Questioning Obama's Critics: Why the Dislike?

[mgb_phys]

I don't believe that holding multiple national status would prevent him from being President as long as he can prove that he was born on US soil.

It doesn't, although the US has an interesting law that you lose your US citizenship if you stand for public office in a foreign country.
If indonesia has a similair law he could lose his chance of one day running for indonesian president!

Is this just a backlash from the suggestions that McCain is ineligible for having been born in the Pananma Canal ?

 

[LowlyPion]

I don't believe that holding multiple national status would prevent him from being President as long as he can prove that he was born on US soil.

No. I believe even in the case of some imagined dual citizenship he still need not prove he was born in the US. His mother being a citizen at his birth is apparently sufficient to establish his citizenship from birth - which seems to be the real standard.

 

[turbo]

Obama was born in Hawaii, and there was a birth notice in the newspaper. For the conspiracy-loons that claim Obama is not a citizen, how do they explain a decades-old birth notice in the paper? All the claims that the nuts have been making about Obama's birth certificate (it's been Photoshopped, it doesn't have an embossed seal, it doesn't bear a signature, etc, etc) have been proven wrong. Philip Berg (the lawyer who filed suit trying to block Obama's nomination because he has "proof" that Obama is a foreign national) should be counter-sued and perhaps disbarred.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

 

[LowlyPion]

Philip Berg (the lawyer who filed suit trying to block Obama's nomination because he has "proof" that Obama is a foreign national) should be counter-sued and perhaps disbarred.

Another in the fine history of Republican attack dobermans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Segretti

From Muskie to Watergate to Swift Boat - a fine GOP tradition.

 

[Evo]

Obama was born in Hawaii, and there was a birth notice in the newspaper. For the conspiracy-loons that claim Obama is not a citizen, how do they explain a decades-old birth notice in the paper? All the claims that the nuts have been making about Obama's birth certificate (it's been Photoshopped, it doesn't have an embossed seal, it doesn't bear a signature, etc, etc) have been proven wrong. Philip Berg (the lawyer who filed suit trying to block Obama's nomination because he has "proof" that Obama is a foreign national) should be counter-sued and perhaps disbarred.

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html

Come on turbo, a birth notice in the newspaper means nothing.

Has Obama furnished his hospital birth record yet? I haven't been following this.

 

[mgb_phys]

Has Obama furnished his hospital birth record yet?

Presumably there a form to fill into apply to be president?
Is it like the DMV, do you have to show a drivers license or a utility bill to prove your address?

 

[Evo]

No. I believe even in the case of some imagined dual citizenship he still need not prove he was born in the US. His mother being a citizen at his birth is apparently sufficient to establish his citizenship from birth - which seems to be the real standard.

Yes, I believe that this was a result of the 14th ammendment.

Presumably there a form to fill into apply to be president?
Is it like the DMV, do you have to show a drivers license or a utility bill to prove your address?

Since it's been questioned, it's curios that he hasn't provided it.

 

[LowlyPion]

Come on turbo, a birth notice in the newspaper means nothing.

It certainly means something however. While it may not be sufficient proof per se, without a doubt it stands as corroboration to any representation provided in a birth certificate.

Of course the Swift Boaters can expand the scope of their allegations to be the result of a more elaborate fraud.

After all with history so against the GOP at this point and their day in power looking to be over in less than 5 months now it's any port in a storm to not own up to the disastrous policies that have served to enrich the few at the expense of a nation that once enjoyed surpluses and now staggers under the burden of debt and financial mismanagement through inadequate oversight.

 

[Evo]

It certainly means something however. While it may not be sufficient proof per se, without a doubt it stands as corroboration to any representation provided in a birth certificate.

No, they just take the information from the birth certificate. They don't investigate the birth certificate for accuracy.

Of course the Swift Boaters can expand the scope of their allegations to be the result of a more elaborate fraud.

And what does this have to do with Obama? I thought the Swift Boater scandal had to do with Kerry.

 

[LowlyPion]

Since it's been questioned, it's curios that he hasn't provided it.

Who says he hasn't provided it? You mean a copy to you?

He's traveled abroad has he not? He has a passport doesn't he? The US Department of State is apparently satisfied that he is a citizen.

It is instructive to note that questions about this are coming from GOP quasi-operatives, in filing suit, in which just about any libel is permitted in filing, and it is not coming from officials of the Department of State.

 

[LowlyPion]

And what does this have to do with Obama? I thought the Swift Boater scandal had to do with Kerry.

Metaphorically speaking these people are serving the same Swift Boat masters as the campaign against Kerry.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Cripes Evo! I look in for the first time in two weeks and the first thing that I see is a bunch of damned nonsense. From Turbo's link.

We beg to differ. FactCheck.org staffers have now seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate. We conclude that it meets all of the requirements from the State Department for proving U.S. citizenship. Claims that the document lacks a raised seal or a signature are false. We have posted high-resolution photographs of the document as "supporting documents" to this article. Our conclusion: Obama was born in the U.S.A. just as he has always said.

This is followed by nine photographs of his birth certificate.

 

[seycyrus]

Metaphorically speaking these people are serving the same Swift Boat masters as the campaign against Kerry.

Ahh, metaphorically speaking ... I see.

I also note that Rove and Cheney were dragged into this as being behind it all. Another metaphorical connection...

 

[turbo]

Come on turbo, a birth notice in the newspaper means nothing.

Wow! Why would someone fake a birth notice in 1961? Just in case Obama wanted to run for president someday? That's just nuts. You are giving way too much credence to the GOP attack-machine and their surrogates.

According to Annenberg Fact Check, somebody trying to dig up dirt on Obama instead stumbled onto a birth announcement in a Honolulu newspaper that ran just 9 days after his birth. Looks like pretty routine stuff for a local newspaper reporter - drop by the hospital and pick up a list of live births and print them with minimal information. This was not the type of notice that the Obamas would have had to pay for - it's pretty darned terse. No "Mr. and Mrs. Barack Obama are pleased to announce the birth of their son on August 4th, 1961..." just the bare facts.

 

[Evo]

Cripes Evo! I look in for the first time in two weeks and the first thing that I see is a bunch of damned nonsense. From Turbo's link.



This is followed by nine photographs of his birth certificate.

It's a discussion of the Berg lawsuit Ivan.

 

[Evo]

Wow! Why would someone fake a birth notice in 1961? Just in case Obama wanted to run for president someday? That's just nuts. You are giving way too much credence to the GOP attack-machine and their surrogates.

turbo, a lot of newspapers post information from birth certificates. It's not a validation of anything on the birth certificate, so I don't know why you keep saying it is proof of anything other than a birth certificate exists. Also, I will state again, that I am not supporting the Berg lawsuit, I have already stated that I think Berg is a nut, but it is a real lawsuit and it was brought up here for discussion.

 

[LowlyPion]

I also note that Rove and Cheney were dragged into this as being behind it all. Another metaphorical connection...

Ideologically and tactically speaking, I'd say they deserve some of the limelight. But I certainly don't attribute anything directly (like say the way John Mitchell and the Committee to Re-Elect the President were once shown to be involved in Watergate) as I expect that they would be more careful than that.

 

[seycyrus]

Ideologically and tactically speaking, I'd say they deserve some of the limelight.

How about the ghost of Nixon? I think a lot of the blame can be attributed to him!

 

[LowlyPion]

"Mr. and Mrs. Barack Obama are pleased to announce the birth of their son on August 4th, 1961..."

... the 44th President of the United States.

Now that would raise some red flags as to authenticity.

 

[LowlyPion]

How about the ghost of Nixon? I think a lot of the blame can be attributed to him!

He certainly did set the standard for Presidential ethics as regards the perpetration of dirty tricks. Cheney and Rove are apparently the kind of Machiavellians satisfied to elaborate on a theme if it suits their political purposes.

 

[Evo]

... the 44th President of the United States.

Now that would raise some red flags as to authenticity.

You mean you didn't see where they photoshopped that part out?

I think you just started another internet rumor.

 

[LowlyPion]

... but it is a real lawsuit and it was brought up here for discussion.

Therein lies the difficulty. Any libel can be forwarded in a filing with the court. Civil filings are allegations after all that have not necessarily been established as factual. A filing can become the vehicle to breathe life into even the most unbelievable fiction and then later dropped through abandonment even, after whatever ulterior purpose to the libel has been achieved.

 

[mgb_phys]

He's traveled abroad has he not? He has a passport doesn't he?

I'm not sure that having traveled abroad actually disqualifies you from being US president.

Wow! Why would someone fake a birth notice in 1961? Just in case Obama wanted to run for president someday? That's just nuts.

Especially because it would have scuppered his chances of plaing cricket for Yorkshire.

 

[Evo]

Therein lies the difficulty. Any libel can be forwarded in a filing with the court. Civil filings are allegations after all that have not necessarily been established as factual. A filing can become the vehicle to breath life into even the most unbelievable fiction and then later dropped through abandonment even, after whatever ulterior purpose to the libel has been achieved.

Sadly, Berg will probably not be counter-sued for this.

Wasn't McCain's birth in Panama first brought up in 2004?

 

[LowlyPion]

Wasn't McCain's birth in Panama first brought up in 2004?

By the Bushies? I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[turbo]

turbo, a lot of newspapers post information from birth certificates. It's not a validation of anything on the birth certificate, so I don't know why you keep saying it is proof of anything other than a birth certificate exists. Also, I will state again, that I am not supporting the Berg lawsuit, I have already stated that I think Berg is a nut, but it is a real lawsuit and it was brought up here for discussion.

The point is that a newspaper printing information from a birth certificate is pretty iron-clad evidence that a birth-certificate existed as of August 13, 1961.

Years back, when I had misplaced the original photostat of my birth certificate, I had to apply to the town office in the town where I was born. I had to pay a fee to get a certified copy (this is what the Obama campaign has) and the town clerk pulled the town's photostat of my birth certificate, typed the relevant information on security paper, embossed it and signed it to attest that it was an accurate transcription of the basic information on the photostat in their possession. It looks very much like Obama's birth certificate. I needed it to get a passport, and used it again more recently to identify myself to the Social Security Commission when applying for disability benefits. Original birth certificates are closely-guarded and are stored in fire-proof safes. For obvious reasons (too easy to fake/doctor) the municipal governments do not give out photocopies of the originals.

Some bloggers' assertions that Obama's campaign could have gotten a valid Hawaii birth certificate and washed it in solvent, then typed in Obama's personal information show just how ignorant and ill-informed those people are. I did service/consulting work for the paper industry, and one of my clients was one of the largest producers of security papers in the country. If you tried to alter any printing subsequently applied to the papers that they made (with alcohol, acetone, and any number of other solvents) the security features would release VERY colorful dyes that would ruin the document. We're not dealing with very sophisticated conspiracy-theorists, here.

 

[Evo]

The point is that a newspaper printing information from a birth certificate is pretty iron-clad evidence that a birth-certificate existed as of August 13, 1961.

Years back, when I had misplaced the original photostat of my birth certificate, I had to apply to the town office in the town where I was born. I had to pay a fee to get a certified copy (this is what the Obama campaign has) and the town clerk pulled the town's photostat of my birth certificate, typed the relevant information on security paper, embossed it and signed it to attest that it was an accurate transcription of the basic information on the photostat in their possession. It looks very much like Obama's birth certificate. I needed it to get a passport, and used it again more recently to identify myself to the Social Security Commission when applying for disability benefits. Original birth certificates are closely-guarded and are stored in fire-proof safes. For obvious reasons (too easy to fake/doctor) the municipal governments do not give out photocopies of the originals.

Some bloggers' assertions that Obama's campaign could have gotten a valid Hawaii birth certificate and washed it in solvent, then typed in Obama's personal information show just how ignorant and ill-informed those people are. I did service/consulting work for the paper industry, and one of my clients was one of the largest producers of security papers in the country. If you tried to alter any printing subsequently applied to the papers that they made (with alcohol, acetone, and any number of other solvents) the security features would release VERY colorful dyes that would ruin the document. We're not dealing with very sophisticated conspiracy-theorists, here.

turbo, I don't disagree that the conspiracy theories about the birth certificate being faked are ridiculous. I've never even mentioned that, so I don't know why you are trying so hard to convince me of something I've never mentioned. I brought up what was in the Berg lawsuit where Berg says (in so many words) that Obama's mother filed the birth certificate once she got back to Hawaii. I was stating what was in the lawsuit.

 

[LowlyPion]

At the bottom of the Birth Certificate it says:

This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/invite/birthcert

If this is a false certificate image that they have on the website "Paid for by Obama for America" at Barackobama.com, an apparent campaign arm of the candidate, then I would say that Obama is facing more serious concerns as regards such a hypothetical fraud that whether or not there is a birth certificate as it seems that even failing a satisfactory birth certificate or birth in Honolulu, his citizenship is still established by virtue of his mother being a citizen prior to his birth.

 

[LowlyPion]

The certificate says he was born after 7 PM on August 4th, 1961.

That was a Friday.

The Registrar recognizes its posting in their records as August 8, 1961 a Tuesday.

Pretty efficient looks like to me.

 

[Evo]

I didn't think anyone on here was questioning the birth certificate?

 

[turbo]

I didn't think anyone on here was questioning the birth certificate?

People ARE questioning the birth certificate. That's the point. Do you think that in 1961, someone could waltz into a municipal office and file a fraudulent claim of a live birth without documentation? That's what Berg is claiming and it's ludicrous. I was born 9 years before Obama, and if you weren't born in a local hospital, your parents had to present a report from an attending physician or family doctor (in the event of a home birth, for instance) before you could be issued a birth certificate. Berg's assertions are transparent and false.

Another point made here repeatedly is also germaine - If Obama was born to a woman who was a US citizen at the time she gave birth, he is a US citizen. All the tap-dancing to the contrary won't change that.

 

[Evo]

Who on "here" is questioning the birth certificate?

And a person "can" waltz into the records office and file for a birth certificate, I think only one person has to claim to be a witness (home births, etc...) that is why the hospital birth records at the hospital his mother claims he was born at would prove she didn't lie. I'm not even sure there has to be a witness.

But, as LP already stated, it's a moot point since the 14th ammendment would give him the US citizen status he needs even if he was born in another country.

 

[turbo]

If you read the snopes comments, there are questions about his citizenship that are unresolved (see my posts above). His Hawaii birth certificate may not be legitimate due to the fact that he appears to have been born in Kenya, then brought to the US where his mother then filed for a US Birth certificate, well, that's not legal (if true) and he may be an Indonesian citizen. Nothing like this has ever happened before in a presidential race. Did you read the lawsuit? Sounds like they have proof that they will furnish to the court.

Who "here" has been questioning the authenticity of Obama's Hawaii birth certificate? My memory is not that short.

 

[LowlyPion]

I was stating what was in the lawsuit.

I might note that references to non-peer reviewed articles aren't seen as discussing good science in these parts. You might also accord allegations brought before a court in a civil case the same status as being non-peer reviewed. They are dubious facts to entertain until proven at trial.

 

[Evo]

I might note that references to non-peer reviewed articles aren't seen as discussing good science in these parts. You might also accord allegations brought before a court in a civil case the same status as being non-peer reviewed. They are dubious facts to entertain until proven at trial.

In this case it is a fact that the lawsuit has been filed and discussion of it is allowed. On the other hand if there was an unsubstantiated claim of a lawsuit, that would not be allowed.