If Ted Is Ineligible, So Is Barry!

obama birth certificate If Ted is Ineligible, So is Barry!
Now that CNN has placed a bright spotlight on Senator Ted Cruz’s citizenship, and ultimately his future presidential eligibility, the closing door on an essential, ground-breaking truth has now been busted wide open!  The choice is clear – we must use the exposure of Cruz’s  ineligibility status as the model to force Obama’s impeachment!
Most Americans are too ignorant or too confused to see clearly the matter set before us. It’s time we take a closer look as the NBC (Natural Born Citizen) clause that provides these necessary and vital clarifications….
Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in the gaps left by the Constitution.
Section 1401 defines the following as people who are “citizens of the United States at birth”:
Anyone born inside the United States*
Any Indian or Eskimo born in the United States, provided being a citizen of the U.S. does not impair the person’s status as a citizen of the tribe;
Anyone born outside the United States, both of whose parents are citizens of the U.S., as long as one parent has lived in the U.S.;
Anyone born outside the United States, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year and the other parent is a U.S. national;
Anyone born in a U.S. possession, if one parent is a citizen and lived in the U.S. for at least one year;
Anyone found in the U.S. under the age of five, whose parentage cannot be determined, as long as proof of non-citizenship is not provided by age 21;
Anyone born outside the United States, if one parent is an alien and as long as the other parent is a citizen of the U.S. who lived in the U.S. for at least five years (with military and diplomatic service included in this time);
A final, historical condition: a person born before 5/24/1934 of an alien father and a U.S. citizen mother who has lived in the U.S.
* There is an exception in the law — the person must be “subject to the jurisdiction” of the United States. This would exempt the child of a diplomat, for example, from this provision.
A minimum criteria clearly states that if a potential candidate was born outside the US, one parent must be a citizen and the other a U.S. national. Even if the controversy surrounding Obama’s birth certificate didn’t exist, a major question still remains regarding the official status of Barack Obama Sr. We need to be absolutely certain about this as the legitimacy of the highest office in the nation is at stake!
As disappointed as I am about Cruz ‘s presidential ineligibility, if we want to salvage our Constitution, we must apply his ineligibility as THE final motivation and ultimate justification in bringing about the impeachment of our reigning commander-in-chief!

"Loophole" from Obama's IRS: Protect your IRA or 401(k) with gold and silver... click here to get a NO-COST Info Guide >

Comments

  1. smrstrauss says:

    Obama was born in HAWAII, a US state, not in Canada, a foreign country. Cruz was born in Canada, a foreign country. That is the difference. BOTH had one parent, a father, who was not a US citizen at the time of the birth, but the citizenship of parents does not affect the Natural Born Citizen status of a child born on US soil, which Hawaii is (and Canada isn't).

    "Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.”—Senator Lindsay Graham (December 11, 2008 letter to constituents)

    “What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)–Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT).

    “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President …"—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

    "Some birthers imagine that there is a difference between being a “citizen by birth” or a “native citizen” on the one hand and a “natural born” citizen on the other. “Eccentric” is too kind a word for this notion, which is either daft or dishonest. All three terms are identical in meaning."—The Wall Street Journal <a href="http:// (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574322281597739634.html?KEYWORDS=obama+%22natural+born+citizen%22+minor+happersett)" target="_blank"> <a href="http://(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574322281597739634.html?KEYWORDS=obama+%22natural+born+citizen%22+minor+happersett)” target=”_blank”>(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204619004574322281597739634.html?KEYWORDS=obama+%22natural+born+citizen%22+minor+happersett)

    • "Obama was born in HAWAII," Yeah right. He has yet to actually prove that. The so-called proof he has offered has already been poked full of holes that it isn't even a reliable document anymore. Not to mention Hawaii posed serious resistance to even the most basic queries into the investigation of Obama's origins. You'd think they'd be the most cooperative and forthcoming on the issue. You'd think they'd be able to produce the document right away if they had nothing to hide. They did not. They denied access, refused admittance, and even refused to communicate with investigators. Two years into Obama's first term and he finally produces a PDF that you can't examine on a forensic level but instead have to take apart (literally) with a number of Adobe programs? Get real. If Obama was legitimate, why the smoke screen? Why is he hiding so much? Why does he actively attempt to discredit and silence his challengers? Why are people disappearing or being found dead in connection to his eligibility?

      "Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.”—Senator Lindsay Graham (December 11, 2008 letter to constituents)
      For one, that's his opinion. For the other, haven't you heard? He's a RINO. I also notice that the date is stamped December 11, 2008. Which would mean that the elections were still going on and the question of Obama's eligibility was still floating around in the air after HILARY CLINTON raised the question. She complied, McCain complied, Obama refused.

      “What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)–Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT)."
      Again, an opinion. I believe under the Constitution of the United States, the qualifications for being President include having parents that are BOTH citizens of the United States. Even if Obama was born in Hawaii, he only had one parent that was a US citizen. His supposed father never was. His supposed father (we really don't know who it is) was a British subject and by extension, so was little Barry. Let's not forget the bit about Obama traveling to Indonesia during a time when they were at war. He couldn't have traveled there with a US passport because they were not allowing US citizens in. He had to have had a foreign passport in order to be admitted. You don't think there's something fishy about that, do you? Or how about the fact that when Obama went to college, he applied for student aid as a foreign student. If he was born in Hawaii, why would he file as a foreign student? Isn't that committing fraud?

      Next time, get your facts straight. We have more evidence that says Obama is not a citizen of the US than he does saying he is. If one outweighs the other, what other conclusion could be reached other than he is not who he says he is?
      "The only people that don't want to disclose the truth…are people with something to hide." Well, he doesn't want to disclose the truth and he's definitely hiding something big.

      • smrstrauss says:

        RE: "Obama was born in HAWAII," Yeah right. He has yet to actually prove that."

        Have birther sites even shown you that Obama's mother had a passport in 1961? IF and when they can show that she had one (and very very few 18-year-olds had passports in 1961) THEN you can start seriously considering that there might be a reasonable chance that Obama was born in a foreign country. But there is no evidence that she had a passport.

        Have birther sites showed you the date on which Obama's mother's passport file was created? NO, they haven't, have they—and I wonder why not. The date on which that file was CREATED is unlikely to have been scratched off of the file, and if it were created after 1961 Obama's mother is unlikely to have had a passport. So why haven't birther sites showed the date on which the file was created?

        And yet they want people to ASSUME that she was one of the few 18-year-olds to have a passport and that she used it to travel abroad during the last few months of pregnancy—which was even more rare due to the risk of stillbirths, which was relatively high at the time. And they want you to assume all those facts, AS WELL AS the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii lying about Obama's place of birth, an the public Index Data file and the birth notices sent to the Hawaii newspapers by the DOH of Hawaii in 1961.

        Re : "Obama traveling to Indonesia during a time when they were at war. He couldn't have traveled there with a US passport because they were not allowing US citizens in. He had to have had a foreign passport in order to be admitted. '

        Answer: THAT is a nutty story made up by birthers. NONE of it is true. It is not true for Indonesia. It is not true for Pakistan (which is what birthers usually refer to). Neither of them were barred to US citizen when Obama went to them. In particular, Pakistan was delighted to get US tourists to travel there because it was eager to get tourist dollars and was an ally of the USA—That was the time of the events in the movie "Charlie Wilson's War" by the way.

        Re: "His supposed father never was. His supposed father (we really don't know who it is) was a British subject and by extension, so was little Barry."

        Answer So?

        Neither the citizenship of the father, or the citizenship of both parents, or even dual nationality has any effect on Natural Born Citizen status whatever. Don't like it? TOO BAD FOR YOU! The US Electoral College elected Obama in the 2008 and 2012 elections without one single member changing her or his vote from the 356 votes Obama won in the general election in 2008 and the 332 votes that Obama won in the general election in 2012. In other words, in the 356 people involved in the Electoral College vote for Obama in 2008 and the 332 in 2012, a total of about 690, NOT ONE thought that Obama was born in a foreign country and NOT ONE believed that the citizenship of Obama's father or Obama's dual nationality has any effect whatever on Obama's Natural Born Citizen status.

        Okay. You don't believe Senators Hatch and Graham. How about former Senator Fred Thompson?
        http://www.fredthompsonsamerica.com/2012/07/31/is

        Don't believe him either?

        • smrstrauss says:

          Continuing:

          How about these court rulings:

          Mustata v. US Dept. of Justice, 179 F.3d 1017 (6th Cir. 1999) (children born in US to two Romanian citizens described as “natural born citizens” of the US):“

          Petitioners Marian and Lenuta Mustata are citizens of Romania. At the time of their petition, they resided in Michigan with their two minor children, who are natural born citizens of the United States.”

          Hollander v. McCain (New Hampshire 2008) ruling: "Those born "in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof," U.S. Const., amend. XIV, have been considered American citizens under American law in effect since the time of the founding, United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 674-75 (1898), and thus eligible for the presidency…"

          Ankeny v. Governor of Indiana (Indiana 2008 – Appellate Court) ruling: "Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are "natural born Citizens" for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents."

          Tisdale v. Obama (Virginia federal court 2012) ruling: "It is well settled that those born in the United States are considered natural born citizens."

          Voeltz v. Obama (Florida 2012) ruling: “However, the United States Supreme Court has concluded that ‘[e]very person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States. ‘Other courts that have considered the issue in the context of challenges to the qualifications of candidates for the office of President of the United States have come to the same conclusion.”

          Allen v. Obama (Arizona 2012) ruling: “Most importantly, Arizona courts are bound by United States Supreme Court precedent in construing the United States Constitution, Arizona v. Jay J. Garfield Bldg. Co. , 39 Ariz. 45, 54, 3 P.2d 983, 986(1931), and this precedent fully supports that President Obama is a natural born citizen under the Constitution and thus qualified to hold the office of President. … Contrary to Plaintiff’s assertion, Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162 (1874), does not hold otherwise”

          Farrar (et al.) v. Obama (Georgia 2012) ruling: “In 2009, the Indiana Court of Appeals (“Indiana Court”) addressed facts and issues similar to those before this court. [Ankeny] v. Governor, 916 N.E.2d (Ind. Ct. App. 2009). … The Indiana Court rejected the argument that Mr. Obama was ineligible, stating that children born within the United States are natural born citizens, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. … This Court finds the decision and analysis of [Ankeny] persuasive.”

          Fair v. Obama (Maryland 2012) ruling: “The issue of the definition of “natural born citizen” is thus firmly resolved by the United States Supreme Court in a prior opinion [US v Wong], and as this court sees it, that holding is binding on the ultimate issue in this case. “

          AND. on October 1, the US Supreme Court rejected an appeal of one of those ten rulings, the Farrar Ruling in Georgia, which had held that the meaning of Natural Born Citizen had been defined by the Wong Kim Ark case and that every child born in the USA is a Natural Born US citizen except for the children of foreign diplomats. The effect of the US Supreme Court turning down that appeal is that it leaves the ruling of the lower court—and the other nine appeals courts—-standing.

          No court in the USA, not even the Minor V. Happersett ruling (which does not say what birthers think it says). has ever ruled that two citizen parents, or even one, is required in order to be a Natural Born Citizen. And the US Constitution itself does not mention parents at all. No, it does not follow te Vattel definition—who is not even mentioned once in the Federalist Papers. It follows the common law, which is mentioned about twenty times. If the writers of the US Constitution had meant to switch from the common law meaning—which was, duh, common—to Vattel, then for sure THEY WOULD HAVE TOLD US, and they didn't.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Re: The claim that Obama applied for financial aid as a foreign student. THAT nutty story comes from an April Fool's article originally published on April 1, 2009. There has never been the slightest confirmation of it, and it is particularly nutty because Obama received US government STUDENT LOANS, which are available only to US CITIZENS.

          • Oh yes. I read about that April 1st article just a while ago. Didn't even know about that until you mentioned it to be quite honest. I was referring to this: http://www.examiner.com/article/whistleblower-say
            Must be a typo.

          • Or this: http://obamaballotchallenge.com/whistleblower-oba
            (Interesting admission to the side, there. Just ignore that, though.)

          • Seeks_the_truth says:

            What they are trying to claim is what happened after Hillary had found out that the failure is ineligible to hold office of the president.
            If you remember, his 'protectors' had sent some out to scrub all information on his foreign citizenship and any/all other information that he was a foreign student. They were caught in the act of changing the information at Columbia College, so to protect him, they made it appear they were just accessing info instead of changing it.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Dream on. None of that happened. Hillary investigated whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii, and when she found out the evidence was that indeed he was born in Hawaii, she stopped investigating. McCain also sent investigators to find out whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii, and when they found out that Obama was indeed born in Hawaii, they stopped investigating too. There isn't even evidence that Obama's mother had a passport in 1961. So she would have had to have been one of the very very few 18-year-olds to have a passport and for some reason birther sites cannot find evidence of it AND the officials of both parties, and the Index Data and the birth notices in the 1961 "Health Bureau Statistics" sections of the Hawaii newspapers would all have to be lying.

          • Seeks_the_truth says:

            No dream, reality. Something you seem to not be living in.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Rational people will notice that Seeks_the_truth has not responded to any of the facts.

          • Seeks_the_truth says:

            Rational people see smrstrauss has yet to post any facts.
            All smrstrauss has posted is the talking points propaganda that the brain dead left is hoping people will buy.

          • Obama is a loser and only losers will defend this man, not only a loser but incompetent, dumb, a failure. Obama is in defensible this Country has gotten much worst since he first took office. Obama and his ugly wife take too many vacations at the expense of the taxpayers and at the same time Obama gives muslims billions of our tax dollars when Americans are jobless. More then half the Country is out of work and no one can defend this loser accept another loser like you

          • smrstrauss says:

            Rational people will notice that the above comment is not a response to the FACTS, which are that the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii have repeatedly confirmed that they sent both the short-form and the long-form birth certificates to Obama and that ALL the facts on the one that the White House has put online are EXACTLY the same as on what they sent to him. In addition, there is the public Index Data file
            http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2011/04

            and the birth notices sent to the Hawaii newspapers by the DOH of Hawaii in 1961 (and ONLY the DOH could send notices to that section of the papers, the "Health Bureau Statistics" section):
            http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/obamabi… (Click on the papers for details of the announcements, not only of Obama but of other children too, and notice that they are ALL in the same format—as in government announcements and never say the name of the child—-also as in government announcements. In short, they are NOT ads, they are notices sent to the papers by the DOH of Hawaii, which is BTW confirmed by the DOH and by the papers)

            And birther sites have not shown you this:
            http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/04/kapiolani-… (I wonder why they have not even shown that fact to you?)

            And they have not told you that there is no evidence that Obama's mother even had a passport in 1961—and that in those days very few 18-year-olds did. (I wonder why they have not shown those facts to you either??)

            And the have not told you that EXREMELY few women traveled abroad during the last few months of pregnancy in 1961 due to the high risk of stillbirths in those days (I wonder why they have not discussed that fact with you either???)

            And birther sites LIED when they said that Obama's Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya (She actually said that Obama was born in Hawaii repeatedly. They simply did not quote her and in fact cut off the tape just before she was asked "Where was he born?" (I wonder why birther site lied to you about what Obama's Kenyan grandmother said? I wonder why????)

            And birther sites did not tell you that only 21 people total came to the USA from Kenya in 1961. I wonder why they did not tell you that FACT either. And they did not tell you that the government of Kenya said that it investigated the "born in Kenya" story, and that it is NOT true. I wonder why birther sites did not tell you that EITHER???

            BTW, Obama has just CUT off aid to Egypt. So he doesn't give aid to Muslims, and when he did, he was only giving the same aid that Bush did, and it was authorized by the US Congress, including the Republicans in it. More important, no matter how much you may or may not like Obama's policies DOES NOT MAKE Obama born in a foreign country.

          • Seeks_the_truth says:

            Still waiting on you to post some facts.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Rational people will notice that Seeks-the-truth once again has not responded to the facts. The facts and links to them were cited above. Simply saying that Seeks_the_truth is "waiting on you to post the facts" is a denial that what was posted are facts. But that is not a response. It is simply a denial, not based on a single fact. Seeks_the_facts CLAIMS to want to know the facts, but when they are shown, Seeks_the-facts denies them.

            Sadly, this is another example of why Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck and the National Review have all called birthers CRAZY.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Continuing:

            The facts remain that birther sites have not told their readers that there is no evidence the Obama’s mother had a passport in 1961—and very few 18-year-olds did. Rational people should ask why birther sites have not told their readers these two simple things?

            And the facts remain that birther sites have not told their readers that EXTREMELY few women traveled abroad during the last two months of pregnancy in 1961 (I wonder why they did not discuss that little fact either??).

            So, birther sites would like their readers to ASSUME that Obama’s mother was one of the few 18-year-olds to have a passport and one of the extremely few women who traveled late in pregnancy, and that the birth certificate of Hawaii and the confirmation of the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii are both lies.

          • Seeks_the_truth says:

            And once again rational people will notice that smrstrauss has YET to post ANY facts.
            All smrstrauss does is post liberal talking points based on distorted views and twisting of facts.
            Smrstrauss CLAIMS to want to know the facts but IGNORES the MANY experts in the field of forensic document examination that PROVE the fact that the birth certificate is a FAKE.
            Sadly this is just another example of a brain dead, obot sheeple liberal that will go to any extent to cover for the usurper in office. They follow the LSM that has gone out of their way to lie for this 'administration' like Candy Crowley did at the debate when she CLAIMED that obama called Benghazi a 'terrorist attack' in the Rose Garden even though ALL evidence shows otherwise. They also hang on every word of "thrill up his leg" Chris Matthews who lusts after obama.
            People like smrstrauss follow others opinions, right or wrong. They refuse to think for themselves and acknowledge the overwhelming evidence that obama is a fraud. How gullible ones like smrstrauss are. Quite sad indeed.
            How pathetic is smrstrauss to follow such lies and refuse to accept the facts.
            IF smrstrauss EVER posts a fact, I can respond but DENIAL of the credentials of EXPERTS that have shown time and time again that these are fake documents purported to be that of barack obama is just closing their eyes to the truth.
            DENIAL of the truth does not change the FACTS.
            How easily deceived obama followers are. How sad.

          • Denial! Oh, what? We're supposed to believe ol' Hillary and McCain's findings? The woman that got a position on Obama's staff and the man that threw the election? Puh-lease. You're in denial.
            I think Seeks is getting to you.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Oh, Hillary and McCain, both desperate to become president, would have ignored the facts, or so you DREAM.

            But rational people will have to accept the FACT that Hillary and McCain and Ann Coulter and Mitt Romney and the National Review and Gingrich and Santorum and Huckbee an Ron Paul and Rand Paul and Paul Ryan and all the members of Congress (with maybe one or two exceptions) recognize the FACTS stated above, that Obama really was born in HAWAII.

            And, guess what, birther sites have not even shown you that Obama's mother had a passport in 1961—and if she did not have a passport, how could she have gone abroad to have given birth to Obama in a foreign country? Birther sites would like their readers to assume that she was one of the few 18-year-olds to have a passport in 1961 an one of the EXTREMELY few women who traveled abroad late in pregnancy in 1961 (because of the risk of stlllbirth) and that the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii are lying, and so is the Index Data (see above) and so are the birth notices sent to the papers by he DOH of Hawaii in 1961 (see above).

            RATIONAL people will believe these facts, and the will distrust birther claims, especially when they LIED about what Obama's Kenyan grandmother said and did not tell their readers that there is no evidence that Obama's mother had a passport and did not tell their readers that the Kenyan government said that it investigated and that Obama was NOT born in Kenya.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Re: "Whisleblower":

            Orly was PUNKED by that "whistleblower"—-who claimed to have had microfilms of Obama's records in the state of New York Education files. But, guess what, that was about two months ago, and Orly has not said that she has seen those alleged microfilms yet. I wonder why not???

            Obama, btw, received US government student LOANS, and they are available only to US citizens.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Regarding that "Whistleblower":

            Orly was PUNKED by that "whistleblower"—-who claimed to have had microfilms of Obama's records in the state of New York Education files. But, guess what, that was about two months ago, and Orly has not said that she has seen those alleged microfilms yet. I wonder why not???

            Obama, btw, received US government student LOANS, and they are available only to US citizens.

          • You think because news wasn't released about that in two months that nothing became of it? Oh, there was a car crash on the highway two months ago and I haven't seen a word on that in any local news paper or on any local news channel. I guess it didn't happen. That's what you're alleging. You didn't hear about it, therefore it didn't happen/wasn't real. Oh, Bengazi was also a "long time ago", but it hasn't gone away, now has it? Again, I'll ask you, why isn't Orly and her lot doing jail time for this? These are serious allegations that you don't lie to a judge about. There are consequences for that. So, why aren't they all behind bars, mister expert? You think the law is suggestion? See, right now all we have to go on that Orly was "punked" is YOUR word and it doesn't count for much. You're the one looking more like the liar, here. Yeah. I'm calling you the liar. What are you going to do about it?

          • smrstrauss says:

            I am showing the fact that Orly claimed to have been approached by a member of the New York State higher education department two months ago and that that person claimed to have microfilm showing that Obama received aid as a foreign student but that Orly has never said that she has gotten that microfilm. I wonder why she hasn't? (Perhaps because it does not exist?)

          • Seeks_the_truth says:

            Whether or not the failure is a natural born citizen and received aid as a foreign citizen is all a moot point until we are shown a VALID birth certificate.
            I know you don't like the truth but the fact remains that the birth certificate purported to be that of Barack Obama is indeed a forgery. Denial won't change this fact.
            It would be very easy to solve this issue. All that's needed is for obama to show the physical copy of his birth certificate. Other Presidents have done this. Why is it such an issue now? The only reasonable explanation is there isn't one to match that which was created and offered.

            On top of this, the Selective Service card that he presented is also a forgery. Again, denial of the facts won't change them. Not registering for the draft alone makes obama ineligible to hold the office of the president of the United States.
            We can't make an informed decision if obama is or is not a natural born citizen until actual documents are presented. Until then it's all just speculation.

            You can also quit using the newspaper ad as some type of evidence. It holds no legal standing. If it did, then I could use the one placed in my Mother's home town announcing my birth which is different than where I was actually born.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Re: "On top of this, the Selective Service card that he presented is also a forgery"

            No question about it. Unfortunately for you, however, Obama did not show his Selective Service card. The guy who posted it, and who claimed to have gotten it from the Selective Services Administration during the Bush Administration, forged it himself or herself.

            Re: "All that's needed is for obama to show the physical copy of his birth certificate. Other Presidents have done this. Why is it such an issue now? The only reasonable explanation is there isn't one to match that which was created and offered. "

            Answer Obama HAS shown both the images on the Web (how else to show them to the public?) AND the actual PHYSICAL copies to the press of his short form and his long form birth certificate. So he has done what you say he should do. It is interesting that birther sites such as WND have not asked to SEE the physical copies—I wonder why not. But Obama has shown them to the press—with the seal on them, the whole thing. One reporter stated that she had felt the seal, and FactCheck took excellent photo images of the raised seal on the short-form BC.

            Re: "Other Presidents have done this. "

            And where did you get that nutty idea from? Obama was the first and so far the ONLY US president to show his birth certificate before and while he was in office (One or two others may have them in their presidential libraries). MItt Romney became the second US presidential candidate to publish his birth certificate. But he showed only a Web image of a black-and-white photocopy of his short form BC, without any confirmation from the Michigan that they had sent it to him or detailed images of the raised seal or Index Data or birth notice in the "Health Bureau Statistics" section of the newspapers.

            Re: "You can also quit using the newspaper ad as some type of evidence. It holds no legal standing. "

            Answer: It is NOT AN AD. It is a birth notice placed by the DOH of Hawaii, and only the DOH could put birth notice into the "Health Bureau Statistics" section of the newspapers (as the name indicates, and as BOTH the DOH and the newspaper confirm). And, as I indicated, the birth notices are additional confirming data to the birth certificates themselves, and the fact that the official of BOTH parties confirmed that they sent them to Obama and that they confirm that ALL the facts on the birth certificate that the White House put online are EXACTLY the same as on what they sent to him, and also the Index Data. And, guess what, birther sites have not even shown that Obama's mother even had a passport in 1961.

            So, for Obama to have been born in a foreign country she would have had to have been one of the few 18-year-olds to have a passport, and one of the EXTREMELY few women who traveled abroad late in pregnancy in 1961 because of the risk of stillbirth AND the officials of BOTH parties, and the Index Data and the birth notices would all have to be lying.

          • Seeks_the_truth says:

            Unfortunately for you, obama DID supply the fraudulent Selective Service card along with the fake birth certificate.
            You can deny the truth, won't change the facts.

          • smrstrauss says:

            First, Obama's birth certificate is not fake. Birther sites have not shown you all the experts who say that there is nothing wrong with it or told you that the officials in Hawaii of BOTH parties have repeatedly confirmed all the facts on it. And, unfortunately for YOU, Obana did not supply the fraudulent Selective Service card. The guy who put it online never even claimed to have gotten it from Obama or from any representative of Obama. The guy who put it online CLAIMED to have gotten it from the Selective Services Administration back during the Bush Administration.

          • Seeks_the_truth says:

            You've made it very clear you refuse to accept the fact that the purported birth certificate of barack obama is a fake.
            How sad you refuse to accept facts but instead will buy what is shoveled down your throat.
            As far as the Selective Service card is concerned, obama didn't put the fake birth certificate on the White House website either.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Re: "the fact remains that the birth certificate purported to be that of Barack Obama is indeed a forgery."

            Actually, the fact is that ONLY birther "experts" claim that it is a forgery—and by far most of them are not even real experts, and none of them have shown that they are fair and impartial. So they are merely CLAIMING that Obama's birth certificate is forged. Well, birther sites claimed that Obama's Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya—when the tape recording shows that she said repeatedly that Obama was born IN HAWAII. So, if bither sites lied when there was a tape recording showing that she said something the exact reverse of what they claimed that she said——why should birther "experts" be telling the truth on their claims that Obama's birth certificate is forged?

            They ARE NOT telling the truth, and such conservative leaders as Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck and the National Review (and Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, and Gingrich and Santorum and Huckabee) all do not believe them.

          • Seeks_the_truth says:

            Actually, MANY experts in the field, including Reed Hayes who is an expert used by the law firm that is defending obama on challenges, say it is without a doubt 100% fraudulent.
            The evidence shows that the purported birth certificate is 100% created from outside sources.
            As I said, denial won't change the facts.

          • smrstrauss says:

            IF Reed Hayes really said it, then he would be one of the FEW real experts who say that Obama's BC is forged.

            But did he say it? The Cold Case Posse claims to have a 40-page report from Reed Hayes and that it says what they quoted. But they have never published that report—I wonder why not? (Oh, and have they told you that Reed Hayes is an expert on HANDWRITING ANALYSIS? No? I wonder why not? Apparently they would like to give the impression that an expert on handwriting analysis is an expert on digital document analysis and that he commented on the Web image of Obama's birth certificate. If he really did, then why not show it. Or if he commented on the handwriting, then why not show what he said about that?)

          • smrstrauss says:

            Continuing:

            And, why haven't they shown you all these experts?

            Dr. Neil Krawetz, an imaging software analysis author and experienced examiner of questioned images, said:“The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.”

            Nathan Goulding with The National Review: “We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.… I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.”

          • smrstrauss says:

            Continuing:

            John Woodman, independent computer professional, who is a member of the Tea Party (who says that he hates Obama’s policies but found no evidence of forgery) said repeatedly in his book and in various articles on his Web site that the claims that Obama’s birth certificate was forged were unfounded.

            Ivan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily:“All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.” And, by the way, when WND received Zatkovich’s article that said that he found nothing wrong with Obama’s birth certificate, WordNDaily simply did not publish it.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Continuing:

            Jean-Claude Tremblay, a leading software trainer and Adobe-certified expert, who has years of experience working with and teaching Adobe Illustrator, said the layers cited by doubters are evidence of the use of common, off-the-shelf scanning software — not evidence of a forgery.“I have seen a lot of illustrator documents that come from photos and contain those kind of clippings—and it looks exactly like this,” he said.

            Why haven't the birther sites showed their readers ALL of these experts? Why haven't they told their readers that Reed Hayes is an expert in handwriting analysis–not digital documents? Why didn't the Cold Case Posse publish the complete 40-page report that they say Reed Hayes submitted?

          • Seeks_the_truth says:

            There is your problem. You are still saying IF.
            You accept that Reed Hayes is a certified handwriting analyst. Does this mean you wish to ignore his credentials as a Forensic Document examiner? It appears so.
            I understand why you won't accept the facts. That would mean you have to recognize you fell for the biggest scam ever perpetrated on the American public.
            Throw out all the propaganda talking points you wish. Doesn't matter.
            Until the public is given a VALID birth certificate of barack obama, nothing else matters.
            Yes, it is a fake.

          • Claim? They claim this? Oh no. It would be far too easy to dismiss if we just had their word on that. They do not simply claim it is a forgery. They have demonstrated this step-by-step in front of a real audience. So, where do you get off calling them "not real experts" or "have shown that they are fair and impartial"? You mean, people that have whole college degrees in software engineering and even wrote tech books on various Adobe products are not real experts? Some of these same people that were at first skeptical about the issue to begin with and some of which didn't even want to have anything to do with the case are not impartial? These are people that have reputations on the line and even received death threats for continuing. You think they're fighting an uphill battle, suffering ridicule, mockery, and persecution based on a lie? Why would they keep at that for nearly five years if it was all made up? Why go through all the trouble of possibly having their lives destroyed if they really had nothing? Gimme' a break. People disappeared and even died over this. You can't tell me it's all lies. Not real experts? Pah! Says you.
            Oh, Obama's Grandmother isn't the only one that says he was born in Kenya. Pretty much all of Kenya says that. Are they all a bunch of liars too? That's a lot of people for you to try and discredit. Then there's this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zzKsNLZ8qrE but, I guess you're going to say that's a fake too. Or perhaps you contend that since "birthers" unearthed it, that it's negligible, even though they attest to being certified experts and committing perjury if they're making it up? Oh yeah. Makes perfect sense to me. They'll risk doing jail time over something made up. Yahuh. That's exactly what ordinary people do. Oh wait, no they don't. Only Obama can commit perjury and get away with it. What was I thinking? That was three years ago, are they in prison for producing phony documents right now? Hmm?

          • smrstrauss says:

            Re: "They have demonstrated this step-by-step in front of a real audience. "

            Answer: Sure they have. Would you like to buy a bridge? A pretty bridge in Brooklyn?

            What they did, for you and other gullible people, was to say things like: "You can open it in Adobe Illustrator, and you see it shows layers, and that is a sign of it being forged."

            And you and other bithers believe that. But, duh, what they did not tell you, what in fact they lied about, is that it WOULD SHOW LAYERS, and that showing layers is normal in PDF, and that in fact that is how PDF WORKS. How else do you think it works?

            And, the did not show you these experts:

            Dr. Neil Krawetz, an imaging software analysis author and experienced examiner of questioned images, said:“The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.”

            Nathan Goulding with The National Review: “We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.… I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.”

            John Woodman, independent computer professional, who is a member of the Tea Party (who says that he hates Obama’s policies but found no evidence of forgery) said repeatedly in his book and in various articles on his Web site that the claims that Obama’s birth certificate was forged were unfounded.

            Ivan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily:“All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.” And, by the way, when WND received Zatkovich’s article that said that he found nothing wrong with Obama’s birth certificate, WordNDaily simply did not publish it.

            Jean-Claude Tremblay, a leading software trainer and Adobe-certified expert, who has years of experience working with and teaching Adobe Illustrator, said the layers cited by doubters are evidence of the use of common, off-the-shelf scanning software — not evidence of a forgery.“I have seen a lot of illustrator documents that come from photos and contain those kind of clippings—and it looks exactly like this,” he said.

            One proof that Obama’s birth certificate is not forged is Obama’s short-form birth certificate.

            Short-form birth certificates are created by a clerk reading the information from the document in the file, and filling out the computer form that generates the printed short-form birth certificate. The officials in Hawaii have confirmed that they sent a short-form to Obama. So, unless they are lying—and they were Republican officials–the only way that Obama’s birth certificate could have been forged was that it was forged in 2007 and slipped into the file just before the clerk looked at the file. That is not very likely, is it? And it is especially unlikely since at the time Obama was not even the candidate of the Democrats. He was still in the primaries at the time, and he was only a junior senator from Illinois.

            Here, BTW, is what the National Review says about Sheriff Joe and his "experts."
            http://m.nationalreview.com/articles/292780/consp

            Obama's Kenyan grandmother NEVER said that he was born in Kenya. Birther sites deliberately misquoted her. She said repeatedly that Obama was born IN HAWAII, "where his father was studying at the time." And guess what, birther sites did not show you the article in which the Kenyan Government said that it investigated the "born in Kenya" story and that it IS NOT TRUE. I wonder why they did not show you that article?

            NOR did they show you the US Immigration and Naturalization Service report for 1961 which shows that only 21 people came to the USA from Kenya in 1961 and all but one of them BY SHIP (and, BTW, there were no regular ships from Kenya to Hawaii or vice versa in 1961). I wonder why they did not show you that fact either?

          • I'm not blind, guy. I know what I saw. Or are you going to say that the video I watched was also a fake? Then there's my own experience with Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop. If you scan in a paper document, save it as a PDF, and then open it again, you only get one flat layer. You don't get several layers with different fonts, type faces, kerning, white backgrounds behind letters, or smiley faces. You don't get all those in one flat layer. You also don't get different fonts, type faces, and kerning from a typewriter. The texture on the document itself should be consistent throughout. There shouldn't be any white background behind the letters, in other words. They didn't have that kind of technology in 1961.

            Your cited experts: Dr. Neil Krawetz – turns out to be a phony.

            Nathan Goulding – Questionable source

            John Woodman – Also questionable source, does not offer much in the way of evidence, but more in personal experience.

            Ivan Zatkovich – Publishes his findings, I read them for myself here: http://www.ecompconsultants.com/news/Obama-report

            Jean-Claude Tremblay – First of all, I've heard the guy a few times. I know what he attests to. Second of all, that quote was taken out of context and he says he didn't say that. Funny how versions of a story come out when you only cut-and-paste what you want people to see.
            Speaking of cut-and-paste, that seems to be the basis of your counter arguments, except that you add a little bit of your own language before each copy-pasta statement, which means you're lazy.

            Obama's Kenyan Grandmother said Obama was born in Hawaii…you never said which one. Hawaii the series of islands as part of American territory or Hawaii, Kenya?

            What about this? : http://unclevladdi.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/obama
            Or this: http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/02/05/breaking-… Isn't he part of Kenyan Government?

            Apparently, you DO have a shiny bridge to sell.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Replying to: ". If you scan in a paper document, save it as a PDF, and then open it again, you only get one flat layer. You don't get several layers with different fonts, type faces, kerning, white backgrounds behind letters, or smiley faces. "

            Answer: There is NO "smiley face." And you do indeed get layers when you open a complex PDF document (and a document on SECURITY PAPER is indeed complex) in Illustrator, as the National Review has shown:

            Nathan Goulding with The National Review: “We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.… I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.”

            Are you claiming that the National Review is LYING?

            (AND, it is not kerning. It is the normal skipping of a manual typewriter.)

          • smrstrauss says:

            Re: "Obama's Kenyan Grandmother said Obama was born in Hawaii…you never said which one. Hawaii the series of islands as part of American territory or Hawaii, Kenya? "

            Answer: There is no "Hawaii" in Kenya—though some Web sites have claimed that there is (they simply inserted the word "Hawaii" in the far north of a Kenyan map— nowhere near Obama's family's home, BTW>)

            And she really said "born in Hawaii, where his father was studying at the time" And Obama's father was studying at the University of Hawaii, which is in the STATE of Hawaii, and not in Kenya.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Re: "What about this? : http://unclevladdi.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/obama….
            Or this: http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/02/05/breaking-…. Isn't he part of Kenyan Government? "

            Are you claiming that everyone in the Kenyan government is infallible and never makes mistakes?

            The Kenyan official you quote, who spoke BEFORE the Kenyan government released its statement that it had investigated and that Obama was not born there, THOUGHT (like birthers) that Obama was born in Kenya. And, duh, he was wrong.

            In addition to the Kenyan government stating officially that it investigated and that Obama was NOT born there, there is the US INS report showing that only 21 people came to the USA from Kenya in 1961—and all but one of them by SEA—and the fact that there were no regular ships from Kenya to Hawaii (or vice versa).

            And, of course, there is also the Hawaiian birth certificate, confirmed by the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii, and the Index Data and the birth notices sent to the "Health Bureau Statistics" section of the papers by the DOH of Hawaii in 1961.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Re: "What about this? : http://unclevladdi.wordpress.com/2013/08/13/obama….
            Or this: http://politicalvelcraft.org/2012/02/05/breaking-…. Isn't he part of Kenyan Government? "

            Are you claiming that everyone in the Kenyan government is infallible and never makes mistakes?

            The Kenyan official you quote, who spoke BEFORE the Kenyan government released its statement that it had investigated and that Obama was not born there, THOUGHT (like birthers) that Obama was born in Kenya. And, duh, he was wrong.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Continuing:

            In addition to the Kenyan government stating officially that it investigated and that Obama was NOT born there, there is the US INS report showing that only 21 people came to the USA from Kenya in 1961—and all but one of them by SEA—and the fact that there were no regular ships from Kenya to Hawaii (or vice versa).

            And, of course, there is also the Hawaiian birth certificate, confirmed by the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii, and the Index Data and the birth notices sent to the "Health Bureau Statistics" section of the papers by the DOH of Hawaii in 1961.

          • "Are you claiming that everyone in the Kenyan government is infallible and never makes mistakes?"
            Why not? You are. Besides, I looked all over for this statement Kenyan officials were supposed to have made and found nothing. All the suggested links I could find said the opposite. Where are you getting your information from?

        • Your first two paragraphs in response to my comment are both red herrings. Neither here nor there. What age Stanley Anne Dunham was when she had a passport made, is irrelevant. The contention is where Barry was born. So far, not even he nor the hospital(s) can keep their story straight. He still has NOT proven he was born in Hawaii beyond a reasonable doubt. He thought he was being slick in slipping it past video cameras, but various experts picked that "proof" apart…literally (they can even make the document say nothing). What's more is you still have nothing to say about that.

          "Answer So?
          Neither the citizenship of the father, or the citizenship of both parents, or even dual nationality has any effect on Natural Born Citizen status whatever. Don't like it? TOO BAD FOR YOU! The US Electoral College elected Obama in the 2008 and 2012 elections without one single member changing her or his vote from the 356 votes Obama won in the general election in 2008 and the 332 votes that Obama won in the general election in 2012. In other words, in the 356 people involved in the Electoral College vote for Obama in 2008 and the 332 in 2012, a total of about 690, NOT ONE thought that Obama was born in a foreign country and NOT ONE believed that the citizenship of Obama's father or Obama's dual nationality has any effect whatever on Obama's Natural Born Citizen status."

          Again, you are working under the assumption that Obama was born here to begin with – which has NOT been proven. Can't have Natural Born Citizenship if you can't first prove you were born here. Ah, but you mention the Electoral College vote…also working under the same assumption you are. They didn't care about the evidences or the cases contending Obama's eligibility. They just went with it, assuming the votes from the ballots (those counted anyway) were legit. Although…there were those few delegates that weren't convinced of his eligibility that you neglected to mention. Oh well. Fact of the matter is we have a poser in the White House that's continually breaking the law and doing all he can to cover it up.

          "Okay. You don't believe Senators Hatch and Graham. How about former Senator Fred Thompson? http://www.fredthompsonsamerica.com/2012/07/31/is….

          Don't believe him either?"

          He's still giving an opinion. He's giving his two cents worth on the issue, not defining it. However, in his opinion he stated that being 'naturalized' (in Obama's case) is insufficient to become President. Since I believe he is not 'natural born', he has no place in that office. You can show me all the opinions of senators and congressman alike, you can show me court cases that ruled in Obama's favor up the wazoo, you can show me video of Obama declaring himself a citizen of the US on the news, but it does NOT equal proof. Sorry, Obama has offered a counterfeit as proof and -will not- produce a physical copy to examine. All attempts to gain access to a physical copy have been blocked. That leads me to believe A) there's something on the real document he doesn't want people to see or B) the document doesn't exist. At least, not in Hawaii. Looking for evidence that Obama was born in Kenya was far more enlightening, especially if there's a proud doctor that will attest to Obama being born in his hospital. That's a pretty big hole, don't you think?

          Oh, let's suppose you're right about everything, for now. Then, by your logic, Mr. Cruiz IS perfectly eligible to run for President. After all, if he's born under one or both parents of US citizenship, that qualifies him alone, right? Isn't that what you tried to explain to me? So, maybe I've been looking at this all wrong. Instead of you defending Obama, you've actually been helping Cruiz's case. Everything that qualifies Obama qualifies Cruiz, too.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Replying to this statement: " various experts picked that "proof" apart…literally (they can even make the document say nothing). What's more is you still have nothing to say about t

            Answer. Here is what I have to say: The fact is that ONLY birther "experts" claim that it is a forgery—and by far most of them are not even real experts, and none of them have shown that they are fair and impartial.

            So they are merely CLAIMING that Obama's birth certificate is forged. Well, birther sites claimed that Obama's Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya—when the tape recording shows that she said repeatedly that Obama was born IN HAWAII. So, if bither sites lied when there was a tape recording showing that she said something the exact reverse of what they claimed that she said——why should birther "experts" be telling the truth on their claims that Obama's birth certificate is forged?

            They ARE NOT telling the truth, and such conservative leaders as Ann Coulter, Glenn Beck and the National Review (and Mitt Romney and Paul Ryan, and Gingrich and Santorum and Huckabee) all do not believe them.

          • smrstrauss says:

            "Oh, let's suppose you're right about everything, for now. Then, by your logic, Mr. Cruiz IS perfectly eligible to run for President. After all, if he's born under one or both parents of US citizenship, that qualifies him alone, right?"

            That is what Cruz says, and what some other experts say too. But the difference is that Cruz was born IN CANADA, and Obama was born IN HAWAII, as his birth certifciate shows, and, duh, birther sites who claim that he was born in Kenya or some other country than the USA HAVE NOT EVEN SHOWN THAT OBAMA's mother had a passport in 1961 (and very few 18-year-olds did.).

            Still, in the highly unlikely (like winnning two major lotteries in the same day) case that Obama was born in Kenya or some other country than the USA, then the fact that Obama's mother was a US citizen would make Obama just as much a Natural Born US Citizen as Cruz. Get it?

          • smrstrauss says:

            Oh, and Obama was not "naturalized."

            The US Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) was in charge of naturalization in 1961, and it did not say that Obama was "naturalized." It did not say that Cruz was naturalized either. So neither of them were.

            Both of them were US citizens at birth, which many Constitutional Experts (But, interestingly NOT the Heritage Foundation) say is sufficient to be a Natural Born Citizen. The Heritage Foundation says that the only sure Natural Born Citizen is a US citizen at birth who was born in the USA.

          • smrstrauss says:

            Continuing:

            “Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President …"—- Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005) [Edwin Meese was Ronald Reagan’s attorney general, and the Heritage Foundation is a well-known Conservative organization.]

          • smrstrauss says:

            Continuing:

            As to that and the judgements of Senators Hatch and Graham and former Senator Fred Thompson being "only an opinion." Answer: Sure.

            But it is such informed opinions as this, and the TEN appeals courts and the US Supreme Court in the Wong Kim Ark case, and the fact that NO court has ever ruled that two citizen parents are required in order to be a Natural Born Citizen, that are the law—and not the nutty ideas of a few birthers. Oh, and last October, the US Supreme Court turned down an apppeal of one of the ten appeals court rulings, which all said that Obama is a NBC, leaving the ruling of the lower court and the other nine rulings STANDING.

          • Contradicting yourself already?

    • VirgoVince says:

      That's a helluva lot of words to support a lie that WE ALL know to be a lie!! And of course, we're going to rely on and believe the lame-stream-liberal-media, which is nothing but a long list of lies!!
      You're another one that's too stupid to be white!!

      • smrstrauss says:

        Rational people will notice that the above is not a response to the facts and appears to be based on the false notion that skin color determines whether or not someone is smart. Such attitudes and the accompanying inability to discuss the facts will not convince rational people.

        • VirgoVince says:

          You should know; you haven't convinced anyone here with your BS, so go back to huffpo and stay there!!

        • Rational people? Do you know what it means to rationalize? That little lie you tell yourself to convince yourself that something is right when in fact, it isn't. REASONABLE people will look at what Obama is doing and has done and determine something isn't right about this man. You don't strike me as a reasonable person. Denial!

          • smrstrauss says:

            Reasonable people will also know that just because you do not like the policies of someone does not mean that he (or for that matter she) was born in a foreign country. They will also know that when someone really truly dislikes the policies of someone, she or he may LIE about that person's place of birth and about claims such as "kerning" (it is the normal skipping of a manual typewriter) and about a document expert, who says that changes in a document are "consistent with enhancement" saying that the facts in the document were changed (which he did NOT say).

          • It's so easy for you to say someone is lying about something when you haven't even bothered to show how or what. You really think typewriters have inconsistent letter spacing and the ability to create white borders around the letters, change fonts, and typesets? If I'm lying about something like "kerning", then so are the instructors I was taught by and so are the authors of the books I was given to learn about typography. Maybe you think "typography" is a word I made up to sound smart, too.
            Which document expert? You listed a few, a couple of which turned out to be unreliable and one of which was a fake. In fact, one of the experts you named went through great detail to explain how the document had been altered. He even identified the means used to do so.
            Reasonable people have the capacity to understand and think for themselves. Being reasonable does not automatically mean you're right. It doesn't automatically make ME right either. Whether someone believes Obama was born in a manger or whether they believe he's a bastard child born in Kenya, by a mother that used him to gain political favor and didn't bother to raise him herself, is disputable. We don't have all the facts and YOU certainly don't. What is clear, however, is we have a traitor in the oval office that gained his political position through foul means BOTH times and his intent appears to be bent toward our downfall as a nation. A reasonable person can deduce that much. An unreasonable person goes out of their way to deny that. The rational person is starting to run out of things to rationalize about Obama and his behavior. When Obamacare falls through, that will be one less thing.

  2. ALL THAT CRAP ABOUT CITIZENSHIP, BIRTH CERTIFICATES; AND IMPEACHMENT I'LL SAY IT AGAIN NOTHING WILL BE DONE CAUSE PEOPLE ARE SCARED

    • VirgoVince says:

      YES, they are scared, but I'm still wondering WHY and what it is that's scaring them??
      (Rhetorical!!) But I'd like some REASONS, NOT EXCUSES!!

    • smrstrauss says:

      Nothing will be done for a very simple reason. Obama was really born in the USA, as his short and long fiorm birth certificates and the confirmation of the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii have confirmed, and birther sites have not even shown that his mother had a passport in 1961.

      • Seeks_the_truth says:

        Is it if you say it enough times it might come true?

        • smrstrauss says:

          Rational people will notice that Seeks_the_truth has not responded to the facts.

          For example, Seeks_the_truth has not even commented on the fact that birther sites have not told their readers that there is no evidence that Obama's mother even had a passport in 1961 (and if she did not have a passport, then she could not have gone to a foreign country to give birth).

          Why haven't birther sites even told their readers that they do not know whether or not Obama's mother had a passport? Why haven't they told their readers that very very few 18-year-olds had passports in 1961? And yet birther sites want rational people to ASSUME that she was one of the very few 18-year-olds to have a passport and she was one of the EXTREMELY few women who traveled to a foreign country in the last few months of pregnancy (because of the risk of stillbirth, which was relatively high in 1961) and that the birth certificate of Hawaii is forged and that the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii are lying.

          • Seeks_the_truth says:

            Rational people see smrstrauss has YET to post ANY facts. All smrstrauss has done is post the same old tiring propaganda talking points made by the obama group to cover up his ineligibility.
            Rational people see the facts and refuse to ignore them as you do.
            I can't have a civil debate with someone who refuses to accept facts and wants to argue a point based on a false narrative. I won't go into the speculation realm as you are.
            Again, just because you refuse to accept the truth doesn't change the facts. UNTIL we are given a VALID birth certificate for barack obama, everything else is a moot point.

  3. he wasnt born in the u.s and any one who believes that is a fool and needs to go with him out the door

    • smrstrauss says:

      He was born in the USA, as his Hawaii birth certificate shows and as the officials from BOTH parties in Hawaii have said and as further shown by the public Index Data file:
      http://www.cleveland.com/nation/index.ssf/2011/04

      (So not only the officials would have to be lying, but the Index Data would have had to be forged.)

      And there are the birth notices in the "Health Bureau Statistics" section of the papers, and ONLY the DOH of Hawaii could send birth notices to that section of the paper—as both papers and the DOH confirm—and in 1961 it only sent out those notices for births IN Hawaii.

      http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/obamabi

      (So, not only would the officials of BOTH parties have to be lying, but both the Index Data and the birth notices in two separate newspapers in two separate library microfilm collections would have to be forged too.)

      Re: "What age Stanley Anne Dunham was when she had a passport made, is irrelevant. "

      Answer: That is truly a DUMB statement. Unless she had her passport in 1961 when she was 18 (and remember that few 18-year-olds had passports), then she DID NOT HAVE A PASSPORT WHEN OBAMA WAS BORN. And, if she did not have a passport she could not have gone to a foreign country in 1961, and if she did not go to a foreign country, Obama could only have been born in the USA. And birther sites have NOT shown that she had a passport in 1961 (and very few 18-year-olds did). Nor have they even shown the date on which he US passport file was CREATED. I wonder why they do not show it—perhaps because it was created in 1966 or 1965?????

      In short, there is no evidence that Obama's mother had a passport and she probably didn't. And, in the highly unlikely chance that she did, there is very little chance that she traveled ALONE (since WND has proven that Obama senior stayed in Hawaii throughout 1961) to a foreign country when she was in the last few month of pregnancy (because very few women traveled late in pregnancy because of the risk of stillbirth in 1961). Anfd the government of Kenya has stated that it investigated the "born in Kenya" story, and that Obama was certainly NOT born in Kenya.

      Yet, bither sites would like rational people to believe that there a reasonable chance that Obama's mother was one of the very few 18-year-olds to have a passport and one of the EXTREMELY few women who traveled to foreign countries late in pregnancy, and that the official of BOTH parties and the Index Data and the birth notices are all lies.

      Oh, and birther sites have not shown you this—have they?
      http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/04/kapiolani-

      Re "whistleblower." Dream on. Orly was PUNKED by that "whistleblower"—-who claimed to have had microfilms of Obama's records in the state of New York Education files. But, guess what, that was about two months ago, and Orly has not said that she has seen those alleged microfilms yet. I wonder why not???

      Obama, btw, received US government student LOANS, and they are available only to US citizens.

      • The MSM was able to track Sarah Palin's grade school records in a matter of days when they were on a mission to do anything they could to discredit her. After six years, no one has been able to get access to Obama's school records. People do not remember him.

        This rasies the question of what he is hiding. True believers in Obama will not look into his past. There are way too many unanswered questions about his past. He and the Dems have spent millions keeping his past hidden.
        You bash the people who have proven the alleged birth certificate to be a forgery, saying only conservatives have said it is a forgery. However, you provide no proof from any document experts saying it is real. That is because no real forensic document expert will say it is not a forgery. When it is shown how many layers there are it is evident it is not real.
        Another thing is the so-called certificate is a different form from those before and after it. Obama has put over the biggest lie in history.
        But it seems that there are people like you who will never be willing to approach the issue with and opne mind.

        • smrstrauss says:

          Re Sarah Palin's grades. Answer: Different states, different privacy laws. Obama really did go to Occidental, Columbia and Harvard Law School—or are you nutty enough to believe that all three are LYING. And are you nutty or prejudiced enough to believe that Harvard Law School is lying when it said that Obama graduated MAGNA CUM LAUDE? As for showing grades, well Mitt Romney and John McCain did not show their grades either, so why should Obama? (Especially when Harvard's saying that he graduated MAGNA CUM LAUDE indicates how good his grades must have been?)

          Re "you provide no proof from any document experts saying it is real."

          Dr. Neil Krawetz, an imaging software analysis author and experienced examiner of questioned images, said:“The PDF released by the White House shows no sign of digital manipulation or alterations. I see nothing that appears to be suspicious.”

          Nathan Goulding with The National Review: “We have received several e-mails today calling into question the validity of the PDF that the White House released, namely that there are embedded layers in the document. There are now several other people on the case. We looked into it and dismissed it.… I’ve confirmed that scanning an image, converting it to a PDF, optimizing that PDF, and then opening it up in Illustrator, does in fact create layers similar to what is seen in the birth certificate PDF. You can try it yourself at home.”

          John Woodman, independent computer professional, who is a member of the Tea Party (who says that he hates Obama’s policies but found no evidence of forgery) said repeatedly in his book and in various articles on his Web site that the claims that Obama’s birth certificate was forged were unfounded.

          Ivan Zatkovich, who has testified in court as a technology expert, and consultant to WorldNetDaily:“All of the modifications to the PDF document that can be identified are consistent with someone enhancing the legibility of the document.” And, by the way, when WND received Zatkovich’s article that said that he found nothing wrong with Obama’s birth certificate, WordNDaily simply did not publish it.

          Jean-Claude Tremblay, a leading software trainer and Adobe-certified expert, who has years of experience working with and teaching Adobe Illustrator, said the layers cited by doubters are evidence of the use of common, off-the-shelf scanning software — not evidence of a forgery.“I have seen a lot of illustrator documents that come from photos and contain those kind of clippings—and it looks exactly like this,” he said.

          Birthers’ claim that Obama’s birth certificate is false is well understood to be caused by their own motives—they hate Obama and would like to harm him.

          Obama's short form BC is not different from anyone else's, and it is the SHORT FORM that is the official BC. Obama's long form BC is different. Yes it is. It is a modern copy, a modern photostat of the original onto modern security paper and the modern seal attached. Since Hawaii has stopped doing that for BCs when they adopted the SHORT FORM system, of course Obama's long form is unique. But the officials of BOTH parties in Hawaii stated that they sent it to him and that ALL the fact on the one that the White House put online are EXACTLY the same as on what they sent to him.

          Re "open mind." How open is yours? Do realize that birther sites have simply never told you that there is no evidence that Obama's mother even had a passport in 1961? (Why do you suppose that they did not tell you that little fact?) Why do you suppose they LIED about what Obama's Kenyan grandmother said? She never said that Obama was born in Kenya. She said he was born in HAWAII repeatedly, only birther sites never quoted her. Is your mind open enough to realize that birthers who would LIE about what Obama's Kenyan grandmother said would also lie about Obama's birth certificate being forged?

  4. ted's got my vote

  5. He was born in Indonesia you stupid damn idiots who actually think his welfare victim mother who wanted to live off our government in hawiaa is or was actually ever a citizen. The Court examiner says 100% fraud why isnt Obama in jail come on you cowards in congress and tv and talk radio!!!!!!!!!!!

    • smrstrauss says:

      Rational people will notice that VirgoVince did not respond to the facts or even discuss the facts. Instead. VirgoVince simply asks that I go away. And, btw. Obama was not born in Indonesia (or in Kenya) as telephone calls to the Embassies of those countries in Washington will confirm.

Speak Your Mind

*