The Whole Truth and Nothing But

Deborah Venable



I’d like to think that we are getting closer to the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about the man that currently occupies the Oval Office.  I can’t believe that we are though.  I know that the subject of the man’s birth is so off limits that many otherwise credible people refuse to even touch it – except maybe to scoff at those who would insist that questions need answering.  “Birthers” we are called – those of us who would ask those questions.  Convenient little term, like “racist” or “bigot” or “homophobe” that carry negative connotations just with the accusation – not backed up with a grain of proof!


Many of us (who ask these questions now) were asking before the election that catapulted perhaps the biggest fraud in American history into the highest office in the land.  The evidence existed then as it does now that Barack Obama did not and does not constitutionally qualify for the presidency.  This wasn’t something that was manufactured by a bunch of nut job extremists.  It also has nothing to do with the man’s race like too many wish to claim.  It doesn’t simply have to do with where the man was born either.  Far too many people have refused to investigate the ramifications of the specific circumstances of his birth. 


If his father was who Obama himself has said he was then he could be constitutionally disqualified from the presidency on that note alone.  Barack Obama Sr. was never an American citizen and as a citizen of Kenya, automatically conveyed (by birthright) an allegiance to Great Britain at that time and later Kenya on his son, Barack Obama Jr.  Whether or not his mother (whom he claims as Stanley Ann Dunham) was an American citizen makes no difference.  The definition of “natural born citizen” has been hammered out in a plethora of cases.  There is no wiggle room to fudge the definition.  That the founders saw fit to include that qualification in the eligibility for president is crystal clear.  Split allegiance is just not something we can or should ever tolerate in a United States President.  Those who don’t agree with this stance should at least be willing to debate it and see it played out in specific case law.


If we couple this with the possibility that a) Barack Obama may have been born somewhere else than where he says, and b) that there is reason to believe he may have misrepresented who his parents really were, there is more than enough reason to question his qualifications.  None of this is made up stuff.  Without reasonable investigation into these allegations, we are simply left with reasonable doubt.


On the question of location of his birth:  the streamlined, computer produced document known as the Certification of Live Birth proves nothing.  Those have been produced for people not born in the state of Hawaii simply by relatives requesting the form with false data provided.  Yes, it is probably an “official” document, but it begs more questions than it answers.  The newspaper notices that appeared at the time prove nothing either, but folks like Bill O’Reilly swear that is the end all for them.  The newspaper notices appeared simply because the aforementioned certificate was issued.  Period.  There was no deep dark conspiracy to do all this in preparation of a boy who would one day seek the presidency.  It was done simply to insure citizenship – not guarantee natural born citizenship.  Many, many parents have done this.  I would suggest that O’Reilly and others like him need to toss out their decaf and grab a cup of the real stuff!


On the question of the stepfather, Lolo Soetoro:  he was a citizen of Indonesia and a Muslim and as such could have conveyed on his stepson both citizenship and religious conviction that would have also called into question his allegiance to the United States of America.  We have been shown no documented evidence that Obama never held dual citizenship.  If that was ever the case, he is “naturally” disqualified from the office.  I repeat – no wiggle room on split allegiance. 


That brings us to the reason why many have chosen to turn a blind eye to all the legitimate questions on Obama’s eligibility – the fact that Hillary Clinton would have surely found out if he were not qualified.  Now I’m sorry, but that is the weakest argument of all.  We don’t know that she didn’t do we?  All we know is that she and her husband have been bought off so to speak.  She remains in the limelight enough to run against Obama in 2012 no matter what she says now.  Anyone who thinks she truly admires her boss is naïve at best.  She has enough skeletons in her own closet that would preclude her from that ultimate showdown which did not occur in 2008.  I find it easier to believe that she could have doled out just enough rope to have Obama hang himself.  Above all that, her political agenda did not deviate that much from Obama’s, and why not let him test the “progressive” waters for her while she observes from a safe shore?


As his popularity falls in the polls and his policies are spelled out in an agenda that most Americans now have a problem with, it is well beyond time for the American people to have the whole truth and nothing but the truth about this man’s origins. 


Even he is feeling the need to bring up the subject of his citizenship in an underhanded way.  At the National Prayer Breakfast as he lectured on policy, he warned against questioning “my faith -- or for that fact, my citizenship!"


Now, folks, you can fall into the trap of “hands off” the eligibility issue if you want to.  You can call me a fool for bringing it up again if you want to.  You can be lulled into believing that “birthers” are just a bunch of extremist nuts like “truthers” or “flat earthers” or holocaust doubters or moon landing doubters or . . . well, I could go on and on with groups we have been compared to.  I also know that many of the prominent birthers also fit into some of the other groups.  I don’t care about that because, as you should know from reading practically anything else I have ever written, I am not a collectivist – I am an individualist.  I would hold these self-evident truths even if no one else did.  The simple question that we should all want an answer to is this: where is the proof that this man’s background qualified him to become (or stay for that matter) president of the United States of America?


In the interest of education for those who have only viewed this subject through the left-leaning lens of Wikipedia or Fight the Smears, (look up those URLs yourself) I am providing two links for suggested continuing study on this subject:


Another Look At Obama's Origins by Jack Cashill, published at American Thinker.


The Obama File - published by Beckwith, (who incidentally sounds like my kind of guy.)


Of course Joseph Farah continues to question Obama’s eligibility on his high quality news site, World Net Daily, which enjoys a permanent link on my front page.


Education is the key to overcoming ignorance that is extremely dangerous for our republic.  Not the kind of indoctrination that goes on in our public school system and the halls of higher learning all over the land – those insufferable torture camps we impose on our children and young people.  No.  The education we sorely need is the self-directed, individual seeking of the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. 



Home    Rant Page    Email DebV