You are on page 1of 27

Part I, Chapter One Ignoring His Birth Certificate

In July 2009, somewhere in Delaware, Republican Representative Mike Castle was speaking at a Town Hall meeting on healthcare reform. As he was taking questions from those assembled, he called upon a certain woman who had her hand up waiting to be recognized. The woman then stood and took a microphone that was offered to her. As she spoke, she held up a plastic baggie containing what she would shortly reveal to be her birth certificate. Although the meeting's intended purpose was a discussion of healthcare, this unidentified woman would be addressing something else entirely. Congressman...um...Castle, I wanna know... she began. I have a birth certificate here, from the United States of America, saying I am an American citizen...with a seal on it. Signed by a doctor, with a hospital administrator's name, my parents, my date of birth, the time, the date. I wanna go back to January 20th and I wanna know why are you people are ignoring his birth certificate? As the assembly suddenly erupted in applause and cheers, the woman raised her voice to be heard above the din. He is not an American citizen! He is a citizen of Kenya. I am an American. My father fought in World War II with the greatest generation in the Pacific theater...for this country, and I don't want this flag to change. I want my country back! Mike Castle remained composed as he waited for the noise to die down. Well, I don't know 1

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

what comment that invites, he then replied. If you're referring to the president there, he is a citizen of the United States. Strangely, this response was received with boos and shouts of outrage, as if the President's citizenship were an unpopular decision Castle had just made rather than a statement of objective fact. But Castle remained unphased. You can boo, but he is a citizen of the United States.1 The video that captured this incident has since gone viral thanks to YouTube, bloggers and some television networks that have played this video when providing coverage of birtherism. But regardless of the video's widespread circulation, this unidentified woman's claims raise a few questions. For one, where did she get her information? She claimed that Obama was a Kenyan citizen, but how would she know this? Did she call the Kenyan embassy, perhaps? She also claimed that Obama wasn't an American citizen. If that's true, he would obviously be ineligible for the presidency, as the Constitution requires the President be not just a citizen, but a natural born citizen per Article II, section 1, clause 5. And what exactly did she mean by ignoring his birth certificate? Obama produced a birth certificate during his Presidential campaign. In what way was Congress presumably whom she meant by you people ignoring it? Her claims about Obama's citizenship, if true, would indicate that she knows something we don't. Perhaps she has access to this information. She might have connections or be employed by the government in some capacity that makes her privy to sensitive information like this. The more likely explanation, however, is that she had no idea what she was talking about. Or worse, that she simply didn't care whether her claims were true or not. The woman is what's known as a birther, a word that has yet to make its way to the lexicon. Lacking a standardized definition, we will define birther as a conspiracy theorist who maintains that Barack Obama is not a natural born citizen of the U.S., and is therefore ineligible for the office of President. And, as this woman demonstrates, birthers also tend to show a certain lack of concern for factual accuracy.
1 Weigel, David. "Rep. Mike Castle Fends Off the Birthers | The Washington Independent." The Washington Independent - National News in Context. The American Independent News Network, 20 July 2009. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://washingtonindependent.com/51736/rep-mike-castle-fends-off-the-birthers>.

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

Among these doubters, there are some who have a more specific definition of term. A birther, they maintain, refers only to someone who believes that Obama was actually born in Kenya, and that his alleged ineligibility is due to his birth on foreign soil. After this initial wave, different factions of doubters gained prominence, particularly when the President eventually capitulated to the birthers' relentless demands and posted to the internet a certified copy of his long-form birth certificate (which as we will see, bears no more weight in a court of law than the short-form he originally provided). This afterbirther contingent, if you will, has forwarded newer supposed obstacles to the President's natural born citizenship, the most prominent of which is the lie that a natural-born citizen can only be someone who is born on U.S. soil to parents who are both citizens. Since the president's father, Barack Obama Sr., was never a U.S. citizen, this requirement (if it actually were a requirement) would certainly prove Obamas ineligibility, and without needing to answer any questions about his birthplace. It would, that is, if the citizenship of the parents had any bearing whatsoever on the citizenship of someone born in the U.S. It doesnt and it never did. In fact, neither of these birther claims is true. Regarding Obama's place of birth, there is plenty of evidence to establish Obama's birthplace in the U.S., which we will review in this chapter. While birthers have attempted to uncover evidence that Obama was born somewhere outside the U.S., their efforts have not been availing, to say the least, and have served to discredit the birthers. (See next chapter.) Ironically, the afterbirthers are right about one thing: Obama's place of birth is irrelevant. But not because he could not be a U.S. citizen even if he was born in the U.S. (which he was). On the contrary, Obama would be a natural born citizen, no matter where he was born. 8 U.S.C. section 1401, paragraph g (U.S. Code Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchapter III, Part I section 1401, paragraph g) states that a citizen at birth (in other words, a natural born citizen) includes those born abroad, if one parent is a citizen who has been physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years.2 Obama's mother, of course, easily meets these requirements. Therefore any child born to
2 "United States Code: Title 8,1401. Nationals and Citizens of United States at Birth | LII / Legal Information Institute." LII | LII / Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. Web. 08 Nov. 2011.

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

Stanley Ann Dunham on or after her 16th birthday, regardless of the location of birth, is a natural born citizen. Birthers have made an uncharacteristically plausible argument that only the laws in effect at the time of Obama's birth would apply to Obama, not the law as it is today. Prior to 1986, before the current law was enacted, a child born abroad would require at least one citizen parent who had lived in the U.S. for at least ten years, at least five of which occurred after the 14th birthday.3 Since Obamas mother was only eighteen when Obama was born, so the birthers maintain, Stanley Ann Dunham would need to be at least 19 to pass her citizenship onto her child, even assuming continuous residence in the United States. While this might sound reasonable, particularly to those whose confirmation bias refuses to see Obama as anything but ineligible, it just isn't true. The law as it reads today allows natural born citizenship to be applied retroactively: This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date. This is according to 8 U.S.C 1401 (g). So, despite the fact that the law itself was enacted in 1986, it applies to anyone born on or after December 24, 1952. Since Obama was born in 1961, obviously this applies to him. Therefore, even if Obama were born outside the U.S., he would still be a natural born citizen. It may seem surprising to some that natural born citizenship could be applied retroactively, but the courts have never had a problem with this. For instance, in the case of Markham Robinson v Secretary of State Debra Bowen et al, a case that challenged John McCains eligibility for the presidency (and was summarily dismissed), Judge William Alsup of the Northern California District Court observed: In 1937, to remove any doubt as to persons in Senator McCains circumstances in the Canal Zone, Congress enacted 8. U. S. C. 1403(a) [Persons born in the Canal Zone or Republic of Panama on or after
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1401.html>. "United States Code: Title 8,1401. Nationals and Citizens of United States at Birth | LII / Legal Information Institute." LII | LII / Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. Web. 08 Nov. 2011. <http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode08/usc_sec_08_00001401----000-notes.html>. "1986Subsec. (g). Pub. L. 99653 substituted five years, at least two for ten years, at least five.

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

February 26, 1904], which declared that persons in Senator McCains circumstances are citizens by virtue of their birth, thereby retroactively rendering John McCain a natural born citizen, if he was not one already. As Judge Alsup points out, this law was enacted in 1937. Obviously, since the law applies to persons born on or after February 26, 1904, conferring citizenship -- even natural born citizenship -can be done retroactively. Even if no such stipulation for retroactive application was included in law granting citizenship at birth, its highly likely that the courts would allow the retroactive application of citizenship laws anyway. The general principle is that the law must be interpreted and applied as it reads today. As the Supreme Court ruled in the case of Bradley v. School Bd. of Richmond, 416 U.S. 696, 711 (1974), "a court is to apply the law in effect at the time it renders its decision unless doing so would result in a manifest injustice." Outdated laws are just that: outdated. The only time the retroactive application of new laws would not be allowed, as ruled in Bradley, is when the application such a law would "impose new and unanticipated obligations on a party without notice or opportunity to be heard." Since the retroactive application of citizenship laws would not impose new and unanticipated obligations, the courts, if consistent, would allow the retroactive application of laws concerning citizenship, even citizenship at birth. Therefore, even if the retroactive clause was not present in 8 U.S.C. Section 1401, paragraph g, the Courts, if consistent, would allow for retroactive application anyway. But this point is immaterial, since there is more than sufficient evidence to prove that Obama was born in the U.S. In contrast, the evidence that President Obama was born somewhere other than the U.S. has been decidedly lacking, despite the birthers best (and most dishonest) efforts to uncover some proof of this. (See next chapter.) As for the claim of the afterbirthers that two citizen parents are required for the offspring to be considered natural born, that isn't true in the United States and never was. The citizenship of the parents is irrelevant to those born in the U.S.; all children born in the U.S., even to aliens, are natural-born 5

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

citizens, unless born to parents who are either foreign diplomats or hostile invaders, neither of whom are considered within the jurisdiction of the U.S. (See Part II, chapter 4, The United States v. Wong Kim Ark.) While some nations, such as Japan, determine citizenship at birth by parentage (a practice known as jus sanguinis), the U.S. does not. Consider the words of Founding Father and fourth president James Madison, primary author of the Constitution who also authored the Bill of Rights. It is an established maxim, that birth is a criterion of allegiance. Birth, however, derives its force sometimes from place, and sometimes from parentage; but, in general place is the most certain criterion; it is what applies in the United States. In his lengthy dissertation on the U.S. Constitution, William Rawle, who was district attorney for Pennsylvania appointed by George Washington himself, wrote, ...every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.4 For the purposes of this book, the term birther encompasses those who insist that Obama is not constitutionally eligible for whatever reason. Since the positions of every strain of birther are invalid, whether arguing the two-citizen parent theory, or the supposed disqualifying factor of dual citizenship or whatever else the birthers come up with, there is little need to distinguish one species of birther from the other. The particular argument subscribed to will be specified as the need arises. A particular oddity regarding the false requirement of two citizen parents is that its staunchest advocates are actually lawyers. It becomes difficult to believe attorneys Leo C. Donofrio and Mario Apuzzo are merely misinformed rather than deliberately spreading misinformation. Why would they lie about such a thing? Probably to create an impression in the minds of the gullible that there is a constitutional crisis going on, namely that the President is not constitutionally
4 Rawle, William. A View of the Constitution. 2nd ed. Philidelphia: Philip H. Nicklin, Law Bookseller, 1829. Print.

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

eligible, and that all of Congress must be complicit since they unanimously ratified the results of the 2008 election. Truly a far-reaching conspiracy, since it not only infects Congress, but the courts as well! The courts have dismissed case after case regarding this issue when they decide to hear these cases at all. The Supreme Court, exercising their tradition of the rule of four (i.e., if at least four of the nine Supreme Court justices vote in favor of hearing a particular case, the court will take it), has declined to hear a single case on the eligibility issue. Which would be more appropriately described as the eligibility non-issue. At the very least, the more this idiocy spreads, it harms Obama's chances for reelection. The unwary and uninformed would certainly be less inclined to vote for a candidate they believe to be constitutionally ineligible for the office. Therefore why shouldn't the birthers engage in this deception? It doesn't seem likely to backfire. Those who dont support Obama certainly arent going to change their minds and vote for him out of sympathy just because the birthers are engaged in a campaign of lies. On the other hand, Obama supporters might be persuaded to vote against him if they thought he was constitutionally ineligible and perpetrating some massive fraud that's infected all branches of the government. So, it would seem the propaganda mill that is birtherism has a neutral to negative effect upon Obama's support base. And even if birtherism is fully exposed (which is the aim of this book), it is highly unlikely to work in Obama's favor. The afterbirthers deserve some credit for artfully constructed lies. (See Part II, Chapter III: Minor v. Happersett, for instance, about how a case on voting rights for women has been distorted by birthers into binding legal precedent defining natural born citizen.) The deceptions of the afterbirthers are much more subtle are argued better than the claims that he was born in Kenya, which has led to embarrassing and transparent instances of dishonesty, such as forged Kenyan birth certificates and a butchered recording of a phone conversation with Obama's grandmother. (See next chapter.) About the birth certificate that was supposedly being ignored by Congress (whatever the woman who hijacked the Town Hall meeting meant by this), Obama's Certification of Live Birth (which is a birth certificate) has been the subject of much disinformation. If birthers are to be believed (and they 7

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

never are), the sparse document posted to the internet as Obama's birth certificate is inadequate to prove Obama's birth in this country. On NBC's Hardball, July 23, 2009, for instance, doddering talk radio personality G. Gordon The G-Man Liddy consigned to everlasting infamy due to his involvement in Watergate told host Chris Matthews that the issue of Obama's eligibility would be resolved if the president would simply produce a valid birth certificate...all he has produced has been a quote - Certificate [sic] of Live Birth. You can't get a passport with that. You can't even register your son for Little League with that.5 Joseph Farah, editor of WorldNetDaily, had similar thoughts. In his article Eligibility 101, he claims that Obama's Certification of Live Birth is insufficient for purposes far less significant than establishing the constitutional eligibility for the presidency. For instance, try getting a passport with one. Try qualifying for Little League with one.6 On CNN's Lou Dobbs Tonight, July 17, 2009, substitute host Kitty Pilgrim lead a panel discussion regarding the issue of Obama's constitutional eligibility. Her guests included former Presidential candidate Alan Keyes and birther queen Orly Taitz. Pilgrim first presented a considerable amount of evidence supporting Obama's birth in Hawaii, including a statement by then-Director of Hawaii's Health Department Dr. Chiyome Fukino and a statement by the Republican former Governor Linda Lingle, statements of PolitiFact.com, the corroborating birth announcements in two Hawaiian newspapers, and a statement by press secretary Robert Gibbs. She then asked Alan Keyes what more he would require to be convinced of Obama's citizenship. Some evidence, Keyes replied, as if that were the most obvious answer in the world (a response that produced guffaws from some unseen panelist). And the evidence is something that President Obama is strenuously blocking. You ask me to prove that I was born in New York City at the time and hospital I say, and I will give you a certified copy of a full birth certificate with a doctor's signature, the hospital, and everything else. I
5 Belle, Nicole. "Hardball: G. Gordon Liddy, Leader of the Birther Movement?" Crooks and Liars. Crooks and Liars, 23 July 2009. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://crooksandliars.com/nicole-belle/hardball-g-gordon-liddy-0>. 6 Farah, Joseph. "Eligibility 101." WND - A Free Press for A Free People. WorldNetDaily.com Inc, 28 Mar. 2011. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=280093>.

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

won't direct you to some photograph on the Internet and a bunch of hearsay statements that would not be accepted as evidence in any court of law.7 Orly Taitz, who was on the same program and the attorney who represented Alan Keyes in his failed lawsuit against the president, offered her expertise on the adequacy of Obama's Certification of Live Birth. Obama never provided his birth certificate. What he provided is Certification of Live Birth that was issued last year that does not have the name of the doctor, does not have the name of the hospital, does not have any signatures.8 Billionaire Donald Trump also weighed in on the issue. To cite one such example, in an interview with Meredith Vieira on the Today Show, she questioned him about previous statements he'd made regarding Obama's Certification of Live Birth. Meredith Vieira: Recently, you've spent a lot of time talking about President Obama's birth certificate, or lack thereof. You don't seem convinced that he has one. Donald Trump: No, I'm not convinced that he has one. I've had very smart people say, Donald, stay on the China issue. Stay on the Saudi Arabia issue. Stay on the India taking our jobs and the Mexico which is NAFTA [sic]... Vieira: Get off the birth certificate issue. Trump: ...Get off the birth certificate issue. Vieira: Why don't you? Trump: Because you know, ah, three weeks ago, when I started, I thought he was probably born in this country. Now I have a really bigger
7 "CNN.com - Transcripts." CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News. Turner Broadcasting System, 17 July 2009. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0907/17/ldt.01.html>. 8 Ibid.

Part I, Chapter One doubt than I did before. Vieira: But based on what?

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

Trump: And you know what? His grandmother in Kenya said he was born in Kenya, and she was there and witnessed the birth. Okay? He doesn't have a birth certificate, or he hasn't shown it. He has what's called a certificate [sic] of live birth. That is something that's easy to get. When you want a birth certificate, it's very hard to get. Vieira: But it's considered the equivalent the equivalent Trump (talking over): Excuse me. Excuse me. It's not the equivalent. Vieira: And in the state of Hawai'i they said they have seen his document... Trump: Meredith...It's not the equivalent. Vieira: It's evidence that he was born in the United States, that's good enough for them. Scholars have... Trump: A birth certificate is not even close. A certificate [sic] of live birth is not even signed by anybody. I saw his. I read it very carefully. Doesn't have a serial number, doesn't have a signature. There's not even a signature. Vieira: Do you believe he's lying? Trump: I'm starting to think he was not born here. Vieira: Do you believe he's lying, Donald? Come on. Just answer. Trump: Meredith, he spent two million dollars in legal fees trying to get away from this issue. And if he weren't lying, why wouldn't he just solve it?9 In light of all this vigorous insistence that the Certification of Live Birth is inadequate to prove
9 McGraw, Seamus. "Trump: I Have Real Doubts Obama Was Born in U.S. - TODAY People - TODAY.com." TODAY.com: Matt Lauer, Ann Curry, Al Roker, Natalie Morales - TODAY Show Video, News, Recipes, Health, Pets. MSNBC.com, 07 Apr. 2011. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/42469703/ns/today-today_people/t/trump-i-have-realdoubts-obama-was-born-us/>.

10

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

Obama was born in the U.S., it becomes somewhat understandable that the uninformed might not be certain what to think about the (non-)issue. And it becomes even more confusing when presumably competent lawyers (which would not include Orly Taitz) get involved, further muddying the waters. In May, 2010, CNN's Anderson Cooper had an interview with then-Lieutenant Colonel Terrence Lakin, an army physician who propelled himself into the public eye by refusing to deploy to Afghanistan on the grounds that Obama's supposed constitutional ineligibility made all orders invalid, including Lakin's orders to report to Ft. Campbell, from which he would deploy to Afghanistan. Despite Cooper's persistent efforts to get answers from Lakin, Lakin's attorney Paul Rolf Jensen insisted on doing most of the talking. Anderson Cooper: Okay, Lieutenant Colonel, if you call up the state of Hawaii and you ask for a birth certificate, you're sent a Certificate of Live Birth [sic]. That is the official document. And the president has Paul Jensen: That is not correct. Cooper: And the president -Jensen: That is absolutely not correct. Cooper: And the president has released -- and the president has released that certificate [sic] of live birth -- there it is -- to newspapers. In 1961, had birth announcements provided by the state of Hawaii Health Department. The Republican governor of Hawaii sent someone to personally view the birth certificate at the Department of Health and says it's there. Jensen: That's not -Cooper: Again, can the colonel not talk for himself? The guy's an adult. Jensen: You said that that's a birth certificate, Mr. Cooper. Now you want to tell the truth to your viewers.

11

Part I, Chapter One Cooper: According to the state of Hawaii --

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

Jensen: That is not a birth certificate. Sir, that's an abstract, a computergenerated abstract -Cooper: According to the state of Hawaii, the certificate [sic] of live birth, and I'm quoting from the state of Hawaii Health Department: "The Certificate of Live Birth [sic] is the standard form acceptable by federal agencies."10 Although Terry Lakin said very little during this particular interview, he had previously spoken on the subject of Obama's birth certificate. He was featured in a video produced by an organization calling itself the American Patriot Foundation, Inc. In listless monotone, the grim-faced Lakin claimed that Obama's citizenship is unknown, because he refuses to release his original birth certificate, dating from 1961, and bearing the signature of the doctor who delivered him.11 By the way, G. Gordon Liddy, Donald Trump and Anderson Cooper referred to the document as a Certificate of Live Birth. The actual document released by the Obama campaign in 2008 is properly called a Certification of Live Birth, not a Certificate. Trivial as it might seem, there is actually a difference between the two. The Certification is the short-form that Obama released during his campaign in 2008, and the only such document available at the time these statements were made. A Certificate of Live Birth is actually the long-form, which Obama released nearly two years later. And no matter what you may have heard from those determined to keep us misinformed, a Certification of Live Birth is a birth certificate. Regarding the supposed inadequacy of the Certification of Live Birth to prove Obama's place of birth, let's first note the following statement at the bottom of the document. This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding. [HRS 338-13(b), 338-19].
10 "Video: Release Birth Certificate, Military Doctor Demands Anderson Cooper 360 - CNN.com Blogs." Anderson Cooper 360 - CNN.com Blogs. Turner Broadcasting System, 10 May 2010. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2010/05/10/video-release-birth-certificate-military-doctor-demands/>. 11 "American Patriot Foundation: FTC Terry Lakin Defense Fund - YouTube." American Patriot Foundation: FTC Terry Lakin Defense Fund. YouTube - Broadcast Yourself, 30 Mar. 2010. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.youtube.com/watch? v=ea9JVnck_-E>.

12

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

If you're unfamiliar with the legalese term prima facie, don't feel too bad. Orly Taitz and Paul Jensen don't seem to know what it means, either. And they're supposed to be lawyers! Had they understood what is meant by prima facie evidence, they would not have implied that the document was anything less than a birth certificate, nor insisted that Obama needed further evidence. Black's Law Dictionary 5th Edition, defines prima facie evidence as follows: Prima facie /pryma fysyshiy(iy)/. Lat. At first sight; on the first appearance; on the face of it; so far as can be judged from the first disclosure; presumably; a fact presumed to be true unless disproved by some evidence to the contrary. As prima facie evidence, every statement on Obama's Certification of Live Birth is presumed true in a court of law. This does not mean that such a document is irrefutable or unimpeachable evidence. However, it will shift the burden of proof to the other side. Without substantial evidence to the contrary, the details of Obama's birth as recorded on the document will be accepted as fact. Faced with prima facie evidence, it is up to those who would dispute the facts as presented to make their case. Should they not be able to do so, the case is considered open and shut in favor of those with prima facie evidence on their side. And the law that establishes the Certification of Live Birth as prima facie evidence is cited on the document itself: Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) 338-13(b) and 338-19. According to these statutes, Obama's Certification of Live Birth is considered for all purposes the same as the original and of like force and effect as the original. Affixed with the seal of the state of Hawaii and the stamped signature of Hawaii State Registrar Alvin T. Onaka (which would put the lie to Orly Taitz's and Donald Trump's claim that it is lacking signatures), it is also a self-authenticating document. By stating the document is self-authenticating, this means that the measures for determining a document's authenticity such as having sworn statements by those who can vouch for the document or perhaps examination by forensics experts are deemed unnecessary in court of law.12 Because it is certified by the Hawaii Department of Health, we
12 "Self-Authenticating Documents | LII / Legal Information Institute." LII | LII / Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/self-authenticating_documents>.

13

Part I, Chapter One know that the document is what it says it is; it authenticates itself.

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

Finally, due to the Full Faith and Credit Clause of our Constitution (Article IV, section 1), this document must be honored as self-authenticating and prima facie evidence in any court in the country. In spite of the evidentiary weight that this document would carry in a court of law, birthers persisted in their demands for more evidence...which is the usual M.O. for the birther movement: when evidence arises, dismiss it with lies and demand more evidence. Keep those goalposts moving! Terry Lakin, as noted above, seems to feel that we should see an original. His attorney, Paul Jensen, in that same exchange with Anderson Cooper, emphatically stated that the original birth certificate has not been released.13 Oh? It hasn't? Lakin and his amorphous attorney Mr. Jensen appear to be invoking the Federal Rules of Evidence, specifically those that govern documents, recordings and photographs admitted as evidence, informally known as the Best Evidence Rule, although this rule is actually eight rules, FRE 10011008. Following suit, birthers picked up on this demand for an original document. For instance, blogger James Madison (who bears no resemblance to the fourth president and founding father of the same name) at the right-wing website Colony Rabble, has cited this rule in his article entitled Obama's Duckin' the Best Evidence Rule. The Best Evidence Rule, he writes, if I recall from collecting evidence in a long ago career, requires the original document to prove the truth of the matter, in this case where Obama was born.14 And indeed it does! He's absolutely right there. FRE 1002, Requirement of Original, plainly states, To prove the content of a writing, recording, or photograph, the original writing, recording, or photograph is required, except as otherwise provided in these rules or by Act of Congress.15 So it would seem, despite the weight of evidence carried by the Certification of Live Birth, the
13 Ibid. 9 14 Madison, James. "Obama's Duckin' the Best Evidence Rule | Red County." Colony Rabble. National | Red County, 14 Apr. 2011. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.redcounty.com/content/obamas-duckin-best-evidence-rule>. 15 "Federal Rules of Evidence (LII 2010 Ed.)." LII | LII / Legal Information Institute. Cornell University Law School. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.law.cornell.edu/rules/fre/rules.htm>.

14

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

birthers might have a point. If the Federal Rules of Evidence requires an original, then Obama should produce an original. Madison, whose only accurate statement regarding the Best Evidence Rule was the one just quoted, goes on to say, Following the requirement of the Best Evidence Rule, Obama being a lawyer, or erstwhile lawyer, ought to know that only his actual birth certificate complete with seal, hospital of birth, and attending physician's signature, items missing from his scam document, is sufficient to prove his location of birth. This necessary information is absent from his certification of life birth. His birth certificate will have this necessary information recorded. What he's pawning off on us is at least a joke, at worst fraud. Aside from the fact that Obama's certification of live birth has a raised seal, Obama already has produced an original birth certificate. No, you didn't miss anything nor did he produce a document that I haven't mentioned yet. Obama has produced an original birth certificate. The Certification of Live Birth is considered an original. It seems unlikely that those who know Federal Rule of Evidence 1002 and its requirement of an original document would be unfamiliar with the previous rule also considered part of the Best Evidence Rule. Rule 1001, Definitions, paragraph 3, reads (emphasis added): An "original" of a writing or recording is the writing or recording itself or any counterpart intended to have the same effect by a person executing or issuing it. An "original" of a photograph includes the negative or any print therefrom. If data are stored in a computer or similar device, any printout or other output readable by sight, shown to reflect the data accurately, is an "original".16 Obama's Certification of Live Birth, being a counterpart intended to have the same effect and
16 Ibid.

15

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

issued by the Hawaii Department of Health, is an original as defined by the same Best Evidence Rule that requires an original. Again, it's inconceivable that those familiar with FRE 1002 (part of the Best Evidence Rule) that calls for an original could overlook the previous rule (FRE 1001, also part of the Best Evidence Rule) that actually defines original. This selective use of the Best Evidence Rule seems to suggest not ignorance but a deliberate attempt to mislead. In fact, in the case of lawyers such as Jensen and Taitz, ignorance of the legal definition of original would be inexcusable. They point out correctly that the law calls for an original, but leave the viewer to assume what is meant by the term. Perhaps some would argue that Obamas Certification is a copy. And why not? The statement that calls it prima facie actually describes it as a copy. We still find it satisfies the requirement of an original as defined in the Best Evidence Rule. Rule 1003, Admissibility of Duplicates, states A duplicate is admissible to the same extent as an original...17 And therefore, far from being insufficient, not the equivalent [of a birth certificate], a joke, a fraud, or not a birth certificate, the Certification of Live Birth is self-authenticating and prima facie evidence, to be regarded the same as the original, according to Hawaii Revised Statutes. In fact, according to the Best Evidence Rule, it is an original. It satisfies the standard of prima facie evidence as determined by law. The woman who disrupted the Town Hall meeting claimed that Congress was ignoring his birth certificate, But ironically, it is the birthers who are guilty of this. With their various dishonest attempts to minimize or deny the validity of a Certification of Live Birth, they are, in effect, ignoring it and claiming that Obama has not proven that he is a natural-born citizen. He has, and he is. The vigorous efforts of the birthers to dismiss the birth certificate as insufficient have changed like the weather. As more claims were discredited, new ones arose in their place. FactCheck.org compiled the various, most frequent objections to accepting the document as genuine, including the supposed missing elements of a raised seal, certificate number and signature. Upon investigating the actual document, FactCheck representatives confirmed that it does indeed have a raised seal, certificate
17 Ibid.

16

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

number and bears the stamped signature of Hawaii state registrar, Alvin T. Onaka. This, of course, reveals the birthers' inconsistency and lays bare their agenda. First they claim that the document lacks a raised seal, certificate number and signature. Then when it's shown that the document does, in fact, have all these things, the birthers claim that the document is inadequate. If they truly believed that, they wouldn't have concerned themselves with the raised seal, signature and certificate number. It was only after it was proven that the document does have a raised seal, etc., that the birthers began to claim that a Certification of Live Birth should not be considered proof. And thus began the ignoble birther tradition of moving the goalposts. It should be pointed out also, that despite the claims of G. Gordon Liddy and Joe Farah, you can get a passport with a Certification of Live Birth. Some states, including Hawaii, produce short-forms that will be accepted by the passport office. (Still waiting on the Little League coach to say what sort of birth certificate they require to sign up your kid.) The July 28, 2009 issue of the Honolulu Advertiser (one of the two newspapers that ran birth announcements when Obama was born) quoted Hawaii Health Department spokeswoman Janice Okubo. 'Our Certificate of Live Birth18 is the standard form, which was modeled after national standards that are acceptable by federal agencies and organizations,' Okubo said.'With that form, you can get your passport or your soccer registration or your driver's license.'"19 But what about Little League??? As noted previously, former presidential candidate Alan Keyes' stated that he would respond to requests for proof of the time and place of his birth by giving a certified copy of a full birth certificate rather than referring us to some photograph on the Internet and a bunch of hearsay statements that would not be accepted as evidence in any court of law. Placing a certified copy of his birth certificate in the hands of every person who ever demanded proof of Obama's eligibility would
18 While this statement clearly reads Certificate of Live Birth rather than Certification as does every source I examined for this quote , it is highly unlikely that this was intended to refer to the actual Certificate, aka the long form, since Obama had not yet released his long form. As Anderson Cooper, G. Gordon Liddy and Donald Trump have demonstrated, she would not be the only one to make this mistake. 19 Nakaso, Dan. "Hawaii Officials Confirm Obamas Original Birth Certificate Still Exists | The Honolulu Advertiser | Hawaii's Newspaper." Honoluluadvertiser.com. The Honolulu Advertiser, 28 July 2009. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2009/Jul/28/ln/hawaii907280345.html>.

17

Part I, Chapter One undoubtedly cost him a tidy sum.

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

Conceding one point to Keyes, it is true that Obama's COLB can only be seen as an image on the internet and Obama has not taken the extravagant measure of providing us all with tangible copies, a measure that Alan Keyes has assured us that he would do. And since, of course, a mere image cannot carry the same weight as a tangible document that has been declared by law to be self-authenticating and prima facie, the birther stance might be justified...if the image of Obama's COLB were all we had to go on. This intangible image of what is claimed to be Obama's birth certificate does come with considerable corroboration. And while it might not be as convincing as the lavish Alan Keyes method, a measure that would kill quite a few trees to produce the necessary safety paper to print up all those birth certificates it is certainly more practical. For an example of corroborating evidence (which would be recognized in a court of law, Alan Keyes' impressions to the contrary), there is the statement by then-Hawaii's Director of Health: There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obamas official birth certificate. State law (Hawaii Revised Statutes 338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record. Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obamas original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures. No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawaii.20 20 To view a pdf of the original statement, see: http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2008/08-93.pdf 18

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

We'll notice that this statement was released on October 31, 2008 over four months after Obama's Certification of Live Birth was available on the internet and that Dr. Fukino didn't happen to make any charges of fraud when issuing her statement, or suggest anything was out of the ordinary with Obama's Certification of Live Birth. So it would seem that she is tacitly vouching for the document. Even if she hasn't done an analysis of the image itself, it must accurately reflect the data on file at the Hawaii Department of Health. In other words, she undoubtedly knew the image of Obama's Certification was out there. Nonetheless she didn't scream FORGERY! Despite her reassurance, the birthers remained determinedly unsatisfied or at least, determined to maintain their pretense of being unsatisfied Dr. Fukino issued another statement on July 27 of the following year: I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.21 Also corroborating Obama's place and date of birth, contemporaneous birth announcements were run in not one, but two Hawaiian newspapers. The Honolulu Advertiser ran the announcement of a son born to Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama on Sunday, August 13, 1961, with the identical announcement appearing in The Star Bulletin22 the very next day. But of course, the birthers were all over that. Donald Trump, who hadn't yet tired of making an ass of himself with his veritable fount of misinformation regarding Obama's birth certificate, claimed that Obama's grandparents planted the announcement in the newspaper.
21 Nakaso, Dan. "Hawaii: Obama Birth Certificate Is Real - USATODAY.com." News, Travel, Weather, Entertainment, Sports, Technology, U.S. & World - USATODAY.com. Garnett Company Inc., 28 July 2009. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-07-27-obama-hawaii_N.htm>. 22 "Whatreallyhappened.com: OBAMA'S BIRTH ANNOUNCEMENTS." WHAT REALLY HAPPENED | The History The US Government HOPES You Never Learn! WhatReallyHappened.com, 2008. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/obamabirth.php>.

19

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate So they wanted him to be a citizen of the United States, for that

purpose, and also for hospitalization, for welfare, for this, for that, for all the other assets you get from being a United States citizen. So there are a lot of very smart people who say that is routinely done and that was done by his grandparents.23 Again with relying on the expertise of undefined very smart people? Writing this book would actually go a lot faster if I didn't have to find sources to footnote in order to back up my statements. I could do a Donald Trump instead, and just claim that very smart people have said all this, instead of imploring on friends, for instance, to get me a quote from Black's Law Dictionary (which is an expensive text and not available in my local library). Rather than citing actual sources for the reader to verify, my footnotes would say things like, a very smart person, a couple of very smart people, or a reasonably smart person. I dont know why The Birther (formerly known as The Donald) keeps referring to the counsel of very smart people. He obviously didn't listen to them when they urged him to get off the birth certificate issue, as he explained to Meredith Vieira. Why surround yourself with very smart people if you're going to ignore them? But I digress. The birth announcements were not planted by Obama's grandparents, because they could not have been. The Honolulu Advertiser gets its information regarding births from the Hawaii Department of Health, not from relatives.24 Even WorldNetDaily, one of the big cogs in the birther propaganda machine, concedes that the Star Bulletin does the same. "'We don't have an editor who handles birth and marriage announcements; we print what we receive from the Department of Health Vital Statistics System,' a Star-Bulletin newsroom operator explained to WND.25
23 Sanchez, Andrea Nill. "Trump Insists Obama's Grandparents Planted His Birth Announcement To Obtain Welfare Benefits." ThinkProgress. 10 Apr. 2011. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/04/10/157467/trump-birth-announcement/>. 24 Ibid. 25 Zahn, Drew. "Hawaiian Newspapers Don't Prove Birthplace." WND - A Free Press for A Free People. WorldNetDaily.com Inc, 22 July 2009. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=104678>.

20

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

Orly Taitz, whose follies on this issue could fill a chapter and they will; see Chapter 5: Making Incompetence Pay like Trump, also attempted to undermine the birth announcements, by accusing his grandmother of something rather underhanded. Taitz appeared on John King, U.S.A. on April 15, 2011: What was sent to the newspapers was an announcement, and in the state of Hawaii, if one sends a notice under the rule 338-5, meaning, a grandmother sends a form to the Health Department saying my grandson was born here, not in Kenya, not somewhere else, here, it is sufficient to issue a birth certificate based on a statement of one relative only. There was never any evidence to show that he was born in any hospital. And based on that statement of his grandmother, who could have been lying simply to get your citizenship for her grandchild born abroad, the state of Hawaii would issue a birth certificate under the rule 338-5 and would send this birth certificate, together with the hospital birth certificate notification to the Hawaiian news agency.26 Well, not quite. Obama's grandmother could have done no such thing, since Hawaii Revised Statute 338-5 does not allow for grandparents to issue such a statement. To be precise, which Orly Taitz very seldom is, Hawaiian Revised Statute 338-5 reads, in part: ...a certificate of birth shall be substantially completed and filed with the local agent of the department in the district in which the birth occurred, by the administrator or designated representative of the birthing facility, or physician, or midwife, or other legally authorized person in attendance at the birth, or if not so attended, by one of the parents.27 So, one of Obama's parents could have substantially completed and filed a certificate of birth
26 "CNN.com - Transcripts." CNN.com - Breaking News, U.S., World, Weather, Entertainment & Video News. Turner Broadcasting System, 15 Apr. 2011. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/1104/15/jkusa.01.html>. 27 "338-5 Compulsory Registration of Births." Hawaii State Legislature. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.capitol.hawaii.gov/hrscurrent/Vol06_Ch0321-0344/HRS0338/HRS_0338-0005.htm>.

21

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

with the local agent of the department of the district in which the birth occurred (and only if not attended by an administrator, designated representative, physician, midwife or other legally authorized attendant) but his grandmother could not have. It says parents, Orly. Not grandparents. So, Orly just lied about what is permitted by HRS 338-5. But, then again, she also lied about the Certification of Live Birth not being a birth certificate and not having any signatures. Aside from her willingness to lie, you may also notice that Orly has a habit of assuming that something did happen simply because it could have happened, another annoying habit of birthers. She claimed that no evidence exists for Obama's birth in any hospital. Yet she has zero evidence of Obama's grandmother's culpability in this supposed fraud forgetting for a moment that, according to the law she cited, Obama's grandmother could not have done what Orly has all-but-directly accused her of. She hypocritically demands evidence (after dismissing the value of the evidence on record), but flings accusations with reckless abandon, even lying about the laws that are on the books, but all the while not providing any evidence herself for her accusations against Obama's deceased maternal grandmother of falsifying a certificate of birth. And that is how birthers operate. As distinct from the birther movement, our judicial system grants the accused the presumption of innocence, and it falls to the prosecution to prove guilt. Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat.28 Innocent until proven guilty, as we like to say. But where the birthers are concerned, Obama is guilty until proven innocent...and if he is proven innocent, he's still guilty. Even if it does take the birthers some time to move the goalposts. It's unclear why Orly thinks she needs evidence that Obama was born in a hospital. Obama is one of only four presidents who actually were born in hospitals, the other three being Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and George W. Bush. No other president was born in a hospital. In April of 2012, some much-needed common sense was injected into the discussion by lawyerturned-conservative-pundit and best-selling author Ann Coulter, who had appeared on the Sean Hannity Show to promote her book, Demonic. Hannity has asked her for her thoughts about Donald Trump's involvement in the birther foolishness.
28 Latin. The burden of proof is on the one who asserts, not the one who denies.

22

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate Well, I think maybe Ive been watching too much Charlie Sheen

because Donald Trump seems perfectly sane to me. I dont know where he gets this $2 million Obama has spent to keep his birth certificate he posted his birth certificate on his web page. I am glad that Donald Trump is bringing it up so that people who havent been paying attention and dont know that the American Spectator, Human Events, Fox News you know, every conservative outlet has already shot down this rumor, which by the way, was started by the Hillary Clinton campaign. Now they will have a chance to find out this is Donald Trumps Pierre Salinger moment. You cant believe everything you read on the Internet. Obama has produced his birth certificate. There were announcements that ran in two contemporaneous Hawaiian newspapers at that time. The head of the Hawaiian medical record has announced I have seen the long-form you all want. I dont know why the long form is considered more credible than the short form. They are both from the same office. The State Department accepts the short form or, as we call it, the birth certificate. Hawaii accepts the birth certificate short form. So, I mean, it is a conspiracy theory that wont die on the Internet, but every responsible, conservative organization to look at it and shot it down, which is why you hear it being talked about exclusively on the liberal cable stations.29 Coulter's level-headed and reasoned response to the protean accusations of the birther movement might seem surprising, considering she normally delights in making over-the-top statements that inflame liberals, to say nothing of the fact that she has never been an Obama supporter. Why she isn't jumping on this particular bandwagon is something for speculation...although when Ann Coulter is on a bandwagon, she's usually holding the reins, not riding as a passenger. Can it be that Coulter, as a
29 Poor, Jeff. "Trump 2012 | Ann Coulter Not on Board Donald Trump's Birther Crusade." The Daily Caller. 12 Apr. 2011. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://dailycaller.com/2011/04/12/ann-coulter-not-on-board-donald-trumps-birther-crusade/>.

23

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

lawyer, recognizes that Obama is constitutionally eligible and that arguing otherwise is futile? Perhaps she sees potential for this movement to backfire upon the conservative movement. Obama eventually capitulated to the demands of these birther lunatics (which, by the way, do not speak for the overwhelming majority of conservatives), and produced his long-form birth certificate, the Certificate of Live Birth, which included the name of the hospital that Orly believes she so desperately needs, and the signature of the doctor who delivered him, which Terry Lakin claims to have needed. Though as Coulter implies, the long-form bears no more weight in a court of law than the short-form. Both are self-authenticating and prima facie evidence, nothing less. With the emergence of the long-form birth certificate, some of the Kenyan-birthers made a rather inelegant transformation into afterbirthers. You will never find a better example of birther mendacity and disingenuousness. It seems that they merely needed to see the long-form to prove that Obama's father was never a citizen; that was the only reason that they had ever wanted to see the long form, so they'd have us believe. Now that they have this proof, they know that Obama is not constitutionally eligible, since (as they dishonestly claim) a natural born citizen requires two citizen parents as well as birth within the jurisdiction of the U.S. A rather sloppily-designed website, obamanotqualified.com, ran this distinctive header: OBAMA'S LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE ADDS PROOF THAT OBAMA IS NOT ELIGIBLE!!! Because~ it lists his father as a "Kenyan", and his Father was NEVER a U.S. Citizen, To be a "Natural Born Citizen" BOTH parentS MUST be U.S. Citizens at the time of birth, His Father was NOT! =Obama NOT eligible.30 Actually, both the long and short forms of Obama's birth certificate list Obama's father as African, not Kenyan. While the long-form records Obama Sr's place of birth as Kenya, East Africa, it does not use the word Kenyan. The afterbirthers' equivocating gets even more delectable when they emphatically deny they
30 The Facts, Why Barack Hussein Obama Is NOT Eligible for Office of President. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.obamanotqualified.com/>.

24

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

were ever of the Kenyan-birther persuasion. I don't know where you got the idea that we were focused on where he was born, WorldNetDaily editor Joseph Farah complained in an email to TPMMuckraker. We've done hundreds of stories on the subject most of which revolved around the hiding of the birth certificate...31 Perhaps the best place to hide something truly is in plain sight, considering Obama's birth certificate was available since he began his campaign and has never been hidden. But how could anyone think that WorldNetDaily ever focused on where Obama was born? Perhaps it was one of the several articles that appeared under the heading BORN IN THE USA? on the WorldNetDaily website. Maybe it was the article dated August 2, 2009: Is this really smoking gun of Obama's Kenyan birth?32 Or perhaps it was a later article, appearing under the same heading, on April 12, 2010: Kenyan officials affirm: Obama 'son of this soil,' by Drew Zahn, which carried the subtitle In partying mood after election win, did African lawmakers say too much? From the article: Kenyan MP James Orengo asked the nation's parliament only last month, 'How could a young man born here in Kenya, who is not even a native American, become the president of America?'"33 (Drew Zahn must have had a very easy time writing this particular article, as it is little more than a list of quotes from various sources claiming Obama was born in Kenya.) Or perhaps it was Jerome Corsi's article, Did Michelle say Barack born in Kenya? It's interesting to note that these articles' titles are all in the question form. Nice touch. It gives WND some deniability. WND can innocently claim that they're not insinuating anything, only asking questions. Although no one loads a question with the aplomb of Glenn Beck, WND does a passable job. I wonder if they find that this style of asking leading questions is truly helpful in stimulating dialogue. Or are the editors and writers at WorldNetDaily all a bunch of serial liars who simply don't care
31 Reilly, Ryan J. "After-Birthers: How Conspiracy Theorists Reacted To Obamas Long-Form Birth Certificate." TPMMuckraker. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2011/04/afterbirthers_how_conspiracy_theorists_reacted_to_obamas_birth_certificate.php>. 32 "Is This Really Smoking Gun of Obama's Kenyan Birth? Read More: Is This Really Smoking Gun of Obama's Kenyan Birth? Http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=105764#ixzz1d3WLlCAY." WND - A Free Press for A Free People. WorldNetDaily.com Inc. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view>. 33 Zahn, Drew. "Kenyan Officials Affirm: Obama 'son of This Soil'" WND - A Free Press for A Free People. WorldNetDaily.com Inc, 12 Apr. 2010. Web. 07 Nov. 2011. <http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view>.

25

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

whether what they say is true or not, as long as they anticipate it harming the President's chances for reelection? Hey, just asking a question. Another example of a neo-afterbirther is SodaHead's Susan Eovaldi, who wrote an article entitled, Does Obamas long form birth certificate clear him or prove hes not a natural born citizen? Oh, look. Someone else who enjoys the implausible deniability of asking loaded questions. By the way, is Susan Eovaldi an ax-murderess who buries the dismembered remains of her victims beneath the basement of her home? Just asking... In her article, Eovaldi writes, Did Barack Obama just stop his own possible bloodless coup detat in its tracks when he released his long form birth certificate? He now clearly reveals his father was a subject of the British Royal Crown rendering him, Barack Obama II, ineligible to assume the U.S. Presidency!34 This not-so-clever ruse of claiming that Obama's long-form birth certificate was needed only to confirm his father's lack of U.S. citizenship overlooks a few things. For one, the citizenship of the parents doesn't matter if someone is born in the U.S., and never did. (See Part II, Chapter IV United States v. Wong Kim Ark) And even more awkward for the afterbirthers is the fact is that Obama's birth certificate doesn't actually reveal his father's citizenship at the time of Obama's birth. Or at any other time, for that matter. Obama's long-form birth certificate only states that his father was born in Kenya, East Africa. But that doesn't tell us anything about his father's citizenship. Someone born in Kenya could become a naturalized U.S. citizen. It's even possible to be a natural-born citizen if born in Kenya (although few, if any birthers would admit this). Merely giving us his place of birth doesn't tell us whether Obama's father was a citizen of the U.S. or not. So even if the neo-afterbirthers truly needed some legal document to prove Obama's father was not a citizen, Obama's long form does not prove anything about Obama's father's citizenship. To be sure, no informed person believes that Obama's father was ever a U.S. citizen. Nor was that even a question. Obama writes in his bestselling autobiography Dreams from My Father of his
34 Eovaldi, Suzanne. "Does Obamas Long Form Birth Certificate Clear Him or Prove Hes Not a Natural Born Citizen?" SodaHead. SodaHead.com, 01 May 2011. Web. 07 Nov. 2011.

26

Part I, Chapter One

...Ignoring His Birth Certificate

father's deportation upon expiration of his visa. This, of course, could only mean that Obama's father was an alien, since we don't deport citizens and citizens don't need visas to stay in the U.S. The point in exposing this rather idiotic oversight on the part of the neo-afterbirthers is not to argue that Obama's father was ever a citizen. Only that Obama's father's lack of citizenship is not provable by Obama's birth certificate. Again, it says only where Obama's father was born; not a word about his citizenship or lack thereof. So, claiming that the long-form was only needed to prove Obama's lack of eligibility due to his father's citizenship leaves the birthers with a massive serving of egg on their collective face. But if birthers seem foolish when trying to claim that Obama was not born in the U.S., it pales in comparison to the embarrassing blunders they make when trying to prove he was born somewhere else.

27