Sean Hannity says Obama should show real Birth Certificate
AS POLITICAL INSIDERS AWAIT OBAMA’S RESPONSE TO NATHAN DEAL
by John Charlton
(Dec. 9, 2009) — Last night Sean Hannity affirmed that the desire of millions of U.S. Citizens to see the real birth certification of Barack Hussein Obama was legitimate.
His argument was, that if Obama was bold enough to vaunt an electronic image to “prove” anything, that he should not be cowardly to hide the real mcoy.
Hannity’s actual comments were quoted by World Net Daily, in an article published nearly 4 hours ago:
“What was so wrong in saying that, ‘Can we see your birth certificate?’ … We were told early on that, in fact, somebody else had looked at it and confirmed that it was legitimate. So, I mean, what was wrong with people saying, ‘Wait a minute. You know what? In light of the fact of where your, your father came from, et cetera, uh, let’s just make sure that this is a legitimate birth certificate’? … It was not asked by the mainstream media. It was asked by places like WorldNetDaily, who, I think, were just doing due diligence considering it’s a constitutional mandate. … I think a lot of people were just afraid to ask the question.”
Hannity’s Comments are revealing
Hannity’s comments are not just significant, because of his exposure as a television personality, but revealing because of what they say and do not say. The Post & Email will therefore comment on them in turn:
“What was so wrong in saying that, ‘Can we see your birth certificate?’ …”
Evidently, this is made in the context of a reporter who has been consistently told by his editors not to mention the topic, and badgered by colleagues who disdain its discussion. It reflects a work environment which is nothing like one in which freedom of speech and the freedom of the press flourish.
It also reflects a professional environment where political correctness has replaced ethical standards and the common sense notions of duty and loyalty to the nation, first and foremost.
“We were told early on that, in fact, somebody else had looked at it and confirmed that it was legitimate.“
Evidently, Hannity admits that he recognized from the beginning the difference between the claim made by the image of the online COLB, published by Obama’s campaign, and the actual document.
Obama’s supporters, however, seem politically obligated or at least mentally afflicted, to such an extent as to deny this distinction.
“So, I mean, what was wrong with people saying, ‘Wait a minute. You know what? In light of the fact of where your, your father came from, et cetera, uh, let’s just make sure that this is a legitimate birth certificate’?”
There is, however, a fundamental error or erroneous concept of the issue, presented here — promoted by World Net Daily too — that the birth certificate alone will resolve the controversy. If the birth certificate proved that his father was another person — say Frank Marshall Davis — a known U.S. citizen, then it would; but as Obama claimed a British subject as his father, if original vital records, whose authenticity were established in court, confirmed this, even if they did also confirm his birth in U.S. territory, then Obama would still be ineligible to hold and exercise the office of President, because he would not be a natural born citizen.
“It was not asked by the mainstream media.”
The understatement of the year.
“It was asked by places like WorldNetDaily, who, I think, were just doing due diligence considering it’s a constitutional mandate.”
Here is the only time Hannity comes close to indicating that he is thinking of the natural born citizen issue, because the Constitution no where requires that a candidate for President be a U.S. citizen, rather it requires that he be a natural born U.S. citizen.
“I think a lot of people were just afraid to ask the question.”
People are only afraid if they:
1) Stand to lose something by asking,
2) Are threatened with adverse action against them if they asked.
3) Or both, such as in the termination of their contract as media personality, or journalist,etc..
One commentator at Free Republic mentioned that in a subsequent interview with Mark Levin, Hannity danced around the issue. Another mentioned that the Main Stream Media have gone into full disinformation mode, by emphasizing the doubts that Trig is the natural son of Sarah Palin.
There is one documented and official reason why Obama won’t show his original birth certificate: he ain’t got one. This was affirmed by Dr. Fukino of the Hawaiian Department of Health in late July of this year, when she stated that the Vital Records office of the State has on file “original vital records”; a detailed analysis of Hawaiian laws shows that only where there is some doubt as to the authenticity of the original filing, or in the case of an adoption or amendment, do there exist more than one original vital record. Why Obama has more than one, lies at the heart of the reason why he won’t reveal them.
See the tags at the end of this article for many more reports on these issues.



OBAMA SIGNS HIS NAME WITH THE
RUSSIAN
LETTER
O,
WITH AN O
WITH A VERTICAL LINE SLASHING THRU IT
FROM TOP TO BOTTOM.
THAT IS THE
RUSSIAN
LETTER O.
WHY DOES OBAMA SIGN HIS NAME
WITH THE
RUSSIAN
LETTER
O?
Because O-Bama is a communist!
Article II, section 1, clause 5, reads
“natural born Citizen” …..(with a Capital C)
it does not read natural born u.s. citizen as stated in
the article. BIG DIFFERENCE
“Here is the only time Hannity comes close to indicating that he is thinking of the natural born citizen issue, because the Constitution no where requires that a candidate for President be a U.S. citizen, rather it requires that he be a natural born U.S. citizen.”
They are trying to confuse you….. WAKE UP!
U.S. citizen is NOT THE SAME as a natural born Citizen
u.s. citizen can be “any” child born on u.s. soil
even if the parents were non-u.s. citizens.
Fidel Castro and a Mistress can have a “child born
on U.S. soil and the child will be considered a u.s. citizen. (NOT A natural born Citizen)
“natural born Citizen” requires that “both” parents
have to be u.s. citizens to a child born.
Nowhere in the Constitution does it say
natural born u.s. citizen.
It only reads “natural born Citizen” (capital C)
as there were two classes of citizens involved.
Federal citizens (naturalized by statute)
who could never be considered a “natural born Citizen
, or,
State Citizens born by “two” u.s. citizen Parents!
The statement “natural born U.S. citizen” is a
MISLEADING PLAY ON WORDS !!!!!!!!!!
IF Obama’s biological father was Obama Sr. of Kenya
there is no way he is a “natural born Citizen”
as his father was NEVER a u.s. citizen, PLUS “IF”
Stanley Ann Dunham was his biological mother,
she was not old enough to pass “any” u.s. citizenship
to her son.
British Law of citizenship would prevail……period!