Thursday, April 21, 2011

The Birth Certificate: Why It Remains an Issue

The United States has been a country of conspiracy theories. I've taught United States History and Government for over 20 years and the conspiracy theories can spice up a history or government class---they get people's attention. If you are a conspiracy theorist, you are also considered to be a bit of a nut, and conspiracy theorist and loony are even treated as synonyms. Conspiracy theories are not relegated to only right wingers---there are left wing and right wing theories and even whole chicken theories as in the case of unidentified flying objects (UFO). Many left wingers believe President Bush orchestrated the destruction of the the two World Trade Center towers on September 11, 2001.

Enter the Obama birth certificate issue. Was our President a natural-born citizen of the United States as required by Article Two of the Constitution of the U. S.? The issue has peaked and valleyed, but it will not go away, and right now percolates about as strong as ever, in light of the incessant questioning of Donald Trump by television news reporters. They question and he answers. He won't say no-comment. So why doesn't this issue or non-issue go away?

Obama supporters, which also happen to be most of the main-stream media, insist that people who question Obama's birthplace do so because of several possibilities, and only these: they are crazy, they are stupid, they are racist, or they are partisan. So if you question the birthplace of our president, you are doing it for only those reasons, and it could only be one or more of those reasons. And that kind of tactic is enough to keep most people from saying that they question where President Obama was born. The other big reason, I believe, that many others won't say anything about this is because they think this is an intricate, complicated, three-level-chess kind of strategy being used by Obama, stringing along the debate, so that around election time, he could play the victim by showing everyone his birth certificate. "What if he really has one? I would feel and look really stupid being one of the ones who questioned it." That kind of thing.

When Donald Trump first started answering this question, he would start the answer by saying he was really smart, went to elite academic institutions, and got good grades, in order to prevent the "you're stupid" charge from the media. I've also noticed that the media, even at those moments, won't necessarily say you're stupid, but they will roll their eyes, sigh, laugh, look at each other like they know you're crazy, and generally treat you like you're likely insane if you don't agree that President Obama was born in Hawaii. They put pressure on those they interview to comply with the politically correct position, that is, he is a natural born citizen.

And the issue persists. Why? My contention is that the "birther" issue won't stop precisely because we are not stupid; in other words, just the opposite reason than what the main-stream media wants people to think. My intelligence will not allow me to dismiss the issue of the president's birthplace. Everything about how the issue is being dealt with sends up red flags to any thinking person. I believe that the people who don't have questions are the ones who are drinking the koolaid, in other words.

When I sit in judgment upon any issue, I have a bias toward wanting to believe a person. Last night I was talking to a Buddhist and I wanted to believe Buddhism. I wanted someone to give me his best shot for Buddhism, so I can understand why someone would believe it. I've asked that type of question thousands and thousands of times. When people cannot give satisfying evidence to a seeking, believing person, it shows it to be false to me. I want to believe, but I'm not going to be naive. That's what media people and others are asking for us to do on this birthplace issue. Just be a dupe, is what I get.

Do I think that President Obama was born in the United States? Yes. I do. I think that. Why? Because I want to believe that. Has he proven that he was born here? No. He hasn't. He hasn't proven that. No one has proven that to the people of the United States. I think he was born here because of certain circumstances, ones however that do not prove that he was born here. Could he prove it? Yes, he could. But he hasn't yet. Which is the reason why I do think and I do believe that he has something else he doesn't want people to see, perhaps on that birth certificate. Should he have to show that? Yes. He should. The president of the United States should have to show his birth certificate. He hasn't, but he should have to.

A couple of years ago I went with the rest of my family to get a passport. I went without my birth certificate. Some of my family members had theirs. I didn't have mine with me. I went with the kind of certificate that Obama has been showing people of the United States online to prove he was born in Hawaii. It is called a Certificate of Live Birth or something like that. It's something that is typed up later and could easily be forged by someone who wanted to fool people into thinking that he was born in this country. It is much more difficult to fake a birth certificate. You've got a combination of signatures and a look that is very authentic as it relates to a birth. I didn't have that one with me when I went to get a passport, and they would not give me a passport. The birth certificate was required. I still don't have a passport. I did get my birth certificate. It took some effort to do it, but I got it, so I could get a passport now, but I couldn't then with that which President Obama is showing the world to prove he was born here.

So people like Trump are saying that the piece of paper Obama is showing everyone is not enough, and people are treating him with ridicule. They say that the certificate he has produced is enough. That certificate was not enough for me to get a passport. I couldn't visit a foreign country with what he produced. But I could and did get my actual birth certificate. It can be done, even with someone with limited resources such as myself.

Is this Obama birthplace issue only a conspiracy theory? No. It's a real issue for any thinking person. And this becomes even clearer the more I hear his defenders. Every time I hear an Obama defender or even President Obama himself, I await the solid evidence necessary to eradicate this issue. I want it to be gone. But it only raises more questions. It answers nothing. Which only makes it a bigger issue with me and obviously others.

What am I talking about?

To start, I'm talking about the fact that the President will not show us his birth certificate. He won't produce the certificate. That is a simple thing to do if someone has one, especially with his resources, and yet he won't show it. That would clear up the matter completely in a matter of seconds. But he does not show the birth certificate.

Second, the main stream media will not ask Obama why he does not show the birth certificate or let everyone see it in some way. They don't ask why he doesn't show the certificate. They are complicit with this issue. I don't know why they don't ask. But they don't. They would ask other candidates, but they don't ask him, even though it should be an easy question to ask. I don't know why they don't ask, but there are several reasonable possibilities. They don't want to be branded a racist---too humiliating. They don't want to lose interview possibilities, a career damager.

Third, the president has fought in court, and spent millions of dollars, to keep people from being able to see the birth certificate. Why spend a few million dollars in court costs in order to keep people from seeing something that you say you have or that has nothing on it that is bad? Showing the actual, real certificate would be the easiest couple million dollars you ever saved yourself. The willingness to lose that money, which is difficult to raise in a campaign appearance, should make any intelligent person wonder about this.

Fourth, the media says that the investigation has already been done and it has already been proven, which is why it isn't an issue any more. OK. Alright. That sounds good. And what is the result of that investigation? Where are those results? Where is the program that has cleared it all up? Nothing. Nothing that shows the certificate. What we think is that there were birth announcements in the newspaper. Yes. A week after the supposed birthdate. I couldn't get a passport with birth announcements from the newspaper. That isn't a legal document. Could a mother, who wanted her son to be a natural born citizen of the United States, send in a birth announcement to the newspaper? Just asking. But she wouldn't know that he would be our future president? Who cares? There are many other very good reasons why she would want people to think he was born in Hawaii without those prophetic abilities. An investigation that does not provide a certificate is not complete. So go back to the drawing board Mr. or Ms. Investigators.

Fifth, the governor of Hawaii is outraged that Trump is questioning the birthplace of Obama. OK. This should be good. Proof forthcoming. Oh goodie. Ready to clear this up. Yes!

"So you say that you were 'there' at his birth, Governor Abercrombie?"
"Yes. I was in Hawaii."
"So when you said you were 'there,' you meant there in Hawaii?"
"Yes. And later I saw little Barack at various functions, because I knew his parents and grandparents. And he was introduced to all of us at those get togethers."
"But Donald Trump is asking why the president won't show the birth certificate."
"How dare he ask that question, someone who has had some bankruptcies and taken people's investment money? He's not credible to me to even ask the question. And the question is an offensive question to his parents and family."

Alright. Does that answer it for you? If it does, you, my friend, are not using your brain.

Sixth, the news media behaves strangely stupid about it. Trump, for instance, will say, "He isn't showing the certificate!" And the media will ignore the statement. They show little to no curiosity. They should say, "Wow, that's true. He hasn't done that." And then, these investigative reporters, whose job it is to investigate and uncover these types of issues, ask Trump how his investigation is going. What information has he gathered? Shouldn't they just do the investigation themselves? Some might say, well, they have. OK, so where is the birth certificate? If they have done that, where is the birth certificate?

I believe there are many other reasons than these six, but you've got to park your brain at the door to conclude that anything on this has been proven yet. It hasn't, not only based on standards for a normal thinking person, but based upon what is expected by the U. S. government itself for me to get a passport.

15 comments:

Scott Leigh said...

Kurt, Something we can agree on! Thank God. Kind regards.

Anonymous said...

In our imperfect world, we need proofs. For example, I learned about the Constitution and the Bill of Rights in grade school. My young mind soaked it in and believed that those documents existed. Later in life, I had opportunity to see those documents first hand in Washington DC. That was the frosting on the cake; my sensory experience then KNEW that those documents existed.

But what if I went to Washington DC and found that there were no such documents? Suddenly all that I held in esteem, all that I believed to be true is suddenly dashed. But at least having that knowledge enables me to make decisions about what to do next.

Or worse, suppose there were never such documents, and I never discovered that those documents never existed? Then I would go through life believing in a lie. It would be my naive little world built upon some fantasy that somewhere was something called a Bill of Rights and a Constitution.

So it is with the birth certificate. I really do not want to find out that our presidency is a hoax and a lie. But if it is, at least I want to know it, and then see what next steps we must take. I don't want to be in the dark my entire life.

Vic said...

With our without a birth certificate, the man is a hoax and a lie.

Thomas Ross said...

Scott,

Pastor Brandenburg's first name is "Kent."

Regards,

Thomas Ross

Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus said...

Pastor Kurt Brandenburger, constitutional supersleuth!

d4v34x said...

Whole chicken. Heh.

Josh said...

Titus,
Its Pastor Kent Brandenburg, not Kurt Brandenburger...

Joshua said...

I believe Titus is known for referencing Pastor Brandenburg, Brandenblogger and Brandenburger in alternating intervals, for the benefit of any late arrivers to the blog...

David Barnhart said...

I've always wondered why a certified copy was not shown. Being in possession of a certified copy of my Hawaii birth certificate, that I did use to obtain a passport, I noted the differences between mine and the version of Obama's that was published a while back. Mine is two years newer than his, so there could be minor differences, but it was obvious to me that what they showed was quite different, but with enough similarities for me to believe it had been published by the State of Hawaii. My copy, with both my mother's and the doctor's signatures, is called a "Certificate of Live Birth" at the top, so that particular title does not mean it's not a regular birth certificate, at least not in the state of Hawaii.

I've done some reading on the "natural born citizen" clause as well, and it appears the presidential eligibility status of those born abroad to U.S. parents, thus also giving U.S. citizenship to the child, is still indeterminate, not having really been touched on in the various court decisions, even though it has been brought up often in the past when challenging the status of a candidate. Since Obama did have one U.S. parent, even if it were determined at some point that the birth was not actually in Hawaii, I feel the courts would settle this issue rather quickly in his favor anyway.

Of course, maybe the real birth certificate is being held back until a politically expedient time to be brought out to discredit opponents, perhaps an appropriate moment around the time of the next election.

d4v34x said...

I actually subscribe to a 3 dimensional chess-playing chicken theory. I think he has one but figured if he doesn't have to show it (and apparently law does not require him to) he won't just to see everybody get stirred up and then he can play victim.

Kent Brandenburg said...

Dave,

I'm not sure on all the details, but there is a book by a Jerome Corsi that is already #1 or #2, still pre-publication that is going to be offering some explanation.

D4,

I'm hoping against the chess genius theory.

Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus said...

Josh and Joshua - Yes, I just like to fun around with Pastor Brandenblogger's name sometimes.

Like, if I ever found out that he'd stole something, then I could label him Pastor Brandenburglar.

If he ever gets boring, I can call him Pastor Blandenburg.

If he ever goes on a liquid diet, I'll refer to him as Pastor Blenderburg.

Seriously, I have more fun than it ought to be legal for one person to have.

d4v34x said...

New thoughts?

Kent Brandenburg said...

D4,

My new thought is, what took him so long? Another new thought is, why did it take Donald Trump to get him to do it? Why couldn't the media asked him for it? And another thought is, Why today? I do think there is usually another political reason for it besides the one that is being said, like Ben Bernanke having a news conference today.

It will be interesting to see if this issue disappears now. Maybe the news media will begin to ask about some of the other unprovided information other people usually show, like his academic record. Employers can ask an employee for an academic record, and they do, but the American people want to know what it is, and they can't see, even though they are hiring him as their president, so to speak.

Those are my newest thoughts.

David Barnhart said...

I think I can respond to your final thoughts now. I requested a while back and finally received (today) a new certified copy of my Hawaii Birth Certificate, and it looks almost exactly like the one Obama first published a couple years back (that is quite different from the long form version). The only difference between mine and his is the ordering of things at the top, which would be a reasonable change for one requested a couple years later. The one they sent is declared by the state of Hawaii to be legal evidence of birth in any court proceeding. So, the reason the original wasn't published before is because that's not what Hawaii sends out now.

I also compared my old copies to the long form that Obama finally published, and they are practically identical, down to the paper pattern and the curve on the left hand side.

None of this says anything about whether or not someone in Hawaii certified a birth that did not take place there, and I'm sure it would be *possible* to falsify, but I no longer think it very likely, and it's obvious to me that given what I received from the State of Hawaii, Obama wasn't trying to snow us with a non-official birth certificate the first time around. He has his issues, but I don't believe a phony birth certificate is one of them.