The Birther Conspiracy Thread (2 Viewers)

[datonn]

Like I said about 800 pages ago, if you offered me millions of dollars if I could produce my original birth certificate, I don't think I could do it. It's lost...amid an avalanche of boxes and papers my Mom has been saving for 40+ years.

So here's the point: I have white skin. If I decide tomorrow to declare my candidacy for POTUS in 2012, I would bet that the farthest the conversation about my citizenship would get would be a reporter or two asking "where were you born?," along with interviewing some of my family and K-12 classmates. My answer would be "Minnesota," and I'd bet good money that would be the end of it.

So how come for Obama, that wasn't the end of it? Even if by some apocalyptic twist of fate it was proven that Obama was born a US citizen, what concerns me ten-times more is why the question would keep coming up for him, but not for me. Neither he or I could produce the original piece of paper that everyone is screaming for. So how come it's an issue for him, and not for me?!

Is the argument about producing the original birth certificate or about producing the long form version?

Either. I have a social security card, passport, and I could probably scare up a copy of a copy of my birth certificate somewhere if I really tried...but that's it, outside of a driver's license and a punch card for a free pizza at our local restaurant after eight pizzas we buy. I assume your point might be that a "long-form version" would be something the hospital or State of Hawai'i can/should provide. i,e, the first link that comes up via Google Search on the subject: http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=105347 I can't speak to that. What I can speak to, however, is you dodging my main question/assertion from my last post.

If I announce my candidacy for POTUS in 2012, and have no "long-form version" or even a copy of my birth certificate at all, what are the odds that reporters and people on the other side of the aisle (the Rs and the Ds, since I'm an I, lol) spend hundreds/thousands of hours and TB of bandwidth trying to prove that I wasn't secretly born in East Germany? If the answer is anything other than "strong odds," then my question is what makes my situation different from Obama's situation when he was running for POTUS in 2008?

 

[bueno]

Like I said about 800 pages ago, if you offered me millions of dollars if I could produce my original birth certificate, I don't think I could do it. It's lost...amid an avalanche of boxes and papers my Mom has been saving for 40+ years.

So here's the point: I have white skin. If I decide tomorrow to declare my candidacy for POTUS in 2012, I would bet that the farthest the conversation about my citizenship would get would be a reporter or two asking "where were you born?," along with interviewing some of my family and K-12 classmates. My answer would be "Minnesota," and I'd bet good money that would be the end of it.

So how come for Obama, that wasn't the end of it? Even if by some apocalyptic twist of fate it was proven that Obama was born a US citizen, what concerns me ten-times more is why the question would keep coming up for him, but not for me. Neither he or I could produce the original piece of paper that everyone is screaming for. So how come it's an issue for him, and not for me?!

Is the argument about producing the original birth certificate or about producing the long form version?

Either. I have a social security card, passport, and I could probably scare up a copy of a copy of my birth certificate somewhere if I really tried...but that's it, outside of a driver's license and a punch card for a free pizza at our local restaurant after eight pizzas we buy. I assume your point might be that a "long-form version" would be something the hospital or State of Hawai'i can/should provide. i,e, the first link that comes up via Google Search on the subject: http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=105347 I can't speak to that. What I can speak to, however, is you dodging my main question/assertion from my last post.

If I announce my candidacy for POTUS in 2012, and have no "long-form version" or even a copy of my birth certificate at all, what are the odds that reporters and people on the other side of the aisle (the Rs and the Ds, since I'm an I, lol) spend hundreds/thousands of hours and TB of bandwidth trying to prove that I wasn't secretly born in East Germany? If the answer is anything other than "strong odds," then my question is what makes my situation different from Obama's situation when he was running for POTUS in 2008?

What are the odds that you would just get a certified copy from the hospital?

 

[datonn]

What are the odds that you would just get a certified copy from the hospital?

bueno, you're a smart guy...so please, out of respect for this issue, answer the question.What are the odds that I would *NEED* to get a certified copy of my birth certificate from the hospital? What are the odds the subject of my birth certificate would come up at all? And if it is different than the odds of those issues coming up for Obama, then why?You can do it! You can answer this question...even if it hurts to say.

 

[bueno]

What are the odds that you would just get a certified copy from the hospital?

bueno, you're a smart guy...so please, out of respect for this issue, answer the question.What are the odds that I would *NEED* to get a certified copy of my birth certificate from the hospital? What are the odds the subject of my birth certificate would come up at all? And if it is different than the odds of those issues coming up for Obama, then why?You can do it! You can answer this question...even if it hurts to say.

You were the one that said:

If I announce my candidacy for POTUS in 2012

As to why you might need to get a certified copy if you were not running for POTUS, how about moving to another state and registering to vote? Or to get an FM-3 Visa to work in Mexico? Or to get security clearance? Or to get your first US passport? Or any number of other things that required multiple forms of identification?ETA: or to apply for a professional registration in some cases. I have had to provide a certified copy of my birth certificate for some reason or other three times in the past ten years.

 

[Witz]

What are the odds that you would just get a certified copy from the hospital?

bueno, you're a smart guy...so please, out of respect for this issue, answer the question.What are the odds that I would *NEED* to get a certified copy of my birth certificate from the hospital? What are the odds the subject of my birth certificate would come up at all? And if it is different than the odds of those issues coming up for Obama, then why?You can do it! You can answer this question...even if it hurts to say.

100% and to say otherwise wouldn't be truthful.

 

[Witz]

Like I said about 800 pages ago, if you offered me millions of dollars if I could produce my original birth certificate, I don't think I could do it. It's lost...amid an avalanche of boxes and papers my Mom has been saving for 40+ years.

So here's the point: I have white skin. If I decide tomorrow to declare my candidacy for POTUS in 2012, I would bet that the farthest the conversation about my citizenship would get would be a reporter or two asking "where were you born?," along with interviewing some of my family and K-12 classmates. My answer would be "Minnesota," and I'd bet good money that would be the end of it.

So how come for Obama, that wasn't the end of it? Even if by some apocalyptic twist of fate it was proven that Obama was not born a US citizen, what concerns me ten-times more is why the question would keep coming up for him, but not for me. Neither he or I could produce the original piece of paper that everyone is screaming for. So how come it's an issue for him, and not for me?!

Link to any prior presidential candidate who wasn't able to prove they were born in the US and everyone (the press, opposing candidates, etc) left it at that?

 

[datonn]

What are the odds that you would just get a certified copy from the hospital?

bueno, you're a smart guy...so please, out of respect for this issue, answer the question.What are the odds that I would *NEED* to get a certified copy of my birth certificate from the hospital? What are the odds the subject of my birth certificate would come up at all? And if it is different than the odds of those issues coming up for Obama, then why?

You can do it! You can answer this question...even if it hurts to say.

You were the one that said:

If I announce my candidacy for POTUS in 2012

As to why you might need to get a certified copy if you were not running for POTUS, how about moving to another state and registering to vote? Or to get an FM-3 Visa to work in Mexico? Or to get security clearance? Or to get your first US passport? Or any number of other things that required multiple forms of identification?

That's not an answer....that's a dodge. I assume Obama has a US passport too. That he'd get his FM-3 Visa with relative ease if he ever wanted to work in Mexico. That he produced what he needed to produce to register as a voter in Illinois. That he's got at least "entry-level" security clearances (lol). We can play this game all night...and I will if I have to, to prove a point. All I'm asking is whether the odds of the question of my own US citizenship and birth certificate coming up would be different than Obama's. And if those odds are different, why? It's really not that hard. We shouldn't need a legal team to petition courts to clarify the question(s). But I'll let you in on a little info you already understand: Your not answering the question? It's answering the question. So if you don't want that to be your answer, please give us a better one.

This isn't a witch-hunt against bueno! I like and respect you as a FFA participant. You're a sharp guy! This is getting to the core of the issue that has become known as the "birthers," and I'd really like to hear your honest take on it.

 

[Rohn Jambo]

Don't you need your birth certificate to get a Passport?

 

[datonn]

100% and to say otherwise wouldn't be truthful.Link to any prior presidential candidate who wasn't able to prove they were born in the US and everyone (the press, opposing candidates, etc) left it at that?

So if we went out and interviewed all living Presidents and living former presidential candidates, how many of them do you think were asked to produce their original birth certificate? Strike that...asked to produce their original birth certificate, then subsequently accused of submitting falsified documents and/or not submitting the right forms/documents after the fact?We could probably easily ask:Hillary Clinton, U.S. Senator from New York, former First Lady of the United StatesJohn Edwards, former U.S. Senator from North CarolinaBill Richardson, Governor of New MexicoDennis Kucinich, U.S. Representative from OhioJoe Biden, U.S. Senator from DelawareMike Gravel, former U.S. Senator from AlaskaChristopher Dodd, U.S. Senator from ConnecticutTom Vilsack, former Governor of IowaEvan Bayh, U.S. Senator from IndianaJohn McCain, U.S. Senator from ArizonaMike Huckabee, former Governor of ArkansasMitt Romney, former Governor of MassachusettsRon Paul, U.S. Representative from TexasFred Thompson, former U.S. Senator from TennesseeDuncan Hunter, U.S. Representative from CaliforniaRudy Giuliani, former Mayor of New York CitySam Brownback, U.S. Senator from KansasJim Gilmore, former Governor of VirginiaTom Tancredo, former U.S. Representative from ColoradoTommy Thompson, former Governor of Wisconsin...from 2008. Probably have well over one hundred other candidates still living from the previous rounds of elections from the 1970s-2000s too. What if we asked them how many of them were asked to share a copy of their original birth certificate, then their State's equivalent of a "long-form" certificate after supplying said copy? 100%? 50%? 5%? Now that's a survey I'd like to see someone conduct.

 

[datonn]

Don't you need your birth certificate to get a Passport?

Apparently Obama doesn't have a passport then.

 

[Witz]

100% and to say otherwise wouldn't be truthful.Link to any prior presidential candidate who wasn't able to prove they were born in the US and everyone (the press, opposing candidates, etc) left it at that?

So if we went out and interviewed all living Presidents and living former presidential candidates, how many of them do you think were asked to produce their original birth certificate. Strike that...asked to produce their original birth certificate, then subsequently accused of submitting falsified documents and/or not submitting the right forms/documents after the fact?We could probably easily ask:Hillary Clinton, U.S. Senator from New York, former First Lady of the United StatesJohn Edwards, former U.S. Senator from North CarolinaBill Richardson, Governor of New MexicoDennis Kucinich, U.S. Representative from OhioJoe Biden, U.S. Senator from DelawareMike Gravel, former U.S. Senator from AlaskaChristopher Dodd, U.S. Senator from ConnecticutTom Vilsack, former Governor of IowaEvan Bayh, U.S. Senator from IndianaJohn McCain, U.S. Senator from ArizonaMike Huckabee, former Governor of ArkansasMitt Romney, former Governor of MassachusettsRon Paul, U.S. Representative from TexasFred Thompson, former U.S. Senator from TennesseeDuncan Hunter, U.S. Representative from CaliforniaRudy Giuliani, former Mayor of New York CitySam Brownback, U.S. Senator from KansasJim Gilmore, former Governor of VirginiaTom Tancredo, former U.S. Representative from ColoradoTommy Thompson, former Governor of Wisconsin...from 2008. Probably have over one hundred of other candidates still living from the previous rounds of elections from the 1970s-2000s too. What if we asked them how many of them were asked to share a copy of their original birth certificate, then their State's equivalent of a "long-form" certificate after supplying said copy? 100%? 50%? 5%? Now that's a survey I'd like to see someone conduct.

So you're saying you don't know of anyone? Just asking because based on your earlier comments, you seem to be 100% positive if anyone else was asked to provide a birth certificate but couldn't, it wouldn't be questioned. I'm sure you have seen birth certificates before - there is a lot of information on them. The 'Certification of Live Birth' that was provided has minimal information at best: Child's NameDate of BirthHour of BirthSexCity, Town or Location of BirthIsland of BirthCounty of BirthMother's Maiden NameMother's RaceFather's NameFather's RaceDated Filed by RegistrarThat's it. Birth certificates typically have more information such as the hospital where the birth occurred, the address of the place of birth, the doctor who performed the delivery, the name of the individual who certified the birth, etc. None of this information was provided on the form that was provided which is why folks wanted to see the long form. I guess I don't see what the big deal is in providing that information.

 

[datonn]

So you're saying you don't know of anyone? Just asking because based on your earlier comments, you seem to be 100% positive if anyone else was asked to provide a birth certificate but couldn't, it wouldn't be questioned.

I don't know any past President or past Presidential candidate who was asked to produce proof of US citizenship (i.e. birth certificate), then was also subsequently called into doubt/question for producing either suspected false documentation or not producing the "right" documentation. That's what I'm saying.If birthers were calling for the birth certificates of ALL Presidential candidates? I have no issue. Probably a great idea, since being a US born citizen is a requirement of the office! To only ask for the birth certificate of ONE Presidential candidate? That is what I am hoping someone can explain or try and defend. The obvious answer is that they want only one (Obama) because Obama won! However, the calls for Obama's birth certificate were being made loudly and often long before the first Tuesday of November, 2008. So why no calls for McCains? Or Bidens/Palins (since they'd be first in line to take over as POTUS if anything happened). Or Clintons? That is the question (discrepancy) I want answered.

 

[Witz]

So you're saying you don't know of anyone? Just asking because based on your earlier comments, you seem to be 100% positive if anyone else was asked to provide a birth certificate but couldn't, it wouldn't be questioned.

I don't know any past President or past Presidential candidate who was asked to produce proof of US citizenship (i.e. birth certificate), then was also subsequently called into doubt/question for producing either suspected false documentation or not producing the "right" documentation. That's what I'm saying.If birthers were calling for the birth certificates of ALL Presidential candidates? I have no issue. Probably a great idea, since being a US born citizen is a requirement of the office! To only ask for the birth certificate of ONE Presidential candidate? That is what I am hoping someone can explain or try and defend. The obvious answer is that they want only one (Obama) because Obama won! However, the calls for Obama's birth certificate were being made loudly and often long before the first Tuesday of November, 2008. So why no calls for McCains? Or Bidens/Palins (since they'd be first in line to take over as POTUS if anything happened). Or Clintons? That is the question (discrepancy) I want answered.

I know about as much as you with regards to this, but I'd have to think that this information was provided for all of the individuals you noted just now. Candidates are asked to provide countless pieces of information over the course of a campaign. As it has been noted numerous times in this thread, one of the requirements to be President is to be a naturally born citizen of the United States - based on that fact alone, I'd be shocked if it wasn't requested of and verified for each candidate. Once provided, great, nothing to see there and on to the next item. The reason you don't hear about this as an issue from candidates is that it's pretty easy to provide proof. I think the only reason this is an issue is that the information provided was incomplete at best (since it wasn't the birth certificate but rather a certification of the birth - same words but different meanings). I'd say it was comparable to the deed of ownership on a car vs documentation noting that you are the owner of the car (i.e. the registration). Coupled with the fact that so much time and money was spent to put a stop to these requests it makes you wonder.

Who knows - I voted for the guy but I can see why folks would want the question answered.

 

[mad sweeney]

100% and to say otherwise wouldn't be truthful.

Link to any prior presidential candidate who wasn't able to prove they were born in the US and everyone (the press, opposing candidates, etc) left it at that?

So if we went out and interviewed all living Presidents and living former presidential candidates, how many of them do you think were asked to produce their original birth certificate. Strike that...asked to produce their original birth certificate, then subsequently accused of submitting falsified documents and/or not submitting the right forms/documents after the fact?We could probably easily ask:

Hillary Clinton, U.S. Senator from New York, former First Lady of the United States

John Edwards, former U.S. Senator from North Carolina

Bill Richardson, Governor of New Mexico

Dennis Kucinich, U.S. Representative from Ohio

Joe Biden, U.S. Senator from Delaware

Mike Gravel, former U.S. Senator from Alaska

Christopher Dodd, U.S. Senator from Connecticut

Tom Vilsack, former Governor of Iowa

Evan Bayh, U.S. Senator from Indiana

John McCain, U.S. Senator from Arizona

Mike Huckabee, former Governor of Arkansas

Mitt Romney, former Governor of Massachusetts

Ron Paul, U.S. Representative from Texas

Fred Thompson, former U.S. Senator from Tennessee

Duncan Hunter, U.S. Representative from California

Rudy Giuliani, former Mayor of New York City

Sam Brownback, U.S. Senator from Kansas

Jim Gilmore, former Governor of Virginia

Tom Tancredo, former U.S. Representative from Colorado

Tommy Thompson, former Governor of Wisconsin

...from 2008. Probably have over one hundred of other candidates still living from the previous rounds of elections from the 1970s-2000s too. What if we asked them how many of them were asked to share a copy of their original birth certificate, then their State's equivalent of a "long-form" certificate after supplying said copy? 100%? 50%? 5%? Now that's a survey I'd like to see someone conduct.

So you're saying you don't know of anyone? Just asking because based on your earlier comments, you seem to be 100% positive if anyone else was asked to provide a birth certificate but couldn't, it wouldn't be questioned. I'm sure you have seen birth certificates before - there is a lot of information on them. The 'Certification of Live Birth' that was provided has minimal information at best:

Child's Name

Date of Birth

Hour of Birth

Sex

City, Town or Location of Birth

Island of Birth

County of Birth

Mother's Maiden Name

Mother's Race

Father's Name

Father's Race

Dated Filed by Registrar

That's it.

Birth certificates typically have more information such as the hospital where the birth occurred, the address of the place of birth, the doctor who performed the delivery, the name of the individual who certified the birth, etc. None of this information was provided on the form that was provided which is why folks wanted to see the long form.

I guess I don't see what the big deal is in providing that information.

Seems like that has everything necessary to prove he was born in the US to US citizens. I don't see what the big deal is that people need to see more.

 

[datonn]

I know about as much as you with regards to this, but I'd have to think that this information was provided for all of the individuals you noted just now. Candidates are asked to provide countless pieces of information over the course of a campaign. As it has been noted numerous times in this thread, one of the requirements to be President is to be a naturally born citizen of the United States - based on that fact alone, I'd be shocked if it wasn't requested of and verified for each candidate. Once provided, great, nothing to see there and on to the next item. The reason you don't hear about this as an issue from candidates is that it's pretty easy to provide proof.

I think the only reason this is an issue is that the information provided was incomplete at best (since it wasn't the birth certificate but rather a certification of the birth - same words but different meanings). I'd say it was comparable to the deed of ownership on a car vs documentation noting that you are the owner of the car (i.e. the registration). Coupled with the fact that so much time and money was spent to put a stop to these requests it makes you wonder.

Who knows - I voted for the guy but I can see why folks would want the question answered.

On your bolded statement, 100% Here's the question though: don't you think/assume Obama was "vetted" and/or subjected to just as many hoops, trials and tribulations in that "vetting" process (to make sure he was a legal candidate for the position), just as every other candidate would have been scrutinized?I assume that answer has to be yes. And if that answer is yes, then why are we even discussing it?

I'm discussing it because of the greater issue, the issue being why Obama would seemingly be subjected to a different set of rules or scrutiny than the other candidates. I'm not going to throw the "R-word" around (at least not at the moment), but I would LOVE for an actual birther or "birther sympathizer" to explain the discrepancy.

If my memory is correct, McCain had probably as much trouble proving he was a native-born US citizen as Obama did (born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936). But 99.9999999999% of the discussion has centered on Obama. It looks like a duck, and it quacks like a duck...so I'd love to have folks present a really good birther argument and really good facts supporting why "it" is not a duck (the R-word). Or at BARE-minimum religious discrimination/intolerance...since even the rumor of Obama being a secret Muslim makes him 3/5ths of a human in millions of people's eyes. But that is another 30 pages in another thread.

 

[bigbottom]

I know about as much as you with regards to this, but I'd have to think that this information was provided for all of the individuals you noted just now. Candidates are asked to provide countless pieces of information over the course of a campaign. As it has been noted numerous times in this thread, one of the requirements to be President is to be a naturally born citizen of the United States - based on that fact alone, I'd be shocked if it wasn't requested of and verified for each candidate.

Prior to this last election, I don't recall ever hearing about a candidate being asked to produce a birth certificate to prove constitutional eligibility. I don't know, maybe it happened and I just didn't hear about it. But this link indicates that the McCain campaign declined to publicly disclose his birth certificate during the campaign.

 

[bueno]

What are the odds that you would just get a certified copy from the hospital?

bueno, you're a smart guy...so please, out of respect for this issue, answer the question.What are the odds that I would *NEED* to get a certified copy of my birth certificate from the hospital? What are the odds the subject of my birth certificate would come up at all? And if it is different than the odds of those issues coming up for Obama, then why?

You can do it! You can answer this question...even if it hurts to say.

You were the one that said:

If I announce my candidacy for POTUS in 2012

As to why you might need to get a certified copy if you were not running for POTUS, how about moving to another state and registering to vote? Or to get an FM-3 Visa to work in Mexico? Or to get security clearance? Or to get your first US passport? Or any number of other things that required multiple forms of identification?

That's not an answer....that's a dodge. I assume Obama has a US passport too. That he'd get his FM-3 Visa with relative ease if he ever wanted to work in Mexico. That he produced what he needed to produce to register as a voter in Illinois. That he's got at least "entry-level" security clearances (lol). We can play this game all night...and I will if I have to, to prove a point. All I'm asking is whether the odds of the question of my own US citizenship and birth certificate coming up would be different than Obama's. And if those odds are different, why? It's really not that hard. We shouldn't need a legal team to petition courts to clarify the question(s). But I'll let you in on a little info you already understand: Your not answering the question? It's answering the question. So if you don't want that to be your answer, please give us a better one.

This isn't a witch-hunt against bueno! I like and respect you as a FFA participant. You're a sharp guy! This is getting to the core of the issue that has become known as the "birthers," and I'd really like to hear your honest take on it.

You asked "what are the odds that you would need to get a certified copy of my birth certificate from the hospital?" I gave you several examples of where you would need to get a certified copy.You keep changing the question. Now you are asking whether the odds of the question of my own US citizenship and birth certificate coming up would be different than Obama's.

Please be consistent.

 

[bueno]

So you're saying you don't know of anyone? Just asking because based on your earlier comments, you seem to be 100% positive if anyone else was asked to provide a birth certificate but couldn't, it wouldn't be questioned.

I don't know any past President or past Presidential candidate who was asked to produce proof of US citizenship (i.e. birth certificate), then was also subsequently called into doubt/question for producing either suspected false documentation or not producing the "right" documentation. That's what I'm saying.If birthers were calling for the birth certificates of ALL Presidential candidates? I have no issue. Probably a great idea, since being a US born citizen is a requirement of the office! To only ask for the birth certificate of ONE Presidential candidate? That is what I am hoping someone can explain or try and defend. The obvious answer is that they want only one (Obama) because Obama won! However, the calls for Obama's birth certificate were being made loudly and often long before the first Tuesday of November, 2008. So why no calls for McCains? Or Bidens/Palins (since they'd be first in line to take over as POTUS if anything happened). Or Clintons? That is the question (discrepancy) I want answered.

How many past President or past Presidential candidates do you know? Do you think that maybe the reason is that the other candidates provided proper documentation?

 

[datonn]

Never mind, Bueno. I've got your answer.

 

[Jewell]

Here's the question though: don't you think/assume Obama was "vetted" and/or subjected to just as many hoops, trials and tribulations in that "vetting" process (to make sure he was a legal candidate for the position), just as every other candidate would have been scrutinized?

I assume that answer has to be yes. And if that answer is yes, then why are we even discussing it?

No, I don't assume Obama's citizenship was thoroughly vetted because his other qualifications weren't thoroughly vetted. His education records remain sealed, his life story remains widely unknown, his personal connections have been downplayed, and his voting record was hardly discussed. Why would I assume there was a thorough vetting?

 

[datonn]

No, I don't assume Obama's citizenship was thoroughly vetted because his other qualifications weren't thoroughly vetted. His education records remain sealed, his life story remains widely unknown, his personal connections have been downplayed, and his voting record was hardly discussed. Why would I assume there was a thorough vetting?

But you assume all the other candidates underwent a thorough vetting then? Just trying to clarify your position.

 

[bueno]

Never mind, Bueno. I've got your answer.

The answer is that if you run for president, you need to produce a copy of your birth certificate to prove you are a natural born citizen as well.Most likely he's a natural born citizen, so what is his problem?

 

[datonn]

Never mind, Bueno. I've got your answer.

The answer is that if you run for president, you need to produce a copy of your birth certificate to prove you are a natural born citizen as well.Most likely he's a natural born citizen, so what is his problem?

So you think he produced less information than the other 20+ candidates running in 2008 produced? You think what he supplied was different than what the other 20+ candidates supplied? He was asked different questions? Took different oaths? Like I said, I've got no problem with making Obama produce a birth certificate to run for office! What I have a problem with is:1. Assuming he supplied something lesser or different than the other candidates did, and/or lied about it.2. Assuming he wasn't fully vetted, just as all other candidates for the office were vetted.3. Not holding *ALL* candidates to the identical standards.

 

[bueno]

Never mind, Bueno. I've got your answer.

The answer is that if you run for president, you need to produce a copy of your birth certificate to prove you are a natural born citizen as well.Most likely he's a natural born citizen, so what is his problem?

So you think he produced less information than the other 20+ candidates running in 2008 produced? You think what he supplied was different than what the other 20+ candidates supplied? He was asked different questions? Took different oaths? Like I said, I've got no problem with making Obama produce a birth certificate to run for office! What I have a problem with is:1. Assuming he supplied something lesser or different than the other candidates did, and/or lied about it.2. Assuming he wasn't fully vetted, just as all other candidates for the office were vetted.3. Not holding *ALL* candidates to the identical standards.

We should hold all candidates to the same standard. The reason I think that Obama is getting more scrutiny is his past history and his refusal to produce the long form version. If McCain won and did produce his birth certificate as part of the vetting produce, I'd have the same opinion. Especially if he ran on a platform of openness.The sad fact is that neither of us know what procedures are used to vet a presidential candidate or who does it.

 

[datonn]

We should hold all candidates to the same standard. The reason I think that Obama is getting more scrutiny is his past history and his refusal to produce the long form version. If McCain won and did produce his birth certificate as part of the vetting produce, I'd have the same opinion. Especially if he ran on a platform of openness.

The sad fact is that neither of us know what procedures are used to vet a presidential candidate or who does it.

Maybe the bolded statement is where we differ then. I don't care who won or lost the election when it comes to this issue. If you run, you are held to a certain standard. Period. And neither Obama or McCain provided the information the birthers were requesting (demanding) during the campaign, or after.It's a dumb analogy, but it's like if you ask me to come into a thread and prove I don't hit my wife. I've never raised my hand once in anger towards my wife. Heck, I got into two wrestling matches as a kid with guys who ####ed me off, but no punches were even thrown! I've never landed a single haymaker on another human being in my entire lifetime...and I hope when I die someday, I can make that same claim.

So if you ask me to prove I'm not a wife-beater, do I diligently line-up my defense? Or do I think "#### you!" and wonder why you're singling me out amongst thousands of other FFA participants? Do I get my wife on here to say "Nope...I've never seen him hit a fastball...much less another human being!" ...only to have you say "well, I'm sure you threatened to teach her a lesson if she didn't do what you told her to do!"

See how that works? Again, it's a terrible analogy. I just resent the guilty-until-proven-innocent attitude that so many seem to hold. As if Obama didn't have to jump through the same hoops as 20+ other candidates.

 

[bueno]

We should hold all candidates to the same standard. The reason I think that Obama is getting more scrutiny is his past history and his refusal to produce the long form version. If McCain won and did produce his birth certificate as part of the vetting produce, I'd have the same opinion. Especially if he ran on a platform of openness.

The sad fact is that neither of us know what procedures are used to vet a presidential candidate or who does it.

Maybe the bolded statement is where we differ then. I don't care who won or lost the election when it comes to this issue. If you run, you are held to a certain standard. Period. And neither Obama or McCain provided the information the birthers were requesting (demanding) during the campaign, or after.It's a dumb analogy, but it's like if you ask me to come into a thread and prove I don't hit my wife. I've never raised my hand once in anger towards my wife. Heck, I got into two wrestling matches as a kid with guys who ####ed me off, but no punches were even thrown! I've never landed a single haymaker on another human being in my entire lifetime...and I hope when I die someday, I can make that same claim.

So if you ask me to prove I'm not a wife-beater, do I diligently line-up my defense? Or do I think "#### you!" and wonder why you're singling me out amongst thousands of other FFA participants? Do I get my wife on here to say "Nope...I've never seen him hit a fastball...much less another human being!" ...only to have you say "well, I'm sure you threatened to teach her a lesson if she didn't do what you told her to do!"

See how that works? Again, it's a terrible analogy. I just resent the guilty-until-proven-innocent attitude that so many seem to hold. As if Obama didn't have to jump through the same hoops as 20+ other candidates.

Well you are right - it is a terrible analogy. But in this case, the proof is so easy to produce it makes no sense to resist doing so. That's what bothers me about all this. An this isn't a guilty until proven innocent scenario. This is about demonstrating to the public you are eligible to hold the position. I think we need to develop a system to ensure this is done or the candidate is ineligible to run for the office.

 

[TobiasFunke]

Good lord people. Move on. This #### is sooooooo tired. Grow up.

Don't listen to this guy. This thread needs to hit 50 pages. It's hilarious.

 

[flufhed]

Different inquires or priorities I suppose, but having questions about the background of the president does not make one a racist, nor should you be so quick to label. As I recall this is not the first time you have quickly played that card.

I am not calling you a racist. Nor am I accusing any single birther in particular of being a racist. But I do think that racism is an ingrained part of this whole thing, and I'm not going to apologize for saying it. Yes there have been questions about the background of every president, but never to this extent.

You imply without explicitly stating so that you do not have to own the statements. You are an intellectual coward. Your game is tired.

I bet that left a mark.

Actually it did. That and the "snotty condescending" remarks hurt my feelings because DW is a poster that I really respect around here. I wasn't attempting to be snotty nor condescending nor insulting.

Makes sense. You guys use more unncessary words than anyone in the history of internet posting. Each of your long-winded, flowery "look at me I'm so intellectual" paragraphs could usually be reduced to a handful of words. Didn't anyone ever teach you guys that good writing is doing less, with more words?

 

[flufhed]

If I claim that racism is a main impetus besides the Birther movement (which I truly believe) is that the same as labelling anyone who questions Obama's birth or life history as racist? Is it either contradictory or cowardly of me to suggest that this is a motivating factor without calling individuals racist?

No, DW is just insane and like hearing himself talk. But careful, because you are halfway there yourself.HTH

 

[matuski]

Never mind, Bueno. I've got your answer.

The answer is that if you run for president, you need to produce a copy of your birth certificate to prove you are a natural born citizen as well.Most likely he's a natural born citizen, so what is his problem?

I doubt there is a problem.If anything, like me, he gets great amusement watching people like you get your panties in a wad over it.If I were him I would intentionally drag this out forever, even find ways to rekindle it on a regular basis. Arguments like yours do more for him than he ever could.

 

[jon_mx]

I honestly have not heard one person in real life mention anything about this. I have seen a few facebook posts, and seen a few crazies on Fox news, and heard some weird #### on Hannity or something. But never once have I heard anyone say anything about this.Who are you people?

Reminds me of the person who was saying they knew of no one who voted for Nixon after Nixon won in a landslide.

 

[Battersbox]

This may have been discussed many pages ago, but does anyone know off hand who was the most recent serious presidential candidate (besides Obama) that had at least 1 parent that was not an American citizen?

 

[jon_mx]

This may have been discussed many pages ago, but does anyone know off hand who was the most recent serious presidential candidate (besides Obama) that had at least 1 parent that was not an American citizen?

I think you have to go back to Hoover to find one whose parent was born outside of the US (in Canada) and she became a US citizen when she married. There have been seven presidents total with one parent who was not born in the US. Obama might be the first to actually have one who was not a US citizen.

 

[TobiasFunke]

This may have been discussed many pages ago, but does anyone know off hand who was the most recent serious presidential candidate (besides Obama) that had at least 1 parent that was not an American citizen?

I don't know who it was, but I know that Chester A. Arthur had a non-American parent, as well as many questions about his actual birthplace. He was also attacked by political enemies making unfounded accusations regarding his "actual" birthplace and eligibility for the presidency back in the 1800s. I think it's kind of nice to know that muckraking idiots are nothing new to American politics.

 

[Road Dogg]

 

[jon_mx]

This may have been discussed many pages ago, but does anyone know off hand who was the most recent serious presidential candidate (besides Obama) that had at least 1 parent that was not an American citizen?

I don't know who it was, but I know that Chester A. Arthur had a non-American parent, as well as many questions about his actual birthplace. He was also attacked by political enemies making unfounded accusations regarding his "actual" birthplace and eligibility for the presidency back in the 1800s. I think it's kind of nice to know that muckraking idiots are nothing new to American politics.

Which illustrates why saying this is a racial issue or GOP issue is just dumb. He was a white Republican. It is a political issue. The difference in that case, instead of covering for him, the GOP leadership pressured him to release his records, but he never did. Of course, records back then were not always available.

 

[TobiasFunke]

This may have been discussed many pages ago, but does anyone know off hand who was the most recent serious presidential candidate (besides Obama) that had at least 1 parent that was not an American citizen?

I don't know who it was, but I know that Chester A. Arthur had a non-American parent, as well as many questions about his actual birthplace. He was also attacked by political enemies making unfounded accusations regarding his "actual" birthplace and eligibility for the presidency back in the 1800s. I think it's kind of nice to know that muckraking idiots are nothing new to American politics.

Which illustrates why saying this is a racial issue or GOP issue is just dumb. He was a white Republican. It is a political issue. The difference in that case, instead of covering for him, the GOP leadership pressured him to release his records, but he never did. Of course, records back then were not always available.

You can say that this illustrates that it's a political opponent issue rather than being about race (connecting the current political parties to their 18th century predecessors is silly). In that case, it was the lunatic fringe of the opposition party. In this case, it's the lunatic fringe of the opposition party. The only difference is that now we have the internet, which gives every lunatic his own means of publishing his lunacy, but also allows us to fact-check and and laugh at their lunacy. I'd call it a push.

 

[mad sweeney]

This may have been discussed many pages ago, but does anyone know off hand who was the most recent serious presidential candidate (besides Obama) that had at least 1 parent that was not an American citizen?

I don't know who it was, but I know that Chester A. Arthur had a non-American parent, as well as many questions about his actual birthplace. He was also attacked by political enemies making unfounded accusations regarding his "actual" birthplace and eligibility for the presidency back in the 1800s. I think it's kind of nice to know that muckraking idiots are nothing new to American politics.

Which illustrates why saying this is a racial issue or GOP issue is just dumb. He was a white Republican. It is a political issue. The difference in that case, instead of covering for him, the GOP leadership pressured him to release his records, but he never did. Of course, records back then were not always available.

As usual, your comparisons lack correlation to the subject. Using an example of a white President from the 19th Century to prove that something similar today isn't racist is completely silly. Completely different social circumstances 130 years ago than today where blacks are actually allowed to be in high offices. Sorry, but that does not eliminate racism today. However, I don't think it's racially motivated, other than the few of the Birthers that are just Muslim haters (*ahem*). What it definitively does NOT prove is your conclusion that this is not a GOP thing. It's entirely a GOP thing because there's a Democrat in office that they don't want, so this behavior is accepted/encouraged or outright disseminated by people under the GOP umbrella. That's why Fox gives them airtime and R politicians are more or less careful to not outright deny them. Most of whom will be switching sides when/if Jindal runs in '12. Denying that it's a GOP thing based on an example from 130 years ago? You're outdoing yourself here jon.

 

[jon_mx]

This may have been discussed many pages ago, but does anyone know off hand who was the most recent serious presidential candidate (besides Obama) that had at least 1 parent that was not an American citizen?

I don't know who it was, but I know that Chester A. Arthur had a non-American parent, as well as many questions about his actual birthplace. He was also attacked by political enemies making unfounded accusations regarding his "actual" birthplace and eligibility for the presidency back in the 1800s. I think it's kind of nice to know that muckraking idiots are nothing new to American politics.

Which illustrates why saying this is a racial issue or GOP issue is just dumb. He was a white Republican. It is a political issue. The difference in that case, instead of covering for him, the GOP leadership pressured him to release his records, but he never did. Of course, records back then were not always available.

As usual, your comparisons lack correlation to the subject. Using an example of a white President from the 19th Century to prove that something similar today isn't racist is completely silly. Completely different social circumstances 130 years ago than today where blacks are actually allowed to be in high offices. Sorry, but that does not eliminate racism today. However, I don't think it's racially motivated, other than the few of the Birthers that are just Muslim haters (*ahem*). What it definitively does NOT prove is your conclusion that this is not a GOP thing. It's entirely a GOP thing because there's a Democrat in office that they don't want, so this behavior is accepted/encouraged or outright disseminated by people under the GOP umbrella. That's why Fox gives them airtime and R politicians are more or less careful to not outright deny them. Most of whom will be switching sides when/if Jindal runs in '12. Denying that it's a GOP thing based on an example from 130 years ago? You're outdoing yourself here jon.

I have used many examples from the Bush administration such as the national guard issue. The reason to go back 130 years is that is the only time in our history which this situation arose with similar circumstances. There is usually no reason to question a birth. There are tons of people who have known the person all their lives and there is plenty of documentation to support the person being born in the US. No one in Hawaii seems to recall the birth. His mom traveled a lot and had a Dad who was a foreigner. There has yet to be a signed document produced which indicates the exact details of the birth, yet is supposedly still exists. Opponents on either side will raise any issue they can. It is politics.

 

[mad sweeney]

This may have been discussed many pages ago, but does anyone know off hand who was the most recent serious presidential candidate (besides Obama) that had at least 1 parent that was not an American citizen?

I don't know who it was, but I know that Chester A. Arthur had a non-American parent, as well as many questions about his actual birthplace. He was also attacked by political enemies making unfounded accusations regarding his "actual" birthplace and eligibility for the presidency back in the 1800s. I think it's kind of nice to know that muckraking idiots are nothing new to American politics.

Which illustrates why saying this is a racial issue or GOP issue is just dumb. He was a white Republican. It is a political issue. The difference in that case, instead of covering for him, the GOP leadership pressured him to release his records, but he never did. Of course, records back then were not always available.

As usual, your comparisons lack correlation to the subject. Using an example of a white President from the 19th Century to prove that something similar today isn't racist is completely silly. Completely different social circumstances 130 years ago than today where blacks are actually allowed to be in high offices. Sorry, but that does not eliminate racism today. However, I don't think it's racially motivated, other than the few of the Birthers that are just Muslim haters (*ahem*). What it definitively does NOT prove is your conclusion that this is not a GOP thing. It's entirely a GOP thing because there's a Democrat in office that they don't want, so this behavior is accepted/encouraged or outright disseminated by people under the GOP umbrella. That's why Fox gives them airtime and R politicians are more or less careful to not outright deny them. Most of whom will be switching sides when/if Jindal runs in '12. Denying that it's a GOP thing based on an example from 130 years ago? You're outdoing yourself here jon.

I have used many examples from the Bush administration such as the national guard issue. The reason to go back 130 years is that is the only time in our history which this situation arose with similar circumstances. There is usually no reason to question a birth. There are tons of people who have known the person all their lives and there is plenty of documentation to support the person being born in the US. No one in Hawaii seems to recall the birth. His mom traveled a lot and had a Dad who was a foreigner. There has yet to be a signed document produced which indicates the exact details of the birth, yet is supposedly still exists. Opponents on either side will raise any issue they can. It is politics.

And his opponents are... the GOP! As mentioned before, his political opponents within his own party in the Primary didn't raise it, so it's most definitely a GOP issue.

 

[Fennis]

This may have been discussed many pages ago, but does anyone know off hand who was the most recent serious presidential candidate (besides Obama) that had at least 1 parent that was not an American citizen?

I don't know who it was, but I know that Chester A. Arthur had a non-American parent, as well as many questions about his actual birthplace. He was also attacked by political enemies making unfounded accusations regarding his "actual" birthplace and eligibility for the presidency back in the 1800s. I think it's kind of nice to know that muckraking idiots are nothing new to American politics.

No quite the question asked, but George Romney was born in Mexico. John McCain was born in Panama Canal military base. Barry Goldwater was born in the Arizona territory.

 

[Road Dogg]

This may have been discussed many pages ago, but does anyone know off hand who was the most recent serious presidential candidate (besides Obama) that had at least 1 parent that was not an American citizen?

I don't know who it was, but I know that Chester A. Arthur had a non-American parent, as well as many questions about his actual birthplace. He was also attacked by political enemies making unfounded accusations regarding his "actual" birthplace and eligibility for the presidency back in the 1800s. I think it's kind of nice to know that muckraking idiots are nothing new to American politics.

Which illustrates why saying this is a racial issue or GOP issue is just dumb. He was a white Republican. It is a political issue. The difference in that case, instead of covering for him, the GOP leadership pressured him to release his records, but he never did. Of course, records back then were not always available.

As usual, your comparisons lack correlation to the subject. Using an example of a white President from the 19th Century to prove that something similar today isn't racist is completely silly. Completely different social circumstances 130 years ago than today where blacks are actually allowed to be in high offices. Sorry, but that does not eliminate racism today. However, I don't think it's racially motivated, other than the few of the Birthers that are just Muslim haters (*ahem*). What it definitively does NOT prove is your conclusion that this is not a GOP thing. It's entirely a GOP thing because there's a Democrat in office that they don't want, so this behavior is accepted/encouraged or outright disseminated by people under the GOP umbrella. That's why Fox gives them airtime and R politicians are more or less careful to not outright deny them. Most of whom will be switching sides when/if Jindal runs in '12. Denying that it's a GOP thing based on an example from 130 years ago? You're outdoing yourself here jon.

I have used many examples from the Bush administration such as the national guard issue. The reason to go back 130 years is that is the only time in our history which this situation arose with similar circumstances. There is usually no reason to question a birth. There are tons of people who have known the person all their lives and there is plenty of documentation to support the person being born in the US. No one in Hawaii seems to recall the birth. His mom traveled a lot and had a Dad who was a foreigner. There has yet to be a signed document produced which indicates the exact details of the birth, yet is supposedly still exists. Opponents on either side will raise any issue they can. It is politics.

Anecdotal evidence is not proof, and no one has asked for the birth certificates of any other recent presidents. Why do we know Bush was born here? Because he says he was? Well he is a white guy with an American sounding name, so that's good enough for us.That's the way this is perceived, you understand that no matter if you will admit it or not.

 

[Witz]

Anecdotal evidence is not proof, and no one has asked for the birth certificates of any other recent presidents. Why do we know Bush was born here? Because he says he was? Well he is a white guy with an American sounding name, so that's good enough for us.

That's the way this is perceived, you understand that no matter if you will admit it or not.

Link showing this to be the case? You won't be able to provide one because it doesn't exist.

A president must:

-be a natural born citizen of the United States;[27]

-be at least thirty-five years old;

-have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least fourteen years.

So you are telling me the single document which provides proof on 2 of the 3 requirements has not been asked for from any recent presidents?

Respectfully, I'll have to say that's a pretty naive statement to make.

 

[Sam Quentin]

Like I said about 800 pages ago, if you offered me millions of dollars if I could produce my original birth certificate, I don't think I could do it. It's lost...amid an avalanche of boxes and papers my Mom has been saving for 40+ years.

The State of Haawii has stated that they have the BC on file and it could be released for 10 bucksway to miss out on $(millions - 10) in easy profit, Einstein

 

[bigbottom]

Anecdotal evidence is not proof, and no one has asked for the birth certificates of any other recent presidents. Why do we know Bush was born here? Because he says he was? Well he is a white guy with an American sounding name, so that's good enough for us.

That's the way this is perceived, you understand that no matter if you will admit it or not.

Link showing this to be the case? You won't be able to provide one because it doesn't exist.

A president must:

-be a natural born citizen of the United States;[27]

-be at least thirty-five years old;

-have been a permanent resident in the United States for at least fourteen years.

So you are telling me the single document which provides proof on 2 of the 3 requirements has not been asked for from any recent presidents?

Respectfully, I'll have to say that's a pretty naive statement to make.

Is there a link to show that recent presidents have been asked to provide a birth certificate to prove eligibility for the office?

 

[pantagrapher]

Can't believe the Birthers aren't marching on Washington by now. You just going to sit at your computers and let Obama drive you insane?

 

[jon_mx]

And his opponents are... the GOP! As mentioned before, his political opponents within his own party in the Primary didn't raise it, so it's most definitely a GOP issue.

Yes they did. The issue was originally raised by Hillary supporters. A blog called texasdarlin was started by a democrat and lots of people at the DailyKos have questioned the authenticity of the document that was released. It is all politics. Not race. Not GOP specific. I provide facts, you provide nothing but empty accusations.

 

[Sam Quentin]

What are the odds that you would just get a certified copy from the hospital?

bueno, you're a smart guy...so please, out of respect for this issue, answer the question.What are the odds that I would *NEED* to get a certified copy of my birth certificate from the hospital? What are the odds the subject of my birth certificate would come up at all? And if it is different than the odds of those issues coming up for Obama, then why?

You can do it! You can answer this question...even if it hurts to say.

You were the one that said:

If I announce my candidacy for POTUS in 2012

As to why you might need to get a certified copy if you were not running for POTUS, how about moving to another state and registering to vote? Or to get an FM-3 Visa to work in Mexico? Or to get security clearance? Or to get your first US passport? Or any number of other things that required multiple forms of identification?ETA: or to apply for a professional registration in some cases. I have had to provide a certified copy of my birth certificate for some reason or other three times in the past ten years.

and i'm guess that you're whiteIt must be your ethnicity...that's it...that's the ticket

 

[Sam Quentin]

as Obama is only half African, maybe providing a short form is the appropriate documentattion....(or he could take the long form, and tear it in half)

 

[bigbottom]

There has yet to be a signed document produced which indicates the exact details of the birth, yet is supposedly still exists.

Did McCain produce a signed document indicating the exact details of his birth?