The "Birther" Issue from my perspective

On the birther issue - none of the claims of the Obamites to have produced a valid birth certificate are true. There is an easy way to resolve the issue, but the opponents of disclosure (of which there are many in the media) seem unable to grapple with the real issue, and instead resort to mockery or dismissive jibes. What are they afraid of? Why not just get together and demand that he release the original birth certificate? What is so hard about that?

The behavior of the opponents of disclosure fits the pattern of those who are guilty of what they are accused of. The solution is so simple, and yet they will not even address the question of releasing the original document. The "Birthers" are subjected to lies, misdirection, stonewalling, scorn and mockery, legal obfuscation, threats, even fines - anything, but a straightforward response to the request for disclosure. 

Recall that Lou Dobbs got in serious trouble with his network for daring to even suggest that the Birther's have a point. Clearly, the Obama administration is extremely touchy about the issue, employing an expensive law firm to deflect the legal challenges. The bill to the taxpayers exceeds $1.5 million, and is still rising.

The most accurate information available to the interested party is to be found at http://www.wnd.com/
Appeals to the Liberal http://www.snopes.com/ are useless because they merely regurgitate the "company line" without having really answered the objections of the Birther's to the misleading information that has been put forth by the Obamites as "proof" that he was born in Hawaii. It is true that there is a kind of paper trail concerning the baby Obama in Hawaii. What is missing is the original long-form birth certificate. What has been made public is not that document.

"Birthers" would have to colossally stupid and obstinate to continue to object - if the document that has been released by Hawaii answers basic questions concerning where he was born, the attending physician, hospital, date and time, etc. Would not an official document - the original or certified copy thereof be acceptable as proof of where he was born? Don't we normally find such information on a birth certificate? Wouldn't that info, if supplied on the published document, have stopped the mouths of the objectors? One would think so! But no such information exists on that published document. It fails to answer questions that anyone wanting to verify citizenship and place of birth would require to be satisfied.

Any fair minded person who reviews the arguments and evidences put forth by both sides, and thoughtfully considers the points and counter points would have to conclude that the Birther's have good cause to be calling for the original birth certificate to be released.

So much of the integrity our constitutional system rides on the question of whether we have a deliberate usurper in the White House, and commanding our Armed Forces. What if he is not legitimately the President? Does that not matter? I have to believe that it strikes at the heart of our system of government. Can he order the troops into battle? Can he sign bills passed by Congress? Does he have authority to issue executive orders? Does he have the right to speak to the world as the chief executive officer and representative of our government? I think the answers to these questions are very important. And that is why it is important to clear up the questions about his eligibiity to serve as president.

It has been said that "even a child is know by his doings." By that measure, we may identify certain behaviors in this man that cause us to doubt that he is honestly portraying himself as a natural born citizen of the United States. For instance. If he loved this country and respected the office, would he continue to obfuscate through his legal team over a question that could very easily be put to rest by a simple release of the original document? Would not someone in his position want people to know the details?

But consider the lengths that the Obamites have gone to deflect this issue. For a matter that could be put to rest so easily, the amount of smoke and mirrors operating in the Obama camp to shut this down is highly suggestive that they really have something momentus to hide.

If you were Obama, and really were a usurper, what would you do if you were determined to hang onto power? Exactly what he is doing now.

Some seem to have a hard time getting a feel for this issue, so I created a kind of word-picture.

As an illustration: If you suddenly showed up at my door and pushed your way into my house and started to move your stuff in, claiming you owned the house - I would demand you produce a legal title to my house. Of course you could not. But you might hand me some typed up document that purports to be a title, or resort to name-calling, and even insisting that since you were already in the house, "possession is nine-tenths of the law" and other cutie phrases.

I call the cops, but when they show up, they note who you are, and suddenly wash their hands of it, saying that I will need to get a legal writ to have you put out. They ask for a lease or some evidence that you have a right to be there, and you show them the fake Title. They seem more than willing to accept that even though it is not a certified original and it does not have all the proper information indicating when you bought it, how much was paid, and where the original document can be found in the Court records. Mostly though they just don't want to get involved. They act kind of scared of going against you.

Then you press them, and one of them threatens to have me arrested for disturbing the peace because I got a little loud over this usurpation of my property. You gloatingly smile and tell the police that you have been trying to get me to move out, but I am very stubborn and refuse to "face facts." Later that day I get a summons to appear before a magistrate for attempting a "false arrest", and am fined $25,000. I am outraged, but more determined than ever to get you out of my house and to clear my name.

If and when we get to court you will have to produce the certified Title from the courthouse. Of course I know you will not be able to do that. So perhaps it would be understandable that you would hire lawyers to try to avoid the court date, throwing up all kinds of manufactured legal objections to my demand for you to produce the Title.

I discover that somehow you have gotten into my bank account and are able to take my money to fight me with. That is working well for you now.

Yet I persist, and finally, once pinned down in court, you are shown to be a very bold and audacious liar and con man. I find out later that you have been mentored by some of the most virulent criminals in the world, the Chicago Radical Crime Syndicate. Thier mantra: "If you are going to tell a lie, tell a whopper."

I then press charges against you for your actions against me and recover damages. They are huge. You spend the rest of your life in prison, with no hope of parole.

Again I repeat: Where is the Birth Certificate? No valid birth certificate has been released. The supervisor of public records in Hawaii has sealed the document – sealed it to the public. That is a certifiable fact. If the real document, as some of deluded people have asserted, has already been released, then what document remains that is sealed? Interestingly, the Supervisor, contrary to the rules for disclosure, at one point publicly indicated that she has "seen and handled" the document, and that "it shows that Obama was born in Hawaii." This is enough for some people, but wait a minute. The document still has not been produced. Should we believe her? Suppose she is part of the Obama cover up? Why should we take her word, especially when the laws of Hawaii don't permit such disclosures? Would you take the word of the Clerk of the Court that Obama has a good title to your house? Wouldn't you insist on seeing it produced and verified as an actual, certified title? Any reasonable person would. This all smacks of cover-up. "Give them anything, but don't give them the original long-form birth certificate."

This guy was born in Kenya. The Kenyans celebrate that fact, and are expecting lots of money from their countryman who has managed to get into the US presidency. At least some people are willing to acknowledge - even to celebrate his Kenyan birth. See the post on this blog.

You would think the American Media would be interested in truth, but they have run away from this story. Even O'Reilly, who bills himself a "no-spin" artist, openly mocked the "birthers" as nut-jobs. I have to believe that an enormous amount of pressure has been weilded behind the scenes to dissuade people from pursuing the  matter.

I am not a nut-job; not by a long stretch of the imagination; nor am I a fool. There is way too much evidence circulating about this guy for none of it to be true. Why wasn't he vetted? Why are there two certified copies of his certificate of Nomination to run for the Democratic condidate for president - one certifying that he "meets all the constitutional requirements for President" and the other merely affirming that he is the "Democratic Party candidate for the presidency in 2009". Both are signed by Nancy Pelosi, but the first one was withdrawn and the second one posted. Why? Did Nancy Pelosi not want to put her neck further in a noose by swearing to something she knew, or at least suspected, was not true about Obama?

We'll see.