Obama's Birth Certificate Released

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by agzg

That and they're racist.

BEAT ME TO IT.

[honeychile]

Originally Posted by honeychile

My own issue with the President's birth certificate was that the one he had originally released would not have been valid for most lineage societies. I haven't yet seen it, so I won't comment further on it.

At the time I posted anything, I had not been able to read the long form. What has interested me in the whole birther movement all along was that, in years of doing genealogical work, I had never heard of such a hard time in getting a long form - if you ask for the long form. Pennsylvania is one of those states - no long form, not acceptable. And, I have done genealogical work involving Hawaii, as one of my mother's younger cousins was born there.

Originally Posted by BluPhire

What Obama produced originally is what the State Hawaii allowed to be released.

See above.

Originally Posted by honeychile

I was just stating my own interest in the matter. Also, I have seen Hawaiian birth certificates that were long form - this is not of the magnatude to which it's reached.

What I was saying, from my genealogical experience, was that it doesn't take an act of congress or major league begging to get the long form.

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

Not true for DAR and UDC. What other lineage societies are you referring to?

Very intrigued by where you got this information, as I've taken the training for both. Granted, the DAR is usually considered the strictest, but when it comes to generations from oh, 1900 and up, birth certificates must include the information stated on the long form because it's considered readily available. I'm a volunteer genealogist for the DAR, so I realize that, the further back you go, the more that a preponderence of information must do, since records weren't kept well. This is especially clear when needing the 1890 census.

Originally Posted by BluPhire

Understood in your own interest, but when your own interest shape your opinion, that's how Tea Parties are started. Just like what PreciousJeni wrote Certificate of Live Birth is not proof according to her far right.

Heck some states recognize the Family bible.

Yes, Family Bibles are considered as proofs - WHEN they are contemporary with the information. You can't go out and buy an old Bible, list your family's information, and expect it to be accepted.

I'm hoping to not answer any further questions, as I have said that I had an issue of genealogical interest, not political. No, I'm not a big fan of the President, but it has nothing to do with his race.

[Ch2tf]

Originally Posted by honeychile

What I was saying, from my genealogical experience, was that it doesn't take an act of congress or major league begging to get the long form.

I don't recall the President stating it required "major league begging", but that a request needed to be made. Long story short, he shouldn't have had to make the request for the long form.

I don't recall what Clinton or Bush produced, but there was definitely not this much of a hubub over their birth certificates, long or short form, certificate of live birth, or anything else.

[honeychile]

Originally Posted by Ch2tf

I don't recall the President stating it required "major league begging", but that a request needed to be made. Long story short, he shouldn't have had to make the request for the long form.

FWIW, anyone who applies for their birth certificate in many states (including PA) must specifically ask for the full form or for genealogical purposes to get more than that fact that they were born.

[Ch2tf]

Originally Posted by honeychile

FWIW, anyone who applies for their birth certificate in many states (including PA) must specifically ask for the full form or for genealogical purposes to get more than that fact that they were born.

You can chill with your continuous attempts to inform the masses that you do geneological work, we get that. Lets just say that every single state in the union requires you to specifically request the long form and the default is the short form/certificate of live birth, in the end of the day he still shouldn't have had to go to this length to prove where he was born if it is not law and if other Presidents only produced the short form.

Do I know what other Presidents provided? Nope, never looked into it. Do I think everyone handed in the long form, Nope, I don't.

[MysticCat]

Do I know what other Presidents provided? Nope, never looked into it. Do I think everyone handed in the long form, Nope, I don't.

I'd be surprised if any other presidents ever produced a birth certificate. It only became an issue in this case (well, if you put aside obsessive conspiracy theories) because of the fact that his father wasn't American, his mother had lived overseas before and after his birth, and the fact that some people apparently had trouble remembering exactly when Hawaii became a state.

What's interesting to me is that I remember more "conversation" before the election about whether McCain is a natural-born citizen than whether Obama is.

[honeychile]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I'd be surprised if any other presidents ever produced a birth certificate. It only became an issue in this case (well, if you put aside obsessive conspiracy theories) because of the fact that his father wasn't American, his mother had lived overseas before and after his birth, and the fact that some people apparently had trouble remembering exactly when Hawaii became a state.

What's interesting to me is that I remember more "conversation" before the election about whether McCain is a natural-born citizen than whether Obama is.

When I voted, there was a man who probably shouldn't have been allowed to vote (he was rather drunk) who said something to the effect of "I don't know what I bothered cominig here - neither of them are technically American anyhow." His buffoonery amused the rest of us.

MC, was it Jackson who was questioned about his birthplace? One of earlier Presidents was thought to have been born on the ship heading towards America.

[SOM]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I'd be surprised if any other presidents ever produced a birth certificate. It only became an issue in this case (well, if you put aside obsessive conspiracy theories) because of the fact that his father wasn't American, his mother had lived overseas before and after his birth, and the fact that some people apparently had trouble remembering exactly when Hawaii became a state.

What's interesting to me is that I remember more "conversation" before the election about whether McCain is a natural-born citizen than whether Obama is.

MysticCat:
The "conversation" or "question" was raised, for a very short period of time. And never answered. In fact, the only way that it could have been was if Sen John McCain was election and sworn in. At that point any party with standing would have filed suit and it would have ended up at the USSC. Note:The GOP never filed a suit after Obama sworn in.
On John McCain: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/may/12/born-usa/
http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/how_can_panamanian-born_mccain_be_elected_president.html
http://www.snopes.com/politics/mccain/citizen.asp
http://www.michiganlawreview.org/first-impressions/volume/107
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/28/us/politics/28mccain.html
http://genealogy.about.com/b/2008/08/30/john-mccains-citizenship-status.htm
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2011/04/trumps-birther-libel-and-american-history/237217/

This could be the real issue down the road for anyone else running for office who is a military brat. And an issue only the USSC can rule on. And rule on only after the election and swearing in.

[BluPhire]

Originally Posted by honeychile

Yes, Family Bibles are considered as proofs - WHEN they are contemporary with the information. You can't go out and buy an old Bible, list your family's information, and expect it to be accepted.

I'm hoping to not answer any further questions, as I have said that I had an issue of genealogical interest, not political. No, I'm not a big fan of the President, but it has nothing to do with his race.

Yes I know that it has to be contemporary, but still the principle is "It's the Family Bible, not a birth certificate."

Anyway moving on, I'm not questioning your reasoning they are your own. Yet I do question when people use their own criteria for burden of proof as being superior than the laws and statutes of the US Government and the rights of its states. If Hawaii only wanted to release that form as proof and no other state had an issue, but just a bunch of fringe people then it works for me.

Originally Posted by Elephant Walk

Fantastic.

I bet you have a hard time remembering to breathe.


Which sock puppet corresponds to "I know, bitch"?

You tell me I'm just waiting.