Isn't it sooooooo much simpler to just publish the photo of the original and stop playing games?
Posted on 04/27/2011 6:58:01 AM PDT by Polybius
The White House released President Obama's original birth certificate Wednesday.
The surprise release follows recent and sustained remarks by businessman Donald Trump, among others, that raised doubts as to whether the president was born in the United States.
Obama's birth certificate [PDF]
(Excerpt) Read more at politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com ...
And he needs to release his academic records, and explain why, as the first and only President of the Harvard Law Review, he wrote no articles, the first and only Harvard Law Review president to do that as well.
And a bunch of other stuff. He needs to explain why his history has been scrubbed, as if he were a foreign agent/spy.
It doesn’t bother these idiot trolls that their Constitution has been punked does it. Fools.
Nothing has been "settled" because nothing has been released except a manipulated Photoshop document.
See Post 168.
Am I a "Birther"?
No.
Do I believe that Obama was born in Hawaii?
Probably. Even based on that Photoshop document.
However, if I sell you my house would you accept a Photoshopped deed from me? Don't you trust me 100%?
No, you wouldn't.
You cannot expect the "Birthers" to just lie down and call it a day on the basis of a document that has already been digitally manipulated.
You need straight forward photographic proof, as in Post 168, before you can demand that Birthers agree that this is "settled".
Look at the video of how Trump is handling this. He is taking credit for the release .... if it's real, Trump says .... and Trump then blasts Obama for not releasing it before. What was Obama thinking to wait so long?
I can guarantee you that the Birthers will not let this die just because you accept a Photoshop document.
You therefore need to go to Plan B which is to keep the heat on Obama, now that he has already blinked once.
"Come on, Mr. President. Just allow an original photo of the thing. I don't accept Photoshop business contracts. I believe you but millions of Americans don't. Allow the media to photograph the original and put this circus to bed!"
The label African is on his father, not him. It was a self-description. My statement is more than correct per looking at the form that was filled out and looking at many other Hawaii birth certificates that put non-standard ethnicity / race labels in there.
Like birtherism itself, its a bogus / invalid point.
Obviously we are going too fast for you, so I’ll say it slowly: Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii.
Do you agree that Obama born in the USA?
“Anyone know if that was the rule in 1961?”
There might some informal rule about what Jr means, but it doesnt stop anyone from putting what they want on a birth certificate. Parents call their kids what they want - which is why you get “Moon Unit Zappa”, a girl named “Stanley” and a kid born in Honolulu called Barack Hussein Obama II.
An 18 year-old mother prrobably didnt know different/better.
Like with the bogus issue of the “African” label on his Dad’s ethnicity, we have the logical fallacy of “I wouldn’t have done it that way, so it couldn’t be a valid way to do it”.
The strategy to make the independents second guess the credibility of the conservatives/republicans for the upcoming election is in full swing....Whether the president submitted a valid/fake birth certificate is pointless...There is going to be nothing groundbreaking that would lead to any legal action...just continuous blather for the next several years. However, during the upcoming campaign, there will be incessant references to the birther by the media and politicians catering to the independent voters that you shouldn’t trust anything that the Republican say against Obama’s policies/plans...This release by Obama was brilliant on his part, and is going to hurt us for a long time. I’m just surprised that he released it this soon...I figured that he would wait just a few months before the elections. I began to sense this issue when all of the leading Republicans were distancing themselves from all of this during the past several weeks since Trump has been in the news. They were all trying to shut him up because they knew what was coming.
This is going to be a long election season.
Sincere question: Ok, his father WAS NOT an American citizen but his mother was. Explain why her citizenship doesn’t matter?
“Births in the United States in 1961 are classified for vital statistics ...”
Your citation is relevant only to Barack Obama II and HIS classification.
Barack Obama SENIOR was not born in 1961, nor in the US. He put whatever the heck he wanted to on a birth certificate form for his race, NOT his son’s. He put down “African” on a form that then was typed up, no boxes, no strict classifications, none of that - just space for a typed answer - African. That’s how it got into the real, original long for Birth Certificate.
At long last, are you going to give it up on this and admit Obama was born in Honolulu?
Yes, Hawaii became a state in 1959, so it was part of the US when Obama was born in 1961.
Do you agree that:
1) The Constitutional requirement is that the President be a "natural born citizen"; and,
2) That necessitates that both parents be US citizens?
Dude, your slipping from hardcore conspiracy theorist into the realms of pure blathering insanity. ..... Longbow1969
No doubt, the leftwing websites will be mining these quotes for gems on how stupid birthers are. ..... WOSG
First of all WOSG, I am not a "Birther".
Second of all, is it your contention that Stanley Ann Dunham signed a piece of paper in 1961 that had a 21st Century digital background pattern on it?
Really?
See Post 168.
Regardless of anything else, that PDF is a computer generated, manipulated document. In the current vernacular: "Photoshopped".
It's not Rocket Science. You get an image of an original document from 1961. That's Layer 1. You then layer that over a pretty and fancy digital background which is Layer 2.
Have you never played with Photoshop before?
Any way you slice it, it is still a computer manipulated document and, once you manipulate a document, trust goes out the window.
It is NOT an undoctored orinal photo as shown on Post 168.
As I have said, I am not a Birther but I know that you will not convince the Birthers with an obvious Photoshop document.
You two are being just as pig-headed as the most stubborm Birther.
It is generally understood that the Founders had reference to Vatel’s “Law of Nations”. Several owned copies and could read it in the original French. It is the guiding reference on this matter. Basically, one is a “natural born citizen” if one’s birth admits of no natural loyalty to another nation. This is contrued as meaning that each parent is of US citizenship, properly qualified as to age and length of residency. If either parent is a citizen or subject of another country at the time of the offspring’s birth then the offspring is considered to have ‘natural’ allegiance, in part, to that other country, like dual citizenship. If one parent causes the ‘natural born’ test to fail the citizenship status of the other does not matter.
Isn't it sooooooo much simpler to just publish the photo of the original and stop playing games?
“Nobody has anything except a Photoshop art project.”
You are stubborn in your delusions.
You called the original COLB a photoshop deal, then they released photos of the real thing, then you said it could still be forged document, then state officials vouched for his data on file.
NOW we have what you have asked for: The long form Birth Certificate, released and attested to by the state registrar.
You cant take YES for an answer.
These days we dont keep records in books written in long-hand. We keep the documents on file digitally. To get the digital information released, you get official copies. Obama HAS done that. He HAS gotten everything the birthers could reasonably ask for, and asking for more is unreasonable.
It’s like demanding proof that the sun is hot. Fine: You can go visit it yourself!
“Why won’t President Obama simply end this circus by releasing the long-form document?”
He just did.
We already had, even prior to this release, enough evidence to establish Obama’s birth in a Honolulu hospital. Now that we have the attending physician signature, hospital, and a long form BC that affirms what was already on the COLB, it’s more than confirmed.
Birtherism has jumped the shark.
“Do you agree that Obama born in the USA?”
“Yes, Hawaii became a state in 1959, so it was part of the US when Obama was born in 1961.”
Agreed, Obama was born in Hawaii.
on your questions:
#1, of course I agree. NBC is constitutional reqt.
#2, that definition of NBC is not commonly accepted. Common view is natural-born equates to citizenship at time of birth. Neither Chester Arthur nor Spiro Agnew, nor even Mike Dukakis satisfied NBC under your narrower 2 citizen parents definition and nobody raised an issue. unless you have court rulings to back up that narrower definition, it’s speculative.
So, then, an anchor baby could be POTUS?
Simple test: Do you agree that Obama was born in Hawaii?
I dont have the definitive answer on that, but if someone is a US citizen at birth, then the common answer would be yes, they satisfy NBC. Read Ankeny court decision, and take that question to a professor of Constitutional law, eg Volokh website.
“Even if that’s true (which is doubtful), he now needs to explain why it took three years. “
Nothing stated in #194 was doubtful.
All this “he needs” - in case you havent noticed, he only needs to get re-elected. WE NEED to find ways to stop him in that quest.
Everything else is trivia.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.