It’s a miracle. An individual employed by the state of Hawaii (“Dr. Fukino,” Director of the Hawaiian State Department of Health) today has spoken by way of special visionary powers that enable her to determine what qualifies as evidence and proof of fulfillment of Constitutional requirements for the Presidency by merely looking at a piece of paper. She has, so she is described today, exercised this special power to identify Constitutionally-defined conditions by the mere flash of her eye, by taking a long glance at a document and deeming it — miracles of miracles — real, proof, all that heady stuff, just by looking at it.
And White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs — this is another miracle — has deemed by his mere decree that a graphic file on the internet is a “Birth Certificate” that “proves” Obama was “born in the U.S.” and is therefore qualified to be President. Miracles just continue, it’s as if Obama has enabled all his congregation these special powers to declare, deem and anoint just by looking, just by waving things around: like I wrote, miracles.
So I’ve coined a phrase for this Obama congregation: “NONBIRTHERS.” They’re the makers of miracles and the “explainers of truth” who make determinations — these miracles — of what’s what and who is who with not so much as a dream of what they think should be. Nonbirthers, the Obama congregation that thinks if they wave the paper around wildly enough, spend more than two minutes glancing at a piece of paper, just say it into being — like God — then they’ve created the “truth” that the rest of us have to accept. Accept their miracles and special powers or, I guess so it looks their goal is, perish.
This doctor in Hawaii took a look at a document and — miracle here — decided the document was the official Birth Certificate of Barack Obama, AND — another miracle here — she announced that then meant that “Obama is a natural-born citizen.”
Nonbirthers. The congregation of Obama who believe that their general assumptions and ensuing declarations define what is truth, real and what is not, that, apparently as the grandiose, unspecific but assertive Dr. Fukino is suggesting, she not only has some special powers to declare pieces of paper official and “real” but that she is suggesting, by her irreverance and lack of professional ethics, that Obama was never born, he was wrought: out of the chaos, from the generalizations of those who adulate him, by speaking a phrase, he was so. That, as Robert Gibbs — another Nonbirther — has decided, to believe is sense, to not believe is laughable, to be ridiculed, to be demeaned. Nonbirthers, special powers, miracles!
From outside the window of their looney church, however, there are these observations:
— a doctor in Hawaii or anywhere else is no document expert and can only review any piece of paper and determine one thing and one thing only: that they’ve reviewed a piece of paper; and then report on what their opinion is of that piece of paper, what it said, what color it was, what size, how new or old they guessed it might be, things of that nature.
No doctor — or anyone else without great care and expertise — can review a piece of paper and declare that it “means” or equates with any Constitutional requirement for the Presidency. The doctor in Hawaii assuming she possesses this special power that enables her to proclaim that Obama “is a natural-born citizen” simply by looking at a piece of paper is dubiously qualified to be conducting much of anything of the expert sort — that declaration in and of itself by that doctor in Hawaii suggests she is not at all there, there.
Nonbirthers. They opine elaborate exaggerations such that, so they suggest, anything exact and specific is to be ridiculed.
Again, an observation from outside the Nonbirther church of Obama: being born in the U.S. (or not) does not render one “natural-born” as a citizen, if citizen at all. The Constitutional requirements for the Presidency are that one be both a U.S. citizen AND a “natural-born” citizen: born in the U.S. to parents who are U.S. citizens (or at least one of them) who is a minimum of twenty-one years of age and has resided in the U.S. for (I believe it is) five or eight years prior to the birth of the child.
If under that age and/or of limited residence in the U.S. and showing up in lesser time than that and then giving birth in the U.S., the child is a U.S. citizen BUT NOT “NATURAL-BORN”. So that child isn’t Constitutionally qualified for the Presidency.
Obama’s mother was just into her eighteenth year at the time of his birth, had resided outside the U.S. for a period of time in the months prior to his birth and whether or not she made it back to Hawaii to deliver him or not, the father of Obama was not a U.S. citizen and right there are the conditions that compromise his ability to claim to be “natural-born” as a U.S. citizen. Combine those complications with Obama’s becoming a citizen and resident of Indonesia after being adopted by Mr. Soetoro in Indonesia, and there’s even the possibility that, after returning to the U.S. years later, Obama may have even lost his U.S. citizenship since he never approached naturalization after his return (and naturalization would have also rendered him non-qualfied for the Presidency).
All of these details and requirements have to be addressed by person capable of understanding them — clearly the lady doctor in Hawaii is not — and who have an understanding of what the terms mean as the Constitution states them to be. HOWEVER, what annoys me in this situation as of today is the extensive energy being deployed for purposes of ridiculing very reasonable questions about Barack Obama’s birth circumstances. And Obama’s lengthy and exceptionally expensive attempts to avoid proving just who he is.
It calls into question why the questions are not simply responded to with appropriate documentation. Instead, Obama has hidden all defining documents about who he is, refuses to release information that would substantiate or refute many of his claims about who he is and relies on people such as the irreverent Robert Gibbs to ridicule millions of Americans who exercise a responsible position in asking these questions: who is the guy in the White House and what about all those loopholes and contradictions in the information as he’s reported it but refused to document it?
Nonbirthers, all those people who ridicule those with questions but cannot respond with anything else except ridicule of the questions themselves.
My first impression of the entire birth circumstances of one Barack Obama was that the questions about such were reasonable, interesting and would, certainly I thought, be quickly answered with reputable, credible documentation. When that didn’t happen (and it continues not to happen, that credible documentation), I became keenly interested only because the massive amount of information I read about Obama tipped the scale of reasonable doubt way over into extreme doubt about who the man actually is.
For whomever he may be, is, or hopes to be accepted as, the information I’ve read about him raises more questions about who he is than he has ever attempted to answer and the non-answer creates another round of questions: why not just answer the questions, why the millions of dollars spent by Obama to not answer the questions and worse, today, why the aggressive denigration efforts to ridicule, demean and perhaps ruin anyone who asks these questions?
If you can’t believe him once, when can you believe him? Rogue medical doctors play-acting at being Constitutional and document experts only adds to the ridiculousness of the non-answer, the Nonbirther’s position: Obama was not born, he was made. Or so it seems to be said by the Nonbirthers.
“NATURAL-BORN CITIZEN” DEFINED – what our U.S. Constitution says about who qualifies for U.S. citizenship and among those, who is “natural-born” and qualifies for the Presidency — and it looks more than likely that Barack Obama does not qualify under the U.S. Constitution as “natural-born citizen,” regardless of what overreaching, overassuming, public employees in Hawaii irreverently and irrationally declare.
In December ‘08 a retired CIA officer commissioned an investigator to look into the Barack Obama birth certificate and eligibility issue. On July 21, 2009 westernjournalism.com obtained a copy of the investigator’s report. Here is an unedited version of the report.
…I asked the Dept of Health what they currently ask for (in 2008) to back up a parent’s claim that a child was born in Hawaii. I was told that all they required was a proof of residence in Hawaii (e.g. a driver’s license [We know from interviews with her friends on Mercer Island in Washington State that Ann Dunham had acquired a driver’s license by the summer of 1961 at the age of 17] or telephone bill) and pre-natal (statement or report that a woman was pregnant) and post-natal (statement or report that a new-born baby has been examined) certification by a physician. On further enquiry, the employee that I spoke to informed me that the pre-natal and post-natal certifications had probably not been in force in the ‘60s. Even if they had been, there is and was no requirement for a physician or midwife to witness, state or report that the baby was born in Hawaii…(Continued)