While I've little interest in getting in the middle of the Obama birth issue, Paul Hollrah over at FSM did so yesterday and believes the issue can be resolved by Obama answering one simple question: What passport did he use when he was shuttling between New York, Jakarta, and Karachi?

So how did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later? And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York, Jakarta, and Karachi, what passport was he offering when he passed20through Customs and Immigration? The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers. It makes the debate over Obama's citizenship a rather short and simple one.

Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20?
A: Yes, by his own admission.
Q: What passport did he travel under?
A: There are only three possibilities. 1. He traveled with a U.S. passport, 2) He traveled with a British passport, or 3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport.
Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. passport in 1981?
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the U.S. State Department's "no travel" list in 1981.

Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport.

If he was traveling with a British passport that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims. And if he was traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.

Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a "natural born" American citizen between 1981 and 2008. Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.

Count me in as one of those inquiring minds who'd at least like to know the answers to these easily answered (by Obama) questions.

BEFORE WE IMPEACH HIM......

The real question is, who really cares where he was born? As long as he does his job I don't see why anyone cares.

Yeah...you can get into any country with or without a passport, depending on what routes you take (for example, Americans can get into Cuba if they go through a third party, i.e. Germany).



Because the constitution says he has to be a natural born citizen.

Exactly. I want an American citizen running our country anyway...


Do you trust Obama to do the job?

He's done a pretty crap-tastic job so far. At least no major debacles yet, besides the stimulus packages.

I say we give him four years and see what happens. If you impeach Obama, who will you replace him with? And is he/she going to do what is necessary for the people?

I don't want to sound Racist because I see and hear this kind of stuff all over the places. If the Congress impeaches Obama, then the media, online community, propaganda will be filled by angry protesters say all this and that about racism.

I remember my middle school basketball coach (yes he is african american) and the parents of the kid (who didnt pass the EOCs) went against the school because the school denied the kid (who was back then a basketball star) to play basketball based on his poor efforts in his studying. The coach and the parents said that it was racism. And somehow, the school reluctantly let the kid play.

This is so dumb. Maybe there is something I don't know, but how does the location of his birth effect his status as a natural born citizen of the US?
The law states that anyone born on US soil, to parents who are both US citizens (naturalized or natural born), or to at least one parent who was born as a natural citizen of the US. That means that as long as his mother was born as a US citizen, he is eligible for the presidency.

Seriously, I've had enough of this kind of crust. By the way, Kerm's curse filter should replace words with crust instead of "a". Then I wouldn't feel so alone in using it.

5 months isn't enough for anyone to do much of anything productive; unfortunately since everyone thinks of Obama as some sort of Messiah to save us from what Bush so badly fucked up, people are being let down that he's actually not as godly as he was made out to be while he was campaigning.



It's the whole "he may not have been born on US soil" that people are debating. If your parents are US citizens then you are eligible for citizenship, but you are only a natural-born citizen if you were actually born in the US (or a military base, ship sailing under the American flag, etc.)

Also, he's stupid enough to think that socialism actually works, and that surveillance will make our country safer (or thinks the American public is stupid enough to believe it).

How does that matter, anyway?

False. This is wrong, unless the laws have been recently changed (although a recent change in law wouldn't effect the status of people born decades ago). If you're parents are both US Citizens, or if one was born in the US, then you are exactly the same (legally) as a person born on US soil, bases, etc.
This is just a conspiracy theory spread by people who don't understand how the law works. Just like the whole thing about "he crusted up the oath of office, so he's not really president!" Guess what, he's the president and no one is going to change that based on something like that, OK?

I had no idea that Obama signed in the Patriot Act



Your answer is false. It is quite possible to use a U.S. passport to go to countries on the "no travel" list.

EDIT: And do you seriously think that nobody ever verified Obama's eligibility? Are you really that big of an idiot?

Because the PATRIOT act is the only really concerning surveillance bill to be in the news in the last decade

Don't blame him. Fox News corrupts minds.

Stupid question. Yes he is. He also thinks Tony Blair is still the PM of the United Kingdom. derpy derpy derrr

Oh, "BEFORE WE IMPEACH HIM......." Go read up on how to impeach someone, champ.

This topic makes me lol so hard. XD

Honestly, what we need to do is lock down the borders, remove all congress, senate, and everything, and start the hell over. Make it so someone with ties to a large corporation cannot have anything to do with power, that it is a temporary assignment, no lifetime benefits after spending only one term in office, no random increases of pay because 'we didn't get around to voting on it, so it automatically increases', have the balls to eliminate murders and rapists that are 100% without a doubt guilty of the crimes, and the list goes on.

Wouldn't hurt my feelings any at all if someone were to just hit the master reset switch and start us over again where government is concerned.

Socialism does work (just not as good as democracy); remember, China is the second largest economy in the world. And yes, the American public can easily influenced that anything is to their benefit; all humans can.



Goes back to the whole Constitution thing and how hard it is to change it.



Take a look at this. It's disputed at best. If he is found not to be eligible for office based on his citizenship, guess what? He's gone (however it's very unlikely that anyone's going to be able to prove that he's not a natural-born citizen).



You're thinking of Europe

As of 2007 (most up to date numbers I could find on Google) they have 4 times our population, and barely over half the size of our economy.....speaks well of the benefits of socialism. oh wait, no it doesn't.



The issue I have here, is that our entire country was indisputably founded by illegal immigrants. Anyone living west of the Appalachians at the time of the revolution was in violation of British colonial law.


More importantly, impose a ban on all forms of partisan politics and the use of private funding in political campaigns. Open candidacy, and a fixed spending pool for all candidates.

heh, the lockdown would only be temporary.

And yes, I agree on the limited spending for campaigns.

UD: nope, thinking of the good ol USA. I have considered moving to Europe, might have an easier time with life, and a government that isn't bent on spending money that our great great grandchildren doesn't have. =/

Look who's talking about socialism is bad, leveling the playing field for all politicians.