Texas Bill to Require Presidential Candidates to Submit Birth Certificate

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
I am not a birther, but I am curious as to why Obama's academic records, even documentation of his work in both private practice and government service, is impossible to get to?

I know that there are privacy rules, maybe even laws, which allow a student or a university to withhold information, but as virtually all professional jobs require transcripts in addition to resumes, shouldn't we as voters also demand this information?

Remember when, before the election, ACORN scrubbed its published articles on Obama's work for them? Before then, they were touting it. Reminds me a lot of the Soviet attempts to erase people from official photographs, remove all mention of them from documents, etc.
 

Rainsford

Lifer
Apr 25, 2001
17,515
0
0
I am not a birther, but I am curious as to why Obama's academic records, even documentation of his work in both private practice and government service, is impossible to get to?

I know that there are privacy rules, maybe even laws, which allow a student or a university to withhold information, but as virtually all professional jobs require transcripts in addition to resumes, shouldn't we as voters also demand this information?

I suppose, if we as voters think that's relevant. But "we" probably shouldn't demand access to private records just to give us something to make a stink about. And by the same token, releasing personal information like that would be a good idea for President Obama if it would honestly help anyone make a better decision about him.

The problem is that, like his birth certificate, it's just something for people who already hate him to complain about. Getting bogged down in a debate with people predisposed to hate you isn't a good use of time no matter who you are, but especially if you're the President of the United States.
Remember when, before the election, ACORN scrubbed its published articles on Obama's work for them? Before then, they were touting it. Reminds me a lot of the Soviet attempts to erase people from official photographs, remove all mention of them from documents, etc.

Wow...yes...it's EXACTLY like that.
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
I am not a birther, but I am curious as to why Obama's academic records, even documentation of his work in both private practice and government service, is impossible to get to?

I know that there are privacy rules, maybe even laws, which allow a student or a university to withhold information, but as virtually all professional jobs require transcripts in addition to resumes, shouldn't we as voters also demand this information?

Remember when, before the election, ACORN scrubbed its published articles on Obama's work for them? Before then, they were touting it. Reminds me a lot of the Soviet attempts to erase people from official photographs, remove all mention of them from documents, etc.

You must really love the stench of sleazy innuendo...
 

Fingolfin269

Lifer
Feb 28, 2003
17,948
31
91
I'm pretty sure I had to do this to get a passport so I don't see what the big deal is over requiring a Presidential candidate to show one.
 

manimal

Lifer
Mar 30, 2007
13,559
8
0
I'm pretty sure I had to do this to get a passport so I don't see what the big deal is over requiring a Presidential candidate to show one.

So linda lingle the republican governor and the secret service, the fbi, the cia, the aflcio, the omgwtfbbqs, the national association of birth certificate lookers of america....
 

GarfieldtheCat

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2005
3,708
1
0
For all of you thinking all of this is fake, how can you justify:

-Republican governor lying to protect Obama?

-McCain not bringing this to the attention of the government, it would have been an automatic win for him if Obama was declared ineligible. Do you think McCain ran for President just to lose? He somehow didn't want to win?

Still waiting on blabber or the other birther wingnuts to give their answers to the above questions. Can't wait to hear what crazy theories will be floated to try and justify their delusions.
 

ericlp

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
6,134
223
106
So everyone but me has a problem with actually requiring a candidate to prove they meet the qualifications to run for high office?

Fern


I fail to see how they are not required NOW? Oh yeah, you must but the loon in the bunch that actually think Obama did not have a real certificate and it was not valid?

Sigh...

Next thing you know your not going to believe that 9/11 was an inside job!

:awe: :whiste:
 

Fingolfin269

Lifer
Feb 28, 2003
17,948
31
91
I fail to see how they are not required NOW? Oh yeah, you must but the loon in the bunch that actually think Obama did not have a real certificate and it was not valid?

Sigh...

Next thing you know your not going to believe that 9/11 was an inside job!

:awe: :whiste:

I actually couldn't care less if they were to start something like this AFTER Obama is done. To be honest I was surprised to find out you don't have to produce this kind of documentation to begin with. Obviously it would be no more than a formality but still surprising it is not already required.
 

CallMeJoe

Diamond Member
Jul 30, 2004
6,938
5
81
Still waiting on blabber or the other birther wingnuts to give their answers to the above questions. Can't wait to hear what crazy theories will be floated to try and justify their delusions.
Republican governor? McCain campaign? Amateurs.

If there were even the slightest chance that there was any question of Senator Obama's qualification for the presidential nomination, what are the odds that the Clinton political machine would have failed to spread the word?
The nation would have learned of the Birth Certificate issue the day after Senator Obama's Iowa Caucus victory.
 

werepossum

Elite Member
Jul 10, 2006
29,873
463
126
So linda lingle the republican governor and the secret service, the fbi, the cia, the aflcio, the omgwtfbbqs, the national association of birth certificate lookers of america....

I found that when I started using verbs, my writing came alive. I'm just sayin', dude, you may want to consider adding at least one verb to each post.
 

GarfieldtheCat

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2005
3,708
1
0
Republican governor? McCain campaign? Amateurs.

If there were even the slightest chance that there was any question of Senator Obama's qualification for the presidential nomination, what are the odds that the Clinton political machine would have failed to spread the word?
The nation would have learned of the Birth Certificate issue the day after Senator Obama's Iowa Caucus victory.

True, hadnt thought of that. But most birthers are republicans, so I asked more about how they can think that he was not born in the US, while somehow having the entire republican party particiapte in their conspiracy.

On that note, anyone surprised that the birthers still refuse to answer these questions? Seems all they can do is slip in innuendo and insults, and run away when faced with facts or logic. Unsurprising.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Still waiting on blabber or the other birther wingnuts to give their answers to the above questions. Can't wait to hear what crazy theories will be floated to try and justify their delusions.

-snip-
For all of you thinking all of this is fake, how can you justify:

-Republican governor lying to protect Obama?

-McCain not bringing this to the attention of the government, it would have been an automatic win for him if Obama was declared ineligible. Do you think McCain ran for President just to lose? He somehow didn't want to win?

True, hadnt thought of that. But most birthers are republicans, so I asked more about how they can think that he was not born in the US, while somehow having the entire republican party particiapte in their conspiracy.

On that note, anyone surprised that the birthers still refuse to answer these questions? Seems all they can do is slip in innuendo and insults, and run away when faced with facts or logic. Unsurprising.

I'm called a birther in this thread (even though I don't think so) so I'll answer.

Your questions:

I. How can anyone believe the published copy of the HI BC is fake?

IDK; and I've never said it was fake.

HI originally issues about 4 or 5 types of BC for a birth.

IIRC:

1. The 'normal' BC. Must be born in a hospital or have a midwife in attendance.

2. Delayed BC #1. For births not in a hospital or attended by midwife. basically only must provide proof such as family member or friend attesting to birth. Must be applied for within one year of claimed birth.

3. Delayed BC #2. Same as above, but applied for after the 1 year deadline has expired.

4. Foreign birth. HI will give BC for HI resident if their kid is born abroad.

The HI provided copy of Obama's BC lists his birthplace as Honolulu, so it's a #4 (foreign born BC).

But what type is his original BC? Is it a #1 (normal) or a #2 (delayed)?

As far as HI is concerned all 4 are equally valid. Hi will list as little or as much info the BC copy as the person reqesting (in this case Obama) wants. The copy provided by Obama doesn't have enough info to tell if the original was a #1 or #2.

If it is indeed a #2, there's going to be a heck of a lot of questions.

II. Re: Repub governor lying. Lying about what? All HI BC's are considered equally valid as far as HI is concerned. So as long as Obama's BC is one of the four listed the Repub governor didn't lie.

III. Why didn't McCain or HRC raise this issue? Are you freakin kidding? Allegations of racism were already being hurled at HRC during the primary. No way either of them could touch this for fear of more of the same.

Hope that answers your questions.

Fern
 
Last edited:

GarfieldtheCat

Diamond Member
Jan 7, 2005
3,708
1
0
II. Re: Repub governor lying. Lying about what? All HI BC's are considered equally valid as far as HI is concerned. So as long as Obama's BC is one of the four listed the Repub governor didn't lie.

III. Why didn't McCain or HRC raise this issue? Are you freakin kidding? Allegations of racism were already being hurled at HRC during the primary. No way either of them could touch this for fear of more of the same.

Hope that answers your questions.

Fern

Not really, no. You are avoiding the intent of the questions I think.

I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago...."

That is pretty clear cut.

And hand waving about racism and technicalities about not lieing are pretty weak. This is from the people that tried to link Clinton to Vince Foster's death, and all sorts of other imagined events. Republicans are on-record as wanting to bring down Obama, pretty much by any means necessary. Why wouldn't they use this? They have done lots worse to their own people.

I mean really, Republicans slimed McCain with the illegitimate black baby story which wasn't true, why on earth wouldn't they run with this?

If the R's wanted the white house, and they did, they could care less about claims of racism if they had even a shred of evidence to either:

-convince voters that Obama isn't a native born US citizen
-convince a judge somewhere to rule he is ineligible

So why didn't anyone try? So explain the entire Republican party cover-up consiperecy to protect Obama's birth status.
 

Fern

Elite Member
Sep 30, 2003
26,907
173
106
Not really, no. You are avoiding the intent of the questions I think.

What is remark referring to? You listed to different things. I don't believe I've any "intent". I gave you honest answers.

If you're looking for answers from someone who believes the published HI BC is a fake, you'll need to get someone to answer, as I said I don't believe that it's a fake. Likewise for any 'conspiracy', if I believe the HI produced BC is official what would the conspiracy be? Here again, you'll need to find someone who thinks is a forgery to get your answer.

I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago...."

That is pretty clear cut.

Clear cut about what? That his original BC is a #1, #2 or a #3. That's all she says. (Well, also that's the HI BC copy is not a forgery. But I've never believed that anyway). Actually, she provides less info than the copy does. The copy lists his birth place as Honolulu, she confirms it. All that means is it is not a type #4. Now she doesn't address it, but the copy shows it was issued only a few days after his birth; therefor he doesn't a have a type #3 BC either. But we still don;'t know if it's a #1 or #2. Do we?

(If she had said he was born in 'so-n-so' hospital, it WOULD have been answered, but she didn't.)

And hand waving about racism and technicalities about not lieing are pretty weak. This is from the people that tried to link Clinton to Vince Foster's death, and all sorts of other imagined events. Republicans are on-record as wanting to bring down Obama, pretty much by any means necessary. Why wouldn't they use this? They have done lots worse to their own people.

I mean really, Republicans slimed McCain with the illegitimate black baby story which wasn't true, why on earth wouldn't they run with this?

If the R's wanted the white house, and they did, they could care less about claims of racism if they had even a shred of evidence to either:

-convince voters that Obama isn't a native born US citizen
-convince a judge somewhere to rule he is ineligible

So why didn't anyone try? So explain the entire Republican party cover-up consiperecy to protect Obama's birth status.

Whao whoa whao.

YOU asked why McCain or HRC didn't raise this.

Analogy to Foster is no good. I don't recall any actual candidate raising Foster questions. it may have some Repub types, but not candidates.

And some repubs types HAVE raised the Obama BC issue. How do you think we've been made aware of it?

But as has been amply demonstrated, there's nothing anyone can do at present to make him prove which type of HI BC he has (no one has legal "standing"). The courts have consistantly refused to allow anyone get a copy of his original, and HI says no one but Obama himself can request it.

Basically, you seem to complain that no one (Repubs, political opponents etc) has done more to resolve this, but what has been left undone?

Fern
 
Last edited:

PJABBER

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2001
4,822
0
0
Fern is right. Both the McCain and the Clinton campaigns were very cautious about anything that would smack of racism or would raise questions of character or suitability to any great extent. The ties to Bill Ayers and pals, Rev. Wright, ACORN, etc. were brought up by researchers inside and outside the campaigns and the information was never adequately framed nor much exploited by the campaigns.

McCain did not want to go there as he wanted an aboveboard campaign. Clinton did not want to alienate core constituencies as that would hurt her in the long run.

I think Clinton should have dug deeper and more aggressively used Obama's inexperience against him. She could have pressed for a release of academic records and a full work history and used those against him. She didn't and she lost.

When Obama got the nod he did not hesitate to use every bit of malicious typecasting in an attempt to destroy both McCain and Palin. Look at how many here bought into and still believe the propaganda. Though McCain's and Palin's histories were very much of an open book and thus could never be significantly damaging to them under impartial examination, Obama had lots of ties to questionable characters, his whole history was one of association with them, so he and his campaign never let his book be opened as wide as it should have. It still remains under lock and key, relatively speaking.

The BC matter is a peripheral issue that has much less bearing than others.
 
Last edited:

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,529
3
0
Fern is right. Both the McCain and the Clinton campaigns were very cautious about anything that would smack of racism or would raise questions of character or suitability to any great extent. The ties to Bill Ayers and pals, Rev. Wright, ACORN, etc. were brought up by researchers inside and outside the campaigns and the information was never adequately framed nor much exploited by the campaigns.

McCain did not want to go there as he wanted an aboveboard campaign. Clinton did not want to alienate core constituencies as that would hurt her in the long run.

I think Clinton should have dug deeper and more aggressively used Obama's inexperience against him. She could have pressed for a release of academic records and a full work history and used those against him. She didn't and she lost.

When Obama got the nod he did not hesitate to use every bit of malicious typecasting in an attempt to destroy both McCain and Palin. Look at how many here bought into and still believe the propaganda. Though McCain's and Palin's histories were very much of an open book and thus could never be significantly damaging to them under impartial examination, Obama had lots of ties to questionable characters, his whole history was one of association with them, so he and his campaign never let his book be opened as wide as it should have. It still remains under lock and key, relatively speaking.

The BC matter is a peripheral issue that has much less bearing than others.
Yeah Palin being an ingnorant cun..fool and McCain being so desperate as to pick her for his VP had nothing to do with it.