Question for Birthers: Do you question the citizenship of everyone who doesn't have an 'original' birth certificate?

The answer is simple. Yes I would question anyone without an original birth certificate. Why wouldn't you? It's really no big deal. Produce the original or fess up.

So, do you still question my citizenship?

only if you run for President of the United States

:)

I'm not a "birther" and I certainly believe that the whole thing has been blown out of proportion. But really, you have to prove citizenship to get a passport, why shouldn't one have to prove their citizenship to be elected President?

So, do you still question my citizenship?

Only if you're black and become president!

Has Obama shown anyone a copy of his passport?

Mark-337609

I'm not a "birther" and I certainly believe that the whole thing has been blown out of proportion. But really, you have to prove citizenship to get a passport, why shouldn't one have to prove their citizenship to be elected President?

Well by your logic. I guess all this silliness should stop since the President has a passport. And has his birth certificate posted online.

But really, you have to prove citizenship to get a passport, why shouldn't one have to prove their citizenship to be elected President?

You do. And providing the certified copy issued by the state of your birth (which Obama has done, and Hawaii has authenticated it repeatedly) is considered sufficient and acceptable, under the Full Faith and Credit clause of the United States Constitution.

Do you question the citizenship of everyone who doesn't have an 'original' birth certificate?

No. Just Presidential candidates of mixed or foreign nationality.

How irrational must a person be to arbitrarily dismiss cold, hard evidence in order to rabidly cling to baseless, hyperbolic conjecture?

Tell us what you really think!

To call it a conspiracy theory is somewhat inaccurate--it is a question, not a theory. Barack Obama's citizenship is not being questioned, but his eligibility. Why? A few points:

• The Constitution calls for not just a citizen, but a "natural born citizen" for eligibility to the office of President, with exception of those who had been born British subjects at the time of the founding of the United States, such as George Washington.
• Barack Obama Sr. was a Kenyan citizen and as such, a British subject. The dual citizenship of B.O. Jr raises questions on his Constitutional eligibility.
• There are numerous details of the official life story that do not jibe with other documented details and testimony.
• The marked secrecy about his records: from birth records to college transcripts, and the efforts to litigate rather than come forward with the evidence.

Given that we're not talking about establishing eligibility for a driver's license, but to the office of President, the standard is more stringent.

Questioning a President's eligibility is not a new thing. Chester Arthur's eligibility was questioned as well. By the way, he was white and a Republican.

The marked secrecy about his records: from birth records to college transcripts, and the efforts to litigate rather than come forward with the evidence.

He enjoys the same right of privacy as everyone else. There is nothing unusual or "marked" about it. You do not have any legal right to see my birth certificate or college records, either.

crispy2000

The Constitution calls for not just a citizen, but a "natural born citizen" for eligibility to the office of President, with exception of those who had been born British subjects at the time of the founding of the United States, such as George Washington.

None issue he was born in Hawaii as certified by the Republican Governor. Or did the Governor lie to help a Democrat get elected President of the USA?

Barack Obama Sr. was a Kenyan citizen and as such, a British subject. The dual citizenship of B.O. Jr raises questions on his Constitutional eligibility.

You left out a little part that his Mother was born in the USA. Which gives his US citizenship.

There are numerous details of the official life story that do not jibe with other documented details and testimony.

Please provide a factual details of this.

The marked secrecy about his records: from birth records to college transcripts, and the efforts to litigate rather than come forward with the evidence.

Again please provided factual evidence to support this.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

Is it you don't believe what is provide in this link? If so prove it wrong.

not actually a birhter

just a heretic.. lol

is Obama on heroin?

probably not

but how do we know for sure?

we have to open an investigation immediately and find out the truth

quote from Cartman : South Park

:)

Actually, what I question, is how the American electorate has become so ignorant.

We represent 4.5% of the world population and have every opportunity to become well-educated. With a little will-power, EVERY American could have the equivalent of a college education by regularly visiting their public library, university libraries, or solid websites.

Instead, we have huge dropout rates, functional illiteracy, and a mass culture that fells like voting on American Idol, Survivor, and the Bachelor is more important than knowing the issues and voting for good Congresspeople or Presidents.

For God's sake, has anyone seen what passes for "TV" anymore? The Learning Channel is basically runway model competitions and Jon and Kate Plus 8 types of shows.

We ostensibly fought WWII to preserve this "culture?"

We should be ashamed.

The system that we have in place to verify one's citizenship in the United States in absence of one's 'original' proof of birth is the same for everyone; this includes the President.

I beg to differ. You may be confusing "citizenship in the United States" with "natural born citizen of the United States" as specified in the Constitution.

The controversy is not new to President Obama, it surfaced recently with Senator John McCain, and has been brought up with many different candidates, including some born overseas to US citizen parents.

Given the acknowledged fact that Barack Obama Sr. was not a U.S. citizen, and that Ann Dunham was 18 when B.O. Jr. was born, she would not have been able to pass on her U.S. citizenship, according to the law in effect at the time of her birth:

According to FindLaw.com, which is cited by Geraghty, the requirements that were in force from Dec. 24, 1952 to Nov. 13, 1986, encompassing the time of Obama's birth, state, "If only one parent was a U.S. citizen at the time of your birth, that parent must have resided in the United States for at least 10 years, at least five of which had to be after the age of 16."

Ann Dunham, Obama's mother, was 18 when Obama was born so she wouldn't have met the requirement of five years after the age of 16. [source]

I won't bore you or the other commenters with every single detail that contradicts the original story or raises other eligibility questions. I suspect you can use search engines at least as well as I can. WND's columns are a good starting point for research on this issue.

You asked if "birthers" question the eligibility of everyone who doesn't have an "original" birth certificate. You have your answer.

You do not have any legal right to see my birth certificate or college records, either.

And I don't have "any legal right" to see your age, either. However:

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 in Honolulu. How old his mother was is irrelevant, unless you want to suggest everyone born to an 18-year-old mother is not a natural-born citizen.

I won't bore you or the other commenters with every single detail that contradicts the original story or raises other eligibility questions.

Because none are based in fact. None of these alleged details has stood up to scrutiny and many (alleged travel ban to Pakistan, Kenyan birth certificates, edited tape of his step-grandmother describing Barack, Senior's birth) have been proven false. Please, bor us with any detail you believe provides a legitimate contradiction to his birth in Hawaii.

crispy2000

Very good research. Accept for one thing either you are calling the State of Hawaii a liar or the President was born there. Since you cannot prove they are lying I'll give them more credibility than you and your brither movement.

How old his mother was is irrelevant, unless you want to suggest everyone born to an 18-year-old mother is not a natural-born citizen.

What I want is irrelevant.

I'm not suggesting that "everyone born to an 18-year-old mother is not a natural-born citizen."

I quoted a report that stated that in cases of mixed nationality, the law in effect on August 4, 1961 would not have allowed 18-year-old Ann Dunham to pass on her US citizenship to her son.

I quoted a report that stated that in cases of mixed nationality, the law in effect on August 4, 1961 would not have allowed 18-year-old Ann Dunham to pass on her citizenship to her son.

No, you didn't. The law you quoted only applied to children born abroad. A shame you cannot get basic facts correct.

I quoted a report that stated that in cases of mixed nationality, the law in effect on August 4, 1961 would not have allowed 18-year-old Ann Dunham to pass on her US citizenship to her son.

That may be true if Obama was born abroad and his parents marriage was legally recognized. Obama Sr was still married to a woman named Kezia in Kenya, and he had two children with her before moving to the U.S. If a person is already married, the U.S. does not recognize additional marriages.

Jarrod,

I'll summarize: I don't have my original birth certificate. I have no idea where it is. Thus, I was forced to get a certified copy from the health department.

So, do you still question my citizenship?

It is only a requirement of the President of the United States that he/she be "Natural Born". The issue relating to the "Original" Birth Certificate is the evidence (Hospital, Attending Physician(s), Witnesses) supporting the claim that he was, in fact, born in the United States, and not simply a Citizen of the United States, as required by the Constitution.

Presently, I'm satisfied that he was born there, but only after the State of Hawaii unequivocally stated that he was born in Hawaii, as opposed to their initial statement that his Certificate of Live Birth was "Valid".

Barack Obama is responsible for the continuation of this controversy, by steadfastly refusing to produce, or cause the State of Hawaii to produce, the original "vault copy" of the certificate as requested. Signing an Executive Order secreting any and all of his records perpetuates these theories and accusations.

Finally, if you were running for President I think you should have to prove that you are a natural born citizen, also.

rareety

Barack Obama is responsible for the continuation of this controversy, by steadfastly refusing to produce, or cause the State of Hawaii to produce, the original "vault copy" of the certificate as requested. Signing an Executive Order secreting any and all of his records perpetuates these theories and accusations.

I am sorry but you are wrong. President Obama has produced a valid and legal State Of Hawaii Certificate of Live Birth.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

Name one other President the was ask or required to produce their original Birth Certificate.

Bad1V,

I said "I am presently satisfied", didn't I? Please don't try to create an argument where there isn't one. I also said that HE is perpetuating this by denying access to his background records.

Name another President that made it illegal to release his records. Even Ted Kennedy was willing to admit he got thrown out of Harvard for cheating. Makes people THINK he has something to hide, even if he doesn't.

rareety

Bad1V,

I said "I am presently satisfied", didn't I? Please don't try to create an argument where there isn't one. I also said that HE is perpetuating this by denying access to his background records.

Maybe you didn't understand what I wrote. You also wrote.

rareety

Barack Obama is responsible for the continuation of this controversy, by steadfastly refusing to produce, or cause the State of Hawaii to produce, the original "vault copy" of the certificate as requested. Signing an Executive Order secreting any and all of his records perpetuates these theories and accusations.

Which again tries to fuel the fire with a veiled innuendo that the President has something to hide. If you believe that the President was born in the USA there is nothing else that needs to be done by him.

Name another President that made it illegal to release his records. Even Ted Kennedy was willing to admit he got thrown out of Harvard for cheating. Makes people THINK he has something to hide, even if he doesn't.

Which has what to do with the eligibility to become President? Other than to those on the Far Right Wing putting out talking points. Please show me were in the Constitution it says that to become President you must release your college records?

O.K., you're obviously trolling. Good night.

Answer one question before you go. Why is it that Far Right Wing people must resort to name calling when they cannot debate a subject?

rareety

He did NOT make it illegal to see his records. It is called The Privacy Act and it protects EVERYBODY's records, yours, mine, Obama's. I can not get my daughters college records. The Privacy Act, OK?

Wrong. It isn't the Privacy act:

Executive Order -- Presidential Records

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to establish policies and procedures governing the assertion of executive privilege by incumbent and former Presidents in connection with the release of Presidential records by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) pursuant to the Presidential Records Act of 1978, it is hereby ordered as follows:

Section 1. Definitions. For purposes of this order:

(a) "Archivist" refers to the Archivist of the United States or his designee.

(b) "NARA" refers to the National Archives and Records Administration.

(c) "Presidential Records Act" refers to the Presidential Records Act, 44 U.S.C. 2201-2207.

(d) "NARA regulations" refers to the NARA regulations implementing the Presidential Records Act, 36 C.F.R. Part 1270.

(e) "Presidential records" refers to those documentary materials maintained by NARA pursuant to the Presidential Records Act, including Vice Presidential records.

(f) "Former President" refers to the former President during whose term or terms of office particular Presidential records were created.

(g) A "substantial question of executive privilege" exists if NARA's disclosure of Presidential records might impair national security (including the conduct of foreign relations), law enforcement, or the deliberative processes of the executive branch.

(h) A "final court order" is a court order from which no appeal may be taken.

Sec. 2. Notice of Intent to Disclose Presidential Records.

(a) When the Archivist provides notice to the incumbent and former Presidents of his intent to disclose Presidential records pursuant to section 1270.46 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist, using any guidelines provided by the incumbent and former Presidents, shall identify any specific materials, the disclosure of which he believes may raise a substantial question of executive privilege. However, nothing in this order is intended to affect the right of the incumbent or former Presidents to invoke executive privilege with respect to materials not identified by the Archivist. Copies of the notice for the incumbent President shall be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the President) and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President shall be delivered to the former President or his designated representative.

(b) Upon the passage of 30 days after receipt by the incumbent and former Presidents of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Archivist may disclose the records covered by the notice, unless during that time period the Archivist has received a claim of executive privilege by the incumbent or former President or the Archivist has been instructed by the incumbent President or his designee to extend the time period for a time certain and with reason for the extension of time provided in the notice. If a shorter period of time is required under the circumstances set forth in section 1270.44 of the NARA regulations, the Archivist shall so indicate in the notice.

Sec. 3. Claim of Executive Privilege by Incumbent President.

(a) Upon receipt of a notice of intent to disclose Presidential records, the Attorney General (directly or through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel) and the Counsel to the President shall review as they deem appropriate the records covered by the notice and consult with each other, the Archivist, and such other executive agencies as they deem appropriate concerning whether invocation of executive privilege is justified.

(b) The Attorney General and the Counsel to the President, in the exercise of their discretion and after appropriate review and consultation under subsection (a) of this section, may jointly determine that invocation of executive privilege is not justified. The Archivist shall be notified promptly of any such determination.

(c) If either the Attorney General or the Counsel to the President believes that the circumstances justify invocation of executive privilege, the issue shall be presented to the President by the Counsel to the President and the Attorney General.

(d) If the President decides to invoke executive privilege, the Counsel to the President shall notify the former President, the Archivist, and the Attorney General in writing of the claim of privilege and the specific Presidential records to which it relates. After receiving such notice, the Archivist shall not disclose the privileged records unless directed to do so by an incumbent President or by a final court order.

Sec. 4. Claim of Executive Privilege by Former President.

(a) Upon receipt of a claim of executive privilege by a living former President, the Archivist shall consult with the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel), the Counsel to the President, and such other executive agencies as the Archivist deems appropriate concerning the Archivist's determination as to whether to honor the former President's claim of privilege or instead to disclose the Presidential records notwithstanding the claim of privilege. Any determination under section 3 of this order that executive privilege shall not be invoked by the incumbent President shall not prejudice the Archivist's determination with respect to the former President's claim of privilege.

(b) In making the determination referred to in subsection (a) of this section, the Archivist shall abide by any instructions given him by the incumbent President or his designee unless otherwise directed by a final court order. The Archivist shall notify the incumbent and former Presidents of his determination at least 30 days prior to disclosure of the Presidential records, unless a shorter time period is required in the circumstances set forth in section 1270.44 of the NARA regulations. Copies of the notice for the incumbent President shall be delivered to the President (through the Counsel to the President) and the Attorney General (through the Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Legal Counsel). The copy of the notice for the former President shall be delivered to the former President or his designated representative.

Sec. 5. General Provisions.

(a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

(i) authority granted by law to a department or agency, or the head thereof; or

(ii) functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, or legislative proposals.

(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.

Sec. 6. Revocation. Executive Order 13233 of November 1, 2001, is revoked.

BARACK OBAMA

THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 21, 2009

Wrong again. Do you think people will not check what you have posted. Nice try thought.

http://freegovinfo.info/node/2345

President Obama Revokes Bush Presidential Records Executive Order
Submitted by jajacobs on Wed, 2009-01-21 14:56.

• Executive order

According to the National Coalition for History, President Obama Revokes Bush Presidential Records Executive Order.

The press release from the White House says the following:

“The Executive Order on Presidential Records brings those principles to presidential records by giving the American people greater access to these historic documents. This order ends the practice of having others besides the President assert executive privilege for records after an administration ends. Now, only the President will have that power, limiting its potential for abuse. And the order also requires the Attorney General and the White House Counsel to review claims of executive privilege about covered records to make sure those claims are fully warranted by the Constitution.”

UPDATE: Here is more: On Day One, Obama Overturns Era of White House Secrecy, By Mark Fitzgerald, Editor and Publisher, January 21, 2009.

In his first full day in office, President Barack Obama issued a memorandum ordering government agencies to examine Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests with a bias toward release of the documents -- overturning eight years of a Bush administration directives to find ways not to disclose information.

"For a long time now there's been too much secrecy in this city," Obama said. "The old rules said that if there was a defensible argument for not disclosing something to the American people, then it should not be disclosed. That era is now over. Starting today, every agency and department should know that this administration stands on the side not of those who seek to withhold information, but those who seek to make it known."

Gives the sitting President discretion over the release of ANY public information regarding the current or past Presidents, including those records that have been submitted during the vetting process.

The Privacy Act prevents the Hospitals, Schools, etc., from releasing records of a personal nature. This Executive order prevents the Gov't from releasing records that have been placed into the public domain.

Making ANY release of information about Obama illegal without his consent until he is out of office. Which goes to my initial point; withholding seemingly innocuous records from the public, makes it SEEM as if there is something to hide. In doing so, President Obama perpetuates these myths and assertions.

I NEVER SAID THAT HE IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THEM. So, don't put words in my mouth to create an argument. Personally, I don't give a crap if he provides them or not. He's already the President.

The people perpetuating it are the birthers who are requiring a HIGHER STANDARD than the constitution requires, which is unconstitutional. They won't accept the one thing he has to prove so why would he present other documents for them to weave their fantasies around? Where would it stop? Boy Scout merit badges? Sunday School Records? Dentist x-rays? They are on a witch hunt and he refuses to play. The burden of proof is on the accuser not the accused and they can't come up with one shred of evidence that the State of Hawaii has issued an illegal birth record.

rareety

You still have not provided the section of the Constitution that requires the President of the USA to release college transcripts. Even if he did whats next? DNA test? When does the wild goose chase end?

I NEVER SAID THAT HE IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THEM

How much more clear can I make this?

O.K., try this again. Read it multiple times and really really slowly, then stop trying to pick a fight. I know that may be difficult since your ideaology is getting in the way, but try.

Then why did you and why do continue to bring it up. Can you understand that if it is not required there was no need for you to bring it up in the first place other than to flame the fire.

rareety: you are taking a position that it is his fault that this attack continues, that he has something to hide since he won't release his records, that he signed an executive order to that end and that no other president has ever done so.

None of that is true. The burden of proof is on the birther's not him, he proved that he is a natural born citizen and all recent presidents have protected their personal records even if they have chosen to release them.

When he did release his birth certificate, a legally valid document according to the state that issued it, the birthers went on record with the claim (since proven false) that it was a forgery. Proven liars have no right to demand further evidence, that they would just reject anyway.

I didn't bring it up, jarrod-548247 did. My contention is that Obama, and only Obama, can shut down this rediculous debate by releasing these meaningless documents. If he chooses not to, then some wingnut is going to continue to bring it up, forever.

As far as I am concerned this, and that, debate is over.

Only the birthers can shut it down by stopping their attack against him. I do not believe it has ANYTHING to do with what doc.s he has presented, I believe it is fear mongering and no matter what he gives them they will demand something else. They want people to distrust him, to make him seem suspicious and muslim and un-american. They don't say "there is a sucker born every minute" for nothing and a good many of them are predisposed to believe this type of distortion and lies against this president that they hate.

I didn't bring it up, jarrod-548247 did. My contention is that Obama, and only Obama, can shut down this rediculous debate by releasing these meaningless documents.

Nonsense. The birthers have a laundry list of documents they want that's a mile long. It's a massive fishing expedition, and they would never be satisfied.