Theodore's World: Obama: Constitutionally Qualified? Don’t Know; Open and Transparent? Not! by Colonel Bob Pappas, USMC, Retired

« Bent On Destroying Our Country Obama: No 'silver bullet' to bring down gas prices~ Hello Soros Boy Obama What is Needed Is To Allow OUR Oil Companies To DRILL You Freak! | Main | Mississippi Town Destroys Westboro Baptist Plans »

April 24, 2011

Obama: Constitutionally Qualified? Don’t Know; Open and Transparent? Not! by Colonel Bob Pappas, USMC, Retired

Obama: Constitutionally Qualified? Don’t Know; Open and Transparent? Not!

by Colonel Bob Pappas, USMC, Retired

Before the General Election of 2008 a number of writers including me questioned Obama’s eligibility for the Presidency. My questions were based on two inextricably related factors:

• First, is Obama Constitutionally a qualified Natural Born citizen as required by Article II, Section 1 of the U.S. Constitution? Many inquiring minds are not satisfied by the State of Hawaii’s issuance of a Certificate of Live Birth because of the vagaries of Hawaii law that allowed birth registration by anyone with a couple of “witnesses” at the time of Obama’s birth, ostensibly there.

• Second, is Obama’s repeated campaign promise to be the most transparent Administration in history. It is irrational that he would at the very basic level abrogate that solemn campaign pledge; that is unless he doesn’t consider himself to be a part of his own Administration.

Was Obama born in Hawaii? Dr. Chiyome Fukino former head of Hawaii’s Department of Health released the following statement while still in office in 2008:

“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai‘i 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 Hawai‘i, 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 Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s 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 Hawai‘i.”

In 2009 she released a further clarification which stated:

“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i 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.”

Could Dr. Fukino be lying? One cannot tell. The only way to find out would be by Obama fulfilling his pledge of transparency and openness, by court action or forced by overwhelming public opinion.

Some point to the fact that an announcement was made in Hawaii papers within days of his birth and others to the Hawaii Certificate of Live birth as proof, neither of which satisfy inquiring minds. There are too many other issues which taken alone could be the subject of important investigations, and most of which raise additional questions rather than present believable answers. Then there are the “talking heads” that out of sheer Obama worship, or some misguided notion that to learn the facts would be detrimental to the nation, sweep aside any vestige of curiosity or responsibility to learn the actual truth not some preconceived version thereof. Therefore, they marginalize anyone who has the audacity to question the matter. Some may be satisfied by media buffoons who assert: “we’ve investigated, and he was born in Hawaii” without actually establishing those facts. As far as one knows there isn’t a court in the U.S. that accepts “hearsay” as conclusive evidence; and that is what Mr. Bill O’Reilly and others who lick Obama’s boots for ratings do without flinching. Then there’s the “Intimidation” Factor (pun intended) where O’Reilly either out-screams or verbally abuses those who raise the question or, he cites his years as number one cable news program, both in an effort to intimidate and/or silence legitimate unsatisfactorily answered questions; once again for ratings not serious investigation.

An April 23rd, AP article by Mark Niesse titled, “In Hawaii, accessing some Obama birth info is easy” Niesse states that in the State’s Vital Records office there is a computer generated tabulation of data that shows Obama’s birth on page 1218, highlighted in yellow. The evident conclusion is that is wouldn’t be there if it weren’t backed up by factual data.

For many the issue is not whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii, which seems to be obscurely, but circumstantially settled, the more important and central issue is his inarguable deception and betrayal of his pledge to be “open and transparent.” If he cannot, or refuses to do that at the personal level, which he allegedly defends at great expense, his claim of transparency cannot be trusted at any level. Obama’s lack of personal transparency gives life, and should, to the unsettled issue of Constitutional eligibility, that concerns a growing number of Americans. In stark contrast one recalls the media grilling that G.W. Bush endured about release of his information, upon which he released most everything.

There is no rational reason for Obama to be so tightfisted with his personal information unless he has something to hide, and that he believes the American electorate would find repugnant, repulsive and/or damaging. On the other hand it may be a ploy to keep his committed band of lemmings stirred up while distracting Americans away from damage that he is intentionally inflicting on the Nation.

For example, in a Washington Examiner 20 April 2011 article, titled “Obama: Mistakes? Can’t think of Any” writer Byron York analyzes Obama’s “dancing skills around the subject” concluding that he is no different than any other politician except if there have been any mistakes it would be that he (Obama) had not driven his agenda as deep and as fast as it should have been driven. That folks is an open statement that he has damaged the country intentionally!

Having done considerable research on the eligibility matter one finds that Courts have uniformly rejected cases brought before them regarding Obama’s eligibility on the basis of a lack of “standing;” on the other hand is the possibility of widespread, wholesale corruption of the Courts and that is both alarming and warrants investigation. Out-of-hand rejection by the Courts compels one to wonder why any bona fide U.S. Citizen does not have standing to question the ostensible President’s basic qualification.

The answer is succinctly put: “To have standing, a person must be sufficiently affected by the matter at hand, and there must be a case or controversy that can be resolved by legal action.” Evidently courts do not accord American citizens “standing” in political issues, especially this one.

However, in an instance where a candidate acceded to office though official misrepresentation, artifice or fraud it is, or should be obvious on its face to even the most naive that citizens have been harmed incident to the perpetration of such official misrepresentation, artifice and/or fraud.

A legislative case in point is the “bum’s rush” by Democrats of “Obamacare” signed into law by a President who may or may not be Constitutionally qualified. The harmful result, if nothing else is that no any law signed by Obama is Constitutional and enforceable. That same principle would apply to Executive Orders he has signed.

Those questions, left unanswered by establishing eligibility, harm all American citizens, even the ones who support him. The only way to make a final determination would be for it to be adjudicated in a Court of Law, taking it to the streets or unless Obama in a blinding moment of enlightenment and accompanying compelling need for integrity, makes the issue go away.

Semper Fidelis


Wild Thing's comment...........

It is up to between 2 and 4 Million obama has spent now to NOT do what we all are asking about his birth certificate. If nothing else this for me screams guilty.

Good writei up by the Col.

....Thank you Mark for sending this to me.

3rd Mar.Div. 1st Battalion 9th Marine Regiment
1/9 Marines aka The Walking Dead
VN 66-67

Posted by Wild Thing at April 24, 2011 04:47 AM


Obviously obama has a different definition of "transparency" than Webster's does. And the MSM either doesn't care or, more likely, is aiding and abetting obama.

Posted by: TomR, armed in Texas at April 24, 2011 11:25 AM

For something that isn't important, obama has spent that much money to hide. Yet as the Colonel points out oreilly, beck and others have defended vehemently that obama was born in Hawaii. They are accepting as fact this one statement. While on the other hand challange everything else obama does. That by itself makes no sense. Beck says it is not important. If that is so, the nothing done in Washington is important, either.

Posted by: Mark at April 24, 2011 05:20 PM

Since his father was in the US as a student through his first birthday Obama was probably born by his hippy dippy mother somewhere in the United States. It may not matter his mother made sure that there was no birth certificate which was an excellent way to dodge the draft from WWII to the nineteen sixties the draft boards did not find men who were born at home and had no birth certifies.
But the US Constitution requires positive proof of Natural Birth and if Obama cannot provide that it Voids his Presidential authority and his appointments. He cannot be removed from office except by two-thirds of the Senate in an Impeachment but his authority is his only if he is legal. Unless he can prove that he is positively legal his administration unwinds

Posted by: Avitar at April 25, 2011 12:01 AM