Obama releases long form birth certificate to end debate

[WarpSpeed]

Nowhere does it say "Obama released it".

Somebody somewhere released it.

And it doesn't look like a 1961 birth certificate to me, it's clearly done on a current certificate form..

Well I would think that he wouldn't release it because he wouldn't have it. They would be in the possession of the US equivalent of the office of Births, Deaths & Marriages. They are the ones that won't release the documents unless you give them authority. So he gives the authority and they release it.

It may not look like a 1961 Birth Certificate probably because it wouldn't have been printed back then. I had my birth certificate sent to me from Ireland a couple of years ago, printed a couple of years ago of course, not in 1963.

Why don't you ask the other folk why they spent sooo much money trying to get the document. I mean, really, you people should stop with the conspiracy crap and focus on more important things than his birth certificate.

Since you're not American maybe you don't know that the health dept in every state which keeps these copies has an original on file for every birth, not an uncertified copy, as a certified copy has an official stamp of the state that imprints the paper like a notary stamp..

This original is what they make these supposed copies from but there is no reason the original can't be produced to the public..

Edited April 29, 2011 by WarpSpeed

[koheesti]

Better a tax and spend democrat than a let poor people die by the millions republican.

What are you basing this comment on?

Please provide some information about the millions that have died.

I can't be bothered with such foolish questions. Millions are still dying premature deaths due to the barbaric American health care system. A nationalized plan was politically impossible thanks to socialism phobia, and millions will continue to die early, largely poor, and largely black and Latino. If you don't know these basic things, I won't bother wasting my time on it.

Yeah, it's really difficult proving something that isn't true.

[Jingthing]

Yeah, it's really difficult proving something that isn't true.

The AMA thinks it is. Hard to get more mainstream than that. We all die but too many die too early for conditions that could have been easily and cheaply treated as they are in civilized countries like Canada. Sure anybody can go to the ER when they are dying. Often -- TOO LATE.

Edited April 29, 2011 by Jingthing

[midas]

Yeah, it's really difficult proving something that isn't true.

The AMA thinks it is. Hard to get more mainstream than that. We all die but too many die too early for conditions that could have been easily and cheaply treated as they are in civilized countries like Canada. Sure anybody can go to the ER when they are dying. Often -- TOO LATE.

what has the health debate got to do with the forged birth certificate ?

[jazzbo]

US President -- Age and Citizenship requirements - US Constitution, Article II, Section 1

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.

TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER III > Part I > § 1401

§ 1401. Nationals and citizens of United States at birth

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years:

Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person

(As originally codified under 'The Nationality Act of 1940')

Edited April 29, 2011 by jazzbo

[koheesti]

I had always thought that having one parent an American citizen meant that Obama automatically was - even he he had been born in Kenya.

Edited April 29, 2011 by koheesti

[chuckd]

President Obama did play by the rules. The state of Hawaii had confirmed the validity of his birth certificate years ago and yet people still went on a fishing expedition.

I am no longer surprised by the ignorance that US citizens have of their own government, but it sure is depressing at times. The President of the USA does not make the laws that govern immigration. If you have a complaint take it up with your US Congress delegate(s). When I see the comments in this forum bitching and moaning and always blaming the President of the USAfor the economic mess, I wonder if these people realize that legislation regarding the subject of revenue originates solely and exclusively with the U.S. House of Representatives. A President can submit a budget but it is the House that amends or modifies and ultimately approves the budget.

People get the governments they deserve. And the USA has the government it merits. There is a complete absence of common decency, of basic civility and plain good manners in the USA. Nowhere is this demonstrated better than the political arena where politicians are personally attacked, humiliated, ridiculed and their lives ripped apart. The demand to see someone's academic records is neither required by law, nor justified by common sense. It is the same time of voyeurism that gave people urinal and locker room spycams. None of the people demanding access to the President's academic records can provide a bonafide reason for their demand. Is it because they think he was not qualified as a lawyer? The state bar said he was; he passed the bar exam. Is it because they think he didn't deserve to go to Harvard? Well, the Harvard admissions offfice thought he was qualified. Is it because they think he didn't complete the course work or achieve the GPA required for a Harvard J.D. magna laude? Well, the law school of Harvard said he did and granted him his diploma. Just what exactly are some of these troglodytes trying to achieve?

What is the reason for the academic record to be released? Can anyone anser that question? Can I get an intelligent answer?

"It is almost always the cover-up rather than the event that causes trouble."

Howard Baker

Some troglodytes think the cover-up is worse that what the cover-up covers.

The American voting constituency has every reason to know everything there is to know about a man that might one day be considered the most powerful human being on the face of the earth. Remember the famous MTV interviewer that asked Clinton whether he wore "boxers" or "briefs"? We knew precious little about Obama when he was elected (without my help, I might add) and it has taken two years of his administration to find out that he was vastly overrated.

His complete lack of managerial experience has been his worst failure. He has consistently surrounded himself with sycophants that tell him what he wants to hear rather than what he needs to hear. A good manager will surround himself with the best people possible and expect them to tell him the truth. Obama has failed to do this on a grand scale. He has brought Chicago politics to the White House and it is corrupting the office. As others have said...He has never run so much as a Dairy Queen and we are electing him to run the most powerful nation on earth. (I don't remember who said this. Maybe Jay Leno.)

Others have released their grades when they were running for the Presidency so we aren't trying to reinvent the wheel here.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&contentId=A37397-2000Mar18

http://www.americanpolitics.com/bushtranscript.html

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/06/07/yale_grades_portray_kerry_as_a_lackluster_student/

If Obama has nothing to hide, then stop trying to hide it.

I couldn't care less about your personal academic grades, but I can promise you if you were running for the office of President of the US and attempted to keep them confidential; somebody, somewhere would really want to see them.

PS: Clinton answered the underwear question.

[chuckd]

Better a tax and spend democrat than a let poor people die by the millions republican.

What are you basing this comment on?

Please provide some information about the millions that have died.

I can't be bothered with such foolish questions. Millions are still dying premature deaths due to the barbaric American health care system. A nationalized plan was politically impossible thanks to socialism phobia, and millions will continue to die early, largely poor, and largely black and Latino. If you don't know these basic things, I won't bother wasting my time on it.

A great response. Isn't this usually when you say...."Next"?

PS: If you don't want to waste your time answering what you consider to be foolish questions, you might try making a post that doesn't contain foolish statements.

[jazzbo]

As per The Nationality Act of 1940 (USC TITLE 8 > CHAPTER 12 > SUBCHAPTER III > Part I > § 1401[g] ) it's now time to go after the citizenship of BHO's long-departed Wichita, Kansas (supposedly) born Mother.

Edited April 29, 2011 by jazzbo

[SteeleJoe]

The fact that McCain's issue was dropped quickly -- as it dam_ well should have been - has zero bearing on whether or not the Birther crap is or isn't about racism. You're logic is faulty.

She was not a Birther.

Guess what? I disagree. IMHO it is very applicable to the birther issue. Your logic is faulty.

How does the fact that McCain's issue was dropped quickly speak to whether or not the Birther stuff is about racism? Delineate your logic for me.

[Ulysses G.]

How does the fact that McCain's issue was dropped quickly speak to whether or not the Birther stuff is about racism? Delineate your logic for me.

He was challenged on it - even though he is a rich WHITE guy.

He then provided evidence that he was born on a military base in a military hospital - which means he was eligible to run for president - and it was dropped and forgotten about as he proved that he was in the right.

Obama was also eligible, but not providing his original birth certificate fueled speculation that he had lied about it. As dissatisfaction with his policies grew, more and more voters started to wonder why he refused to do something to put the controversy to rest.

Now he has done so and my guess is that will be the end of it except for the type who insist that the moon landing was faked and that the CIA/Mossad were behind 9/11 - the real nuts.

A lot of people wish that Obama was not president because of things that he has done in office - only a few because he is not white. Some people want to see "racism" where none exists.

Edited April 29, 2011 by Ulysses G.

[Richard W]

The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth:

(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years:

<snip>

(As originally codified under 'The Nationality Act of 1940')

Are you sure of the date of that law? I'm hearing that when Obama was born, the residence requirement split 10 of which 5, not 5 of which 2. His mother was only 18 years old when he was born.

[geriatrickid]

Wow. Talk about a lack of a clear response. Around and around people go, but not one straightforward answer as to why President Obama's academic record should be accessed y the general public.

Let's look at some of the weak justifications offered;

1. It's a cover up.

A cover up of what? The man meets the legal requirements of the office of President of the USA. The issue was dealt with in the primaries and the Governor of Hawaii gave a nice synopsis of who was snooping and who knew about the Obama birth, including the birth announcement in the local paper back in 1961. http://nhne-pulse.org/hawaiis-governor-confirms-obamas-birth/

2. The President o the USA is not the most powerful human being on the face of the earth. He has never been and the USA has been in a state of decline ever since the Reagan era when the Republican budget deficits put the USA on the road to fiscal catastrophe. The US. House of Reps initiates legislation on revenue, not the President. The checks and balances (and gridlock) prevent a President from being the most powerful human. A president can make powerful mistakes, but that's about it. People are talking as if the President has some sort of Harry Potter type magic wand that he can wave and heal the sick, revive the dead and feed the hungry from a few loaves of bread and some rotting fish.

3. The President has no managerial experience and never run a business.

Jeez, and President Reagan's business experience was what? A look at some of the past work experience of President's work experience isn't the most reassuring hikes down memory lane. President Truman, a man that I respect and admire, was a failure in business. President Kennedy achieved what in business? President Eisenhower had no business experience. The job of President is not the same as running a business enterprise. It is a social services position. Look at the biggest chunks of government spending; It is on Social security and related "entitlements", and it is on defense. One does not administer or manage those expenditures as one manages a business. One does not manage a war or international diplomacy as one manages a business. The President is responsible for taking into account the needs and requirements of marginal citizens. Business have the luxury of being able to not deal with such people. A good business would cut an unprofitable segment. Unfortunately, the President of the USA cannot just say to the poor and elderly, sorry, no services for you since you are not good for business.

And then we get into the sniping that the Obama administration doesn't hire good people. Hey, if someone offered me a senior admin job that pays 2/3 of what I am making now and long hours complete with the abuse and violation of my privacy that goes with the job, I'd run away. Americans just don't get that they cannot heap abuse on folks, humiliate them in public hearings, intrude upon their families and then expect the best candidates to volunteer 4 years of their lives for public service. It doesn't matter if a candidate is democrat or republican, the candidates all get the same disrespectful treatment. If one looks at the vacant administration posts, one asks why Congress is taking so long to allow the President to fill the job openings.

4. And I am still waiting for an explanation of how the President's academic records are relevant to demonstrating competency in his job.

I received a D in my 2nd year finite math class. So what? I ended up with a few diplomas and make a decent living. I also aced some advanced quantitative math courses. My academic results predicted nothing except that I could take a class and pass an exam. I am not even employed in a job specific to those studies.

Why do people want to know about the contractual agreement between a private institution (Harvard) and a private party (Obama)? The academic records were not used to apply for the job of President. Mr. Obama entered into an agreement with Harvard for an education. He satisfied the university's admissions and academic office requirements. What legal or moral right does anyone now have to come in and question the private transaction of these two parties when there is no conflict of interest issue involved?

This is a a dispute over the fundamental right to privacy and there comes a point in time where nosy people should be told to &lt;deleted&gt; off. It's high time someone set some boundaries. There is no legal requirement to release the records, nor is there a moral argument to do so.

[Scott]

The purpose of disclosing of his Birth Certificate and his Academic Records is to discredit him. The laws are fairly clear about what records have to be disclosed for public officials and under what circumstances.

There are no educational requirements to become president.

The motivation of those who are interested are malicious and devious.

These are relatively small groups. The majority of Americans have little interest in seeing his university transcripts. But they will have fun with some of the classes he took, I am sure.

[Crushdepth]

This non-issue is even more stupid than the (British) royal wedding. Pathetic.

[Phil Conners]

Why does it matter where you are born as long as you're a citizen.

I will pass on your opinion to the founding fathers.

Maybe the law needs to be updated to reflect reality in the 21st century. Back when it was made people didn't fly on holidays several times a year, did they?

Would feel the same way about Kings and Queens....are they still needed in the 21st century.....

Actually if you think about it, it seems many of the past US presidents came from a rather limited set of very wealthy families - Bush, Kennedy and Roosevelt for example.

[SteeleJoe]

Actually if you think about it, it seems many of the past US presidents came from a rather limited set of very wealthy families - Bush, Kennedy and Roosevelt for example.

No one with half a brain denies that money and connections are a huge asset in the US as they are anywhere else. But, that's a total of 3 families and 5 presidents. Many? You say "for example" as if there are more but you might as well just listed Adams and be done with it., cuz there aint anymore as far as I know. So 4 families and 7 presidents. Out of 44. And only one Kennedy became President. And the Roosevelts were fairly distant relations whose administration were 30 years apart. (And both Adams were highly accomplished men and political players whose position was based on merit).

Seriously -- are you implying that elected US presidents are somehow analogous to hereditary monarchy?

Edited April 29, 2011 by SteeleJoe

[Phil Conners]

Actually if you think about it, it seems many of the past US presidents came from a rather limited set of very wealthy families - Bush, Kennedy and Roosevelt for example.

No one with half a brain denies that money and connections are a huge asset in the US as they are anywhere else. But, that's a total of 3 families and 5 presidents. Many? You say "for example" as if there are more but you might as well just listed Adams and be done with it., cuz there aint anymore as far as I know. So 4 families and 7 presidents. Out of 44. And only one Kennedy became President. And the Roosevelts were fairly distant relations whose administration were 30 years apart. (And both Adams were highly accomplished men and political players whose position was based on merit).

Seriously -- are you implying that elected US presidents are somehow analogous to hereditary monarchy?

No, I'm saying you replaced one ruling elite with another.

[SteeleJoe]

Uhmm...yeah, so you were indeed making the comparison.

I'm sorry but that's fatuous at best. (Which ruling elite is it that replaced the monarchy: all rich people -- and not just a limited set of very wealthy families as you previously posted? I guess we'll just forget folks like Lincoln, Truman, and Clinton -- for example -- whose families had no wealth at all?)

Again: as is the case virtually anywhere, money and connections opens many doors - some of them huge; but to claim that the institution of the monarchy was replaced by some other singular entity...well, you've not made much of a case for that, have you?

EDIT to Add: I'm neither particularly anti-monarchy (cause I just don't care enough about them) nor and ardent fan of the way the US presidents rise to power (or how the wealthy have as much power as they do EVERYWHERE). But those are two completely different things.

Edited April 29, 2011 by SteeleJoe

[SteeleJoe]

And both Adams were highly accomplished men and political players whose position was based on merit.

I feel guilty for saying that and leaving out the Roosevelts -- arguably two of our greatest and extraordinary men by any measure. If the Adams both deserved to be POTUS due to their political skills and other traits -- which admittedly some might argue I suppose -- then so did both Roosevelts.

[jazzbo]

from #132 Are you sure of the date of that law?

http://library.uwb.edu/guides/USimmigration/54%20stat%201137.pdf

Section 201 g (p1139) 14 October 1940

... but I think the real gold-ring now is to prove that his Mother was not a US Citizen either.

[Richard W]

Actually if you think about it, it seems many of the past US presidents came from a rather limited set of very wealthy families - Bush, Kennedy and Roosevelt for example.

No one with half a brain denies that money and connections are a huge asset in the US as they are anywhere else. But, that's a total of 3 families and 5 presidents. Many? You say "for example" as if there are more but you might as well just listed Adams and be done with it., cuz there aint anymore as far as I know. So 4 families and 7 presidents. Out of 44. And only one Kennedy became President. And the Roosevelts were fairly distant relations whose administration were 30 years apart. (And both Adams were highly accomplished men and political players whose position was based on merit).

And now you can add Obama - according to Wikipedia, his grandfather's distant cousins include six US presidents: James Madison, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush.

[Richard W]

from #132 Are you sure of the date of that law?

http://library.uwb.edu/guides/USimmigration/54%20stat%201137.pdf

Section 201 g (p1139) 14 October 1940

... but I think the real gold-ring now is to prove that his Mother was not a US Citizen either.

Thanks for the link. If you take a closer look, you'll see that when that law was passed, its requirement was 10 years total residence of which 5 years must be after reaching 16, so Obama wouldn't qualify under that section as it originally was if he weren't born on US territory.

Are the birthers sure Obama is legitimate? His father was still married when his parents married, and if that invalidated their marriage, then he'd definitely have been a US citizen from birth, wherever he was born!

[Ulysses G.]

Are the birthers sure Obama is legitimate? His father was still married when his parents married, and if that invalidated their marriage, then he'd definitely have been a US citizen from birth, wherever he was born!

Trump will pay you well for this information,

[SteeleJoe]

Actually if you think about it, it seems many of the past US presidents came from a rather limited set of very wealthy families - Bush, Kennedy and Roosevelt for example.

No one with half a brain denies that money and connections are a huge asset in the US as they are anywhere else. But, that's a total of 3 families and 5 presidents. Many? You say "for example" as if there are more but you might as well just listed Adams and be done with it., cuz there aint anymore as far as I know. So 4 families and 7 presidents. Out of 44. And only one Kennedy became President. And the Roosevelts were fairly distant relations whose administration were 30 years apart. (And both Adams were highly accomplished men and political players whose position was based on merit).

And now you can add Obama - according to Wikipedia, his grandfather's distant cousins include six US presidents: James Madison, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush.

I hope you're joking -- because you've taken a ridiculous posit to a whole new level of absurdity with that one.

[ChristopherWilliamsBKK]

So Obamas too liberal, they throw out an obviously fake document, he gets impeached then Palin becomes president. Thats my forecast

[jazzbo]

from #143 If you take a closer look, you'll see that when that law was passed, its requirement was 10 years total residence of which 5 years must be after reaching 16, so Obama wouldn't qualify under that section as it originally was if he weren't born on US territory.

.. and if you take an even CLOSER look you will realize that those requirements are referring to the American citizen parent which in this case is BHO's Mother -- if in fact she really WAS an American citizen.

Edited April 30, 2011 by jazzbo

[koheesti]

The question about Obama's academic records come into play because as a self-admitted bad student he likely got into Columbia because of Affirmative Action (which isn't popular with at least half the population). He probably played up the Kenyan side of his family as that would have helped with admission as well. Not that there is anything wrong with that, students should try to use everything at their disposal to get into a top school.

[TAWP]

This non-issue is even more stupid than the (British) royal wedding. Pathetic.

Indeed.

There are so many things they *could* go after Obama and the Democrats about (before the latter lost the congress) but like collection of lowest form of waste-products they seem unable to assemble something solid and only try to make a mess.

[Richard W]

Actually if you think about it, it seems many of the past US presidents came from a rather limited set of very wealthy families - Bush, Kennedy and Roosevelt for example.

And now you can add Obama - according to Wikipedia, his grandfather's distant cousins include six US presidents: James Madison, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Jimmy Carter, George H. W. Bush and George W. Bush.

I hope you're joking -- because you've taken a ridiculous posit to a whole new level of absurdity with that one.

I'm not joking about his kinship. You might be able to dismiss its relevance on the basis that most of the long-established WASP families are now demonstrably related - I don't know whether the latter suggestion is correct.

from #143 If you take a closer look, you'll see that when that law was passed, its requirement was 10 years total residence of which 5 years must be after reaching 16, so Obama wouldn't qualify under that section as it originally was if he weren't born on US territory.

.. and if you take an even CLOSER look you will realize that those requirements are referring to the American citizen parent which in this case is BHO's Mother -- if in fact she really WAS an American citizen.

If Obama was born in Honolulu, he's a native-born US citizen - end of story.

If Obama was born outside US territory, as a number of unreliable remarks suggest, his mother was too young to qualify him for citizenship at birth, so her nationality is actually irrelevant - unless he was 'born out of wedlock'. There's been discussion elsewhere about whether Obama was born out of wedlock for the purposes of nationality law, but I haven't found any convincing conclusions.