Speaking tonight before a meeting of the Tipton County Tennessee Republicans at Gateway Baptist Church, conservative author Michael Patrick Leahy will outline his argument that Barack Obama has not proven he is a natural born citizen, and therefore is Constitutionally ineligible to serve as President of the United States.
“The Constitution is quite clear on this matter,” according to Leahy. “Article II, Section I of the Constitution states unequivocally that only a natural born citizen, older than thirty-five, who has resided in the United States for at least fourteen years is eligible for the Office of the Presidency. The courts have decided in the past that to be considered natural born, a candidate must have been born either in the United States or on an American military base outside the United States to parents who are American citizens. Any candidate born outside the United States, not on an American military base to American citizen parents is not natural born. For the first time in American political history, serious questions have been raised about the birth location of the nominee from a major party. In such instances, the burden of proof lies with the candidate. And clearly, Senator Obama has not met that burden of proof. Therefore, he is not eligible for the Office of the Presidency.”
The three types of proof offered by Obama to date are insufficient to establish that he is a natural born citizen. The proof offered includes:
(1) A digital image of the front of a State of Hawaii certified copy of Certificate of Live Birth posted on the “Fight the Smears” website in June, 2008.
(2) A physical inspection of the purported State of Hawaii certified copy of Certificate of Live Birth made in August, 2008 at Obama offices in Chicago by researchers from the Annenberg Political Fact Check organization, a unit of the Annenberg Public Policy Center.
(3) A digital image of an August 13, 1961 “notice of birth” in the Honolulu Advertiser newspaper.
None of the three pieces of evidence identified above have been verified by Dr. Alvin Onaka, the Registrar and Chief of the Vital Records Office for the State of Hawaii, as authentic. Even if the certified copy of the Certificate of Live Birth is determined to be an authentic document, it does not mean it verifies Obama was born in Hawaii. “That purported certified copy does not have the signature of Dr. Alvin Onaka on the back. It merely has the stamp of his signature. If it was generated by the State of Hawaii, it was generated by a clerk, who simply typed a certificate number into a computer data base, which contains abstract information supposedly generated at some time by viewing the long form vault copy Certificate of Live Birth submitted to the Department of Health by either the hospital of his birth, or at some time subsequent to his birth by his parents or grandparents. And Dr. Onaka himself has acknowledged in a 2005 speech that the integrity of birth certificate databases needs to be improved. It is within the range of the possible that the Hawaii birth certificate data base has been hacked into and compromised.”
“You can look at this evidence offered to date and a reasonable person might conclude it is more likely than not that Barack Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961 as he claims. Such a conclusion, however, does not meet the Constitutional requirement of absolute certainty. The Constitution does not say a person who more likely than not is a natural born citizen is eligible for the Office of the President. The Constitution says a person must be a natural born citizen to be eligible for the Office of the President.”
Leahy went on to echo the request of the non-partisan Annenberg Political Fact Check organization that conducted the physical inspection of the purported certified copy of the Certificate of Live Birth in the possession of the Obama campaign. “I agree with Brooks Jackson, Director of the Annenberg Political Fact Check organization, who I interviewed both yesterday and today,” Leahy said. “Here is a direct quote from Mr. Jackson, which he gave me this morning:”
"We asked the Obama campaign to consider asking Hawaii officials to release copies of his birth certificate to reporters, or at least to confirm publicly that the birth certificate he has produced is an official document. That way there could be absolutely no question of its authenticity. But they didn't think that was necessary."
“I am simply asking the Obama campaign to do as Mr. Jackson asks them. In my opinion, only the production of the long form vault copy of Barack Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth by the State of Hawaii and the verification of the authenticity of this document as it relates to Obama’s birth in Hawaii will establish that he is a natural born citizen and therefore eligible for the Office of the Presidency,” Leahy said. “I have already demonstrated in my book, What Does Barack Obama Believe?, that Senator Obama has the facts of his early life wrong. For over fifteen years he has been incorrectly claiming that his father left his mother when he was two years old. The facts are clear that his mother left his father, moving to Seattle from Honolulu, when he was seven months old. It’s possible that Senator Obama is as inaccurate in his statements about where he was born as he has been about when his parents separated, and the circumstances under which they separated.”
Click here for rest of press release.