I've heard this Obama's "fake birth certificate" thing all over the wingnut radio, but was surprised to see an actual real lawsuit has been filed as a civil action in Federal Court. What is surprising is that no one has yet sued Panamanian-born McCain over potentially legitimate reasons regarding his "natural born" status.
Now, back to the lawyer involved here is reported to be a "Clinton supporter" who "filed this suit for the best interests of the Democratic Party and the citizens of the United States". This is also a favorite venue of Philip J. Berg, esquire, to file at U.S. District Court in Philadelphia, Berg vs. Obama, Civil Action No. 08-cv-4083. One previous filing was Bergs' RICO filing against Bush for 9/11, also filed in the U.S. District Court in Philadelphia, is Rodriguez v. Bush, et al., Civil Action No. 04-cv-4952.
The tactics seem a little too blatant (as in The Simpsons' "superliminal") and aside from the obvious attack on Obama's citizenship and Americanism, there seems to be no subtly to it and almost a blatant effort to make it seem like the Democrats are attacking themselves. For one thing, the scans of the filings in the Obama case are hosted on "obamacrimes.com", and as for Berg... well, you should read his blog: www.911forthetruth.com/pages/BergBlog.htm
And if this snippet from the filing is any indication... this guy should be laughed out of the courtroom, if only for citing "Wikipedia" and the Italian version at that for his evidence in his "complaint" (posted on Berg's ask-for-donations website Obamacrimes.com)
18. Upon investigation into the birth of Barack Hussein Obama in Honolulu, Hawaii, Obama’s birth is reported as occurring at two (2) separate hospitals, Kapiolani Hospital and Queens Hospital. Wikipedia English Version under the subject “Barack Obama” states Obama was born at Kapiolani Hospital. Wikipedia Italian Version under the subject “Queens Hospital” states Barack Obama was born in Queens Hospital. (p.5)Yes, his court filing cites Wikipedia as the proof of TWO hospital names listed. One might perhaps also investigate this "Kapiolani" word and discover that Queen Kapi'olani has a rich history in Hawaii and I'm guessing it may be possible that "Queens" hospital and Kapiolani Hospital might be one in the same. Of course that was 30 seconds of googling, and Mr. Berg only sticks to Wikipedia for his lawsuits.
For the record this is classic GOP Rovian tactics, spread some rumor about black babies or fake birth certificates.
Will the media actually do their job and report the actual interesting other half of this topic, that McCain actually was not born in a US Territory (at the time) and there is reason to question his naturalized status. Again, classic Rovian tactics to take your guys weakest points (Panamanian born in a fictious hospital that was not built at the time) and accuse your opponent of it (Hawaiian born in possibly two different hospitals listed).
- intranets's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Front page
Comments
No one needs to take this post seriously
What is surprising is that no one has yet sued Panamanian-born McCain over potentially legitimate reasons regarding his “natural born” status.
Anyone who knows anything about this issue knows that these questions have already been answered -- that McCain was born in the Canal Zone, which at that time had the legal status of a US territory, and that 44 years ago the question was settled by the US Supreme Court as to whether those born in US territories were eligible for the Presidency (Barry Goldwater was born in Arizona while Arizona was still a territory, and not a state.)
Furthermore, this issue had been raised in the past, and McCain produced his actual birth certificate showing that he was born in the Canal Zone itself (rather than on Panamanian territory).
The Berg suit is a mess, but not for the reasons cited by the poster. Quoting wikipedia is just plain dumb -- however, the "two hospitals" claim is a significant piece of evidence, insofar as it is based on contradictory published accounts from people (like Obama's sister) who would be in a position to know.
But what reveals Berg as a hack is his factual assertion that the "registration of birth" certificant was a forgery that originally had the name of Obama's sister on it. While the evidence that the "registration of birth" certificate that has been used by the Obama campaign is indeed fraudulent, no one has been able to confirm the claim made by one internet "expert" that the document was Obama's sister.
There are legitimate questions to be raised regarding Obama and the circumstances of his birth that could be easily settled if Obama would simply release his original birth certificate. They go beyond citizenship, IMHO, to the question of Barack Obama's legal name -- and whether someone can be elected to federal office using a pseudonym (can you vote for someone who doesn't legally exist?)
The fact that there are some people who are not entirely credible asking questions does not mean that the questions are not valid. And as we saw with the Killian memos controversy, the easiest way to discredit legitimate questions is to ignore the legitimate questions, and concentrate on discrediting the critics.
papieren, bitte
nobody can get or provide their own original birth certificate. every state in the union keeps the original and if asked for one [for purposes of getting a passport, social security card, etc] gives out a certified copy.
and the certified copy isn't really a copy. nobody goes down into the basement, or up into the attic, or wherever the storage room is, and hunts through cardboard boxes to xerox the original piece of paper. all the information was entered into computer databases ages ago, and it gets printed out onto fancy-schmancy paper and somebody signs the back certifying that all the information [names, dates, times, races, wev] that appears on the 'copy' is the exact same information that was recorded on the original piece of paper way back when.
sorry. nobody has proven that the certificate provided used by the obama campaign is fraudulent. what they have proven is that someone with a little bit of time, talent, zeal, and some image manipulation software would be able to whomp up that particular image if they were so inclined, but nobody has yet proven that that's what the obama campaign actually did.
it's an interesting thought exercise, but there are a lot of us who are natural-born citizens, a lot of us who really are who we say we are, but couldn't actually prove it to the satisfaction of these particulr 'critics.' it's a scary thought for me that some of you would happily make me into a non-person in your quest to discredit a presidential candidate you don't like.
also
to the question of Barack Obama’s legal name
i just remembered what a lawyer friend of mine told me about legal names several years ago when we were talking about women keeping their name or taking their husband's name: if your legal name is firstname middlename1 middlename2 middlenamewev lastname1 lastname2 lastnamewev, you can legally use any combination of those names as your legal name. so, if your legal name were barack mohammed hussein obama, you could legally call yourself either barack obama or barack hussein obama.
Cite please
I clearly think McCain is eligible for President as a natural born citizen, but I do think the Supreme Court could hear the case as it isn't defined very well.
As for Senate resolutions, I had not seen SR 511, but last time I checked Senate resolutions cannot change the Constitution or wording of "natural born".
At any rate, SCOTUS would side with if not Panama, then at least McCain's status is clearly naturalized if not natural born.
But, it is just as legitimate a question when 911-truthers are claiming wikipedia is proof that Obama was never born.
PCZ was not a US Territory and I'm not sure how the legal status can be deemed as such.
Is renting land considered possession or a territory?
Back to Panama Canal Zone...
1903 Hay–Bunau-Varilla Treaty
So from the 1903 Treaty, the US did have sovereign control over the territory and that some of what I have read regarding PCZ is false and the renting thing is also wrong.
Miss Manners says ignore nut-jobs
There are fringe weirdos on both sides. The wingnuts don't have a monopoly on tin-foil hats, but theirs are more likely to make money from it.
------------------------------------------------
“Payback is a PUMA”
Readers might be interested to know...
that Cannonfire, a PUMA site, spend a considerable amount of time producing a definitive takedown of the "COBL" attack on Obama -- earning considerable enmity over at Johnson's place, one reason I don't link to our cite Johnson. Just saying.
[ ] Very tepidly voting for Obama [ ] ?????. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.
mccain is a natural-born citizen
the senate says so. end of argument.
"Natural-born" citizen
Both McCain and Obama are natural-born citizens, meaning they were US citizens naturally at birth; there is no question about that for either of them. The law is explained clearly here with much supportive linkiness, but the simplest rationale comes from their being born to at least one parent who was already a US citizen; the place of birth does not matter.
McCain could have been born in the Canal Zone or Panama proper, Obama could have been born in Hawaii or Canada or Africa or the moon, makes no difference; both are eligible to be president.
And we're supposed to believe that the documents were faked or altered or his name was somehow misrepresented as "Barack Hussein Obama" because that would give him some advantage? Smarter, I guess, than "Barack Bush Obama"; that would really be an opportunity killer.
Can we go back to talking about houses now?
US Code
BIO,
I had not read the nicely laid out USC relevant here. I did see many references to US Immigration webpages talking about naturalization and children born on military bases and overseas. It seems the official naturalization process is a lot more complex and rule ridden than USC definition of "nationals and citizens of the United States at birth".
enough apples and oranges, pretty soon you have fruit salad
Hey intranets. Didn't mean to sound harsh there, on re-reading perhaps I did; life is for shit right now, sort of spilled over, bad form; sorry about that.
Our brilliant Founding Fathers once again worked out a solution that was good enough for their immediate purposes and left the obvious future inadequacies for later generations to figure out on our own, the lazy bastards. US Code now is apparently comprehensive enough to cover most "natural" possibilities, but what say an egg and a sperm from one or another US citizens are combined to impregnate a non-US citizen on US soil who then gives birth in some really weird un-American place like, say, France? "Who's your Daddy?" gets a whole new meaning.
Besides that, US Code is just statutory law and subordinate to the Constitution itself; it is only the law for as long as the federal courts say so. Absent a constitutional amendment to clarify, a properly constructed lawsuit might make its way to the SCOTUS where the "real" meaning of the Constitutional requirements could be decided. Think the 2000 election was buggered up? How about the fun that will ensue if two years after election the SCOTUS decides that Obama - or McCain - wasn't actually eligible and orders him to step down.
You aren't wrong to raise these questions, because the answers aren't as absolutely clear as they might first seem and I should have added some qualifiers to that effect in my earlier comment. The whole teetering enterprise that is the USofA rests on a general agreement that nobody will press on any of the weak spots; BushCo/VRWC
have broken that agreement again and again with the 2000 SCOTUS travesty on the Florida vote count, their loony ginned-up insider lawyer fake opinions and ignore-this-law executive signing statements and gutting the DOJ to install political puppets and refusals to honor legitimate congressional subpoenas etc etc etc. Now, the "law" is finally seen for the house of straw it really is and no telling where all it will lead.
Might as well impeach a fairly elected president with legalese, as use it to elect one that never got the votes.
whatever
i'm the number one abuser of bad form responses and I'm certainly never going to get sensitive over you or any of the sane folks on here putting me in my place.
Honestly, I read a lot about the McCain PCZ issue and I never once came across the USC definitions which do make it a non-issue. And the USC is the living breathing part of the Constitution that is the rule of law until someone brings it to the SCOTUS to say otherwise.
My point is that if the media is going to give air time (like every radio station lately) to these Obama birth certificate issues (even if it was faked does that make him non-natural born?) why can't they give equal time to the other side which also has brought up semi-legitimate questions about McCain.
If the McCain natural born thing wasn't somewhat a real concern, I doubt the Senate would have had to pass a resolution.
My only point is that it isn't quite good form to spend all the time pointing to lunatic lawyers who question Obama, but then leave out the whole part where McCain faced the same questions and challenges himself on his "Americanism".
Re: that McCain Senate resolution, & the media critique
Wouldn't it be good form right about now for McCain to introduce a resolution declaring Obama to be a natural-born citizen? Turn-about, fair play and senatorial collegiality, all that sort of stuff. There's an agit-prop opportunity, me thinks.
You have more faith in the ability of the MSM to change than I do. Expect them to be unfair and biased, as well as inept and committed to trivilization and meaningless minutia. That is the pattern their corporate masters want them to adopt, and sadly the sort of "journalism" the mass of the American public most enjoys.
Dancing with the Stars plus American Idol plus Survivor plus Big Brother and there you have the typical American's ideal political campaign coverage. If meaningful policy discussion is what the public wanted, Bill Moyers would be the #1 rated show on television.
"We", collectively, have exactly the government we deserve.
minor point
Wasn't S.Res. 511 a simple resolution=non-binding Senate resolution?
binding, nonbinding, doesn't matter
the question [at the end of the post] was why won't the media do their jobs and report on mccain's being foreign born? and the answer is because mccain's birthplace is a nonissue.
as bio points out, mainstream modern-day constitutional scholarly opinion is that any child, no matter where they were born, is by definition a natural-born citizen of the united states if at least one parent was a natural-born citizen of the united states at the time of that child's birth. end of story.
the zeal with which some of these folks are pursuing the obama colb issue makes them look a bit like red star fans.
not quite
As BIO points out in his link, your statement is a little oversimplified.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/...
The closest I see to your statement involves a one year timelimit.
close enough for government work
my statement was a lot oversimplified, actually, but i (1) abhor witchhunts, and (2) think the presidency should be open to naturalized as well as natural-born citizens.
mccain very clearly qualifies as a natural-born citizen under
and obama very clearly qualifies as a natural-born citizen under
even if both of them were born in deepest darkest russia or in a tent in a desert in iran or on the lost continent of mu.