# What if the Birthers are right? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 4, 2009, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330 "2009-08-04T20:12:22Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2009, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/61 "2009-08-05T19:23:05Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > My best guess is that practicalities will trump legal naval gazing. You can’t just hit the reset button after 8 years. Too much water under that bridge. His presidency, and all official acts, would stand. Just to pick on what is otherwise an excellent point, nav **e** l gazing is what is done, netaphorically, by meditators. Nav **a** l gazing would be done by lookouts in crow’s nests, etc. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [August 5, 2009, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/62 "2009-08-05T19:36:32Z")
> [@Polycarp](#): > > Just to pick on what is otherwise an excellent point, nav **e** l gazing is what is done, netaphorically, by meditators. Nav **a** l gazing would be done by lookouts in crow’s nests, etc. OK, so I’ll trade you my “a” for your “e”, and I’ll throw in an “m”, **m** etaphorically speaking, of course. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2009, 10:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/63 "2009-08-06T22:27:15Z")
There is one way to find out what would happen. There’s some historical speculation based on contemporary accounts that Andrew Jackson wasn’t born in the Carolinas as he claimed, but rather on a ship bound to America from Ireland as his parents were emigrating. All we need to do is find a modern plaintiff affected by presidential action taken or legislation signed by Andrew Jackson and file a lawsuit on their behalf in the federal courts. I suggest we start with the Indian Removal Act. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2009, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/64 "2009-08-06T22:37:14Z")
> [@pravnik](#): > > There is one way to find out what would happen. > > There’s some historical speculation based on contemporary accounts that Andrew Jackson wasn’t born in the Carolinas as he claimed, but rather on a ship bound to America from Ireland as his parents were emigrating. All we need to do is find a modern plaintiff affected by presidential action taken or legislation signed by Andrew Jackson and file a lawsuit on their behalf in the federal courts. I suggest we start with the Indian Removal Act. Nah. The Supreme Court still doesn’t have an army to enforce their decisions. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2009, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/65 "2009-08-06T22:42:10Z")
ISTM that given, a Barack Obama victory in the Presidential election of 2012, there wouldn’t be any reason to expect him to depart from the offce in 2016. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2009, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/66 "2009-08-06T23:16:15Z")
Everybody is so obsessed with _where_ Obama was born that they don’t seem to give any thought as to _when_ he was born. I think it’s no coincidence that Barack Obama was born six months after JFK’s inauguration, which means his mother (whoever she was) would have been about 3 months pregnant, generally about the last month a woman can conceal a pregnancy without wearing baggy clothes. So look at [this picture of Jackie](http://www.kennesaw.edu/pols/3380/pres/pics/jfk03.jpg)from the Inaugural ball- 6 months before Obama’s birth. Does it look just a tad unnecessarily “blousy” to anybody else? As if perhaps she’s concealing something like, oh, I don’t know… a half black illegitimate baby? Two months before the inauguration was the election itself, and a month before that, about the time that Obama was being conceived, was the great scramble to take votes away from Nixon. Now it’s fairly well known that the Election of 1960 all hinged upon one city: Chicago. What organization that was hostile to Irish Catholics had their headquarters in Chicago in 1960? A group that had in fact said they had no intention of voting for any candidate? And yet was just large enough that their votes might could sway an election? Yep, you guessed it— Elijah Muhammad’s Nation of Islam. Wouldn’t it be a great coup if JFK could get them to vote for him and every vote being one that took away votes from the Nixon base there? Obviously JFK could not meet with Elijah Muhammad, that would have alienated everybody in the white community. But IF he could send an unofficial ambassador like, perhaps, his wife… to meet with somebody who just happened to be a powerful presence in the nation of Islam yet traveled in broad circles… someone like, oh, I don’t know… [who](http://www.stanford.edu/group/ccr/blog/malcolm.jpg)? John F. Kennedy, scion of a family forged by the union of political bosses and organized crime and desperately seeking the validity that would absolve the family’s origins and create the ultimate crown of the white power elite, the presidency, and willing to pay for it by any means necessary. Jackie Kennedy, the attractive needy penniless aristocrat but bound in lucrative prestigious marriage to the John F. Kennedy, but humiliated by his constant infidelities and seeking to avenge herself in the most painful slap to his pride she could imagine. Malcolm X, militant separatist, yet at the same time having the psychosocial needs that any child rejected by society and rejected by his mentally ill mother had- the need for acceptance by the aristocracy, and at the same time the need to revenge himself against the most powerful white official in America— Yes, you read it here first. Barack Hussein Obama is the lovechild of Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy and Malcolm X. He was born on Air Force One (which is, I believe, American soil) en route to Hawaii, a brand new state, one where few people could have even told you who the president was and were far more concerned with appeasing the volcano goddess with blood atonement. Enter Stanley Ann Dunham, an 18 year old white girl who wants to rebel, who wants to show her contempt for the power structure, who wants to even aide the Black Muslims, but at heart is also a good girl. Enter Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., an African emigre who needs money for college and wants to modernize the economy of his nation, something that will require the help of an American president, and thus he needs an in. A quick marriage. A scandal solved. A child raised in secrecy. Who knows if even he knows his past? Or that when the “strange men” came to his hometown and asked his help in a pod racing match that it was destiny. Evidence? If by any chance you need any- 1. Jackie Kennedy gave birth to 4 children (that she admitted to). She was absolutely without doubt fertile. 2. Malcolm X- father of 5 children. Very fertile man. 3. Malcolm X and Jackie Kennedy were never once photographed together. Doesn’t that seem a bit suspicious? 4. When JFK died Malcolm X famously said “the chickens have come home to roost”. Later this line is spoken by none other than Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s own minister. Coincidence? 5. [Barack Hussein Obama Sr.](http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/photo/2007-03/28585925.jpg)allegedly returns to Kenya, and yet later[this man](http://www.celebritywonder.com/picture/Ernest_Thomas/ErnestThomas_Cohen_10431800.jpg)shows up in L.A. and sends out one message: 'What’s Happening?" And that show is shown in major markets everywhere, including… Hawaii. 6. On this show about a man with a black younger sister (Malcolm X had several daughters born after Barack) as if saying “something’s happening, and you need to know what’s happening”. 7. What’s Happening was filmed in Los Angeles until April 1979. Who suddenly moved to LA in 1979 to go to college? Give ya one guess. 8. What college does he attend? Occidental College. _occidental (adj.) denoting or characteristic of countries of Europe and the western hemisphere_ As if saying “Yes, I know my birthright, and I renounce it.” 9. Caroline Kennedy Schlossberg- does undergrad at Harvard, then graduate work at Columbia. Barack Hussein Obama: undergrad at Columbia, graduate at Harvard, as if saying “I am the same as you, but reversed”. 10. 1994: Stanley Dunham comes to New York City. That same year Jackie Kennedy dies and Stanley returns to Hawaii, where soon after- she dies. Like the serpent biting the heel that crushed it. 11. Where’s Obama this time? In Chicago, where the egg was hatched. Oh, there’s more, there’s a lot more. I have a suspicion that in the next day or two there will be birth certificates and adoption records, but really: with this much evidence, does anybody even need to see them? And look at pictures of Barack Obama Jr., then at Malcolm X, and Jackie Kennedy- there’s no need for DNA. ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2009, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/67 "2009-08-06T23:22:11Z")
**Sampiro** , I’ll give you ten bucks for each birther website you post that on. . . 😃 ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2009, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/68 "2009-08-06T23:56:46Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > **Sampiro** , I’ll give you ten bucks for each birther website you post that on. . . 😃 We should all chip in and have him post it on Free Republic. (We need an exploding head smiley) ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2009, 7:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/69 "2009-08-07T07:05:28Z")
> [@pravnik](#): > > There’s some historical speculation based on contemporary accounts that Andrew Jackson wasn’t born in the Carolinas as he claimed, but rather on a ship bound to America from Ireland as his parents were emigrating. All we need to do is find a modern plaintiff affected by presidential action taken or legislation signed by Andrew Jackson and file a lawsuit on their behalf in the federal courts. I suggest we start with the Indian Removal Act. Jackson was born in 1767, before the revolution, and was a citizen of the US when the Constitution was adopted, so the question of where he was actually born is moot. Besides, it seems to me that it would be kind of silly to say that if someone were president-in-error, all presidential actions taken between the time he’s inaugurated and the time he’s removed be annulled. You can’t rewind a clock. It seems to me that the remedy would simply be removal from office, and, if the deception were deliberate, a prosecution for election fraud. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2009, 8:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/70 "2009-08-07T08:17:51Z")
> [@RealityChuck](#): > > [Slate had an article discussing this](http://www.slate.com/id/2224167/) yesterday. > > Briefly, the answer is: If Obama is shown not to be a citizen, there are three options: Obama resigns, Congress impeaches him, or nothing. Why would they have to impeach him? According to the Constitution it would be impossible for him, by definition, to be President. The whole presidency would be a sham, so he would simply be kicked out of the White House and Biden would take over. That seems to make sense, no? ---
**Author:** ![Giles](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/giles/32/60_2.png) [@Giles](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Giles)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2009, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/71 "2009-08-07T13:12:53Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > Why would they have to impeach him? According to the Constitution it would be impossible for him, by definition, to be President. The whole presidency would be a sham, so he would simply be kicked out of the White House and Biden would take over. > > That seems to make sense, no? Right. And then Congress impeaches President Biden for being a co-conspirator in the fraud, so that Speaker Nancy Pelosi becomes the first woman president of the U.S. – thus sending joy both to the birthers and to Hillary Rodham Clinton. ---
**Author:** ![Inigo\_Montoya](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/inigo_montoya/32/124_2.png) [@Inigo\_Montoya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Inigo_Montoya)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2009, 1:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/72 "2009-08-07T13:42:15Z")
**Sampiro** , you are a sick, _sick_ man. You could give Rove a run for his money. ---
**Author:** ![pravnik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/8edcca/32.png) [@pravnik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pravnik)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2009, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/73 "2009-08-07T17:59:31Z")
> [@Captain\_Amazing](#): > > Jackson was born in 1767, before the revolution, and was a citizen of the US when the Constitution was adopted, so the question of where he was actually born is moot. Not necessarily. If he had been born to Irish parents outside of the colonies, he would have been an Irish citizen who would have had to apply for naturalization and swear an oath of alliegance in the colonial courts. That wasn’t automatic; part of the problem the colonies had with England was that the King had “endeavored to prevent the population of these states; for that purpose obstructing the laws for naturalization of foreigners…”. After the Declaration of Independence former British subjects and colonial citizens were automatically U.S. citizens, but those who hadn’t been naturalized prior to that might have had to apply for citizenship after the passage of the First Naturalization Act of 1790. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Amazing](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@Captain\_Amazing](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Amazing)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2009, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/74 "2009-08-07T22:10:04Z")
If his parents were Scots-Irish, wouldn’t they be British subjects anyway, and therefore fit under your category of “automatically US citizens”? It’s a moot point, anyway. Jackson was born a few days after his father’s death , after his parents had been in America for about two years. His parents had a farm along the North/South Carolina border, and his father died in the fields. His mother went into premature labor when she found out. ---
**Author:** ![Captain\_Carrot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/f0a364/32.png) [@Captain\_Carrot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Captain_Carrot)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2009, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/75 "2009-08-07T23:09:58Z")
> [@kaylasdad99](#): > > ISTM that given, a Barack Obama victory in the Presidential election of 2012, there wouldn’t be any reason to expect him to depart from the office in 2016. Err, what? Being reelected would cause him to become a megalomaniac and claim permanent power? ---
**Author:** ![kaylasdad99](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kaylasdad99/32/3398_2.png) [@kaylasdad99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kaylasdad99)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2009, 1:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/76 "2009-08-09T01:26:06Z")
No, but his term of office wouldn’t end until January 20, **2017**. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Belowjob2.0](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Belowjob2.0](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Belowjob2.0)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2009, 7:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/77 "2009-08-09T07:22:12Z")
> [@](#): > > Yes, you read it here first. Barack Hussein Obama is the lovechild of Jacqueline Bouvier Kennedy and Malcolm X. He was born on Air Force One (which is, I believe, American soil) en route to Hawaii, a brand new state, one where few people could have even told you who the president was and were far more concerned with appeasing the volcano goddess with blood atonement. Bravo! ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2009, 7:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/78 "2009-08-09T07:38:36Z")
Where are the lawyers? Bricker? DSYoung? Is there a judge in the house? ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2009, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/79 "2009-08-09T14:26:50Z")
I agree with **Oakminster** that since there are no precedents, we’re just speculating. However, there is a common law doctrine known as the de facto doctrine - that the acts of a person who appears to hold office are legally effective, even if some defect in the person’s appointment to the office subsequently comes to light. A Canadian judge, Judge Albert Constantineau, summarised the de facto doctrine in this way: > [@](#): > > The de facto doctrine is a rule or principle of law which, in the first place, justifies the recognition of the authority of governments established and maintained by persons who have usurped the sovereign authority of the State, and assert themselves by force and arms against the lawful government; secondly, which recognizes the existence of, and protects from collateral attack, public or private bodies corporate, which, though irregularly or illegally organized, yet, under color of law, openly exercise the powers and functions of regularly created bodies; and, thirdly, which imparts validity to the official acts of persons who, under color of right or authority, hold office under the aforementioned governments or bodies, or exercise lawfully existing offices of whatever nature, in which the public or third persons are interested, where the performance of such official acts is for the benefit of the public or third persons, and not for their own personal advantage. The idea is that the rule of law requires some certainty in the law, for all the reasons that the different hypotheticals given in this thread illustrate. If a public officer appears to have the authority, and exercises it, apparently in accordance with law, there is a strong reliance factor generated. The public, the courts and the other institutions of government are entitled to rely on those acts, even if a defect in the officer’s appointment or eligibility subsequently comes to light. Since we’re just speculating, as **Oakie** has pointed out, I can’t say whether the US courts would apply the de facto doctrine in the situation where a President, duly elected and sworn in, is subsequently found to have been ineligible to office. However, it certainly would provide a starting point for discussion. ---
**Author:** ![Steve\_MB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/steve_mb/32/5339_2.png) [@Steve\_MB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Steve_MB)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2009, 2:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330/80 "2009-08-09T14:54:21Z")
> [@kunilou](#): > > The same thing that happened to all those Constitutional amendments that were supposed to be invalid because Ohio wasn’t _really_ a state until 1950. In that case, Congress went through a proper admission process and declared it retroactive to 1803 when the sloppy one was carried out and everyone assumed it was taken care of. In this case, Congress could (and almost certainly would, to insure that the worm cans remained firmly sealed) declare that birth to a US citizen mother suffices to satisfy the “natural born” requirement (equivalent legally to the Congressional declaration to clear up any such question about McCain, though different in details) and make that retroactive. It would almost be worth it to watch Birther heads explode. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-if-the-birthers-are-right/505330.md?page=3)