original, bona fide, State of Hawaii birth certificate, but any real American who dares to question him on this matter, is immediately labeled a racist.
mangoman

This site has edited Hannity’s segment to exclude the introduction, in which Chris Matthews (a huge Obama fan) clearly explains the difference between the Certificate of Live Birth, which was produced, and the actual long-form Birth Certificate with signatures, the name of the hospital, etc., which has yet to be produced. Even Matthews is calling for the President to do the right thing and release the actual birth certificate. Even Obama’s friend the Governor of Hawaii says he should release it. So it’s not just “birther nut jobs” saying these things anymore. If you want to hear the full segment, go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X_N85fjQVMk
http://www.zazzle.com/talkingpoints NORBIT Jr.

I haven’t followed the birth story too closely, but it seems a rather innocuous request to produce a birth certificate.

Why is Obama so obstinate in not producing it; and why is the LeftStream ADVOCACY Media trying to smear people making the very request?

As in all else, just reverse the roles and put GW Bush in Obama’s spot.
Ask yourself how the LeftStream ADVOCACY Media would be covering the story THEN!
valkyrie101

Barack Must Go said:
Do you really want the truth? Sadly, it’s simply because Barack Obama is black. Bizzarly this not only allowed him to become the 44th president of the United States without producing a legitimate, original, bona fide, State of Hawaii birth certificate, but any real American who dares to question him on this matter, is immediately labeled a racist.

And yet according to the State of Hawaii, the certificate of live birth that Obama has provided constitutes proof of Hawaii citizenship. Why is that not enough? Perhaps Obama does not want to provide the long form because he values his privacy. But under the law, he does not have to provide it.
mangoman

How can anyone seriously say that this question is only being raised due to Obama’s race? John McCain, born in the Panama Canal Zone, provided an authenticated copy of his birth certificate to the Federal Elections Commission and Congress in 2008 when a lawsuit was filed over his eligibility to be president. Last time I checked, McCain is Caucasian.
mangoman

Valkyrie101: State citizenship is not the same as U.S. citizenship. And all U.S. citizens are not natural born U.S. citizens. You say perhaps Obama “values his privacy.” But the long-form birth certificate document would only verify information that he has already given us. So why won’t he produce it? There must be some other reason. In any event, he will likely be forced to produce this document prior to running for re-election, since 12 states are planning to require it in order to be on the ballot.
BatBoy

There is something Obama does not want the public to see.

Most likely he committed fraud and it paid for his education….just speculating.
catfishjuggling

The more I read these yahoos deny a FREAKING FACT, the more conveniced I am that so much of the opposition to Obama is just FREAKING NUTS.

As I said, there are plenty of reasons to oppose the guy.

The non-issue of a birth certificate isn’t one.

HE FREAKING PRODUCED ONE.

http://factcheck.org/2008/08/born-in-the-usa/

LOOK AT IT!

If this is not acceptable to you, then I offer THAT NOTHING AT ALL WILL CONVINCE YOU!

I would love for someone not crazy to run as a Republican and become the 45th President. But I get more and more convinced every day that he’ll win re-election and it is because America will have to choose between a very flawed President AND TURNING THE SHOP OVER TO INSANE PEOPLE!!!

Jesus.
valkyrie101

mangoman said:
Valkyrie101: State citizenship is not the same as U.S. citizenship. And all U.S. citizens are not natural born U.S. citizens. You say perhaps Obama “values his privacy.” But the long-form birth certificate document would only verify information that he has already given us. So why won’t he produce it? There must be some other reason. In any event, he will likely be forced to produce this document prior to running for re-election, since 12 states are planning to require it in order to be on the ballot.

So, your view is that Obama was not a natural born citizen? He was not born in the U.S.?
glenn113

I think Hannity needs to prove he doesn’t have to sit down to pee.
The_Reasonable_Lib

mangoman said:
Valkyrie101: State citizenship is not the same as U.S. citizenship. And all U.S. citizens are not natural born U.S. citizens. You say perhaps Obama “values his privacy.” But the long-form birth certificate document would only verify information that he has already given us. So why won’t he produce it? There must be some other reason. In any event, he will likely be forced to produce this document prior to running for re-election, since 12 states are planning to require it in order to be on the ballot.

Am I supposed to take this seriously?
Jelperman

Barack Must Go said:
Do you really want the truth? Sadly, it’s simply because Barack Obama is black. Bizzarly this not only allowed him to become the 44th president of the United States without producing a legitimate, original, bona fide, State of Hawaii birth certificate, but any real American who dares to question him on this matter, is immediately labeled a racist.

No, they’re labeled racists because they are racists.
screwauger

Jelperman said:
No, they’re labeled racists because they are racists.

And your are labeled a hate monger because you spew Hate!
screwauger

valkyrie101 said:
So, your view is that Obama was not a natural born citizen? He was not born in the U.S.?

I don’t know what he was born as, or in or where. And neither do you. Your blind faith proves you were never taught to question reality or think analytically. That makes you part of the Ignorant in our society. That’s a fact.
Steve_27

mangoman said:
How can anyone seriously say that this question is only being raised due to Obama’s race? John McCain, born in the Panama Canal Zone, provided an authenticated copy of his birth certificate to the Federal Elections Commission and Congress in 2008 when a lawsuit was filed over his eligibility to be president. Last time I checked, McCain is Caucasian.

I think I know why.

McCain, although i’m not a big fan, “seemed” very American. Maybe his historical experiences in the military while the country was at war may be the reason for this. Just a gut feeling.

Obama, definitely not a fan at all, also “seems” American. BUT: NOT because he didn’t serve, but because he has spent time growing up in a muslim country and at one time practiced islam. Now pay attention here because I am not cursing swearing or insuting, I want libs or people who dont think it’s an issue to just look at it this way:

We are at war with an element of islam. It does not matter how large or small it may be, all that matters is that it exist, it’s brutal, serious, determined and deadly. The basics of this enemy is that they wish to literaly destroy our country. They want the flag of islam flying over our WhiteHouse and a world wide caliphate. They are stealthy and lying and deciet is a practice of theirs. If they are confident with a plan, they would not care if it took 20 years to come to fruition.

Knowing and understanding all this, the attitude should be, what kind of leader is BO to not be understanding of concerned Americans? Is it not strictly selfish and selfserving to stubbornly ignore any segment of your own peoples concerns when their concerns are justified because of these unique circumstances? (Note to people who whine; “How come no other president” or “It’s because he’s black,” the word UNIQUE.)

With so much at stake, should the prevailing attitude be that we just trust him at his word? Or wouldn’t it be easier, and responsible, for him to just show it? It wouldn’t only end this, which I assume all on both sides want, for it to end, but it would show concern and respect for the people he’s supposed to be leading.

I outright ignored this whole birth certificate issue but only recently after realizing this, I feel strongly that he should show it. There really is no argument that rightfully articualtes he shouldn’t. “It’s because he’s black” and “No one else had to,” clearly are only child like retorts and there is no place for that rite now.
screwauger

valkyrie101 said:
And yet according to the State of Hawaii, the certificate of live birth that Obama has provided constitutes proof of Hawaii citizenship. Why is that not enough? Perhaps Obama does not want to provide the long form because he values his privacy. But under the law, he does not have to provide it.

Money can’t buy me love, but it will sure buy a Liberal Hack in Hawaii. Gosh most people were not born yesterday and are clearly able to see the divisive, non-transparent corruption in this administration. Why would they then be willing to BLINDLY accept anything.
I for one could care less where he was born, actions speak louder than birth certificates and he’s proven he is a radical leftist and likely the most Anti-American POTUS ever.
catfishjuggling

valkyrie101 said:
And yet according to the State of Hawaii, the certificate of live birth that Obama has provided constitutes proof of Hawaii citizenship. Why is that not enough? Perhaps Obama does not want to provide the long form because he values his privacy. But under the law, he does not have to provide it.

They crazy people won’t listen to you. But, remember, he CAN’T get the so-called “long form.” Again:

http://factcheck.org/2008/08/born-in-the-usa/

The short form is printed by the state and draws from a database with fewer details. The Hawaii Department of Health’s birth record request form does not give the option to request a photocopy of your long-form birth certificate, but their short form has enough information to be acceptable to the State Department.

So what in the hell are the crazy people wanting? He has provided all that there is.
catfishjuggling

NORBIT Jr. said:
I haven’t followed the birth story too closely, but it seems a rather innocuous request to produce a birth certificate. Why is Obama so obstinate in not producing it; and why is the LeftStream ADVOCACY Media trying to smear people making the very request? As in all else, just reverse the roles and put GW Bush in Obama’s spot.Ask yourself how the LeftStream ADVOCACY Media would be covering the story THEN!

No, you’ve been too busy sitting around in your anger soup.

To use you “reverse the situation” argument, how would you react if the left kept asking for Bush’s Birth Certificate after HE ALREADY PRODUCED IT????

Here it is:

http://factcheck.org/2008/08/born-in-the-usa/
Barack Must Go

valkyrie101 said:
And yet according to the State of Hawaii, the certificate of live birth that Obama has provided constitutes proof of Hawaii citizenship. Why is that not enough? Perhaps Obama does not want to provide the long form because he values his privacy. But under the law, he does not have to provide it.

Sharia law?
Sprocket

NORBIT Jr. said:
I haven’t followed the birth story too closely, but it seems a rather innocuous request to produce a birth certificate.
!

LOL at the first part of that sentence and asked and produced on the second part. I’ve seen it. Anybody who has searched the internet has seen it. They prefer to cling to the idea that maybe there is a microscopic chance the Obama presidency is a bad dream, because there is NO WAY America could have 1) have elected a black man president, or 2) have elected a black man president with a name as foreign sounding as Barack Hussein Obama.

Sometimes it is painfully obvious that some Americans are not as smart as they make themselves out to be or as worldly.

Maybe Hannity should be required to provide proof he has a brain, or is just playing to the peanut gallery of birthers in the Low IQ section.
catfishjuggling

mangoman said:
How can anyone seriously say that this question is only being raised due to Obama’s race? John McCain, born in the Panama Canal Zone, provided an authenticated copy of his birth certificate to the Federal Elections Commission and Congress in 2008 when a lawsuit was filed over his eligibility to be president. Last time I checked, McCain is Caucasian.

I would offer that on one rational could say that the question is only be asked because of his race.

Refusing the accept that he gave a copy of his birth certificate is.

http://factcheck.org/2008/08/born-in-the-usa/
screwauger

Sprocket said:
LOL at the first part of that sentence and asked and produced on the second part. I’ve seen it. Anybody who has searched the internet has seen it. They prefer to cling to the idea that maybe there is a microscopic chance the Obama presidency is a bad dream, because there is NO WAY America could have 1) have elected a black man president, or 2) have elected a black man president with a name as foreign sounding as Barack Hussein Obama.

Sometimes it is painfully obvious that some Americans are not as smart as they make themselves out to be or as worldly.

Maybe Hannity should be required to provide proof he has a brain, or is just playing to the peanut gallery of birthers in the Low IQ section.

your petty small mindedness prevents you from the bigger picture and concluding that we are nuts. Your entitled but wow, do you look like a frikkin fool.
screwauger

catfishjuggling said:
I would offer that on one rational could say that the question is only be asked because of his race.

Refusing the accept that he gave a copy of his birth certificate is.

http://factcheck.org/2008/08/born-in-the-usa/

stroking out?
catfishjuggling

Typos. Let me clarify.

I would offer that on one rationally could say that the question is NOT only be asked because of his race. It is a valid question, sure.

Refusing the accept that he gave a copy of his birth certificate AND RESOLVED THE QUESTION is because of his race.

http://factcheck.org/2008/08/born-in-the-usa/
catfishjuggling

screwauger said:
stroking out?

Yes.

Because I would love for someone not Obama to be the next President.

But I would like it to be a sane person.

And you people with your stupid obsession over his birth certificate are painting anyone who opposes the guy as a crazy person.

You people are worse than the lefties who wouldn’t shut up about the 2000 election.

Let it go and focus on 2012 already.
ProObamaAgenda

NORBIT Jr. said:
I haven’t followed the birth story too closely, but it seems a rather innocuous request to produce a birth certificate.

Why is Obama so obstinate in not producing it; and why is the LeftStream ADVOCACY Media trying to smear people making the very request?

As in all else, just reverse the roles and put GW Bush in Obama’s spot.
Ask yourself how the LeftStream ADVOCACY Media would be covering the story THEN!

NORBIT Jr. said:
I haven’t followed the birth story too closely, but it seems a rather innocuous request to produce a birth certificate.

Why is Obama so obstinate in not producing it; and why is the LeftStream ADVOCACY Media trying to smear people making the very request?

As in all else, just reverse the roles and put GW Bush in Obama’s spot.
Ask yourself how the LeftStream ADVOCACY Media would be covering the story THEN!

NORBIT Jr. said:
I haven’t followed the birth story too closely, but it seems a rather innocuous request to produce a birth certificate.

Why is Obama so obstinate in not producing it; and why is the LeftStream ADVOCACY Media trying to smear people making the very request?

As in all else, just reverse the roles and put GW Bush in Obama’s spot.
Ask yourself how the LeftStream ADVOCACY Media would be covering the story THEN!

NORBIT Jr. said:
I haven’t followed the birth story too closely, but it seems a rather innocuous request to produce a birth certificate.

Why is Obama so obstinate in not producing it; and why is the LeftStream ADVOCACY Media trying to smear people making the very request?

As in all else, just reverse the roles and put GW Bush in Obama’s spot.
Ask yourself how the LeftStream ADVOCACY Media would be covering the story THEN!

youre the typical wingnut republican liar, First the disclaimer then the dumb statement…hahaha….Obama is enjoying himself watching you dumbasses wallow in your ignorance… fortunately for you only 6 more years to go b4 Obama is gone…..are you gonna make it that long????, I say no….my guess is that The end of times will come b4 then or you’ll wind up in a MOOOOS LIM CONCENTRATION CAMP if youre not a victim of the upcoming CALIPHATE, you sir are a waste of space on this site.
ProObamaAgenda

dont know why his statement showed up 4 times….sorry folks…….MOOSLIM influence i suppose
valkyrie101

screwauger said:
I don’t know what he was born as, or in or where. And neither do you. Your blind faith proves you were never taught to question reality or think analytically. That makes you part of the Ignorant in our society. That’s a fact.

Will you admit that, as a matter of Hawaiian law, Obama is a natural born citizen of that state? Because that is what the State of Hawaii has been saying for years. Then the next question is whether you believe in the notion of full faith and credit, and the 10th Amendment. Even under U.S. law the short form certificate of live birth is all that is required to proove citizenship. You wanting more is an invasion of Obama’s privacy, and he knows it, and because he is a man of principle, he will not cave on this issue.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Ken-Hansen/1696941384 Ken Hansen

Honestly, I think the President is choosing to keep his birth certificate private for exactly one reason: it helps him discredit the right.

If Obama produced his full, original birth certificate, the “birthers” would be marginalized and then the president couldn’t use the birthers to drive independent voters to the left. As long as the president can keep the birther movement “active”, the left appears reasonable.

He did this with his race as well – I never, ever, heard any politician on the right comment on Sen. Obama’s race (though I do remember Sen. Biden commenting on it), yet Obama was able to quell almost any opposition as being “race based” because he “doesn’t look like the guys on the money.”

Shame he can’t run on his accomplishments – he reformed the Chicago school system, and it’s still horrible. He was an Illinois state senator and had little impact (voting “present” on “tough issues”). He came to the U.S. Senate, only to start his Presidential Campaign, and since taking office he has (successfully, at least in the minds of his supporters) blamed everything bad on his predecesor, while claimng responsibility for even the smallest positive news…
Paul G

To all you libs out there…..Here’s a question. You guys make fun of everyone that bringS up his BC, but you guys avoid the REAL question. HOW COME HE JUST DOESN’T SHOW IT? I don’t want to hear excuses, jokes, replys like, “it’s just b/c he’s black…BS!. IF he’s got nothing to hide….why play this game? And again, I dont what to hear “”it’s just to get us repubs in an uproar”. WHAT IS HE HIDING? AND WHY DOESN’T HE JUST PROVE IT? and his school records? Bush did. You guys made fun of it. Is Obama afraid?
Paul G

valkyrie101 said:
Will you admit that, as a matter of Hawaiian law, Obama is a natural born citizen of that state? Because that is what the State of Hawaii has been saying for years. Then the next question is whether you believe in the notion of full faith and credit, and the 10th Amendment. Even under U.S. law the short form certificate of live birth is all that is required to proove citizenship. You wanting more is an invasion of Obama’s privacy, and he knows it, and because he is a man of principle, he will not cave on this issue.

Come on Val…Even you can’t really honestly believe what you just wrote…can you? I know you can…but?
http://www.facebook.com/people/Wayne-Black/100000981006695 Wayne Black

For you birthers out there…here’s the bottom line: the burden of proof falls on you. Obama displayed his birth certificate, if you don’t like it, provide proof to the contrary or shut your face!!!
Steve_27

Wayne Black said:
For you birthers out there…here’s the bottom line: the burden of proof falls on you. Obama displayed his birth certificate, if you don’t like it, provide proof to the contrary or shut your face!!!

Whether it’s righty’s attacking it or lefty’s defending it, almost everyone else seems to be addressing it one way or the other. So if BO already showed what everyone wants to see, it must have not been seen by many or poorly covered cause otherwise all this discussion wouldn’t even be happening.

Do you know where I can see a copy of it? Cause if it’s out there i’m sure it’s viewable.
Paul G

Wayne Black said:
For you birthers out there…here’s the bottom line: the burden of proof falls on you. Obama displayed his birth certificate, if you don’t like it, provide proof to the contrary or shut your face!!!

NO THE F–K he did not!!! Saying that a zillion times doesn’t make it so!
I’m not a birther..I happen to think he WAS born in Hawaii. So WHAT’S THE BFD THEN!
screwauger

valkyrie101 said:
Will you admit that, as a matter of Hawaiian law, Obama is a natural born citizen of that state? Because that is what the State of Hawaii has been saying for years. Then the next question is whether you believe in the notion of full faith and credit, and the 10th Amendment. Even under U.S. law the short form certificate of live birth is all that is required to proove citizenship. You wanting more is an invasion of Obama’s privacy, and he knows it, and because he is a man of principle, he will not cave on this issue.

To be brief, NO. Will you accept that it was Shrillary’s campaign that first raised this issue and on the whole, it is the left that typically raises the issue albeit this latest round was spurred by Trump. Like I said earlier, I don’t care to see it and I don’t care where what when or why. He’s already proven by his actions or lack thereof, that he sides on the radical left and is the most radical leftist to ever be elected POTUS. Add to that the precedents he has set with governing against the wishes of the majority…he’s not my president nor the president of those I love. Have you spoken to any military families or members of late? What are they thinking about their CIC? Huh, do you think if tomorrow Hussein ordered our military to slaughter citizens (like his buddie Getcoffee) that they would, or, would they overthrow this Regime in a Kinetic Military Op and install a new one? Hmmmm
azgrandma

Who cares about seanie – he is such a creep and he gets started on one point and beats it to death for months on end.
Steve_27

ProObamaAgenda said:
youre the typical wingnut republican liar, First the disclaimer then the dumb statement…hahaha….Obama is enjoying himself watching you dumbasses wallow in your ignorance… fortunately for you only 6 more years to go b4 Obama is gone…..are you gonna make it that long????, I say no….my guess is that The end of times will come b4 then or you’ll wind up in a MOOOOS LIM CONCENTRATION CAMP if youre not a victim of the upcoming CALIPHATE, you sir are a waste of space on this site.

This probably just shot you up to the top of the “Dumb bastards that visit Mediaite” list.
Colorado_Conservative

Why not Obama?

Because the lame stream media decided he is the chosen one and refused/refuses to vet him, instead they continue to vehemently do whatever they can to coddle him and the pathetic GOP are afraid of being labeled a nasty word by the left for even asking the question.

So now we are stuck with the least experienced, most incompetent person possible as POTUS…….and we don’t even know if he even meets the Constitutional requirements…good grief America, what were you thinking in 2008?
Bill Huggins

Must not be many Pro-Lifers posting in this thread…
The Tea Weasel®

screwauger said:
To be brief, NO. Will you accept that it was Shrillary’s campaign that first raised this issue and on the whole, it is the left that typically raises the issue albeit this latest round was spurred by Trump. Like I said earlier, I don’t care to see it and I don’t care where what when or why. He’s already proven by his actions or lack thereof, that he sides on the radical left and is the most radical leftist to ever be elected POTUS. Add to that the precedents he has set with governing against the wishes of the majority…he’s not my president nor the president of those I love. Have you spoken to any military families or members of late? What are they thinking about their CIC? Huh, do you think if tomorrow Hussein ordered our military to slaughter citizens (like his buddie Getcoffee) that they would, or, would they overthrow this Regime in a Kinetic Military Op and install a new one? Hmmmm

Clean up on aisle three. Screwauger is now officially ScrewLoose.
James Randal

Even more proof that teabagger/GOP pigs are intellectually bankrupt. How can anyone remain a conservative after this?
Truth

” Hannity, not typically one to be passionate about the birth certificate issue”

He isn’t??? Hannity has been harping about this on and off for two years. Hannity is no more than a hired gun hired by Fox to attempt to discredit this president. It just kills the far right that they cannot find any legitimate dirt on this guy. They cannot politically go toe to toe with him so they continuely come back to this brither issue and attempt to discredit him in other ways. The state of Hawaii has legitimized his birth certifcate, so why can’t the birther leave it at that? Every democratic president has been attack in a similar why. I guess that is how they do things on the far right.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Tom-Ferstl/100000425836277 Tom Ferstl

This is a response to Whoppi! You asked Trump why Bush didn’t have to show his BC? Trump should have replied to you, The Democrats forced John McCain to prove and show his! Racism whoppie get’s you nowhere! Where’s Obamas birthplace. Why did he send himself a letter to the hospital telling them he was born there? Wouldn’t they already know it? Why has NONE of his school friend ever reported as even knowing him. Ditto for the Colleges he supposidly attended. Why does he have multiple Social Security Number and uses one from Conn where he never lived? Why does his wife say he was born in Kenya? He’s a fraud and not a Natural Born Citizen and could not be because his father was NOT a US Citizen and his mother was too young to convey citizenship to him!

Here’s the evidence against him:
http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/05/catalog-of-evidence-concerned-americans.html

Show us where the evidence is for him?
Bill Huggins

Bill Huggins said:
If you’re a PROLIFE conservative: then you must believe OBAMA IS A CITIZEN.

Let me explain:

Obama’s parents were married in Hawaii on Feb. 2, 1961

Obama was born on August 4 of the same year, making his mother three months pregnant with him in Hawaii when she was married.

So: either Obama’s a citizen or fetuses don’t count as people.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Tom-Ferstl/100000425836277 Tom Ferstl

Why does a white man, McCain, have to show his BC but a half black man does not?
Bill Huggins

Tom Ferstl said:
Why does a white man, McCain, have to show his BC but a half black man does not?

Show me when that happened. In real life.
Bill Huggins

Tom Ferstl said:
Why does a white man, McCain, have to show his BC but a half black man does not?

It seems like you’ve got it backwards.
Truth

Tom Ferstl said:
Why does a white man, McCain, have to show his BC but a half black man does not?

McCain didn’t have to do anything he chose to. Just like Obama didn’t have to do anything and he chose not to.
valkyrie101

Tom Ferstl said:
Why does a white man, McCain, have to show his BC but a half black man does not?

Because McCain was born in Panama?
The Tea Weasel®

Can anyone prove to me that Obama was NOT born in the U.S.?

Where is the Kenyan birth certificate? Kenya was a British protectorate, and we all know what sticklers the Brits are for bureaucracy….
cjd ohio 1

valkyrie101 said:
Because McCain was born in Panama?

panama canal zone
mangoman

catfishjuggling: Look, I have a Certificate of Live Birth for myself. It looks virtually identical to the one Obama has produced. It has my name and date of birth and an official looking seal on it. The State of WA will produce as many of these as anyone cares to buy for about $17 each. It is accepted for most legal purposes. But it is NOT my original birth certificate, which is a unique, one of a kind document. It is a secondary document, based on information from the original birth certificate. Like Obama’s, my Certificate of Live Birth does not even state what hospital I was born in. My original birth certificate is printed on hospital stationery, has the seal of the hospital, the signature of the doctor, the signature of his supervisor, the time of day I was born, and on the back it has my parents’ names, addresses and birthdates. It also has my tiny little footprints. THAT is the primary document. Evidently in some states it is called a “long-form” birth certificate, although in my case the original birth certificate is smaller than the Certificate of Live Birth, yet it contains more info.

Now, the fact that the secondary document, the Certificate of Live Birth, is accepted for MOST legal purposes is irrelevant. We are talking about the most powerful job in the world, the guy who could launch thousands of nukes anytime he wants to. It is totally reasonable to ask for the primary document. I’m sure that it is required for many top level classified jobs in the government. As I have already pointed out, John McCain had to produce his in 2008. Why don’t you and factcheck.org understand this? Chris Matthews gets it. Listen to what he said at the beginning of that Youtube clip I gave a link to, the one that this website edited out of the Hannity segment.

But this whole thing just keeps getting stranger and stranger. In July 2009, a Dr. Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, issued a statement that “I have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen.” OK, so at least we know that the original document exists, right? Dr. Fukino says he (she?) has personally seen them.

Last fall, Neil Abercrombie was elected Governor of Hawaii. A longtime friend of Obama and his parents, he said he was going to put the controversy to rest. All he had to do was release the original records Dr. Fukino was referring to, right? Dr. Fukino is now his employee, after all. Well, a red-faced Gov. Abercrombie later decided that he can’t produce the document after all. It’s not clear whether he was actually able to even see it. A friend of the Governor’s was quoted on a radio station as saying the Gov couldn’t find it. The official story is that he can’t release it because he doesn’t have Obama’s permission: http://goo.gl/2ck4P

I am not a Republican, Democrat, conservative or liberal. People should set aside their partisan feelings and pretend that they are an objective investigative reporter. Anybody with an ounce of journalistic blood would have to conclude that Barack Obama is hiding something. There is something on that original birth certificate that he doesn’t want us to see. It may not be his place of birth; it may be something else.

I could almost understand it if he said he lost it. People lose things all the time. But if that were the case, I think he would have said so by now. No, he’s hiding something.
valkyrie101

cjd ohio 1 said:
panama canal zone

Still, it is odd and ironic that McCain was born in a foreign country, his first breath Panama air, in light of the birther complaints against Obama. Of course Obama led the group that verified McCain’s citizenship.
cjd ohio 1

valkyrie101 said:
Still, it is odd and ironic that McCain was born in a foreign country, his first breath Panama air, in light of the birther complaints against Obama. Of course Obama led the group that verified McCain’s citizenship.

panama cone zone was considered american soil, a unorganized territory
ndanielson

John Sidney McCain III, the Republican U.S. Senator from Arizona, was born August 29, 1936 in Panama Canal Zone, Panama. Despite being born on foreign soil, McCain’s parents (Admiral John S. McCain, Jr. and Roberta Wright McCain) were U.S. citizens, which gave him American status from birth. McCain’s father and grandfather were both famous U.S. Navy Admirals, and instilled in him the values of duty, honor and service of country.

valkyrie101 said:
Still, it is odd and ironic that McCain was born in a foreign country, his first breath Panama air, in light of the birther complaints against Obama. Of course Obama led the group that verified McCain’s citizenship.

Pretty much don’t matter where he was born, does it? He could have been born on Mars. His parents were BOTH US citizens. His parents, grand parents and wife, actually loved America, too. Imagine that.
cjd ohio 1

valkyrie101 said:
Still, it is odd and ironic that McCain was born in a foreign country, his first breath Panama air, in light of the birther complaints against Obama. Of course Obama led the group that verified McCain’s citizenship.

but do see your point
ndanielson

mangoman said:
Anybody with an ounce of journalistic blood would have to conclude that Barack Obama is hiding something. There is something on that original birth certificate that he doesn’t want us to see. It may not be his place of birth; it may be something else.

Anybody with an ounce of common sense, would ask what he has hidden, not just his BC. But what do you expect from government loving, America bashing sheep? Most of them are probably like Michelle – never have been proud of America, and can never be…as a sheep.
RoughAcres

Mangoman, that “certificate of live birth” is NOT the “OFFICIAL” birth certificate; some hospitals gave them to parents, others did not. I have one, myself… but the federal government does not consider it an official document, and I had to write to the state in which I was born to get an official copy – which is very plain, very small, and looks a lot like what the President has produced.

This whole “birther” issue is a diversionary tactic: anything to delegitimize Barack Obama. Anything. Someone’s probably looking at his earlobes to ‘prove’ he’s an alien.
mangoman

RoughAcres: What certificate of live birth are you referring to as not being official? The one Obama posted on the Internet? Your post is confusing.

Sure, his political opponents will use anything against him, just as the Dems will use anything against the GOP. But this controversy would have died out long ago if he had just produced the long-form BC. Even his friends are starting to acknowledge that.
jrcmi

Dentist-turned-shyster Oily Taint and her misguided munchkins have tried repeatedly – and fruitlessly – to disprove Obama’s citizenship in numerous courts.

When one comes to a conclusion BEFORE investigating the facts he inevitably comes out looking like a fool. We’ve seen many such examples on this site – mostly with a rightward slant.

“Sure, his political opponents will use anything against him, just as the Dems will use anything against the GOP.”

I disagree.. The Dems could have just as easily made an issue of McCain’s “foreign” birth – or at least muddied the waters. I’m not saying they’re all angels, mind you, but Dems are usually content to deal with facts and issues rather than emotions and distractions.

When they actually DO talk about issues, it’s strictly for show. Boehner and the Republicans hammered Obama about jobs throughout the last election – then clammed up as soon as they took control of the House, which they now have working diligently . . . THREE days a week.
jrcmi

When they (Republicans) actually DO talk about issues, it’s strictly for show. . . .
http://sajepress.com zafarz

Barack Obama’s real birth place was Timbuktu. Here is proof:
http://www.sajepress.com/2011/03/final-proof-of-barack-obamas-birth.html
gme11

Any intelligent person has already googled (and seen) the certificate online. Which means only the foolish still listen to Hannity. I guess thats his target audience.
valkyrie101

cjd ohio 1 said:
panama cone zone was considered american soil, a unorganized territory

Yea, born in America by a technicality. McCain was eating tacos before he left Panama.
catfishjuggling

I fucking quit.

He’s Kenyan.

You guys win.
valkyrie101

ndanielson said:
Pretty much don’t matter where he was born, does it? He could have been born on Mars. His parents were BOTH US citizens. His parents, grand parents and wife, actually loved America, too. Imagine that.

But if he was born on Mars, and that was designated a U.S. territory, would you say he was a natural born citizen?
catfishjuggling

Oh to heck with it.

You guys win.

He’s Kenyan.
Armageddon T Thunderbird

Hannity….there goes one really stupid fucking idiot. Still riding the birther band wagon out there with the tea baggers and registered republicans who lives are all one big zero. Hannity and his kind are living proof that republicans and tea baggers are not true conservatives. They just claim to be. These people are just one big giant circle jerk with people like Hannity , Palin, O’ Donnell, Coulter, Limbaugh, O’ Reilly, John Boehner, Mitch McConnel, Eric Cantor and Michelle Bachman taking their turns at stepping into the middle.
http://www.facebook.com/people/Rick-Shoaf/100000918279221 Rick Shoaf

You Birthers just don’t get it do you? Ya, his father was Kenyan. Obama is a naturally born US citizen. He could have been born in Russa, and it still wouldn’t matter.. His mother is a US citizen. That makes him a US citizen automatically.

Get over it already. Obama’s been president for over 2 years now. Any more of this birth certificate issue and you’re looking like A. You’ve got no real issues with him other than where you THINK he was born. or B. are just racists. My guess is B.. seeing as how you’re not protesting McCain’s Panamanian birth.

The State of Hawaii has stated that they are happy to announce his US citizenship, his mother is a US citizen.. He is a US citizen, natural born.
mangoman

jrcmi: The Dems DID make an issue of McCain’s birthplace. An associate of Hillary Clinton’s took him to court over it. That’s why McCain had to produce his long-form birth certificate. But anyone who does the same with Obama is said to be a racist. Most prominent Dem politicians distanced themselves from the issue, though, just as Boehner and the GOP leadership are distancing themselves from the issue of Obama’s birth. They don’t want people like you accusing them of being racists.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10006

Another example of Democrat hypocrisy: Most Democrats were anti-war as long as Bush was in office (so was I). Once Barack Obama became president, they cheered on his warmongering. What do they say about his unconstitutional bombing of Libya? Nothing, for the most part. Nor do they care that he has handed out far more in bailouts to Wall Street (his biggest campaign contributors) than Bush ever did.
valkyrie101

screwauger said:
To be brief, NO. Will you accept that it was Shrillary’s campaign that first raised this issue and on the whole, it is the left that typically raises the issue albeit this latest round was spurred by Trump. Like I said earlier, I don’t care to see it and I don’t care where what when or why. He’s already proven by his actions or lack thereof, that he sides on the radical left and is the most radical leftist to ever be elected POTUS. Add to that the precedents he has set with governing against the wishes of the majority…he’s not my president nor the president of those I love. Have you spoken to any military families or members of late? What are they thinking about their CIC? Huh, do you think if tomorrow Hussein ordered our military to slaughter citizens (like his buddie Getcoffee) that they would, or, would they overthrow this Regime in a Kinetic Military Op and install a new one? Hmmmm

Obama has proven to be moderate on most issues. And he is substantially following Bush policy in the middle east. So what you say is not true.
catfishjuggling

mangoman said:
jrcmi: The Dems DID make an issue of McCain’s birthplace. An associate of Hillary Clinton’s took him to court over it. That’s why McCain had to produce his long-form birth certificate. But anyone who does the same with Obama is said to be a racist. Most prominent Dem politicians distanced themselves from the issue, though, just as Boehner and the GOP leadership are distancing themselves from the issue of Obama’s birth. They don’t want people like you accusing them of being racists.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10006

The dems? One guy did this. Therefore the dems.

One idiot with a racist sign at a tea party rally means all you geniuses are racist? Right?

Maybe we should paint with slightly less broad strokes.

Another example of Democrat hypocrisy: Most Democrats were anti-war as long as Bush was in office (so was I). Once Barack Obama became president, they cheered on his warmongering. What do they say about his unconstitutional bombing of Libya? Nothing, for the most part. Nor do they care that he has handed out far more in bailouts to Wall Street (his biggest campaign contributors) than Bush ever did.
catfishjuggling

mangoman said:
jrcmi: The Dems DID make an issue of McCain’s birthplace. An associate of Hillary Clinton’s took him to court over it. That’s why McCain had to produce his long-form birth certificate. But anyone who does the same with Obama is said to be a racist. Most prominent Dem politicians distanced themselves from the issue, though, just as Boehner and the GOP leadership are distancing themselves from the issue of Obama’s birth. They don’t want people like you accusing them of being racists.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10006

The dems? One guy did this. Therefore the dems.

One idiot with a racist sign at a tea party rally means all you geniuses are racist? Right?

Maybe we should paint with slightly less broad strokes.
catfishjuggling

This is the comment I was trying to make:

The dems? One guy did this. Therefore the dems.

One idiot with a racist sign at a tea party rally means all you geniuses are racist? Right?

Maybe we should paint with slightly less broad strokes.
beavoux

Aye Sean Hannity ya big dumb Mick, go back to Dublin and crawl in a bottle! That’s the curse of you people!
Tedderman

Show us your birth certificate so we can slap your mother and go kick your dad off his barstool.
Tedderman

Bullspit to those who claim a “certificate of live birth” is not offically recognized by the U.S. government. In 1982 I could not find my original birth certificate when I tried to join the army. I sent to my home state up north and recieved a copy with a raised seal of a “certificate of live birth.” The U.S. Army looked at it then swore me in for the next six years then six more after that. So if they don’t accept “certificates of live birth’” they sure have a funny way of showing it.
eingriff

The level of analysis is pathetic.

The object lesson of Chester Alan Arthur is that he disproved a false charge, which distracted everybody from the real issue. Chester was ineligible because his father was not a U.S. citizen when Chester was born in Vermont. Barry is distracting everybody with the false charge that he was not a natural born citizen at birth. He was. Dr. Fukino has seen the “vital records” – original birth certificate and amended birth certificate – and says so. We trust Dr. Fukino, but the “vital records” to which she refers must be produced to verify his birth parents, who were almost certainly U.S. citizens.

The real eligibility issue is not his status at birth. It is whether he lost that status by becoming a citizen of Indonesia as a young lad.

The original birth certificate will show that Barry’s political manifesto “Dreams from My Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance” is a total fabrication and a gigantic hoax. This may be election fraud, but doesn’t make Barry ineligible at birth.

The whole Obama matter must be exhaustively investigated by official agencies, with power to compel sworn testimony and seize documents (like original birth certificates) and things (like DNA).

As Dr. Charles E. Rice, Professor Emeritus at the Law School of the University of Notre Dame has said, “The first step toward resolving the issue is full discovery and disclosure of the facts.
“The courts are not the only entities empowered to deal with such a question. A committee of the House of Representatives could be authorized to conduct an investigation into the eligibility issue.”

Dr. Rice’s full call for congressional investigation follows:
http://thesteadydrip.blogspot.com/2011/03/is-he-or-isnt-he-american-citizen.html
TUESDAY, MARCH 1, 2011
Is he or Isn’t he an American citizen? – Professor Emeritus at the Law School of Notre Dame University
It is time for a new approach

The speculation about President Obama’s eligibility goes on and on, with no reliable access to the truth and with no end in sight. It is time for a new approach.
The Constitution provides: “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.” Art II, Sec. 1. Neither the Constitution nor any federal law defines the term “natural born citizen.” Nor has the Supreme Court provided a definition that covers the questions presented in the Obama case.
In Minor v. Happersett, in 1875, the Supreme Court, made an incidental reference to the issue: “[N]ew citizens may be born or they may be created by naturalization. The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners. Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first.” 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875).
The Obama “Fight the Smears” website has published a digital photograph of a short-form “Certification of Live Birth” issued by the Hawaiian Department of Health that lists his place and date of birth as Honolulu on August 4, 1961. At that time, Hawaii’s practice was to issue also a long-form Certificate of Live Birth which contains more information, including the name of the hospital, or address of the place, where the birth occurred; the identity of the physician or other “attendant” at the birth; and the signature of the parent or other ”informant” certifying the accuracy of the information, etc. President Obama has not given the permission required by Hawaiian law for release of that long-form certificate.
Numerous lawsuits challenging Obama’s eligibility have been rejected by every court involved, including the Supreme Court of the United States. Some are still pending. The rejections have been based on various grounds, including the plaintiffs’ lack of standing to sue and other specified and unspecified procedural grounds. No court has agreed to decide any of those suits on the merits.
The lawsuits have presented a bewildering array of claims, including, among others, that: Obama was born, not in Hawaii, but Kenya; if he was born abroad, his mother, an American citizen, was legally too young to confer that citizenship on him at birth; the Hawaiian short-form certification of birth published on the Obama website is a forgery; that short-form certification could have been legally issued in 1961 to certify a birth occurring elsewhere than Hawaii; Obama is ineligible because, wherever he was born, he had dual-citizenship since his father was a British citizen and the British Nationality Act of 1948 made his son a British citizen at birth; Obama identified himself as a foreign student at Occidental College, Columbia University, and Harvard Law School; when Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1981, he did so on an Indonesian passport at a time when Indonesian law forbade dual citizenship, etc., etc.
There is no reason to analyze those lawsuits here in detail. Their lack of success cannot be ascribed simply to a hyper-technical evasion of judicial responsibility. For example, the rule requiring a plaintiff in a federal court proceeding to have a sufficient personal interest, or standing, to bring the suit provides needed assurance that suits will be seriously contested and will seek more than merely advisory opinions. On the other hand, it is fair to say that the Obama controversy involves significant issues of fact and law that deserve some sort of official resolution.
I suggest no conclusion as to whether Obama is eligible or not. But the citizens whom the media and political pundits dismiss as “birthers” have raised legitimate questions. That legitimacy is fueled by Obama’s curious, even bizarre, refusal to consent to the release of the relevant records. Perhaps there is nothing to the issues raised. Or perhaps there is. This is potentially serious business. If it turns out that Obama knew he was ineligible when he campaigned and when he took the oath as President, it could be the biggest political fraud in the history of the world. As long as Obama refuses to disclose the records, speculation will grow and grow without any necessary relation to the truth. The first step toward resolving the issue is full discovery and disclosure of the facts.
The courts are not the only entities empowered to deal with such a question. A committee of the House of Representatives could be authorized to conduct an investigation into the eligibility issue. The classic formulation of the Congressional role is Woodrow Wilson’s, in his 1884 book Congressional Government:
It is the proper duty of a representative body to look diligently into every affair of government and to talk much about what it sees. It is meant to be the eyes and the voice, and to embody the wisdom and will of its constituents. Unless Congress have and use every means of acquainting itself with the acts and the disposition of the administrative agents of the government, the country must be helpless to learn how it is being served; and unless Congress both scrutinize these things and sift them by every form of discussion, the country must remain in embarrassing, crippling ignorance of the very affairs which it is most important that it should understand and direct. The informing function of Congress should be preferred even to its legislative function…[T]he only really self-governing people is that people which discusses and interrogates its administration. (p. 198)
Wilson later retreated from his affirmation of Congressional supremacy. He said in 1900 that the president, rather than Congress, “is now at the front of affairs.” (Congressional Government, preface to 15th edition, 1900, p. 22.) In his 1908 book Constitutional Government in the United States, four years before he was elected to that office, he described the president as “the political leader of the nation.” (pp. 67ff.) Wilson’s second thoughts on congressional supremacy, however, do not negate Congress” “informing function.” The investigatory power has remained as an essential role of Congress.
The Constitution nowhere expressly grants to either House of Congress a general power to investigate in aid of legislation, or in aid of overseeing the Executive Branch. However, the Supreme Court has long recognized that such a power is implied as an essential concomitant to Congress’s legislative authority. John E. Nowak and Ronald D. Rotunda, Constitutional Law (2004), 280. See McGrain v. Daugherty, 273 U.S. 135 (1927).
The investigative power of Congress has multiple purposes. “The ability to gather information has been regarded as a predicate to effective legislation and as important to providing a legislative check on executive actions. The Supreme Court has explained that Congress thus may conduct ”inquiries concerning the administration of existing laws as well as proposed or possibly needed statutes. It includes surveys of defects in our social, economic or political system for the purpose of enabling the Congress to remedy them.” The power to investigate also includes ”probes into departments of the Federal Government to expose corruption, inefficiency or waste”….. The authority to investigate necessarily requires the power to compel testimony.” Erwin Chemerinsky, Constitutional Law (2006), 310. (Internal citations omitted).
It is difficult to imagine, to borrow Wilson’s phrase, a more pressing “affair of government” than the question of whether a sitting president obtained his office illegally, and perhaps even by fraud. An investigating body must not prejudge the case. Its concern must be, first, to put the facts on the record and then to consider whatever legislation or other remedy might be appropriate in light of those facts.
The House of Representatives is an appropriate body to inquire into the facts and legal implications of a President’s disputed eligibility for the office. The House itself has a contingent but potentially decisive role in the election of a president. The 12th Amendment to the Constitution governs the counting of the electoral votes as certified by the states:
The President of the Senate shall, in the presence of the Senate and House of Representatives, open all the certificates and the votes shall then be counted; — The person having the greatest number of votes for President, shall be the President, if such number be a majority of the whole number of Electors appointed; and if no person have such majority, then from the persons having the highest numbers not exceeding three on the list of those voted for as President, the House of Representatives shall choose immediately, by ballot, the President. But in choosing the President, the votes shall be taken by states, the representation from each state having one vote; a quorum for this purpose shall consist of a member or members from two-thirds of the states, and a majority of all the states shall be necessary to a choice.
The power to investigate can be exercised by a House committee provided that the investigation is within that committee’s authorization as determined by the House. An investigation into Obama’s eligibility by a committee or subcommittee of the House could have several legitimate objectives, including among others:
1. To ascertain the facts, compelling by subpoena the production of all the available records relevant to Obama’s eligibility, including the complete Hawaiian records of his birth; his passport records to ascertain whether he traveled to Pakistan in 1981 on an American or other passport; the records from Occidental College, Columbia University and Harvard Law School to determine whether Obama described himself as a foreign student; and such other records as may be relevant. The disclosure of such information to the public would be an appropriate exercise of Congress” “informing function.”
2. The consideration of legislation to require candidates for a federal elective office to produce, at an appropriate time, evidence of their eligibility for that office. There is now no federal law or regulation that requires such disclosure.
3. The consideration of legislation to define the constitutional term, “a natural born Citizen.”
The American people do not know whether the current president achieved election by misrepresenting, innocently or by fraud, his eligibility for that office. I neither know nor suggest the answer to that question. But it would be a public service for the House of Representatives to employ its authority to determine those facts and to recommend any indicated changes in the law or the Constitution.
Charles E. Rice is professor emeritus at the Law School of Notre Dame University in South Bend IN. He is the author of What Happened to Notre Dame?
http://www.speroforum.com/site/article.asp?id=49420&t=Barack+Obama%3A+Is+he+or+Isn't+he+an+American+citizen%3F
POSTED BY SAM SEWELL AT 12:06 PM

If Hannity, Corsi and others would read what I send them, they wouldn’t sound so ignorant, but would join the hue and cry for official investigations to find the evidence that is being concealed.
payneec

Hannity should show us his college and masters degree. OOPS! I forgot he has none. .
Montecore

I was born in Sacramento, CA and the hospital I was born in was torn down, rebuilt and given a new name. In 1949 there were no computers and I lost my origional birth certificate so I had to get a copy. It says ‘certificate of live birth.’ Through yhe years I have been able to get married twice with it and managed to get four state IDs with it. So if certificates of live births are good enough foor judges, a number of workers at the DMV and even the military as Tedderman assures us, where is the problem?
Anonymous

fiat uno