I understand that some of you are fed up with this issue and just want it to go away. It is my position that it is not yet settled. Obama has reputedly spent close to $1,000,000 to keep his records from public scrutiny – why?
Obama’s Eligibility for POTUS
I’m not going to give up on this issue. Many have thrown in the towel and just resigned themselves to that fact that OB is the president, thus the issue is closed.
It is far from closed. The thing that I have a hard time understanding is how his supporters, blinded by adoration, refuse to see that if he is not a natural born citizen, how that alone would create a constitutional crisis. What would be the effect on the legality of his actions. If he is not “legal,” how can his actions on behalf of the country be legal? The result could be extremely damaging to the U.S.
Suppose he signs treaties and agreements with other countries, are they required to adhere to those documents? How could they be held liable if the U.S. was represented by an illegal president? How about closing Guantanamo, sending more troops to Afghanistan, spending Trillions of taxpayer dollars, etc.. What if we find out tomorrow, a year from now or in 2011, that he is legally not a U.S. citizen?
I’ve seen no constitutional scholars volunteer their opinions on the effect of an “illegal” president – perhaps Barack Hussein Obama could offer his learned opinion?
The possibilities are disturbing and for that reason, if for no other, it is incumbent on us to verify that he does fit the Constitution’s requirements for the office of the President – that he is legal.
Following are reasons that I have real doubts that he is legal.
Exhibit 1. Chiyome Fukino, the director of the Hawaiian Department of Health, issued the statement, "I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."
Right … did you catch the glaring absence of the word “Hawaii” preceding the words “birth certificate”? The director just stated that Obama’s original birth certificate was on file – she didn’t say that it was a Hawaii birth certificate. Given our presidential history when it comes to parsing words (depends on the meaning of “is”, etc.), it is incumbent on us to be wary of the way that statements are worded.
Attorney Phillip Berg maintains that there is a valid birth certificate on file in Hawaii alright, but it is a Kenyan birth certificate – not a Hawaii birth certificate. Mr. Berg is one of those who are attempting to legally force Obama to product a valid birth certificate, showing him to have been born in the United States.
It has been asserted by Mr. Berg, that Obama was born in Mombasa in Kenya (said by some to be the Coast Provincial General Hospital) at 7:24 PM on August 4th 1961.
Exhibit 2. Hawaiian procedures at the time allowed the state to issue a Hawaii “Certification of Live Birth" document to be issued to parents of children not born in the state.
A comment left by a reader in response to a Forbes magazine article stated that her adopted daughter received a “Certification of Live Birth” from Hawaii (she was adopted there) although she was born in South Korea to Korean nationals and that the Korean birth certificate is on file in Hawaii. That just reinforces the policy in effect at that time was to issue a COLB (and NOT a birth certificate) to those born outside of Hawaii and fits neatly with attorney Berg’s assertion.
The document was given to parties that didn't have a proper hospital birth certificate and was given based on a statement of one relative only. The state of Hawaii doesn't give full credit to these documents; they are NOT the equivalent of a birth certificate.
Exhibit 3. Why would an individual with an original Hawaii birth certificate on file also be issued a "certification of live birth"? Riddle me that, Obama.
Exhibit 4. Why does Obama still refuse to allow release of the birth certificate on file in Hawaii and has legal representation vigorously defending his decision NOT to allow release? He also refuses access to college records which could also shed some light on his place of birth and/or nationality at birth.
The issue is not going to go away. If he has nothing to hide, Obama could quash the issue completely by allowing public access to the record on file in Hawaii – in a matter of minutes. What information is there on a birth certificate that could be deemed confidential?
For those wanting to see Hawaii’s related rules for themselves, here is the URL of the State of Hawaii’s Dept. of Health, Vital Records website:
Interestingly, a search of the Hawaii DOH website DOES NOT turn up a document titled, “Certification of Live Birth,” which is the title of the document that Obama people have published and purport to be his “birth certificate.” The document that he has provided clearly is titled “Certification of Live Birth,” NOT “Birth Certificate.” It also is missing an attending physician’s name and the weight and length of the baby, items expected to be present on a birth certificate.
Of course, the state likely has changed nomenclature since 1961. In today’s parlance, it looks like the COLB may be the equivalent of an “amended” birth certificate.
The State of Hawaii WILL issue an “Amended Certificate of Birth” in four cases:
· A Hawaii birth certificate is already on file AND the individual has had a sex change operation
· A Hawaii birth certificate is already on file AND a parent-child relationship has NOT been shown to existfor the parent listed on the birth certificate (could there have been a “Frank” in the woodpile?)
· A Hawaii birth certificate is already on file AND a court order or a certificate of marriage establishing the marriage of the natural parents to each other is presented
· And, the last (and most likely) one: For a person born in a foreign country who has been legally adopted in the State of Hawaii.
Exhibit 5. Some supporters of the “he was born in Hawaii” position refer to Snopes as “proof” that the statements made by those who are skeptical are fantasy.
I suggest that anyone willing to take the Snopes entry as proof, read the entry fully and with skepticism (remember that exact parsing of words is necessary when dealing with those lusting for power at any price). For example:
· The first four paragraphs deal with the authenticity of the COLB. Personally, I think that it has been shown to have been altered, but forget that issue – it’s moot. It doesn’t matter whether the COLB is good as gold or a forgery – it’s still NOT a birth certificate.
· The fifth item presents an image of a newspaper birth announcement. This appears authentic, but since when is a newspaper birth announcement taken as the equivalent of a valid legal birth certificate? It is simply an announcement.
· The next three bullet items are flawed as well:
o No evidence that Obama’s mother traveled to Kenya during 1961. Since Kenya has also refused to make details surrounding Obama’s records available, this may or may not be true. Any record showing her travel to Kenya could lend credence to the Kenyan birth and would therefore be kept under wraps. For someone who is refusing to show his birth certificate, I don’t think we should expect the voluntary disclosure of any facts that could be detrimental to his position.
o Despite the many statements attributed (via transcript) to Obama’s grandmother that she was present when he was born in Kenya, Snopes quotes Alex Koppelman writing in Salon (hardly an objective source) as saying that she was mis-translated and the “correction” is “consistently excised from transcripts of the conversation.” Everyone else’s transcripts are wrong, only Mr. Koppelman’s is correct?
o And, they say that it would not have been possible for Obama’s parents to obtain a Hawaii birth certificate for a foreign-born child. DUH … that’s what the COLB was used for. DUH.
· The next section notes that Phillip Berg’s August, 2008 suit was dismissed by a federal court judge. True, but that decision was based on Mr. Berg’s standing to bring suit – not on the merits of his evidence.
· And the last segment in the Snopes rebuttal begins by stating: “State officials say there’s no doubt Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.” That was Snopes’ statement. But then they follow up with the quote on which that statement is based: “Health Department Director Chiyome Fukino says she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama’s original birth certificate.” This is very similar to the quote that I referenced earlier - basically, the same language. Once again, they DID NOT say that they saw a Hawaii birth certificate, only that they saw Obama’s original birth certificate. So, Snopes is stating a fact that was not supported by that quote to assert that state officials said that they had no doubt that he was born in Hawaii. The quote simply doesn’t say that. The quote would still be true if what they had seen was Obama’s Kenyan birth certificate.
As you can see, there are still a number of unresolved issues relating to Barry Obama’s qualification for the POTUS job. It seems to me that a “beyond a reasonable doubt” threshold has not been satisfied and there has been NO PROOF that he really is a “natural born” citizen.
If all of these arguments are simply the hallucinations of a frenzied anti-Obama conservative, there is still that overriding single issue that Obama supporters refuse to address:
Why won’t Obama allow access to his REAL, ORIGINAL, ON-FILE birth certificate and his college records?
There is only ONE justification for that position, and that is that there is something there that he doesn’t want us to see.
A final note on this issue. If Obama does eventually produce a valid Hawaii birth certificate showing him to have been born in the state of Hawaii, I will gladly publish a single-issue post apologizing to Obama and his supporters in big, bold, capital letters. I will admit that I was wrong.