#eligibility: Obama Doesn’t Like Questions About His Citizenship
Via WorldNetDaily and TheHill.com comes the following video from today’s National Prayer Breakfast during which President Obama remarked that he doesn’t think that his citizenship should be questioned:
Partial transcript:
…Now, I am the first to confess I am not always right. Michelle will testify to that. But surely you can question my policies without questioning my faith, or, for that matter, my citizenship.
Challenging each other’s ideas can renew our democracy. But when we challenge each other’s motives, it becomes harder to see what we hold in common. We forget that we share at some deep level the same dreams – even when we don’t share the same plans on how to fulfill them.
Once again, a particularly prescient comment — from “RED NECK INN MA” — is on TheHill’s posting:
Personally I am no birther … but I am curious as to why Obama continues to beat on this issue .. is it a politcal ploy by his handlers to continue to use this as a divisive issue?To try and embarrass a certain segment of the popualtion? And if not, why doesn’t he just provide the certificate and end all the specualtion for the conspirators once and for all ? Obama has certainly been a little less than forthcoming on his grades, his Harvard review publications and many other accomplishments he has accomplished .. it makes one wonder what his true intentions are .. and if he is indeed the self described post partisan, post racial, post everything he claims .. seems to me he would disperse this rumor once and for all and lets move on …
Yeah, well, the Democrats actually refuse to give up on the issue; in fact, as HotAir.com has already pointed out, the party wants to make it a political issue for 2010. Not only this, but as Prof. Jacobson notes, calling those of us who challenge this Administration crazy (in one form or another, to include the “birther” pejorative) will likely only inflame the electorate, potentially costing the Democrats even more seats at the end of the year.
Advertise on this site
Now, dare I say that anyone’s smearing the President — he is, after all, smearing himself just fine (no, wait — the teleprompter made him do this latest gaffe!) — the smears against those of us who actually do question this President continue, unfortunately, over at PeachPundit.
Rep. Nathan Deal’s request for information regarding the President’s birth certificate (here’s my latest on that story) has drawn the ire of commenter Loren Collins (I nevertheless congratulate him on the cross-post on Georgia’s biggest blog).
So, what’s the beef? Well, shouldn’t Rep. Deal have to show his birth certificate as a GOP gubernatorial candidate for Georgia Governor? Here’s the same cross-posting snippet (Loren’s link):
I have never seen any proof that Nathan Deal is a U.S. citizen. Unlike President Obama, he has never released any records of his birth. The documentation that is publicly available leaves many things to be desired. Extensive online research turns up only an alleged birthdate and birthplace of Millen, Georgia. Who were his parents? What was the hospital? Who was the delivering doctor? These are questions that need answers.
You see, there are unsourced internet rumors that Nathan Deal was not born in Georgia at all. That instead, his mother gave birth to him while his parents were in Canada, dodging the WWII draft. They then returned to Georgia and registered his birth here. Moreover, there is further rumor that Nathan is actually the son of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. I’m not saying these rumors are true, but when can we expect Deal to produce the documents that would put them to rest? What is he hiding?
And unfortunately, a birth certificate alone cannot settle this matter, even after it’s been forensically examined. Deal has been a U.S. Congressman since 1993, and was previously a Georgia State Senator beginning in 1981. Both offices have citizenship requirements, yet in his nearly three decades in elected office, Nathan Deal has never publicly produced a shred of evidence to support his presumed U.S. birth and citizenship. Three decades of evasion. Even his Congressional website says nothing about his birth, opting instead for the conveniently ambiguous statement that he “was raised in Sandersville, Georgia.” His gubernatorial campaign website avoids the subject of his youth entirely.
And are you aware his first name is not actually “Nathan”? It’s John. John Nathan Deal. Did he ever legally change his name? Could his surname still be Rosenberg? We simply don’t know.
In the interests of full disclosure, I have spoken with Mr. Collins on the phone as he interviewed me for a book that he is writing regarding the eligibility movement. As a part of a follow-up email, he asked me about Rep. Deal and eligibility:
As you know, Nathan Deal has asked Obama to publicly produce a birth certificate. Since Deal is running for governor, and the Georgia governor is required to be a US citizen, do you think Deal should publicly produce his own birth certificate? Should it be
authenticated in the same fashion you’d like to see Obama’s authenticated?
…to which I responded accordingly:
Regarding an answer to your follow-up question:
According to the GeorgiaEncyclopdia.org site, the following candidate qualification requirements must be met in order to be seated as a Governor for Georgia:
- Must be 30 years old “upon assumption of office;”
- Must have been a US citizen (no qualifiers there) for 15 years prior to election;
- Must have been a resident (no qualifiers there) of Georgia for 6 years prior to electionConsistent with my call that federal candidates for the office of the presidency and vice-presidency should be required to show their bona fides, I think it would be similarly helpful if candidates for Governor would submit documentation that substantiates the above qualifications as a part of their request to be put on the ballot.
In the instance that a given candidate’s background is suspect by, say, the Secretary of State’s office, that would be grounds for either further research or disqualification.
Honestly, I don’t see what the problem is in asking for any candidate’s bona fides, especially if some of us have reason to believe that said candidate’s credentials are in doubt. This would be akin to someone having a problem with getting a mortgage because the mortgage broker is asking for documentation of income, thereby putting lower-income individuals at a disadvantage in the process — wait: that “someone” is the federal government making the complaint!
As far as what the President thinks about those of us questioning his background is concerned, I’ll simply say what I’ve been saying in some comments here lately:
Cry me a river, big guy.
You’re a public servant in the highest elected office in the land. You don’t have any rights as President — only specifically-delineated power and authority. Therefore, it’s not up to you to decide who gets to question you and about what. You’re not obligated to answer any questions (unless the Constitution otherwise calls for it), and we’re not obligated to listen to your defiant, ego-laden attitude about questions you don’t like.
See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:
- The background:
- The questions:
-Phil
Subscriptions -=- Twitter: @trsol -=- email: phil [at] therightsideoflife [dot] com
Photo courtesy VOANews.com
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by trsol: New Post: #eligibility: Obama Doesn’t Like Questions About His Citizenship http://bit.ly/daXB7V...
http://blogs.ocweekly.com/navelgazing/the-hilarious-haters/orly-taitz-in-danger-of-disbar/
The Hilarious Haters
[UPDATED:] Orly Taitz in Danger of Disbarment? By Spencer Kornhaber, Monday, Feb. 15 2010 @ 3:57PM
Thank you, Phil. Your work on this blog is much appreciated. You certainly have a higher tolerance than I do.
I commend you for taking this position. I think you have been more than fair with some of the commenters and the opinions they post here.
Please keep up the good work!
elspeth
PS Full disclosure!
bystander says:
February 14, 2010 at 5:45 am
slcraig says:
February 13, 2010 at 12:04 pm
bystander says:
February 13, 2010 at 2:43 am
c.scott says:
February 13, 2010 at 1:17 am
One day Gen X and beyond will wake up and see they got screwed, probably will begin killing us all,or over throw the gov.
.. do you have any hold on reality at all?
Quote of the week
“Obama is part of a long tradition on the left of being for the working class in the abstract, or as people potentially useful for the purposes of the left, but having disdain or contempt for them as human beings.
In other words, they mattered only in so far as they were willing to carry out the Marxist agenda.
–Thomas Sowell
http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2008/04/25/obama-pathos-part-3-another-marx-brother
.. and that is relevant to the previous post in what way precisely?
It is obvious you are grounded in and educated by the School of Political Illusions, Utopia’s, Pure Democracies and other Failed forms of government.
Socialism is a FOREIGN INFLUENCE when it is attempted to be grafted to a Representative Republic.
It is antithetical to the purpose of the Constitution, Individual Liberties.
The collectivist system have FAILED every where, in all of history, it has been tried.
The ONLY reason the Socialists think it is worth doing here is the vast wealth accomplished by the Representative Republican system has produced.
Thieves, being resourceful, have apparently recruited a large number of useful idiots to help them out.
Doing so by usurpation, deceit, deception and concealment of purpose is subject to the strong rebukes it encounters when it crawls out of the darkness and seen for what it is.
C scott said:
Fact:Barack said he was born a Britsh Subject.
.. true and irrelevant as there is no prohibition on dual citizenship.
Fact:Barack was born a Dual Citizen with divided allegiance.
… partially true – he was a dual citizen, he has no divided allegiances in terms of citizenship law, which relates only to the children of diplomats and invading armies.
Fact:Barack has not commented publicly on the status of his foreign citizenships
… he has written a book about it and put the information on his website. He has commented frequently on his Kenyan father. What more do you want?
Fact: Barack has sealed all of his college records, which might shed some light on his Foreign citizenships.
.. not a fact, a myth. The College has declined to release his records, just as they would for anyone else. Obama has not sealed anything.
slcraig says:
February 13, 2010 at 12:04 pm
bystander says:
February 13, 2010 at 2:43 am
c.scott says:
February 13, 2010 at 1:17 am
One day Gen X and beyond will wake up and see they got screwed, probably will begin killing us all,or over throw the gov.
.. do you have any hold on reality at all?
Quote of the week
“Obama is part of a long tradition on the left of being for the working class in the abstract, or as people potentially useful for the purposes of the left, but having disdain or contempt for them as human beings.
Karl Marx said, ‘The working class is revolutionary or it is nothing.’
In other words, they mattered only in so far as they were willing to carry out the Marxist agenda.
Fabian socialist George Bernard Shaw included the working class among the ‘detestable’ people who ‘have no right to live.’
He added: ‘I should despair if I did not know that they will all die presently, and that there is no need on earth why they should be replaced by people like themselves’.”
–Thomas Sowell
http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2008/04/25/obama-pathos-part-3-another-marx-brother
.. and that is relevant to the previous post in what way precisely?
Moderation. In all things.
tancy,
If the former Gov. made any sort of commentary, that was unknown to me when I originally made the comment.
Either way, it should be interesting: do I cut all moderation or send comments back to moderation-only?
-Phil
Bry,
Well guess what, big guy? I’m thinking about stopping all commentary on my site, regardless if coming from friend or foe.
I think I’m at least going back to moderation.
This kind of commentary is simply getting ridiculous, and I’m tired of having to deal with it.
-Phil
brygenon says:
February 13, 2010 at 12:09 pm
c.scott says:
Ok, The Gay white man is counted as an equal minority.
Score them in order of hiring preference.
C.Scott, when you’re pushing the idea that Barack Obama cannot be President of the United States, your own issues with equal opportunity hiring are not a point in your favor.
——————————————————————–
My own issue?
Hardly.
If you leftists think that Gay’s are more oppressed than other minorities and should be on the top of the hirng,college entrance, etc.. prefernce lists, just have Barack say so. Let us know how that works out for you.
I am not pushing any Idea, just the facts. Barack is not the first person in history to Usurp an office and won’t be the last. I am reconciled to the fact that unless he get’s impeached for corruption(the whole rezko mansion thing etc..)he is here to stay, until the next election anyway.
I am in the camp that wants him and other Leftists kicked to the curb in the polling place,just like Jimmy Carter.
Fact:Barack said he was born a Britsh Subject.
Fact:Barack was born a Dual Citizen with divided allegiance.
Fact:Barack has not commented publicly on the status of his foreign citizenships.
Fact: Barack has sealed all of his college records, which might shed some light on his Foreign citizenships.
You can have the last word, I am done here for awhile.
None of that LA Times article actually means that President Obama was a Muslim while in school. All that was said in that article was to confirm that Lolo Soetoro had him registered as a Muslim student. Religion is not a function of your school registration when you are six.
MGB,
“Evidence. Cited and linked before. Quotes from FRIENDS and TEACHERS in Indonesia when he lived there.”
Evidence of what? That Obama, as a child in Indonesia, went to the mosque?
A child cannot “practice” religion. I have witnessed individuals grow up in the Catholic faith and attend the required Catholic curriculum. Yet, when they became adults, they did not practice the Catholic faith.
From:
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/mar/15/nation/na-obama15?pg=3
also from other pages of same LA Times article, March 15, 2007, with emphasis added:
“Barry WAS MUSLIM. He went to the mosque,” Adi said. “I remember him wearing a sarong.”
“The Catholic elementary school had only opened the previous year and wanted to enroll as many students as possible, so it welcomed children of any religion, said Israella Dharmawan, 63, his first-grade teacher. ‘At that time, Barry was also praying in a Catholic way, but Barry WAS MUSLIM,’ Dharmawan said in Obama’s old classroom, where she still teaches 39 years later. ‘He was registered as a Muslim because his father, Lolo Soetoro, was Muslim.’ Like ALL pupils, Obama had to pray before and after each class, and cross himself in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit, Dharmawan said.”
“. . . two of his teachers, former Vice Principal Tine Hahiyari and third-grade teacher Effendi, said they remember clearly that at this school too, he was registered as a MUSLIM, which determined what class he attended during weekly religion lessons. . . . ‘”Muslim students were taught by a Muslim teacher, and Christian students were taught by a Christian teacher,” said Effendi. . . ‘”
Evidence. Cited and linked before. Quotes from FRIENDS and TEACHERS in Indonesia when he lived there.
brygenon says:
February 13, 2010 at 12:09 pm
c.scott says:
Ok, The Gay white man is counted as an equal minority.
Score them in order of hiring preference.
C.Scott, when you’re pushing the idea that Barack Obama cannot be President of the United States, your own issues with equal opportunity hiring are not a point in your favor.
“Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclination, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.” –John Adams
A ‘gay person’, having expressed their ‘gayness’ openly is ‘in effect’ expressing their intention to regard ANY slight that MAY be interpreted as a disparagement, whether coming from the employer, other employees or any others encountered while preforming duties on behalf of the employer, constitutes a liability to the employer which should mitigate the obligation to disregard the applicants ’status’ in the consideration to hire.
This consideration is applicable to a variety of categories of individuals based on the ‘open-ness’ of their disclosures.
c.scott says:
C.Scott, when you’re pushing the idea that Barack Obama cannot be President of the United States, your own issues with equal opportunity hiring are not a point in your favor.
bystander says:
February 13, 2010 at 2:43 am
c.scott says:
February 13, 2010 at 1:17 am
One day Gen X and beyond will wake up and see they got screwed, probably will begin killing us all,or over throw the gov.
.. do you have any hold on reality at all?
Quote of the week
“Obama is part of a long tradition on the left of being for the working class in the abstract, or as people potentially useful for the purposes of the left, but having disdain or contempt for them as human beings.
Karl Marx said, ‘The working class is revolutionary or it is nothing.’
In other words, they mattered only in so far as they were willing to carry out the Marxist agenda.
Fabian socialist George Bernard Shaw included the working class among the ‘detestable’ people who ‘have no right to live.’
He added: ‘I should despair if I did not know that they will all die presently, and that there is no need on earth why they should be replaced by people like themselves’.”
–Thomas Sowell
http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2008/04/25/obama-pathos-part-3-another-marx-brother
bystander says:
February 13, 2010 at 2:43 am
c.scott says:
February 13, 2010 at 1:17 am
One day Gen X and beyond will wake up and see they got screwed, probably will begin killing us all,or over throw the gov.
.. do you have any hold on reality at all?
You guys are aware that the ‘Trust Fund’ exists in the form of ‘Debt’ don’t you?
The money has been spent through the ‘General Fund’ and the ‘Trust Fund’ received IOU’s.
That means that the Tax Payers are now on the hook for the ‘interest’ that would have been paid on the actual funds AND the ‘interest’ on the ‘IOU’s” that replaced the actual funds.
These little accounting maneuvers represent only a small part of the FRAUD that has been and is taking place in the ’system’ as a whole, complements of the generosity of the American People.
c.scott,
“There would be no preference other than the individual that is the most qualifed and had the best reference from his/her previous employer.”
“Maybe out on the ranch, but that’s not how it works in the real world.”
Really? I’m so glad you told me this. Duh! Unfortunately, you are correct. People get jobs and positions based upon their contacts and social status rather than their own ability and achievements.
Guess who controls that “good ole boy” system? Educated, white, wealthy men in this country.
Example: You’ve got two medical school applicants(top tier) of equal qualifications for entry into medical school. One of them comes from a long line of specialty area physicians. The other comes from a long line of blue collar workers. Which one do you think is going to be accepted into the top tier medical school? And, many times, the son/daughter of the blue collar worker qualifications are better than the son/daughter of the specialty area physician.
BTW, what do you do in the “real world”?
c.scott says:
February 13, 2010 at 1:17 am
One day Gen X and beyond will wake up and see they got screwed, probably will begin killing us all,or over throw the gov.
.. do you have any hold on reality at all?
The fact is that social security is a Ponzi scheme, those at the bottom will get left holding the bag.
Best if you can get on Disability and milk the system, from the numbers it looks like many are on to that.
One day Gen X and beyond will wake up and see they got screwed, probably will begin killing us all,or over throw the gov.
[Social Security could be brought into actuarial balance over the next 75 years with changes equivalent to an immediate 16 percent increase in the payroll tax (from a rate of 12.4 percent to 14.4 percent) or an immediate reduction in benefits of 13 percent or some combination of the two. Ensuring that the system remains solvent on a sustainable basis beyond the next 75 years would require larger changes because increasing longevity will result in people receiving benefits for ever longer periods of retirement.]
[Is there a point to this?]
The Lefties in Government like to pontificate to those of us out here actually running a buisness,they do not have a clue. Recent statements by dear leader O have shown that.
[There would be no preference other than the individual that is the most qualifed and had the best reference from his/her previous employer.]
Maybe out on the ranch, but that’s not how it works in the real world.
2037 is just a projection, not fact. Just as the earlier number was just a projection that suddenly got changed. Operating in the red means that it will be taking in less money than paying out. Not bankruptcy.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2010-02-07-social-security-red-retirements_N.htm
“tancy says:
February 12, 2010 at 4:52 pm
AnotherReader says:
February 12, 2010 at 4:15 pm
“Social Security is not drawn down until 2037
Social Security went into the RED this YEAR.”
Untrue. The Social Security trust fund has sufficient funds to pay out benefits until 2037. The Social Security trust fund is projected to take in more money than it pays out until 2016.
You should learn the facts instead of making stuff up.
http://www.nasi.org/sites/default/files/research/Brief_Findings_of_the_2009_Trustees_Report_.pdf”
——————————————————————–
tancy,
Yep, they make statements and regard them as fact, yet they never ever cite their source.
AnotherReader says:
February 12, 2010 at 4:15 pm
“Social Security is not drawn down until 2037
Social Security went into the RED this YEAR.”
Untrue. The Social Security trust fund has sufficient funds to pay out benefits until 2037. The Social Security trust fund is projected to take in more money than it pays out until 2016.
You should learn the facts instead of making stuff up.
http://www.nasi.org/sites/default/files/research/Brief_Findings_of_the_2009_Trustees_Report_.pdf
Sue says:
February 12, 2010 at 2:29 pm
slcraig,
You are one very sick puppy.
That answer, as it is instructive of your naïveté, shows me, and anyone who encounters such, that you conceive your ideas through ‘feelings’ that ignore the realities of life and attempt to make wants equivalent to needs.
Your dear leader is learning these lessons the hard way, which would be fine were it not for the fact that he is subjecting the entire Nation to the dangerous consequences of his naïveté.
One of you indicated that you thought I am a relic and that time had past me by and I’m not capable of understanding the ‘modern world’.
Such is arrogance when wrapped in the ignorance of the past, chasing a tomorrow that is incongruent with the realities of life and history, day after day, ‘till finally you look back on your own footsteps and stand aghast at the end of the path your fantasies have led you to.
Social Security went into the RED this YEAR.
c. scott,
“Score them in order of hiring preference.”
Is there a point to this? There would be no preference other than the individual that is the most qualifed and had the best reference from his/her previous employer. Why did you leave out a woman?
c.scott says:
February 12, 2010 at 2:37 pm
“So you are unemployed now, understood.”
I am employed. Nothing I have written would lead you to believe I am unemployed. You made it up to try to fit me into your pre-conceived notions of liberals. Nor can you reach any conclusion about my age or race or economic level. You should examine your prejudices.
By the way, 45% of the people over 65 who voted in the 2008 election voted for Obama. 52% of the people who make more than $200,000 voted for Obama. As of 2009, Social Security is not drawn down until 2037. When the economy is good, the life of SS is longer.
http://www.ssa.gov/OACT/TR/index.html
Which one should I hire?”
You say they are all equally qualified; however, I would presume you had required work references? If so, i would contact the work references of each individual and hire the one who was given the best work reference by his previous employers.
Also, do I count the white gay man as a minority?”
Yes, because they are in the minority (gays) and I certainly would not refuse to hire them simply because they were gay.
http://www.medindia.net/news/Gays-Lesbians-Increasingly-Powerful-in-US-Court-Told-in-Landmark-Trial-64206-1.htm
——————————————————————–
Ok, The Gay white man is counted as an equal minority.
Score them in order of hiring preference.
tancy says:
February 12, 2010 at 8:24 am
c.scott says:
February 12, 2010 at 6:52 am
“My experience is that they like to sit back on the sidelines pontificate and whine.
Capitalism is a beautiful thing.”
——————————————————————–
[Actually more than 3 million of us walked the pavement…. (blah blah blah, blah)
——————————————————————–
So you are unemployed now, understood.
You also seem to be hung up on labels. Very angry.
If I learned anything over the years about elections is that old goats sitting back in the barca loungers are the ones who keep you in office, year after year. We used to go out and drive them to the polls.
There are exceptions to the rule. Youths are not dependable voters.
Politicians will always pander to the seniors, because that is how they stay in power. They Vote!!
It will be intersting when the social security bubble bursts and the 16/1 worker to retiree ratio, goes to 2/1.
Gen X will be the new slaves. Along with the Illegals (we will need them to pay taxes).
slcraig,
You are one very sick puppy.
“There are no pictures of human life so wearisome and insipid as the Utopias of poets and reformers.
We sincerely try to admire the; but in the end we secretly turn away from them and say,
“Give us the world as it is, with all its topsy-turvydoms and inequalities, its squalor and its splendor, its low attainments and steep ideals, its ecstasies and its agonies, as a place to live in.”
“Nature does not send all of her children into the world equally endowed for the battle of life; she does not place them in equally advantageous conditions; she does not seem to care for the interests of the less fortunate as she does for those of the fortunate.
Accordingly, the race is to the swift and the battle to the strong; and though by degrees the ascending scale of life is climbed and the world is filled with finer and happier creatures,
yet is every step of that stairway slippery with the blood of those who have perished on the way up.
The final result is glorious, but the method by which it has been attained seems, at least at first sight, strangely ruthless and coldly cruel.”
“The more we do so, the clearer I think our conviction that it is a fact bedded into the very foundation and fabric of the world.
This is no accident, no chance happening; it is one of Nature’s ineradicable, ubiquitous laws.
Those who dream of an ideal social condition in which the manifold differences that distinguish men as regards their outward lot and fortune, their ultimate destiny in life, are to be finally and forever leveled, and in which all are to have an equal share in the good existence, may be filled with a most noble and laudable ambition; but it is certain they are flying in the face of the Constitution of the Universe.
Men are not born equal, nor do they fair equally, nor can any artificially arranged equality amongst them be long maintained.
You may minimize the evils of inequality, and readjust your estimates of men in view of their wide differences of gift and opportunity, but the fact you will never remove.
Not for all your heats and your outward revolts will you reverse this law; you must reconstruct the Universe ere you will annul its operation or undo its consequences.
In dealing with a fact like this, it is better therefore, frankly to face it, than fruitlessly to gird at it.
Excerpts; E.Griffith-Jones
So, considering that, would you have it that the Founders had done something other than Establish the Republic?
Or are you intent on tearing down all they accomplished with your words, ‘who cares’?