Coal Industry Post
Multiple Guest Appearances
"Mohammed the Bear" Stuff
"Don't Taze Me, Bro!"
"Yikes! I Might Be...Militia!"
Ramadan Coke Post
Credentialed Poll Watcher
HERO SHOT
Mitt Romney Post
"2007 BugsGoneWild.com Calendar"
Ramadan Coke Post
As of 12-31-08
Editor’s Note: Several times during the past few years, I’ve turned to Michael Johns, a White House speechwriter during the George H.W. Bush presidency who brings a more-scholarly-than-average approach to the news topics of the day. Three weeks ago, he tackled the issue which, if one is on the “wrong” side of it, can get him labeled as a “birther”. Well written and free of hyperbole, his article appears below.
By Michael Johns
Guest Blogger
One of the most constructive developments of the past eight months is that tens of millions of Americans appear to be reawakening to the critical importance and relevance of the U.S. Constitution. The brazen growth of the federal government, which now controls sizable portions of the economy (automobiles, banks, health care, mortgages and other industry segments), violates the tenets of free market capitalism, the system that has been the foundation of our nation’s globally unprecedented growth and prosperity. But this debate is not merely a policy one. Increasingly, as millions of Americans associated with the burgeoning Tea Party and 912 Project movements are demonstrating, the debate is about whether such expansions of federal powers are even Constitutionally permissible.
It is difficult to pinpoint exactly when the dangerous disregard for our nation’s founding legal document began. It certainly predates this administration. But the culture upon which it rests might be best exemplified in the apparent congressional and media group think that our 44th president holds no obligation to respond to questions about his Constitutional eligibility, under Article II, Section I of the Constitution, to hold the office to which he ran and was elected. This Constitutional provision states unequivocally that no person except a natural born citizen shall be eligible to the Office of President.
Is Barack Obama a natural born citizen of the United States? Probably. But because Obama is going to great lengths to conceal the documents that would settle this issue definitively, it is impossible to say for sure. Since October 2008, Obama has spent in excess of $1.35 million in legal fees to file protective and privacy motions in at least eight federal lawsuits to avoid releasing his birth documents — his mother’s hospital admission record, his Hawaii certificate of live birth, his educational records during his four years of residence in Indonesia, his Indonesian citizen status at that time and the time of his subsequent reentry to the U.S., and his college and law school admission records–that likely would definitively establish his Constitutional eligibility. Congress, the media, and even many Obama opponents, meanwhile, have failed to exert any pressure on him to halt his pro-active legal measures to avoid disclosure of these documents.
Quite obviously, the question of a president’s Constitutional eligibility is serious business. It was serious business when, in February 2008, The New York Times called into question Senator John McCain’s eligibility for the office because McCain was born on an American Naval base in the Panama Canal Zone, which was then under U.S. control. “It is certainly not a frivolous issue,” The Times quoted Atlanta attorney Jill Pryor as saying at the time. The questions also were serious enough for the U.S. Senate to investigate them, with the Senate ultimately concluding in a unanimous vote that the U.S. administration of the Panama Canal Zone at that time meant that McCain was indeed a natural born citizen and eligible for the Presidency.
Whatever these records might reveal, Obama’s extensive, year-long efforts to conceal them are now inexplicable, inexcusable and harmful to the nation. There is no innocuous explanation for his extensive efforts to conceal them, especially since their release is easily authorized and would settle the controversy, permitting the nation to move on with full confidence in his Constitutional eligibility and the Constitutional foundations of our nation in 2009. But Obama has refused to do this and, as a result, a frightening and growing number of Americans now understandably ask the question: What exactly is he hiding?
Let me stipulate that, despite following this issue for a year, I am utterly unable to answer that question. But logic dictates that one would not expend in excess of a million dollars in legal fees, as Obama has done, knowing that the only likely result is that a certain percentage of the American people will view such efforts as non-transparent, or even malfeasant. Conversely, it also is wrong to conclude, in the absence of these documents, that Obama has necessarily misrepresented anything about his birth location or Constitutional eligibility, as some critics of Obama’s concealment of these documents continue to do. Under pressure to settle the issue during his presidential candidacy, the Obama campaign ultimately produced a Certification of Live Birth in 2007, but that document, skeptics argue, is manufactured by the state and is not an unequivocal authentication of his birth location.
The most important point is this: No national interest is served by permitting these important questions to linger and persist. To settle them, Obama should cease blocking release of the documents sought by the plaintiffs in the various federal cases over his eligibility. And going forward, it seems reasonable to insist that our nation’s Federal Election Commission, which is charged with regulatory oversight of presidential elections, require presidential candidates to submit, along with their candidacy filing, the documents that clearly establish their natural-born eligibility for the office. Americans’ confidence in our Constitutionally-rooted democratic political system requires no less.
Read more of this writer’s work here.
* * *
SEE ALSO: 2004 Headline from Kenya’s Oldest Newspaper: ‘Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate’ (Just published!)
13 responses so far ↓
1 Beckwith // Oct 15, 2009 at 8:42 am
Re: “Is Barack Obama a natural born citizen of the United States? Probably.”
Probably? No way!
There is no way that a person who was a Kenyan citizen and British subject, “AT BIRTH,” ever was, or ever will be, a “natural born” American citizen.
2 Dredd // Oct 15, 2009 at 8:55 am
A federal judge slapped birther Orly Taitz with a $20,000 sanction for a “delusional” filing in the court alleging Obama is not an American citizen.
3 Debbie // Oct 15, 2009 at 9:23 am
Good article. It shows that those of us who want to see the documents and wonder why Obama spends so much time and money hiding them — are not conspiracy nuts. We simply believe in facts and as citizens we have a right to see the proof.
It would be a very simple thing to produce the documents.
Where does the latest legal hearings stand???
4 Former White House Speechwriter Calls for Barack Obama to ‘Release the Birth Documents’ | THE AUDACITY OF HYPOCRISY | Media Lies | ObamaLies.com | Exposing Mainstream Media Hypocrisy and Lies // Oct 15, 2009 at 9:48 am
[...] Bob McCarty Writes [...]
5 smrstrauss // Oct 15, 2009 at 9:55 am
Re: “because Obama is going to great lengths to conceal the documents that would settle this issue definitively, it is impossible to say for sure.”
Obama has posted and shown to Polifact and FactCheck the OFFICIAL birth certificate of Hawaii. And, it is the only birth certificate that Hawaii currently sends out. (http://www.starbulletin.com/columnists/kokualine/20090606_kokua_line.html)
This is what the Wall Street Journal concluded: “Obama has already provided a legal birth certificate demonstrating that he was born in Hawaii. No one has produced any serious evidence to the contrary. Absent such evidence, it is unreasonable to deny that Obama has met the burden of proof. We know that he was born in Honolulu as surely as we know that Bill Clinton was born in Hope, Ark., or George W. Bush in New Haven, Conn.”
6 » Former White House Speechwriter Calls for Barack Obama to ‘Release the Birth Documents’ NoisyRoom.net: Where liberty dwells, there is my country… // Oct 15, 2009 at 11:43 am
[...] By: Bob McCarty Bob McCarty Writes [...]
7 Duke // Oct 15, 2009 at 12:31 pm
If The President was born in 1961 Why does his MYSPACE.COM page list him as 52 not 48!
http://www.myspace.com/barackobama
That would have him born in 1957 When Hawaii was still a Territory not a US STATE.
8 smrstrauss // Oct 15, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Re: “Why does his MYSPACE.COM page list him as 52 not 48!”
Because MYSPACE is wrong.
9 Jane-101 // Oct 16, 2009 at 7:51 am
smrstrauss,
He hasn’t shown a long-form birth certificate that shows exactly where he was born; hospital and attending doctor. At that time, Hawaii allowed foreign-born babies to acquire a certification of live birth once they moved there. Obama’s sister, Maya Soetoro, was born in Indonesia and has a certification of live birth. Sun Yat-Sun (father of modern China) born in China, also has a certification of live birth. And Obama (born who knows where) also has a certification of live birth. I don’t understand why the big deal of taking him out of office if he wasn’t eligible. The Constitution provides directions in the event it would happen. The VP would take over until a legitimate candidate is elected….that’s it. European and former Soviet nations have special elections quite often. Another democrat could win. Who knows? It would most certainly get people out to vote finally wouldn’t you think?
10 Yeah Right // Oct 16, 2009 at 7:37 pm
The only part I totally disagree with you Mr. Johns is that Barrack Obama/Barry Soetoro is NOT a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!
Look up what a natural born citizen is….in short a citizen born of two parents who ARE citizens!
His mother was not of age according to law then to pass citizenship to the baby and his father WAS NOT an immigrant only a student on a visa who was Kenyan with British citizenship.
So he is NOT a natural born citizen but bending the laws a native born citizen.
However there is more than a can of worms here which has to do with his own words stating his citizenship in his autobiography (British/Kenyan), to his adoption by an Indonesian Citizen (in country), to his travels to Pakistan, to all his records he has sealed as an adult all through his life until he became a US Senator.
Though one thing is very clear he is NOT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!!!
11 smrstrauss // Oct 17, 2009 at 6:58 pm
Re: “Look up what a natural born citizen is….in short a citizen born of two parents who ARE citizens! ”
Is that why such prominent conservative Senators who are also lawyers as Orren Hatch and Lindsay Graham say that a Natural Born Citizen is simply one who was born in the USA:
Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), said:
“Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.” (December 11, 2008 letter to constituent)
Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT), said:
“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 hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)
And:
Gov. Bobby Jindal, who delivered the Republican response to Obama’s speech, said: “Regardless of party, all Americans are moved by the President’s personal story – the son of an American mother and a Kenyan father, who grew up to become leader of the free world.”
Jindal, of course, would be even less of a natural born citizen under your idea because neither of his parents were citizens at the time of his birth. His mother was about three months pregnant when they came to the USA.
And Yale Law Review wrote: “It is well settled that “native-born” citizens, those born in the United States, qualify as natural born. It is also clear that persons born abroad of alien parents, who later become citizens by naturalization, do not. (Jill A. Pryor, Yale Law Review, 1988)
At the time of the writing of the Constitution, Natural Born was the phrase for what we now call Native Born. Native Born was seldom used (I cannot find it at all). Natural Born was the law in England and in the US Colonies that referred to people who were citizens or subjects due to the palace where they were born regardless of the number of parents who were citizens.
The term “Natural Born” was used instead of native born as late as World War I (maybe later, but I can’t find it), when men registering for the draft were asked whether they were citizens, and then if they were citizens whether they were naturalized or Natural Born.
12 smrstrauss // Oct 18, 2009 at 10:04 am
Re: “He hasn’t shown a long-form birth certificate that shows exactly where he was born; hospital and attending doctor.
True. But Hawaii does not send it out anymore. Thus the situation that Obama has not shown it can be explained by the simple fact that he does not have it. And besides, the document that he showed is the OFFICIAL birth certificate of Hawaii, and the facts on it were confirmed twice by the authorities in Hawaii.
Re: “At that time, Hawaii allowed foreign-born babies to acquire a certification of live birth once they moved there.”
No it didn’t. That was not allowed until 1982, more than twenty years after Obama’s birth
Re: ” Obama’s sister, Maya Soetoro, was born in Indonesia and has a certification of live birth.”
No she doesn’t. She has no file in the Hawaii birth registry, as Leo Donofrio’s research has shown. She is now a naturalized US citizen.
Re: “Sun Yat-Sun (father of modern China) born in China, also has a certification of live birth.”
Yes. That was in 1904. At one time Manhattan island sold for $26. A lot has happened since then.
As the National Review pointed out: “The theory that Obama was born in Kenya, that he was smuggled into the U.S., and that his parents somehow hoodwinked Hawaiian authorities into falsely certifying his birth in Oahu, is crazy stuff.”
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZmJhMzlmZWFhOTQ3YjUxMDE2YWY4ZDMzZjZlYTVmZmU=&w=MA
13 Elianastar // Oct 26, 2009 at 4:00 pm
I’ve scanned through the comments here. Most defending the THEORY that Obama is a “natural born citizen” have failed to acknowledge the POINT of the article:
IF Obama has nothing to hide,
IF he has documents… in addition to whatever has been produced as a “birth certificate”… and he DOES have such documents or he wouldn’t be spending so much money locking them down…
WHY doesn’t he stop ALL the debate and speculation and
SIMPLY PRODUCE THE DOCUMENTS that will silence the questions?
WHY does he CONTINUE to spend millions of dollars to keep them concealed?
WHY was one of his FIRST orders of business on Jan 20, 2009 to sign an Executive Order to SEAL every document that would definitely answer these questions?
“If one has nothing to hide, one hides nothing.”
There are issues, legal/Constitutional issues, above and beyond the birth certificate, whether what he has provided is legitimate or not, that requires the OTHER documents he actively and aggressively conceals and protects to definitely quell.
Unless and until THESE documents are released and verified, to take the position that HE IS a legal natural born citizen perfectly and legitimately occupying the Office of President… or to take the position that Obama IS NOT a legal natural born citizen and must be immediately removed from office because he is not qualified to hold the Office according to the Constitution… EITHER position is a THEORY because there is NO DOCUMENTATION that definitely supports EITHER position! It is BIGGER than whether there is a birth certificate, what kind of birth certificate it is, and whether or not it is a valid/verified birth certificate.
The bottom line is, IF OBAMA had produced ALL the documents necessary so that they could be verified, THIS ARTICLE AND THIS DEBATE would not exist. The comments following this article would be MOOT and without merit… which ever side of the discussion you fall on. THAT’s what this article is saying and it is the reason I cannot dismiss the debate as without merit… because neither I NOR ANYONE ELSE, other than Obama and the individuals complicit in the concealment of these documents, has the information NECESSARY to take an informed position and defend it with any integrity.
Leave a Comment