What does bother me is that he speaks about deadbeat dads on fathers day (a day to celebrate dads…he should have given that speech on mother’s day), yet he writes books praising how great his father was. ???

Another thing that bothers me is that it doesn’t matter to me what his parents feel about religion. It matter what HE thinks. I found out how he thinks from Rev Wright and Rev Pfleger.

Only one parent needs to be a US citizen, and you can be born abroad, so that is really a non-issue with me.

Something just isn’t right though. The copy of the birth certificate looks fake, like many have said: no hospital name…did the mother not take her husband’s name or were they even married? Maybe they couldn’t get married in the US since the father was married to other women in Kenya, and it wouldn’t be legal here? That doesn’t mean he’s not a US citizen (I would LOVE that though & he’d have to leave the race)…

Little things that add up. Like him saying in Selma that his parents got together because of the march on the bridge…which happened AFTER he was born. Then when he said that JFK was responsible for his dad coming to study in the US, which was incorrect. One thing may not seem so unusal, but it does when you add them all up. And nothing adds up about his father. I mean I heard him say something once about his brothers. I’m like “What? he has brothers???”…

If he wants to help the world and bring about change…why not make a bigger deal about your African family? Why not be proud? Why not give them money? Bill Clinton is doing more for Africa that Obama ever will in his entire lifetime. I wish people would have noticed that.

One thing has been bothering me. Maybe someone can help. Back in 1961, different words were used, that are today now offensive, so I hope I don’t offend. I’m trying to be historically correct, not offensive: but would a birth certificate (even if it is a copy, it is invalid if anything was changed)…anyway, would a birth certificate back from 1961 say the father’s race was AFRICAN AMERICAN or Negro?

Internet access opens up a lot of information to people that no other medium does.

Just like any form of query or quest for information be it for scientific discovery, investigating a crime or research for your college thesis, when you find a piece of information and it raises more questions that you asked, you have keep going. You don’t abandone your research because your effort has thrown up more questions and the task got harder? You follow your leads, each one to it’s logical conclusion. Access to information facilitates this.

No information = no debate. Little information = little debate. Outside the internet, the msm has abrogated their duty to inform the public. Their silence on many important issues are deafening, to the detriment of democracy.

Thank God for the internet, the bane of dictators and tyrants.

Bloggers who are asking these questions are the freedom fighters for democracy, for freedom of speech of the 21st century.

Others come here to stiffle that or distract.

However, I suspect it reveals a lie…maybe even a couple of lies.

What relevance does that have today?

If he can’t even be honest about a birth certificate why would I trust him with my country or my rights?

As I’ve pointed out multiple times in multiple threads, I’ve had to get a a certified copy of my birth certificate, and it is not a faithful reproduction of the original hospital birth certificate. It is an official document that states, “yes, we have a record of this person’s birth on file,” but it does not reproduce all the information on the original.

He produced a document from the state of Hawaii that says, “yes, we have this person’s birth on record.” That settles the “where” question. Everything else is irrelevant. Whether his race was listed as “white”, whether his parents were married or not, whether they were Christian or Muslim or Wiccan or Subgenius, none of that has any bearing on his eligibility to run.

Yet another “Nuff Said” puffer.

No, NOT “end of story.”

The story’s just beginning. The questions, above, and below, are being asked.

The question isn’t just his CITIZENSHIP. It’s “What WAS your name? Who WAS your daddy? Did you change any of that to something different? If so….What’s your name? Who’s your (adopted?) daddy?”

That version of the certificate has only been around since 2001.

Look at the bottom left corner.

It’s not the old originals, that used to look like paper copies of negatives.

Why not just xerox that old one and hand that out? You know, the one he used to get a passport, to go to school with, to apply for loans, whatever?

Two reasons, perhaps?

Perhaps he was born with the less romantic name, Barack Hussein Obama DUNHAM.

Back in the day, if two folks weren’t married, they gave “the little bast-ud” the name of the MOTHER. It wasn’t a negotiable/choice point, like it is now. I know lots of unmarried women these days whose children have the father’s name, but way back when, that wasn’t how it was played.

No marriage certificate, no daddy-name.

And the states joined the union with some caveats of their own, like many Hawaii natives still claiming to be a sovereign nation, Texas wanting to retain the right to Independence, and Wyoming insisting that they would stay out of the union for 100 years unless women retained their right to vote although it was another 30 years before the passage of the 19th Amendment gave the rest of the women the right to vote.

Do you suppose if Wyoming hadn’t been so stubborn Obama wouldn’t have had to worry about Clinton besting him in the popular vote?