Spread the love

by Sharon Rondeau

Is this man constitutionally eligible to be on the ballot in any state?

(Apr. 20, 2010) — One chamber of the Arizona legislature has voted in favor of adding a provision to a bill which would require presidential candidates to submit proof of constitutional eligibility to have their names placed on the state’s ballot.

The AP news report posted by Fox News tacitly acknowledged the Obama eligibility issue by stating in the first paragraph that he would have to produce proof of eligibility “when he runs for re-election.”

Today when Lester Kinsolving of WorldNetDaily asked Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, if Obama had seen the Arizona proposal, Gibbs answered, “Lester, I’m the guy – I’m the guy that said, put the president’s birth certificate on the Internet two years ago.”  Last August Gibbs had referred to “all preponderance of the evidence, that the president was born … uhm … in … uhh, uhh … was born here and not somewhere else” when questioned by the same reporter about Obama’s origins.

Obama’s posted “birth certificate” has been labeled a forgery by at least two document experts.  Recently The Post & Email has reported that a member of the Kenyan Parliament, Mr. James Orengo, stated that Obama was not a “native American” because he was born in Kenya.

Join the Conversation


Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

  1. Unless the bill has in it that an NBC means jus soli AND jus sanguinus it’s completely useless. If they accept “citizen at birth” under any circumstances it’s just a waste of time.

  2. If FL were to follow AZ’s lead with this type of legislation, that would be huge since they have a large electorate. CA will never do it unfortunately.

  3. All the Lawsuits that have been dismissed have been dismissed on the grounds of not being in the right court room , No Lawsuit about ” OBAMA’S” Citizenship has been heard on the merits __Fact = ” Natural born Citiizen “=” A child born on U.S. Soil to parents not owing foreign Allegiance to any other Country ” !! Obama’s Mom was/is a U.S. Citizen , OBAMA’S Dad was/is a Kenyan Citizen , therefore ” OBAMA ” does not meet the criteria for ” Natural born Citizen ” ! the most “OBAMA ” can be is a Native citizen because of the 14th amendment , not ” Natural born Citizen “

    1. Thomas, so far the lamestream media are batting 1000 with regard to covering this issue accurately. Wrong 100% of the time. Lying about the facts, 100% of the time; or at least obfuscating the facts while hiding the pertinent details, like none of the cases were heard on the MERITS.

  4. Jon: What’s ridiculous about lamestream media attacks on AZ is that simultaneously they all repeat the meme that Obama has already provided his birth certificate on the Internet, that Hawaii has vouched for it, that the birth announcements prove that he was born in Hawaii, that all lawsuits were thrown out of court, and that he’s already proven that he’s a natural born citizen, eligible to be POTUS.

    Therefore, if all of the above WERE true, why would anyone oppose AZ seeking to ensure that the eligibility requirements in the Constitution, the supreme law of this land, are enforced in 2012?

    It defies logic and common sense.

    Don’t most media elites believe that they are far more logical, intelligent, and sensible than we are?

  5. The media is already attacking AZ for having the courage to ensure no presidential candidate is unqualified to fill the position. We should expect to hear that leaders in AZ are unhinged, wing nuts, etc. to pass such a bill. Obviously other states should join but what state is next?? I live in NJ and never expect either party to protect its citizens. Hope that TX is next to stand up to Obama to further lead the way for his removal.

  6. If the birth certificate comes from the campaign, and not the state, the state will not verify its authenticity. There’s the loophole. It needs to come from the candidate. Candidates do stuff like make speeches, vote, eat and go in their file cabinets for stuff. The candidate has to give it, not the campaign.

  7. Now for another “tell” that has been staring us in the face for over a year:

    In March, 2010, Gibbs said:
    “I’m the guy that said, put the president’s birth certificate on the Internet TWO YEARS AGO.” [Emphasis added.] Two years ago means MARCH, 2008.

    In August, 2009, Gibbs said:
    “A YEAR AND A HALF ago I asked that the birth certificate be put on the Internet . . . ” [Emphasis added.] A year and a half ago means FEBRUARY/MARCH 2008.

    When was the COLB posted on the Web? Wasn’t it June, 2008, on Fight the Smears, followed by the infamous “Born in the USA” FactCheck blog story in August 2008?

    So do these TWO statements by Gibbs mean that he ASKED for the BC to be put on the Web on or before March 2008, but it didn’t show up until June 2008? Seems so. And he’s intent on taking credit for that coup! He’s the guy, after all.

    What else was happening in February/March 2008, besides Gibbs asking for a BC to post on the Web?

    The passport files at the Dept. of State were being “sanitized” of information “embarrassing” to Obama, according to an anonymous source speaking to a reporter (Timmerman, I believe was his name). The FACT remains that the passport files were indeed breached in Jan., Feb., and March 2008, with one of the perps (the one who viewed Obama’s files) being an employee of John O. Brennan, who worked for the CIA and who now is a member of Obama’s administration.

    What else might have been going on in March 2008? Remember the photos of the alleged “real” COLB, seen and examined by FactCheck staffers? They posted these photos along with their “Born in the USA” story in August, 2008. HOWEVER, the exif data (soon sanitized from the photos at the FactCheck blog) showed that the photos were actually TAKEN in, wait for it . . .

    MARCH, 2008!! Right around the time that the final sanitization of Obama’s passport files took place. In fact, within only a few days. Yet another Gibbs “tell”:

    In explaining why he asked for the BC to be posted on the Web, he said, “because lord knows, you got a birth certificate and you put it on the Internet, what else could be the story?”

    Indeed! “You put it on the Internet; WHAT ELSE COULD BE THE STORY?” [Emphasis added.]

    In the case of the sycophantic lamestream media, NOTHING ELSE could possibly be the story because Gibbs has given them a way to rationalize away any doubts they may be tempted to have, niggling away in the backs of their journalistic minds, about whether or not Obama just possibly may be ineligible to be POTUS.

    No, you “got a birth certificate” (no matter how gotten) and you put it on the Internet under the “rubric of transparency.” Voila! No other story IS possible from the lamestream media. He was born in Hawaii. Case closed. That’s their story and they’re sticking to it.

    Interesting word, “rubric.” Infoplease defines it as “an explanatory comment; gloss.”

    GLOSS. We get it now, Gibbs. Minister of Disinformation.

    1. This is interesting. “What else was happening in February/March 2008?” Also it must have been in around that time in 2008 that questions were asked as to whether Senator John McCain, born in the Canal Zone was a natural born citizen — because on April 10, 2008 the Senate introduced a resolution giving support to McCain. “Yes”, they said, ” we believe John is natural born and can be President.”

      Can’t you just imagine how the Obama campaign (with Gibbs as Communications Director) was scurrying around at that time? And what with McCain having to produce his birth certificate, Gibbs must have been asking to “put Obama’s on the internet”. He could have at that point just assumed Obama had a real Hawaian one.

      Yeah you’re the guy alright Mr. Gibbs, now com’n man apply some critical thinking and put the pieces in place. Figure it out. Your job’s not THAT important, your integrity means more.

      1. Trac, thank you! Another “coincidence” to add to my Gibbs/Brennan timeline. This is so interesting. Guess what I just found, another instance of Gibbs harping on the fact that HE’S the guy who asked for the BC to be put on the Interenet. Twice in one news conference on April 21, 2010. http://www.mediaite.com/online/fox-news-correspondent-to-robert-gibbs-have-the-birthers-hurt-obamas-muslim-american-outreach/

        “Again, I’ve said this many times, Wendell. If you’re — if after I asked that the President’s birth certificate be put on the Internet hasn’t dissuaded you from where he was being born, I’m almost positive that no argument is somehow going to dissuade you from that. I don’t — I got to tell you, I don’t — we don’t spend a lot of time here worrying about what to do about people that don’t think the President was born here. I don’t — again, I’m the guy who said “put the birth certificate on the Internet.” It has apparently, among those people, dissuaded virtually none of them.”

        What the HECK the issue of his ineligibility has to do with Muslim outreach is over my head. Any idea what Goler’s point was?

        “what to do about people that don’t think the President was born here?” What to DO ABOUT THEM? Scary words, wouldn’t you say?

      2. I have to add that it’s interesting that the very day that I wrote this analysis of Gibbs and the BC/passport breach timeline, and the fact that Gibbs et al pretend that they don’t pay any attention to the “birthers”, yet every indication is that they do, Gibbs goes out there (what time is the daily press briefing? Anyone know?) and Gibbs, in answer to a question mentioning Brennan, repeats–twice–that he’s the guy who asked for the BC to be posted on the Web and reiterates that they don’t pay any attention to birthers.

        One wonders how quickly comments here at this site get reported to the WH and who is tasked to monitor it?

        8,000,000 AMERICANS on the WH enemies list? They have Nixon beat!

        Do any of you so-called Americans who monitor “birther” sites ever doubt yourselves? Do you truly believe that you are doing right? In your heart of hearts, do you believe that you are loyal Americans? Do you have a conscience at all? One wonders.

        God bless the United States of America. God bless the Constitution of these United States. We the People of the USA have the God-given right to freedom of speech. Remember that.

  8. So in March, 2010, Gibbs said:
    “Lester, I’m the guy – I’m the guy that said, put the president’s birth certificate on the Internet two years ago,” Gibbs joked. (More about this in my next comment.)

    In August, 2009, Gibbs said this:
    “A year-and-a-half ago I asked that the birth certificate be put on the Internet because lord knows, you got a birth certificate and you put it on the Internet, what else could be the story?”

    Sounds like a prepared speech, huh? Aren’t we supposed to believe that they pay no attention to those crazy “birthers” and their nutty ideas?

    Here’s what seems like a “tell”, if you read between the lines of what Gibbs said less than a month ago:

    “For the crazy idea that … for the crazy idea that somebody might actually look at the birth certificate under the rubric of transparency and come to the conclusion that the state of Hawaii came [to], that the president was indeed born in the state of – say it with me, Lester – Hawaii,” Gibbs joked.

    Why is he always “joking” about this issue, one has to wonder?

    Notice what he said, though: “the conclusion that the state of Hawaii came to,” which was that the “president was INDEED born in the state.”

    Is that how a normal person would describe someone’s birth certificate, issued because a hospital reported the birth at their facility?

    So, for some reason known to Gibbs, in Obama’s case, Hawaii had to COME TO A CONCLUSION about whether or not Obama was born there; and they (according to Gibbs) came to the conclusion that, yes, he was “INDEED” born in Hawaii.

    Tell me. If he really does have a normal, hospital-generated birth certificate, like every other natural born citizen in the great state of Hawaii, then why would the state have to make a determination about whether or not he was “indeed” born there?

    If the hospital notified the DoH of the birth, and that generated the birth announcements, then why would the state have to draw a “conclusion” about whether he was “INDEED” born in Hawaii? Wouldn’t the doctor’s signature and the hospital’s imprimatur be sufficient?

    In Obama’s case, the hospital was allegedly Kapiolani, but they’re not stepping forward to collect the $15,000 that Farah said he’d donate to them if they proved he was born there. Why not? Seems like easy money. Think of all the good they could do with 15 grand.

    1. The STATE of Hawaii did not announce a conclusion. Only one person did. Hawaiian Health Department Director Fukino. She made a statement she told everyone for months before was ILLEGAL. She never consulted the Hawaiian Attorney General. No document was with the statement. The statement didn’t say Obama’s photoshoped COLB was the PICTURE of something official. Fukino said vital records–plural–meaning more than one. A regular birth won’t have multiple records. The statement didn’t even say what YEAR Obama’s vital records came from. The newspaper ads of Obama’s birth didn’t come from HHD–that wasn’t done until 1976. And yes Fukino’s statement is unsworn.

      A WITNESSED and AUTHENTICATED record stands up in court. That’s what we got them for. No way does Fukino’s unsworn statement get into court. We only got that insult because there is nothing better. If Obama’s people got nothing better what have they got? He must of had something from birth if nothing Hawaiian. You got to ask–what birth certificate WAS Obama using in life? Kenya government members could have the answer. From what I read here at P&E they think they know better than Fukino where Obama was born.

      1. Of course, you’re right, Travis. I’m simply dissecting what Gibbs said and the curious way that he said it. I’m not vouching for any conclusion that Gibbs says that Hawaii made. I’m trying to identify the subtext. Why he says what he says the way he says it.

        To me, the timeline is so suspicious. It was bad enough when the exif data matched up with the passport break-ins, and then when FactCheck blog disappeared the exif data when people started questioning their timing, and then when they made up stories about how their photographer didn’t set the camera’s clock (except it just happened to coincide with the passport breaches), but NOW we have Gibbs placing his brilliant idea about putting a birth certificate on the Internet exactly in the timeframe when somebody was photographing a dubious document (not the backside, though!) at Obama headquarters in Chicago. Talk about coincidences.

  9. Thanks, AZ, state of John McCain, but you’re a day late and a dollar short.
    Mrs. Rondeau replies: However, I read last night that several other states have measures similar to Arizona’s that they’re considering. If we all propose such bills in our respective states, that would send a strong message to Obama and his minions that we know he’s a fraud. While he should be removed from office immediately, and I still believe he will not finish this term, he also would not be able to seek the re-election which the leftists believe he is entitled to.