Top of the Ticket

Political commentary from Andrew Malcolm

« Previous Post | Top of the Ticket Home | Next Post »

Mystery solved*: Barack Obama was American-born

(UPDATE: Alan Keyes stoked the Obama birth certificate controversy anew in February 2009. See Ticket coverage here.)

*Except, of course, for the conspiracy theorists out there.

One of the subtexts to the presidential reviews birth certificate and says Barack Obama is as American as John McCainpaign so far has been speculation by haters of both Barack Obama and John McCain that neither is eligible to be president because neither was born in the U.S.

In the case of McCain, he was born to U.S. citizens in the U.S.-controlled Panama Canal Zone while his military father was stationed there. McCain's Senate colleagues pooh-poohed the idea that disqualified him, and lawyers are wrestling over it, but we doubt that a challenge on those grounds will get far.

In Obama's case, there has been rampant online speculation that his birth certificate is forged or altered somehow. Well, the folks at say they have seen the certificate, touched and vouched it -- Obama is as American as baseball, apple pie and, these days, burritos, pasta and kung pao chicken.

So that should settle it ... unless ... wait ... the people at use computers, with keypads, that have the letters r-e-z-k-o on them, which just happened to spell the name of one of Obama's disgraced former backers ... and they were in Chicago to see the birth certificate at ... Obama headquarters ... CONNECT THE DOTS, PEOPLE!

--Scott Martelle

Photo: Francine Orr/Los Angeles Times


Comments () | Archives (65)

The comments to this entry are closed.

It doesn't matter.

Obamahaters will just completely ignore the topic of this article and spout some rumors they heard about Obama's church/friends/taxing. And of course these rumors will all be lies.

Are u stupid guy? u connect the dots in ur brain i think u are missing a couple of screws...if u need some assistance call the Mccain campaign they have experience with fixing loose screws

Of course none of this is really about where he was born. It's about continuing a narrative that Obama isn't really American enough. You know, the guy with the strange name, African-American, etc....

"Obama: It's the Name, Stupid"

The problem with this vouching for obama is that the press is behind it. I hate to break it to the press but most people don't trust them.

These are the people who did not care to investigate John Edward and his mistress story. The same people who keep telling us that John McCain is not well defined after 25 years in the public arena, but can't lift a finger to actually investigate Obama.

Obama may very well have been born in the U.S but the fact that we are supposed to take the press' word for it means that this vouching by factcheck is null and void.

This will be a big disappointment to racist bloc voters out there. Now they must invent something new to spread around.

Brilliant post, Scott. Unfortunately, there are some people out there for whom the vague emails going out about Obama will be enough to deter them. But if they're so easily swayed, I'm not sure there's much you can do to convince them otherwise.

What everyone keeps forgetting is that being born in the country in question isn't the only way to make a person a natural citizen of a country. This goes for Obama and McCain. McCain was born to parents who were both U.S. citizens in Panama. He's an American citizen. Obama was born in Hawaii, but (for you lovely haters out there) even if he was born in Kenya, his mother was a U.S. citizen, as well as his father (though a citizen through naturalization, not natural born), which makes his a U.S. citizen. Good grief. This man's "americanism" has been questioned enough. What is it about him that makes him un-American, un-patriotic, and unacceptable? Why don't people man up and say what it really is - it isn't for any real reason than the fact that white people still don't trust black people, or even half-black people. Bottom line. This is just yet another attempt to discredit a capable candidate. If he was born on the moon to parents who is an American, he automatically has American citizenship. Squash it.

This doesn't "solve the mystery". It only adds to it. The ONLY way that Obama can end this as an issue is for him to direct the State of Hawaii to make his birth certificate publicly available to anyone who wishes to view it.

Since Factcheck is holding the document always at an angle in the photographs, there is no way to determine if this is the same document used on Fight the Smears. It's amazing to me how stupid some people are that they would accept this BS (Barry Soetoro) on it's face.

Obama is unfit to be president. It's just that the media is too stupid to realize that. I can't believe that I still have a subscription to this idiot rag called the Los Angeles Times. Just for the record, the only reason I do is for ads!

'it is easy to take liberty for granted, when you have never had it taken from you.' - dick cheney

there seems to be overwhelming evidence, that both obama and mccain, do not qualify as native born americans, as would be the constitutional requirement. but what do they or their handlers, care about the constitution, or the people of america?
but if the people don't realize that even without that, their character and actions, their voting records and their lies, disqualify them many times over, who's to wake them up? if their own conscience can't do it any longer, it's impossible. and if they choose to turn in their birthright, and the fruits of liberty, for the poisoned crumbs of cradle-to-grave monitored slavery - this is their free choice, but their last one for a long dark time.
if the people don't choose to act as mature, responsible citizens, to reclaim their rights, their country and their future - they will lose, no matter what their vote. and if they vote into office, someone for good reasons excluded by the constitution, it is the mandate of the people to destroy it.
the legitmate and qualified candidate for president to uphold and defend the constitution, the liberties of the people, and the sovereignty of the nation, is RON PAUL.

'it is easy to have liberty taken away from you at any time, when you take it for granted.'
(constitutional republican candidate for president)

there is a way to check. there is an 'artifact' on the kos image that is not on the factcheck image. it is underneath the 'e' in certificate. easily seen on the enlarged image. check it out.

August 21, 2008 Attorney Philip Berg filed suit seeking injunction against Barack H. Obama.
Judge Surrick denied the injunction against Barack Obama but said there were issues that he would look at soon. MY GOODNESS. I've read the injunction and it appears CLEAR that if any of the issues are correct then Mr. Obama is clearly deceiving the American Public, and he has apparently lied without any question on legal documents.

WHAT KIND OF A JUDGE IS WORKING HERE. This candidate COULD fail to win because of the uncertainty hanging out there, so you would think logically that the paperwork that proves that he has US citizenship can be produced, or Indonesia citizenship, or Kenya citizenship and that when Obama moved back to the US documents that show he regained his citizenship. All of this paperwork must already exist as he is a SENATOR from ILLINOIS. Why would any Judge not want to clear this matter up for Mr. Obama's sake, and for our country's sake. Just let this issue continue to grow!

The so-called birth certificate that is depicted on Obama's campaign website is NOT the ORIGINAL birth certificate, so it proves nothing. This is just a form onto which some information has been typed. Even if it is a "Certified" "official" document released by some agency in Hawaii, it is NOT THE ORIGINAL, so it proves nothing.

Americans deserve to see the ORIGINAL birth record so we can know whether this candidate is legally qualified to run for President of our country.

Here's the problem. If Obama has a legitimate birth certificate from Hawaii, why is he only releasing it to Factcheck or Smears? How is it that the Democratic party could have so utterly failed to vett Obama in this way. Why release such vital information to non-governmental entities? Take the time to read up on this, even though the mainstream media is completely whitewashing or ignoring the QUESTION. If it's a clear about it, produce the real deal and let's move on. What makes me concerned is the lemming-like way this really vital issue is being that it's NOT. Put your party loyalties down for an hour and educate yourself on the argument at least. Here are 2 good places to start- don't dismiss them because they aren't the KOS or the Huffpo...the former has touted as genuine a known forgery. I'm just saying wake up and read...and see if there isn't a concern here. Do we really want this fight to be fought after January?

If there isn't any truth to Obama's non-american birth, how can this lawsuit by a Democrat go through?

Thursday, August 21, 2008

Obama Sued in Philadelphia Federal Court on Grounds he is Constitutionally Ineligible for the Presidency

by Jeff Schreiber

A prominent Philadelphia attorney and Hillary Clinton supporter filed suit this afternoon in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania against Illinois Sen. Barack Obama, the Democratic National Committee and the Federal Election Commission. The action seeks an injunction preventing the senator from continuing his candidacy and a court order enjoining the DNC from nominating him next week, all on grounds that Sen. Obama is constitutionally ineligible to run for and hold the office of President of the United States.

Philip Berg, the filing attorney, is a former gubernatorial and senatorial candidate, former chair of the Democratic Party in Montgomery (PA) County, former member of the Democratic State Committee, and former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania. According to Berg, he filed the suit--just days before the DNC is to hold its nominating convention in Denver--for the health of the Democratic Party.

“I filed this action at this time,” Berg stated, “to avoid the obvious problems that will occur when the Republican Party raises these issues after Obama is nominated.”.

Berg cited a number of unanswered questions regarding the Illinois senator’s background, and in today’s lawsuit maintained that Sen. Obama is not a natural born U.S. citizen or that, if he ever was, he lost his citizenship when he was adopted in Indonesia. Berg also cites what he calls “dual loyalties” due to his citizenship and ties with Kenya and Indonesia.

Even if Sen. Obama can prove his U.S. citizenship, Berg stated, citing the senator’s use of a birth certificate from the state of Hawaii verified as a forgery by three independent document forensic experts, the issue of “multi-citizenship with responsibilities owed to and allegiance to other countries” remains on the table . . .

The Obama Birth record that is being shown is just an abstract of the original. application to register a birth. What we need to see is the original application. They are kept on microfilm by the Hawaii State Department of Health. The application has his mother and father's ,age, place of birth , and thier signitures.

It is amazing that when the Drudge Report broke the story of the stained dress, all President Clinton's defenders screamed "It's just the internet -- you can't trust that!"

Now the same people are saying we should accept these obvious forgeries that are "just on the internet".

If Obama cannot produce a certified copy of his original birth certificate, which he apparently cannot, he is clearly unqualified to serve as President under the Constitution. But, of course, Democrats do not care about the Constitution.

First, I'm not an Obama "hater". That being said, what printed is rather loose.

* The birth certificate is an obvious duplicate, and I'm assuming state-produced since it has the seal and signature. As a politician, I'm sure that he couldn't pull in a few favors to get that done. I'd feel more comfortable seeing the "long" form (the original).

* They offer as "evidence," which is supported here, that a birth announcement in a Hawaiian newspaper is somehow relevant to where he was born. As I recall, his parents were in Hawaii before his birth, traveled to Kenya, and then returned to Hawaii. Wouldn't it make sense to announce it in Hawaii? And according to accusations the return to Hawaii was after his birth, which is the whole point of all of this.

I have do my own research on this, I obtained a known to be real hawaiian birth certificate and conpared it with the one posted on Obamas site. IMO- it's a fake for the following reasons.
**It does not have the embossed State of Hawaii Seal in the center.
**It does not have the embossed signature at the bottom center.
**It does not have any fold marks, all certificates are mailed and can not be picked up in person.
**It shows his race as "AFRICAN", in 1961 it would have said "NEGRO"
**The security boarder does not match

See for yourself at

He MUST clear up this issue before he is nominated or McCain will win by default, if he can't produce the original, he can not be confirmed by congress period!

mccain, who equally does not qualify as a 'native american citizen,' cannot win. so the legitimate republican candidate, representing the core majority, upholding traditional values and principles, and the sovereignty of the nation, rather than the neocon fringe (represented by mccain) that has hijacked the party, will win by default. it is very fortunate that he is also the most qualified candidate in this race by far, and has the viable solutions to america's most fundamental problems. his name: RON PAUL.

There is only one problem with, it is part of the Annenberg foundation. A foundation in which Barack H. Obama was a board member along with William Ayers.
There is a conflict of interest in them doing the "CHECKING" on behalf of Obama. This means that he needs to allow an unbiased 3rd party do the checking of the certificates.
Personally, I only care about the laws that are in place.
If Barack H. Obama is indeed a citizen, then great. It should NOT be a far stretch for him to prove in court that he is indeed a citizen of the United States. There is indeed a lawsuit against Obama. And I am sure that he may have to face these charges in court.
This also includes the possibility of him having dual citizenship in which there are ramped claims and reports.
Either which way, the LAWs of the United States must prevail and take precedence over personal feelings.

Dan said: "mccain, who equally does not qualify as a 'native american citizen,'"

I think that there is a small aspect you and many others are forgetting. The law at the time of Obamas birth required that his mother spend 10 years in the US before giving birth, 5 years had to be after the age of 14. She was 18 when she gave birth, as a result she could not confer "natural born" status *if* he was not born in the country. As I recall McCains parents were older and thus its likely they could if the law was the same when mccain was born.

Further Indonesia requires that you renounce your other citizenships. At the age of 20 Obama traveled to pakistan on an Indonesian passport, meaning at that time he was not a US citizen, he would have had to renounce his citizenship. This is a formalized procedure and it wasnt until well into the Clinton years that they started ignoring default standard renouncing (Indonesia may not qualify under even this depending on how they do it).

So at the very least he would have to be *naturalized* to be a citizen today (unless the US just ignored it because they never knew which may also happen, why he should at least prove that he got his citizenship back after renouncing it).

Btw I am a native american citizen, McCain/Obama may or may not be a natural born citizen, there is a difference :)

As listed, Barack was born in Hawaii to a woman that could not be legally married to his father, because he was still married to another woman. In most states, the race of the mother (in this case white) is the listed race of the infant. So, it looks like Barack didn't want his birth certificate made public because he is listed as "white" on the certificate. tsk tsk.

The date-stamp which appears to be on the reverse of and showing through the document above the phrase "...the fact of birth in any court..."

As I examine the date-stamp is reads:

JUN -6 2007

Although not legible, there appears to be a circular impress above the date-stamp on the reverse of the CERTIFICATION.

This would seem to be the "issuance date" of this CERTIFICATION. It is obviously a modern reprint using contemporary printing technology.

To pretend this is an original historical document is to waste the effort.

If Senator Obama birth certificate shown on the NY Times web-site is real, why does it state that his father's race was "African?" The term African American was not used popularly until the late 1970's and 1980's. Official government verbage in 1961 would have stated that the Raceof the Father being Negro or Arab, not African.

Wether or not Obama is a US citizen is not the point, the birth certificate revealed as the official certificate of live birth is Typed using a COMPUTER with Arial or Helvetica type faced NOT available in 1961! Ooops, didn't the DNC learn from the forged military files of Bush?

My brother was born in Honolulu in June 1961 which would be 2 months before Barack was born there. My brothers birth certificate looks completely different than this. Weird.

That John McCain is out of touch with America is evident in his asking who Barak Obama is. The senator from Illinois has been vetted and re-vetted more thoroughly than any political figure in recent history. Every American who reads a newspaper or watches TV knows full well who and what Barak Obama is. The same, though, cannot be said of John McCain’s running mate. The public has yet to know the full story behind her ties with the secessionist Alaskan Independence party, her veiled acceptance of earmarks, her undisclosed government perks, her alleged abuse of power, her anti-witchcraft rituals, her daughter’s shotgun wedding, and so forth. The pit-bull, barracuda, untutored hockey mom from the most sparsely populated state in the nation is the one who is a mystery. Why John McCain chose her over far better qualified candidates as his running mate is also a mystery.

Not that it matters much at this point, but my Honolulu-born husband's birth certificate looks EXACTLY like this. That's because this is a replacement certificate that the Department of Health issues when the original is unavailable (lost) or inadequate. In my husband's case, he had only the hospital-issued certificate, without the state seal, that is no longer considered "official" -- the state certificate standards weren't in place until sometime after statehood in 1959. My husband had to produce an official certificate, just like this one, to get a passport for travel last summer. I'm guessing this is why Obama produces this one. I should go to the DOH today and ask if it's possible to get a microfilmed print of the original.

Obama was born in Kenya, his mother flew to Hawaii as soon as possible to register him as born in America. This has been proven by his Kenyen realitves who swear he was born in Kenya. He used a Indonesian passport when he was 20 to enter Pakistan. When did he become a naturalized citizen? You can't have both a US passport and a Indonesian passport.

Hi. I'm obviously getting here quite late, but I have a question or two about the document putporting to be Obama's birth certificate. Like "V in Hawaii" said on 10/13, this is obviously a replacement certificate. I mean, I learned to type almost 40 years ago, and I didn't see a typewriter with a "sans serif" typeface until I was using an IBM "Selectric" machine that was new 1982: instead of the keys activating arms, one for each letter, an internal computer turned a metal ball with all the letters raised on its surface, and one could change balls to change typefaces. Does anyone know what happened to Obama's original birth certificate? I've seen the short film "October Surprise", and the questions it raised are both very serious and easy to answer. So, what's the hold-up? Can you imagine what will happen if these allegations turn out to be true, but it's not revealed until too late? That's not going to be funny, from anyone's perspective.

Wow. Yeah, I'll trust the people at and not any... you know... actual forensic scientists. Hmmm... I'm thinking that I'm probably going to have to take science over beliefs. Sorry all you believers out there.

"The purported Certification of Live Birth published by the Daily Kos left wing blog and claimed as genuine by the Obama campaign features a security border that differs dramatically from security borders on COLB documents before and after the one supposedly printed out for Obama in 2007."

For Scott Martelle to make fun of a serious question on the constitutional natural born citizen qualification to be President by writing Mystery Solved, except for conspiracy theorists, irresponsibly airbrushes out the journalistic report that the Democratic candidate’s paternal grandmother not so long ago bragged that her grandson is about to be President of the United States and she is so proud because she was present in the delivery room when he was born in Kenya, and that the candidate’s half brother and half sister were present when she made the statement and agreed with that. Naturally, the official Obama Fight the Smears web site states: “When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.”
The difficulty revolves around the fact that, instead of responding to the Philadelphia court case that raised the issue by simply producing an authenticated photo of a 1961 typewritten original of a record in the official records of the State of Hawaii or of a medical record kept in whatever hospital such a birth may have occurred at (There were only two hospitals in Honolulu at the time.), Mr. Obama and the DNC are setting up technical defenses to obstruct the hearing of the case on the evidence. That could give rise to an inference that no contemporaneously prepared official or medical record, i.e. one that is admissible in evidence, of any such birth in Honolulu ever existed.
The DNC and the openly biased Fact Check group have merely witnessed a piece of paper that was computer generated in 2007. That the Fact Check group touched that piece of paper is meaningless. That paper is not admissible evidence of where the August 4, 1961 event actually occurred – particularly in light of the first-hand personal knowledge assertion by the paternal grandmother, who had no reason to lie when she made her statement. Since Stanley Ann Dunham is no longer around to provide evidence, the question arises: if the birth really did take place in Honolulu, even though they forgot which hospital (They first said one and then the other.), was the maternal grandmother there to help her daughter out? If not, surely the maternal grandmother got a phone call just after the birth to report the baby's sex, etc. The maternal grandmother is still available as a witness. Why are the candidate and the DNC resisting her production as a witness? Also, there had to have been some medical personnel that assisted at such a birth. Hospitals don’t just throw away people’s medical records. With all the tens of millions of dollars available to the campaign, it seems that the candidate and the DNC could easily clear up the maternal grandmother’s statement with some admissible evidence to corroborate the unauthenticated multiple hearsay behind a computer print-out that was not generated until 46 years after the matter. However, even then the 2007 paper certified that the fact of birth was not “registered” until four days after the event it refers to. There doesn’t have to be a conspiracy behind these discrepancies, just some admissible evidence from the candidate to clear up the paternal grandmother’s statement and carry his burden of proof that he is constitutionally qualified. Since the candidate is a constitutional law specialist, he must have thought about this lack of proof a long time ago. What's the big problem?

What has been staring everyone in the face is the effects of political correctness and no one has seen it. The beauty of this liberal political correctness is that the person who forged this document got caught in their own trap of affirmative action hyphenated Americans.

Look closely at Stanley Ann Dunham's race. Caucasian.

Now look closely at Barack Hussein Obama sr's race. It is listed as African.
That doesn't seem all that interesting and no one has noticed it until one looks that this is an official document filed in August 1961.

Most people on the internet and blogging have no sense of history nor in the use of words and it is this lack of sense which is going to bite whoever forged this document.

Up until 1968, the standard term for all Africans was "negroe". This fit with the absolute secular scientific teaching of the day which notes the world has 3 races in Mongoloid, Caucasoid and Negroid.
It was not until the Black Revolution when negroe or negro became a foul description in the late 1960's and then "black" was demanded by this group to describe them.
It was not until the late 1970's when political correctness came into vogue that it ushered in by the 1980's the term "African" to describe all blacks.

Whoever forged this birth certificate was not utilizing the 1960's terminology which a black person would be listed as. They fell instead into a warped year 2000 politically correct description of "African".

This is absolutely telling as if you looked at birth records in Prussia centuries ago, those people would be termed Prussian, Bavarian etc... as Germany did not yet exist as a termonology for nation state. If someone was listed as German in 1700, it would be glaring forgery just like the Obama forgery stuns the eyes once one knows what they are looking at.

One could research the certificates in Hawaii for absolutes, but considering as has been warned in this blog that Hawaii is a Democratic state, has Democratic officials who have been hemming and hawing about this certificate and only upon precise questioning do they start backing down as it means their jobs and prison time if they certify a forgery as real and this is Democratic transplanted son Barack Obama carrying on this charade, could one ever get a clear answer from them unless one looked at numbers of birth certificates to precisely learn how Hawaii was labeling "blacks".
If this case it is African, then why is not Stanley Ann Dunham labeled correctly North American after her continent? She though is labeled correctly as caucasian as that is exactly as she is.

If one still today searches enough death certificates in the 50 United States, you will find listed on them the term NEGRO. Now that is over 40 years since 1961 in Barack Obama's birth and political correctness has not reached completely into the coroner's records.
That fact is scientific and if it still exists today as proof it certainly is the proof from before 1900 in America and past 1960 that all blacks were noted as "negroe" or "negro" on all public records from birth certificates, marriage licenses, passports, driver's licenses to death certificates.

Whoever forged the Barack Obama birth certificate got caught in Mr. Obama's own political correctness.
In 1961 America, blacks were negroes and not Africans no matter if they came from Africa or not.
If one cares to examine the Negroe Leagues in baseball where blacks were to "pass" as Cubans to the United Negroe College Fund to the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, there was no African at all in any terminology.
One was negroe on legal documents and "colored" in common usage.

No pixels in this. No questioning borders and no questions about the researcher's expertise as negroe is American history and scientific fact just like whoever forged the Obama birth certificate got caught in political correctness in not being able to use a term they were trained to avoid.

That is a fact. This birth certificate is a fake.

Does anybody reading this who is over 10 years old possess a birth certificate that has never been folded? Every one I've ever seen has been folded at various times to be placed in envelopes or in safe deposit boxes, etc. This is way too new, clean, pristine to be a 40 year old birth certificate!

I have never read such denial and blatant Obama Apologistism in all my life....

You can pick and choose all the facts you like... I seems Obama is hiding a lot and there are plenty of people willing to help cover up these questions....

The copy of the birth certificate shows the name Barack Hussein Obama II. I thought he was born Barry Obama and not Barack Obama?

In order to qualify for Top Secret access each individual must undergo an FBI Single Scope Background Investigation. If there is anything bogus about Obama's US citizenship it's a 100% certainty the SSBI will uncover it.

Between the millions of people educated in our public education system within the last 25 years and the millions of third world illegal aliens voting, who cares about OUR Constitution. Heck let Arnold run next time. Nothing American matters in the new world order. I'm sure theres a perfectly legit reason Obama won't show his ""Certified Birth Certificate." (not "certificate of live birth) Least time I got a certified copy of mine it cost 25 dollars to have it expressed mailed and took two whole days to get here. Obama is busy and need that 150 million to buy ads. I'm positive there's nothing more sinister abiut him hiding his birth info than there is having his college records sealed and hiding his passport info.

There are a couple of OBVIOUS "errors" on the forgery.

1-"African" was not a termed used at the time.
HIs father would have been described as "Negro" or "Colored" (the terminology of the times).

2-There is not a Notarized Seal--ALL "legal" Birth Certificates have a Notary Seal.

You cannot get a Passport or a Driver's LIcense without a Notarized copy of a birth certificate.

3-Where is the Mother's Signature? (I'm assuming there is not a father signature since he was not present).

4-Where is the Attending Physician Signature?

5-Why is his Birth Certificate Different than what was commonly issued in HI at the time?


I am fascinated with how people keep coming back to the birth certificate and place of birth. Neither matters in the least to whether Obama is a "natural born citizen." It does not change the facts to give your version of what that phrase means. The only thing that matters is that the people who wrote that phrase explained in writing that it meant any child born to a citizen of the United States anywhere in the world was a "natural born citizen."

The 1790 Congress, many of whose members had been members of the Constitutional Convention, provided in the Naturalization Act of 1790 that "And the children of citizens of the United States that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens." Note particularly that at the time of the passage of this bill the president of the United States was George Washington, and he was also president of the Constitutional Convention. If he did not agree with this definition he would have vetoed the bill.

This is the essential point being ignored by the naysayers.

My children were all born in different states, but their birth certificates all specify the sex of the child, as well as the weight and length at birth. I had to sign the birth certificates and so did the attending physician. Something looks suspicious about this "certificate if live birth!"

To Nick 11/02/2008 ~

It appears that you want to pick and choose what "supports" your case against the "naysayers" and ignore the truth of history.

The Naturalization Act of 1790 that you quoted was no longer operative when Barack Obama was born in 1961. The law in effect at the time of birth was not governed by the Naturalization Act of 1790.

It was repealed and replaced by the Naturalization Act of 1795, signed by President George Washington on January 29, 1795, which states:

"...the childred of citizens of the United States born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as CITIZENS of the United States."

The Naturalization Act of 1795 does NOT state that childred of citizens of the US that are born outside of the states "shall be considered natural born citizens." This phrase that you have quoted was clearly revoked by the Naturalization Act of 1795.

So, Nick... your statement that "any child born to a citizen of the US anywhere in the world was a 'natural born citizen' " is totally false.

A letter from John Jay to George Washington in 1787:

"Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the Administration of Foreigners into the administration of our national government; and to declare expressly that the Commander-in-Chief of the American Army SHALL NOT BE GIVEN TO NOR DEVOLVE ON, ANY BUT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN."

John Jay's warning in 1787 was true and it holds true today.

The "essential point" here is that Barack Obama and Associates have been stonewalling the American People with half-truths. We, The People, deserve better than that...

To Nick 11/02/2008 ~

It appears that you want to pick and choose what "supports" your case against the "naysayers" and ignore the truth of history.

The Naturalization Act of 1790 that you quoted was no longer operative when Barack Obama was born in 1961. The law in effect at the time of birth was not governed by the Naturalization Act of 1790.

It was repealed and replaced by the Naturalization Act of 1795, signed by President George Washington on January 29, 1795, which states:

"...the children of citizens of the United States born out of the limits and jurisdiction of the United States, shall be considered as CITIZENS of the United States."

The Naturalization Act of 1795 does NOT state that children of citizens of the US that are born outside of the states "shall be considered natural born citizens." This phrase that you have quoted was clearly revoked by the Naturalization Act of 1795.

So, Nick... your statement that "any child born to a citizen of the US anywhere in the world was a 'natural born citizen' " is totally false.

A letter from John Jay to George Washington in 1787:

"Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the Administration of Foreigners into the administration of our national government; and to declare expressly that the Commander-in-Chief of the American Army SHALL NOT BE GIVEN TO NOR DEVOLVE ON, ANY BUT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN."

John Jay's warning in 1787 was true and it holds true today.

The "essential point" here is that Barack Obama and Associates have been stonewalling the American People with half-truths. We, The People, deserve better than that...

If Obama was born in a Hospital , Who paid the bill, Is he a Malaudo, Negro ,white,brown/ Tan ? all that schould be on his release forms ,

If he cannot produce his birth certificate (an actual signed & sealed by the state) he may not actually be a citizen. Do we really allow just anyone in our office as president?? He may have his own agenda & it i may not be for the best of america.. possibly there to serve another nations agenda even. i would like to be able to go to bed each night w/confidence that our country is in good hands, but its so scary to even rest w/all that is going on during this time. There are rules & regulations for a reason & if we would all just follow them our country would be in a much better situation.

fake fake fake .... i want real proof ! this doesnt even look half way real!!! Im VEry concerned about this all even from the beginning & not b/c he is of black color but b/c this nation was founded "In GOd We Trust" ! He (Oboma)could not even lay his hand on the BIBLE. We as a people must swear to the whole truth & nothing but the truth "so help me GOd" anytime that we go in front iof a judge & to say those rules do not apply to him is wrong. and then now, ...HE cant provide U.S. citizenship either. We would not be allowed to use a copied certificate so why is he so special that we would allow it of him. I would expect the same of Mccain had he won also but he didnt, so thats that! I cant belief that we wanted to make history so bad... that we didnt even stop to study the facts behind each of the candidates.


The only people that are bringing the race card out is the blacks and the liberals. Facts are facts look at the whole picture not just what you want to see. listen to and read what the canadiates are saying. Honestly we need someone who is not going to back down on military issues and tear down our military apart. We need someone that is going to take and get our country back on the right track. Liberal views is not what our country needs in the crisis we are going through. Think Think people.

I have read the blog at length. No one has mentioned who must ultimately make the decision. Please read the September 16, 2008 Opinion by Federal District Judge William Alsup in the case contesting John McCain's Candidacy. This case also was dismissed on the question of standing, but unlike the Judge in Berg v Obama the Judge actually wrote a good opinion.

He clearly states that the Congress of the US must make the first determination of qualification to sit as President.

You may ask when will that take place? Answer: January 6, 2009 at the Joint Session of Congress. The Vice President will ask if there are any objections to certifying the Electoral College results. If at least one Congressman and one Senator file and sign an objection which must be in writing clearly and succintly put without argument, then the session will be adjourned and each house will deliberate on the issue.

My resommendation would be for each person to write their elected members of Congress and demand that an objection be filed to avoid a constitutional crisis

My great grandather was unable to receive social security due to lack of an official birth certificate or signed and notarized documents from people, who were 21 or older and when he was born and could testiy to that fact. He was born at home and his birth was never recorded. He retired in 1955 around age 86 years and had no witnesses to his birth. The question is what constitutes an offical birth certificate, not an unofficial one. In order to be official and legal, midwives need their record of live births nortized and signed by the midwife. This does not seem to be the case with Obama's birth certificate that is being shown to the public.

1 2 | »


Recommended on Facebook


In Case You Missed It...

About the Columnist
A veteran foreign and national correspondent, Andrew Malcolm has served on the L.A. Times Editorial Board and was a Pulitzer finalist in 2004. He is the author of 10 nonfiction books and father of four. Read more.
President Obama
Republican Politics
Democratic Politics



Get Alerts on Your Mobile Phone

Sign me up for the following lists: