Not looking for a debate on the dumbass birther movement, just some facts.
[moderating]
Generally, adding an adjective like “dumbass” is not a good way to avoid debate. If you’re looking for factual answers, you’re better off with non-confrontational phrasing in your questions.
That said, folks, let’s please keep responses to this thread appropriate for GQ.
[/moderating]
Sorry.
perhaps people have lost interest in this topic.
This may be of interest.
To simplify, there is some form of documentation, filed under penalty of perjury, on file with the Hawaii Department of Health, which attests that a child was in fact born at a given place on a given date. This is what the Birthers are terming the “long form vault birth certificate.” Quite simply, Hawaii’s Freedom of Information and Privacy laws restrict who may access this information to those with a legitimate official need to inspect it.
It exists; it has never been released; the Secretary of Health has made a formal public statement of having inspected it when the Birther controversy got going.
There are allegations, with some evidence but irrelevant to the question of Pres. Obama’s birth, that the Territory of Hawaii, prior to statehood, would register the sworn statements of immigrants born elsewhere and provide them with the official paperwork they needed. Cse law provides that such certificates are presumed valid subject to rebuttal in a court of law. But to whatever extent this practice was carried on by the territorial government, it was ended before statehood, which predated Obama’s birth.
Is that helpful?
I remember reading one of the leading Birther’s demands. These included three original birth certificated with the name of Obama, Barry, and whatever other name he used, a certified document of loyalty to the U.S. signed by Obama when he turned 21, and photographic proof of birth in the U.S. I’m not exactly sure what that last one would entail. Oh yes, a certified statement from the six year old Obama that he did not revoke his citizenship when he lived in Indonesia.
I remember reading those and thinking to myself “Heck, under those criteria, I can’t prove I was born in the U.S.”.
There is no single “birth certificate”. It’s handled by the states, and each state is different. My birth certificate I use is certainly not the original, and I doubt in this computer age, that the state even has an original copy. It was entered into a computer, and when requested, they’ll print out a new one.
I would think the announcement of Obama’s birth in the newspaper is pretty solid. However, when you have a good conspiracy, you don’t let facts get in your way of the truth.
Interesting thing about birth certificates. My father had a Certificate of Live Birth from the State of New York. It was issued when he was born, but my grandfather didn’t want to name him officially until the bris on the eighth day. Therefore, the certificate simply said “Baby Boy”.
No one thought much about it until my Father took us to Europe and needed to get a passport. He suddenly he realized his birth certificate just said “Baby Boy” and not his name. He had to get certified statements from two people who were at least 18 years old at the time of his birth and knew him from birth. My dad was probably in his late 40s at that time, and both his mother and father had passed away. He was desperately looking for two relatives who fulfilled the two conditions and could vouch for him.
We joked that he might have to change his name to “Baby Boy”, so he could get his passport.
I think part of the issue is that Hawaii’s Certification of Live Birth could be used to record a live birth to a Hawaiian resident when the child is born abroad therefore Obama could have had a Certification of Live Birth issued by Hawaii even though he was born in Kenya. What is neglected by the birthers is that the certification records where a birth was, not where it was recorded, and Obama’s says Honolulu.
This is what Obama has released.
What I find most interesting is a line that doesn’t ever seem to get quoted.
“This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court preceding.”
I see that as all-encompassing. Every use that the birthers want to demand a certificate for would be a court proceding or its equivalent. If Obama issued this as he undoubtedly would, he’s legally covered in every possible venue. Yet it wouldn’t satisfy long-formers. Of course, many Hawaiian officials - all of them apparently Republican - has stated that they have reviewed the long form original which may not be released and every one of them says that it has nothing that is attackable.
But some birthers have now conceded a Hawaiian birth. Their new claim is that Obama is not a natural born citizen, which according to them and only them requires that both parent be citizens. That this definition is nowhere in the Constitution or legislation or case law and that previous presidents had a foreign born non-citizen parent appears to make no headway at all.
Moving the goalpoles is always a sign of a cause acknowledged, if not publicly, to be lost. There may yet be continued farce on this, but I can’t see any aspect that has not or could not easily pass all legal hurdles since the opposition has no coherent legal case or precedent to hold up as a barrier.
If the birthers are so certain Obama was born in Kenya, why don’t they ask the Kenyan government for his birth certificate?
Heck, you can just generate your own Kenyan birth certificate: right here.
Print one out, and someday you too can be President!
A recent thread at SDMB linked to a humorous(?) explanation of why “Barry Obama” refuses to show his birth certificate.
(I hope Mods will forgive me for linking again, redundantly.)
