By Yael T. Abouhalkah, Kansas City Star Editorial Page columnist
It's Friday, and the 'birthers' who claim President Barack Obama wasn't born in the USA have had their week in the media spotlight.
Now it's time to return to the real world.
That's because the facts -- as outlined in countless stories this week by reputable and even some conservative sources -- show Obama was born in Hawaii.
Just like he claims.
The bottom line is that the 2007 document called a Certification of Live Birth is a real, official document that has the state officially saying Obama was born in Hawaii.
It is a birth certificate.
That document, issued by the state, is based on Obama's (unreleased) original 1961 birth certificate.
The birth certificate that millions of Americans can see on line is based on the original birth certificate.
Which, by the way, Hawaii state officials reiterated this week that they have once again examined and affirmed that it shows Obama was born in that state.
End of story -- at least for anyone not living in a fantasy world.
Delicious
Digg
اغاني جديدة
اغاني جديدة |
اغاني خليجية |
اغاني |
اغاني سعودية |
اغاني كويتية mp3
اغاني اماراتية |
اغاني لبنانية |
اغاني مصرية |
اغاني شامية |
اغاني سورية |
اغاني عراقية |
اغاني مغربية |
اغاني عربية |
اغاني يمنية |
البومات جديدة |
اغاني MP3 |
طرب |
اغاني اجنبية |
اغاني جلسات |
اغاني شعبية |
اغاني ريمكسات |
تحميل اغاني mp3 |
اغاني طربيه |
احدث الالبومات |
احدث الالبومات الخليجية |
احدث الالبومات المصرية |
اخر الالبومات |
جديد الالبومات |
جديد الاغاني |
جديد الاغاني |
تحميل اغاني |اغاني جديده | خريطة الموقع |
اغاني طربية |
االبومات mp3 |
احدث الالبومات العربيةفي آي بي للبيع والشراء
منتدي
منتديات
بيع
شراء
عقار في أي بي
عقارات مقاولات
تجارة
المقاولات التجارة مزارع للبيع
مباني للبيع
شقق للبيع فيلات في آي بي للبيع والشراء
بيع وشراء العقارات والأسهم
والمقاولات وتجارة عامة
بيع وشراء السيارات والمركبات
والنقليات
بيع وشراء أجهزة الجوال
والأرقام المميزة
بيع وشراء الكماليات
والمنوعات وسوق المرأة
المنتدى العام
بيع وشراء أجهزة الكمبيوتر
والانترنت والإلكترونيات والكهربائيات
المنتدى الاسلامي
منتدى المشرفين
المنتديات العامة
منتدى الشكاوي والإقتراحات
منتدى الوظائف والتوظيف
منتدى الذهبيين
متجر الذوق
عقارات المنطقة الجنوبية
ومنها أبها والباحة ونجران وجيزان وباقي مدنها
عقارات المنطقة الشمالية
ومنها تبوك وحائل والجوف والحدود الشمالية وباقي مدنها
عقارات المنطقة
الشرقية ومنها الدمام والخبر والظهران والجبيل والأحساء وباقي مدنها
عقارات المنطقة الغربية
ومنها جدة ومكة المكرمة والمدينة المنورة والطائف وباقي مدنها
عقارات المنطقة الوسطى ومنها
الرياض والقصيم والخرج وباقي مدنها
عقارات باقي الدول العربية
والعالمية
اسهم ومقاولات وتجارة عامة
بيع وشراء أجهزة الجوال
بجميع أنواعها
الاقسام الإدارية
المنتدى الادبي
منتدى المرأة
منتدى الضحك والوناسة
منتدى الشباب
منتدى الكمبيوتر والانترنت
منتدى الماسنجريات
منتدى الجوال
الرياضة بجميع انوعها
السيارات بجميع موديلاتها
التوبكات
صور
بيع وشراء لوحات السيارات
بيع وشراء أرقام شركة
الاتصالات
بيع وشراء أرقام شركة
موبايلي
بيع وشراء أرقام شركة زين
بيع وشراء أرقام باقي
الشركات العربية والعالمية
منتدى المواضيع المحذوفة
والمكرره
منتدى رمضان
سوق المرأة مستعمل فلل للبيع ارض للبيع سوق فله للبيع شقه للبيع تأشيره للبيع تأشيرات للبيع فيز للبيع مخططات لكزس كامري سياره للبيع سيارات للبيع فورد كورولا جيب لوحه مميزه لوحات مميزه للبيع رقم مميز رقم مميز للبيع ارقام مميزه لوحه للبيع ارقام للبيع جوالات للبيع جوال للبيع نوكيا سوا الرقم الخاص رقم شحن رقم عام ارقام شحن ارقام عامه عطور مكياج ادوات تجميل مجوهرات العاب الزوجيه كمبيوتر للبيع لاب توب للبيع موقع للبيع ايميل للبيع محمول للبيع مودم للبيع كونكت للبيع وظيفه وظائف توظيف فرص وظيفيه
I guess they are very tight
I guess they are very tight with the reserves. Funds may come in shortage. They must be wise enough to spend it.
mail in gold
Wrong
Hr2454tax falls into this second category. Inadvertently, Hr has demonstrating why it would be useless to show any documentation by providing a list of things that would eventually be asked for—probably not even an exhaustive list. This is followed by rank speculation—Hr is “pretty sure it will become very obvious that he told some real whoppers - LIES - about his life in those books and in his 'public' information.” I suppose for people who don’t like Obama, speculation is enough. No matter how many documents are released some people will cling to the idea that Obama must be hiding something.
Then Apop joins in with facts—and damn funny ones, too. Facts? Facts? Apop you are smart enough to know that facts have no place in this discussion. Indeed, the “hiding something” crowd is relying almost entirely on the absence of facts. I suspect you are just stirring the pot and waiting to hear further rationalization supported by different “facts.” I will say nothing to dissuade you in this endeavor.
Several polls show that a majority of republicans doubt Obama is an American citizen. One from just a week or so ago indicated close to 60% of Republicans can be considered birthers.
The poll was from the Daily Kos, which is still pushing many "truther" conspiracy theories.
The poll was conducted by an independent agency and posted on the Daily Kos website.
You Tell Me
At last check, US code does not trump the US Constitution nor does it run counter to SCOTUS settled case law. You cite the Title and Section that has been codified and continue on with "...Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born" Can you point to a specific part of our constitution or somewhere in SCOTUS cases where this quote derives from?
Allow me to retort:
Article II of the US Constitution: "...No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States." THAT IS THE LAW
Supreme Court of the United States; United States v. Wong Kim Ark 1898. Justice Gray writing for the majority: "...The right of citizenship never descends in the legal sense, either by the common law or under the common naturalization acts. It is incident to birth in the country, or it is given personally by statute. The child of an alien, if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle." THE RULE OF LAW
Once again, notice that Justice Gray DOES NOT SAY "...The child of an alien, if born in the country, is as much a NATURAL BORN citizen as the natural born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle."
The constitution plainly separates the requirements for holding office in the legislative branch (citizen) and the executive branch (natural born citizen). This separation continues with Justice Gray's words "...child of AN ALIEN ...is as much a citizen as the natural born child..". Clearly there is a difference between someone born of two citizens and someone born of one or more non-citizens.
These are not my words, my opinions, but rather the words of our laws and the rule of those laws. You can view these words in the constitution at http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#Article2
and you can view the supreme court ruling at http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0169_0649_ZO.html
That's the law. I've quoted and cited my sources. Now you tell me, is the law being broken?
Rule of Law
OK.
"Currently, Title 8 of the U.S. Code fills in those gaps. Section 1401 defines the following as people who are "citizens of the United States at birth:"
Anyone born inside the United States *
Anyone falling into these categories is considered natural-born"
Rule of Law
1898 SCOTUS decision United States v. Wong Kim Ark
Gray, in writing for the majority: "The right of citizenship never descends in the legal sense, either by the common law or under the common naturalization acts. It is incident to birth in the country, or it is given personally by statute. The child of an alien, if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle."
That is what Gray wrote, what he did NOT write is: "The child of an alien, if born in the country, is as much a NATURAL BORN citizen as the natural born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle."
To be constitutionally eligible for POTUS, it doesn't matter WHERE you are born, only that you are NATURAL born. Having a parent with British citizenship forever removes the opportunity to be considered NATURAL BORN in this country, at least according to the SCOTUS.
BHO is a citizen of the US without question. The operative question is whether or not he fulfills the requirements to hold the office of president as spelled out in the constitution. Having a parent who is loyal to the British crown is exactly the situation that the constitution plainly seeks to avoid.
Here are the facts: BHO is a US citizen. BHO's father was a British subject, SCOTUS made the distinction between citizen and Natural Born citizen, and hence BHO does not meet constitutional requirements. All we need to know to make an educated determination is what is written in the constitution, what is written in case law by the supreme court, and what we know about BHO's father.
Since when is it considered political in nature to follow the constitution using SCOTUS case law for interpretation? This has nothing to do with Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, conservatives, independants, or liberals. Follow the rule of law for crying out loud.
Daily Kos
Hr2454tax falls into this second category. Inadvertently, Hr has demonstrating why it would be useless to show any documentation by providing a list of things that would eventually be asked for—probably not even an exhaustive list. This is followed by rank speculation—Hr is “pretty sure it will become very obvious that he told some real whoppers - LIES - about his life in those books and in his 'public' information.” I suppose for people who don’t like Obama, speculation is enough. No matter how many documents are released some people will cling to the idea that Obama must be hiding something.
Then Apop joins in with facts—and damn funny ones, too. Facts? Facts? Apop you are smart enough to know that facts have no place in this discussion. Indeed, the “hiding something” crowd is relying almost entirely on the absence of facts. I suspect you are just stirring the pot and waiting to hear further rationalization supported by different “facts.” I will say nothing to dissuade you in this endeavor.
Several polls show that a majority of republicans doubt Obama is an American citizen. One from just a week or so ago indicated close to 60% of Republicans can be considered birthers.
The poll was from the Daily Kos, which is still pushing many "truther" conspiracy theories.
An Issue of Doubt - A Question of Law
There is no doubt that Barack Obama is a US citizen because he was born in Hawaii. Those who claim otherwise without proof do a disservice to our country. And the media who fan the flames of this conspiracy theory are complicit. However, those who assume that being a US citizen from birth equals being a natural born citizen do a disservice, too. The latter is not a conspiracy, but a question of constitutional law. And the media who ignore this issue are derelict.
The Constitution does not define natural born citizen. There is much evidence that being a natural born citizen requires two US citizen parents.
For the first time ever, the US knowingly elected a president who was born after 1787 and whose parents were not both US citizens at the time of birth. (For the exception, see Chester Arthur.) Isn't this unique situation worthy of the discussion as to whether or not this satisfies the requirement that the president be natural born?
There is no US law that designates anyone as a natural born citizen. From time to time the Supreme Court has designated an individual as a natural born citizen, but it has never done so for anyone who did not have two US citizen parents.
The 14th Amendment was adopted in 1868. The 14th Amendment describes circumstances under which a person would be considered a citizen.
Subsequently, the Supreme Court decided Minor v. Happerset in 1874. In this case, the Court said that the Constitution does not say in words who would be a natural born citizen. This includes the 14th Amendment. Therefore, the 14th Amendment does not designate anyone to be a natural born citizen, either directly or indirectly.
Later, in United States v. Wong Kim Ark 1898, the Court said that Wong Kim Ark was just as much a citizen as the natural born children of a citizen. But Wong Kim Ark was not a natural born citizen. The Wong Kim Ark case is the Holy Grail for Obama defenders, but it is a fig leaf of legitimacy.
What does the Constitution intend by "natural born citizen?" This question will not be answered by public opinion, an election, the Electoral College, the Congress, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, or by me. This uncertainty can be resolved only by a Supreme Court opinion or by a constitutional amendment.
Was George Washington a natural born citizen? Why did Chester Arthur go to great lengths to successfully cover up the fact that he was born before his father was naturalized as a US citizen?
Again, this is question of law, not of the birth certificate. Barack Obama is without doubt a US citizen, and he has been one from the moment of his birth in Hawaii. Is this the only requirement to be a natural born citizen? There is much evidence that says no.
Birthers win!
Obama's out! He was born in Kenya, and his mother flew back reaalll quick to Hawaii and phonied up a birth certificate!
Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States---Joseph Robinette Biden, Junior!
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAA.....
BTW, YuEfo, nobody on this planet gives a rat's pajamas what libertarians do, say, or think. Whyn't you go over in the corner and play with Nader's Raiders?
Birthers lose?
As a left-leaning libertarian, I was a fan of MSNBC. But after listening to the hysterical ad hominen attacks of Keith Olbermann, Rachel Maddow and Chris Matthews for the past couple weeks, that has changed. "crazy, tinfoil hats, right-wing nuts, right-wing racists, etc." One thing I know for sure--when name calling is the primary attack methodology, you know they've got a problem, a big, big problem. Curious that an absurd conspiracy theory with no validity would garner so much of their air time, eh? Every day? Just wait till people finally begin to understand that Hawaii, up until the '70s, handed out certificates to anyone, from anywhere, who simply said they were born there, then the game changes. Barry, your number's up. Thanks for the Constitutional crisis.