Last week, we highlighted a video published by FireDogLake that included a somewhat troubling response from GOP Rep. Aaron Schock regarding the manufactured controversy over President Obama's birth certificate. When asked by blogger Mike Stark if he thinks Obama is a "natural born" U.S. citizen, Schock initially answered, "That's a question he [Obama] needs to answer, not me." He then went on to say, "Well, he was my U.S. Senator. He said he was [a citizen], so I believe he was."
Considering how ridiculous this entire issue is, Schock's answer was surprisingly wishy-washy.
Today, the State Journal-Register's Bernie Schoenburg circled back and got a more definitive response from Schock's office. “Congressman Schock has no doubt whatsoever that President Obama was born in the United States,” spokesman Dave Natonski told him. Schoenburg received a similar response from the office of Republican Congressman John Shimkus, who said in a statement: "I do not believe the president’s birth should be questioned any further."







Comments
DCBikerJohn (not verified) on Mon, 08/03/2009 - 11:03
There is no doubt that Barack Obama is a US citizen because he was born in Hawaii. Those who claim otherwise without proof do a disservice to our country. And the media who fan the flames of this conspiracy theory are complicit. However, those who assume that being a US citizen from birth equals being a natural born citizen do a disservice, too. The latter is not a conspiracy, but a question of constitutional law. And the media who ignore this issue are derelict.
The Constitution does not define natural born citizen. There is much evidence that being a natural born citizen requires two US citizen parents.
For the first time ever, the US knowingly elected a president who was born after 1787 and whose parents were not both US citizens at the time of birth. (For the exception, see Chester Arthur.) Isn't this unique situation worthy of the discussion as to whether or not this satisfies the requirement that the president be natural born?
There is no US law that designates anyone as a natural born citizen. From time to time the Supreme Court has designated an individual as a natural born citizen, but it has never done so for anyone who did not have two US citizen parents. The 14th Amendment was adopted in 1868. The 14th Amendment describes circumstances under which a person would be considered a citizen.
Subsequently, the Supreme Court decided Minor v. Happerset in 1874. In this case, the Court said that the Constitution does not say in words who would be a natural born citizen. This includes the 14th Amendment. Therefore, the 14th Amendment does not designate anyone to be a natural born citizen.
Later, in United States v. Wong Kim Ark 1898, the Court said that Wong Kim Ark was just as much a citizen as the natural born child of a citizen, but Wong Kim Ark was not a natural born citizen himself. The Wong Kim Ark case is the Holy Grail for Obama defenders, but it is a fig leaf of legitimacy.
What does the Constitution intend by "natural born citizen?" This question will not be answered by public opinion, an election, the Electoral College, the Congress, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, or by me. This uncertainty can be resolved only by a Supreme Court opinion or by a constitutional amendment.
Was George Washington a natural born citizen? Why did Chester Arthur go to great lengths to successfully cover up the fact that he was born before his father was naturalized as a US citizen?
Again, this is question of law, not of the birth certificate. Barack Obama is without doubt a US citizen, and he has been one from the moment of his birth in Hawaii. Is this the only requirement to be a natural born citizen? There is much evidence that says no.
Kyle (not verified) on Mon, 08/03/2009 - 13:50
Regardless or whether or not Obama is a natural born citizen or a Kenyan born man, the fact that he refuses to proove one fact or the other is his reflection of stupidity. He knows that if he is NOT a natural born American citizen he is not legally the President. However he also knows that the topic itself is a distraction for many people so that they are not viewing him for the trainwreck he is. He is robbing the United States of America on it's own dime.
Paul (not verified) on Mon, 08/03/2009 - 13:01
In my opinion the Republican Party has been taken over the most extreme religious right (people who love to push their beliefs on others while trying to take away their rights) and that’s who they need to focus on if they real want to win. Good Luck, because as they said in WACO, “We Ain’t Coming Out”.
In the same vein, to all the birthers in La, La Land, it is on you to prove to all of us that your assertion is true, if there are people who were there and support your position then show us the video (everyone has a price), either put up or frankly shut-up. I heard Orly Taitz, is selling a tape (I think it’s called “Money, Lies and Video tape”). She is from Orange County, CA, now I know what the mean when they say “behind the Orange Curtain”, when they talk about Orange County, the captial of Conspiracy Theories. You know Obama has a passport, he travel abroad before he was a Senator, but I guess he fooled them too?
markg8 on Mon, 08/03/2009 - 13:30
I don't care if they distance themselves from these idiots. I want someone to bug them about distancing themselves from the health insurance lobby. Why waste time on this nonsense when that's the real battle right now?
Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 08/03/2009 - 14:49
Kyle, etc.
HE HAS PROVEN IT!
His birth certificate is right there on the Internets for any fool with Google to look up.
That you refuse to believe reality is a reflection on you, not Obama.
Besides, how do we know you are a US citizen. Maybe you are actually French or Japanese. Orly Taitz is from Russia. How do we know you aren't a commie spy sent to disrupt our nation from the inside out?
You need to prove you're a US citizen before posting again on this topic that is only relative to US citizens.
I'd also like to know if you are part of the racist white supremacist groups that keep promoting this nonsense.
Ryan (not verified) on Tue, 08/04/2009 - 12:01
"His birth certificate is right there on the Internets for any fool with Google to look up."
--
There is a difference between a birth certificate and Certificate of Live Birth.
Kathleen (not verified) on Mon, 08/03/2009 - 15:47
Birther conspiracy theory = weapon of mass distraction.
Keep your eyes on the prize, everybody. It's health care we're working on right now.
Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 08/03/2009 - 15:57
smrstrauss,
You realize that what you just said is that the 14th Admendment was completely unnessecary because every born here was already a citizen and even eligible to be President.
Do I really need to point out the absolute stupidity of that arguement?
smrstrauss (not verified) on Tue, 08/04/2009 - 10:24
Re: "14th Admendment was completely unnessecary because every born here was already a citizen and even eligible to be President."
Not true. Some states after the Revolution adopted Jus Sanguinis, meaning that only people born of citizens of that state were able to be citizens. (Virginia, for example. And in Southern states, the criteria was limited to those who were born of White parents.)
When the 14th Amendment was passed and said that everyone born in the USA is a citizen, it removed Jus Sanguinis from the criteria completely and it removed the ability of a state to set the criteria for US citizenship.
So, the Federal government had to set the criteria. What was the criteria? Born in the USA, as the 14th makes clear.. What does born in the country mean? It means Natural Born. Thus the 14th amendment returned the entire USA to Jus Soli, and Jus Soli, according to the Wong case, means Natural Born.
As noted before, the Wong case repeatedly sets up the syllogism that ALL born in the country are Natural Born and Wong was born in the country, so Wong must be Natural Born. Wong was a citizen because he was Natural Born.
Anonymous (not verified) on Mon, 08/03/2009 - 16:03
Kathleen,
Calling a legal elligiblity issue a "Birther conspiracy theory" = weapon of mass distraction.
Laborguy (not verified) on Tue, 08/04/2009 - 12:20
I am all for free speech and an open exchange of ideas, but could all you right-wing nutters take your rants to some other blog like the Free Enterprise Institute or something. This is Progress Illinois where the news of the day is covered from a Progressive point of view. I think everyone has has quite enough of your insanity. It is time to put childish things away and move on to something else.
Post new comment
Progress Illinois' intention is to foster community and to maintain a comfortable and constructive blogging environment. While we encourage and appreciates different points of view, we do not consider it our duty to give a voice to anybody with an opinion.
Discussion on this site is moderated. All comments submitted will be automatically held for review by the editors before posting. Your comment will not appear on the site until it has been approved.
We will not publish comments that we consider:
Please leave a name or nickname when commenting, as it makes it easier for others to respond directly.