Saturday October 19, 2019
SNc Channels:

Search
About Salem-News.com

 

Dec-08-2008 13:46printcomments

Never Fear, Obama Was Definitely Born Here

The nation's top court has said it will not review Obama's eligibility to serve as the next U.S. President. Factcheck.org backs it up.

Barack Obama
Photo: Obama's MySpace page

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) - The U.S. Supreme Court has rejected an emergency appeal from a New Jersey man who alleges that President-elect Barack Obama is ineligible to be president because he was not born in the United States, but Great Britain.

No comment was issued today as the court rejected the call by Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick, N.J., to intervene in the presidential election.

Donofrio has claimed that since Obama had dual nationality at birth — his mother was American and his Kenyan father at the time was a British subject — he cannot possibly be a "natural born citizen." U.S. birth is a mandatory requirement if any person hoping to become the U.S. president.

Donofrio didn't stop with Barack Obama. He also has claimed that Republican John McCain and Socialist Workers candidate Roger Calero are not natural-born citizens and are ineligible to be president.

It is reported that at least one other appeal over Obama's citizenship remains at the court. The AP reports that Philip J. Berg of Lafayette Hill, Pennsylvania, states that Obama was born in Kenya, not Hawaii as the Presdident-elect and the Hawaii secretary of state have confirmed.

Berg alleges that Obama also may be a citizen of Indonesia, where he lived as a boy, but federal courts have dismissed Berg's lawsuit. The matter has been rejected in federal courts in Pennsylvaniz, Ohio and Washington state.

Obama's critics believe Obama's birth certificate that shows him being born in Hawaii on August 4th 1961, is a fake. The matter has been addressed by state officials in Hawaii, who say they have health department records that determine without a doubt, that Obama was born in Hawaii.

Factcheck.org checked the original document and reported that it does have a raised seal and the usual evidence of a genuine document. Factcheck.org also reproduced an announcement of Obama's birth, including his parents' address in Honolulu, that was published in the Honolulu Advertiser on August 13th 1961.




Comments Leave a comment on this story.
Name:

All comments and messages are approved by people and self promotional links or unacceptable comments are denied.



PS December 11, 2008 7:50 am (Pacific time)

HR you said: "Major reason many go MIS-informed is due to lack of care to know sources. That's why honest news writers have signed their stuff, known as "by-lines", to publicly disclose by reputation and checkable source reliability of what they offer." I agree with that statement except that it does not explain how some will use sources that are highly ideological in nature to skew the news. You agree? I always suggest that one look at all sides and also researche the authors if time allows. There are legitimate reasons why terms like "far left" and "far right" are used to describe different msm organizations. In my opinion there are far more far left outfits and it appears the American people are "getting that" more and more every day as the left loses market share while others increase or maintain their market share. Americans are not dumb, just grossly misinformed, in my opinion. HR why isn't Pelosi and Reid starting the impeachment process? Are they hiding from something that may come back and bite them?


Henry Ruark December 10, 2008 10:05 am (Pacific time)

To all: Explanation re ID is part of truth tonic. "Truth tonic" is code from propaganda days, from famous conspirator who stated: "Truth is best tonic for protection from seeds of distortion and perversion." Old quote from memory; seeking source buried in deep-file, for further report here per our usual pattern for open, honest democratic dialog.


Henry Ruark December 10, 2008 7:56 am (Pacific time)

Discrete: Yours is same propagandistic line of b/s totalitarians have always taken, turned on its head by neocons now. It is part of GOP "Noise machine" line since Reagan-days. In War II it was used to show why Nazi/Fascist regimes MUST control ALL communications OR face ultimate disaster. They failed, in part by pressure for open ID of sources for rapid check despite use of falsities for concealment. BUT now used to provide very damaging shelter for those who cannot stand open, visible, accountable, responsible ID as in regular civil conversation. For medical and police or like channels, source-protection is properly provided by both work pattern and law. THAT does NOT justify usage for false-face purposes otherwise. For open, honest, democratic dialog one needs to know who speaks, from what base, with what experience. Major reason many go MIS-informed is due to lack of care to know sources. That's why honest news writers have signed their stuff, known as "by-lines", to publicly disclose by reputation and checkable source reliability of what they offer. That's journalistic ethic literally for centuries False-face fiction and fantasy (read: "flat-out lies") are the main tools for spin and for distortion/perversion. Best weapon vs such is our "seek with own eyes", then "evaluate with own mind" --which provides source, sets up checkability, leaves any decision firmly up to YOU --thus preventing power of overly-persuasive words from US. Op Eds offer honest"informed opinion" with access to all sources on request with ID to Editor. ID guarantees good faith inquiry as well as open return-address and thus fair face-to-face continuance. HOW can anyone be more open, honest, and "democratic" than that ??? This approach part of original bgrnd taught by my "four guys from Virginia" decades ago, at IU special-training group set up to test out work-pattern. (For the record, that fact is checkable, too...)


PS December 9, 2008 3:54 pm (Pacific time)

Actually I'm not trying to plant a seed at all. Do my gardening in the spring when I can work the soil. Unfortunately this is a story that will not go away regardless of what you,I, the Supreme Court, or anyone else does.


PS December 9, 2008 10:28 am (Pacific time)

Tim King: I personally consider the matter irrelevant. My below comment was about how to just put an end to the rumors. Of course thay all won't be stopped, like the JFK example, but it would probably curtail the rumor somewhat. We as a nation have bigger fish to fry.

Tim King: Yeah, but you are trying to plant a seed and compare two events that could not have less in common than they do.  Come on... the assassination of  President John F. Kennedy and Obama's birth certificate?   You are suggesting that this trivial boring little accusation equates to the possible inside killing of one of the nation's most popular presidents, and I can't see the comparitive value.  JFK might have been killed by the CIA, Barack Obama was born on U.S. soil.  Feel free to make your point, but  I suggest a strong evaluation of your priorities., 


Discreet December 9, 2008 9:47 am (Pacific time)

Advocates for Internet anonymity argue that it is the most important aspect of free speech on the Internet. Anonymity allows for Internet users to express themselves freely without worry of being discovered or tracked, ridiculed, or harassed. This is important to online discussions and forums, especially those involving personal questions or topics, in which those participating do not want to have to admit who or where they are. A perfect example of the importance of such anonymity is in medical forums where patients are free to ask medical questions of doctors or others with similar medical afflictions. Advocates also maintain that Internet anonymity is essential for transmitting information that must remain anonymous. The reporting of illegal activities and criminal behavior via the Internet is also an example of how vital anonymity can be: it gives witnesses and reporters the comfort and security necessary to offer their testimony.


PS December 9, 2008 9:13 am (Pacific time)

I don't see why Obama just has not come out and made a public statement about this matter and provided a certified birth certificate to the media. There will always be conspiracy rumors, heck they debate who asassinated JFK 45 years later. In Obama's case it is costing us taxpayers money and wasting valuable court time. By the way I am "not" the Plain and Simple poster. Would also like to point out that it was Obama who publically stated that his parents "met on the bridge during the Selma march" [1965]. Please note he was born 4 years before that event [1961]. Hopefully this can be cleared up with the appropriate documentation so these rumors can cease.

Tim King: Come on PS, this is a loaded line of BS concocted by Obama's critics.  So you don't think the Supreme Court decision is enough?  That I have no doubt is an extremely narrow opinion.  Let it go, he won and the gop candidate lost by miles.  These characters should at least try to come up with something that is more serious; the birth certificate saga just shows how desperate people are.


Henry Ruark December 9, 2008 8:03 am (Pacific time)

P/S: Many will consider yours from behind-the-tree of synonym just one more classic racist/denial-shot. It demonstrates refusal to accept court authority well documented in two cases and several courts, at varying levels. "Conspiracy"-theory is always a last resort of those plainly suffering from other symptoms, as your own words show here. Re news-notes on births, that is solid societal custom from more than a century of use; it is based on simple facts-known then to those who could and did observe: long months of pregnancy in plain sight, and arrival of the child, usually with neighborhood knowledge. IF you know neighborhood news practice, you would never ever question rational response like that from those in good situation to observe and thus know. They DO observe, as any editor will confirm for you. I'm tempted to write:"Vas you dere, Charlie ??" but your name may not be Charlie. However, observant neighbors surely were --with sharp and pointed questions for sudden appearance of baby from ???


Plain and simple December 8, 2008 3:08 pm (Pacific time)

I was taught to respect my elders, but I am sorry, but it is foolish to base your belief on whether or not Obama was born in the US simply on the fact that a newspaper states: "Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama, 6085 Kalanianaole Hwy., son, Aug 4" He has yet to provide anyone with the proof.

Is this about race? Am I a racist for wanting proof? Absolutely not. If the same issue was raised about any other candidate, particularly a socialist/Marxist pathological narcissist such as Obama, I would be just as concerned, regardless of skin color.  

"It does not matter actually where he was born"???? Then why did the drafters of the US Constitution put take the time to include that? Would it be ok if a person born in China to Chinese parents was elected? Absolutely not! And your argument is ridiculous regarding the birth location of the PARENTS of Jefferson and Hoover, and, the last I checked, Massachusetts was a US state! Obama spent time in Indonesia and had to become a citizen of Indonesia in order to attend school. And, at the same time, had to give up his US citizenship since Indonesia did not allow dual citizenship.

Plain and simple: For the good of the country, OBAMA should prove once and for all that he is elligible to be the President. If he does not, then it is obvious that he has something to hide.




Ted December 9, 2008 5:45 am (Pacific time)

Obama inaugurated 1/20/09? No way. No how. 


new2site December 8, 2008 2:40 pm (Pacific time)

I believe, that focus should be put on the spirit of the founders writings. I dont think they would be too upset, even if a child was born in another country and brought here even two months later. I dont think that is their point. It is about love of country. Being taught while young, the virtues and history of the U.S. THe history of 1776, the Constitution etc. From what I understand, most learned people say that the first 10 years of a childs life are the most impressionable. Family nurturing when very young to provide a well balanced individual, and education in the grade school years to provide them with values and morals, and love of this country. I have not researched Obama's history from age 0 to 10.


doubsack December 8, 2008 2:13 pm (Pacific time)

OBAMA birth was advertised here (13th August 1961 Honolulu Advertiser) http://wikileaks.org/leak/obama-1961-birth-an... As a white man from georgia, who has been voting REpublican for 75 years, I have never witnessed a situation where a candidate has to show his certificate of birth.(President Hoover both parents were not born in USA ). What is wrong with OBAMA situation. You may say i am too old. However, I think it is a racial issue going on here. If my party won the elections, nobody will be talking about Mccain should show his birth certificate. In any case take time to read the constitution located in www.supremecourtus.gov/ . It does not give a reader the definition of 'Natural born'. I suspect that most of above contributors have not read the constitution. Clearly any legal mind will tell you the term 'Naturally born' is open various interpretation. DoNofrio case says Natural born means both parents must be born in USA. Donofrio definition of 'USA natural born' IS NOT SPELLED OUT IN THE CONSTIUTION. THEREFORE HIS CASE WILL BE THROWN OUT, period. My definition of 'Naturally born' could be in a DNA delineage, in which case nobody will qualify, because this land of made of immigrants from different parts of planet earth (including native indians, who immigrate from some where else). AS TO MR OBAMA, YOU CANNOT ASK A CHILD TO PROVE WHERE HE WAS BORN. YOU CAN ONLY RELY ON WHAT OTHER PEOPLE SAY. WOmen can give birth in hospitals, some do at home without any midwife witness (draw your own conclusions). In any case OBAMA birth was advertized in Honolulu new paper on 12th August 1961, 8 days after he was born (4th August 1961). It is clear. NO DOUBT about. OBAMA WAS BORN IS USA (HAWAII, HONOLULU, clearly printed in that local newpaper edition in 1961). I DID NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA, However this man, is of GREAT INTELLECT who will fix up our country problems. MY PARTY (REPULICAN) delivers a disastrous performance over the last eight years under an intellectually ineffectual GUY. LOOK AT WHAT A MAN CAN DO, NOT AT HIS COLOUR OF SKIN. NOW MY PEOPLE ARE ACTUALLY PAYING SOME BLACKLEADERS (Clarence thomas, supreme court and others) to create this mess. PLEASE STOP. IN MY 95 years, I have seen my people misuse, mistreat blacks, native indians, THIS IS THE CHANCE TO BRING PEOPLE TOGETHER to work for our COUNTRY. I WILL ALWAYS VOTE REPUBLICAN, BUT REPUBLICANS AND OTHERS MUST RESPECT THE WILL OF MAJORITY (over 7000000 people spoke clearly in favour of trying again the democrate governing philosophy.). We are in the 21st century. MR OBAMA DOES NOT HAVE SHOW HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE. WHERE WILL YOU STOP, IT WILL NOT PROVE ANYTHING. ANY USA birth certificate, however forensically tested will ONLY TELL YOU THAT 99.9999 % correct. BUT IT IS NOT 100


doubsack December 8, 2008 2:09 pm (Pacific time)

IN August 1961, OBAMA birth was advertised here (13 Th august 1961 edition): http://wikileaks.org/leak/obama-1961-birth-an ... There is no doubt that OBAMA was born in Hawai. It does not matter actually where he was born. because the constitution see(www.supremecourtus.gov/ ) DOES NOT DEFINE 'Naturally born'. It is open to any legal interpretations. The term 'natural born' has no standing in any court of law. Actually quite a few presidents (i.e, Jefferson, Hoover) parents where born abroad. JF Kenedy was born in Massachusset and spent quite a long time in London when his dad was Ambassador. He Did not lose his US citizenship, one can claim that JF kenedy had dual citizenships. But IT DID NOT Matter, people did not question it. So I do not understand why some people are questioning somebody citizenship

[Return to Top]
©2019 Salem-News.com. All opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Salem-News.com.


Articles for December 7, 2008 | Articles for December 8, 2008 | Articles for December 9, 2008
Sean Flynn was a photojournalist in Vietnam, taken captive in 1970 in Cambodia and never seen again.

Your customers are looking: Advertise on Salem-News.com!

googlec507860f6901db00.html
Support
Salem-News.com:

The NAACP of the Willamette Valley

Special Section: Truth telling news about marijuana related issues and events.