Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

[A Laughing Baby]

There's the "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" style of argument, and then there's the "throw so much at the wall that the wall itself begins to be made of what you threw at it" style of argument.

 

[KDLarsen]

Hey BAC, you missed this bit:

(a) To protect the integrity of vital statistics records, to ensure their proper use, and to ensure the efficient and proper administration of the vital statistics system, it shall be unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or to disclose information contained in vital statistics records, or to copy or issue a copy of all or part of any such record, except as authorized by this part or by rules adopted by the department of health.

Obama has in fact had a certified copy issued, which was subsequently posted on his campaign website. You know, the one people have been ignoring for 3 years running so far?

 

[A'isha]

LOL! You don't think the President of the US, in the interests of national harmony, has a "direct and tangible interest in the record"?

He does indeed. Which means, per the quoted law, he can do two things: either get a certified copy (which he did, and released it to the public), or go into the records and look for himself.

Be honest now, BAC. If Obama held a press conference and said "I went to Hawaii, and saw my birth record, and it says I was born in Honolulu", would you believe him? Would that settle the issue for you?

Sorry, but all I hear from you are lame excuses.

Only because you, as usual, have no idea what you're actually talking about.

And by the way, when have democrats really cared about the law? They certainly didn't during the Clinton administration.

And you've spent many years and many posts excoriating them for that because you thought it was bad. And now you want them to break the law, because you think it will benefit you.

That's called "hypocrisy", BAC.

And there are already plenty of examples of the Obama administration making a mockery of "the law".

And you've posted angrily about it every time. So I take it you'll never post about Obama breaking the law again, since you're urging him repeatedly to do so now.

 

[headscratcher4]

What? You folks don't believe Michael Isikoff?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42519951/ns/politics-more_politics#



Now if the so-called "long form" absolutely exists, why doesn't Obama just end this whole controversy by asking Hawaii to publish that so-called "long form" record of live birth? Hmmmm? He is the President, after all. Are you naive enough to believe they'd refuse a request from him? Do you think letting this controversy simmer is good for the country? Of course not. Wouldn't it be in the interest of the country to resolve this once and for all? Of course. So why isn't he putting an end to this? What is he hiding? Hmmmmm? Just curious.

The so-called long form and the certificate of live birth are both documents of the very same agency. The COB says he was born in Hawaii. The State certifies it. What possibly more could the long-form provide that is relevant or even of interest? Again...NOTE the key point. Both documents (and keeping in mind that one only exists on Microfiche) are issued by the same state. I.E. The state issued the certificate of live birth as, essentially, certifying the information that was in the state record that was turned into microfiche/computer recrods when the state went paperless on birth certificates.

So, the documents in question were NEVER (you understand that word right?) in the control of Obama. Obama is not asserting the validity of the COB, it is the State of Hawaii that stands behind it. The document issued to Obama IS EXACTLY the same as any citizen of Hawaii or of the United State born in Hawaii would get ... if you think that Obama's is suspicious, than you must conclude either all citizens of Hawaii who use that state certified form are suspisious and/or not really born citizens.

Why should Obama or any citizen of Hawaii have to provide more? BUT more importantly, Obama and all citizens born in Hawaii who no longer have an copy of their birth certificate of COB from prior to the state going electric with their records CAN NOT provide more. The COB IS IS IS (you understand "is" don't you?) the record...and in this case the record CERTIFIES (you understand that state ceritification is a legally important and binding assertion that the information provided on the document is true and what it purports to be) that Obama was born in Hawaii.

Since Obama was never a state official and could not have manipulated the documents, your theory must be that officials (including Republican Secretary of Health) conspired seperately or with Obama to fake a COB -- because it must be fake IF he was not born in Hawaii. When and how? Who? Because if he was Born in Hawaii...which he was...there is ONLY one document that is EVER used to prove birth in the state of Hawaii...that IS (remember "is"?) the Certified State Document issued to Obama, just as it would be to any person born in the state of Hawaii.

NO one, not the president of the United States, Not Donald Trump, has legal access to the so-called original. No request of the president to the state to violate its own law can or should be honored.

But, AGAIN, the COB issued contains all of the same information. What information could there possibly be that is useful other than what it says -- i.e. that Obama was born in the state when he said he was? Any other information is irrelevent to the question at hand...or a direct violation of an individual's privacy rights (a funny position that birther's seem to take while trying to make Constitutional arguments that Obama can't Constitutionally hold the job because he wasn't born a Citizen, but I guess you have to violate the Constitution to save the Constitution?).

I suspect that that some birthers hope (you?) that somehow some imaginary form says that he was a "muslim." Yawn. Even were it true, what would it matter? He clearly is a practicing Christian today (even if you don't like his choice of church). I suspect that Birthers want him to be muslim because it proves some grand islamic conspiracy. But were he a "muslim" at birth, he actually is that thing that fundumentalist chrisitians should love, he is an apostate and Islam abhors apostates.

In any event, and this is what I don't get, what difference does it make if, hypothetically, his father did put down "muslim"? People change. I was born into a cahtolic family. I am not catholic. I know people who have converted to Judism, and I know at least one person who was born Jewish who is a practicing catholic.

Whatever his father may have wanted/thought...Obama is not a muslim either by his own choice and by not adhering to any tenents of the faith.

So, it is a meaningless grasp....

like all of your so-called objections.

 

[BeAChooser]

So, you want President Obama to completely disregard Hawaii state law by either making some sort of executive fiat order, or by coercing state officials to break their own laws?

Doubts about the legitimacy of the President are the seeds of anarchy. They need to be addressed and the easiest way to do that is simply copy and publish this one long form document. No harm no foul. What possible damage could it do Obama or any of his kin? None, if all is as you claim. But now we have multiple court suits, soldiers refusing to serve because of their doubts, half the people in one of the country's two largest party's saying they aren't sure he's a citizen, and numerous top leaders and media people (including some on the left) expressing these doubts. Surely, in this case, Obama could see the wisdom of asking the Hawaiian authorities to release his so-called "long form" birth certificate that they have stated exists? Why are you folks so afraid of this issue, ANTPogo? Hmmmmmm?

Does your newfound respect for Obama's dictatorial powers and disrespect for the law portend a change in your views regarding the President and what he can do, BAC? What other state laws do you feel Obama can freely break (or make others break), simply by virtue of the fact that he's President?

Edited by Tricky: 

Edited for rule 11.

 

[A'isha]

I suspect that that some birthers hope (you?) that somehow some imaginary form says that he was a "muslim." Yawn. Even were it true, what would it matter? He clearly is a practicing Christian today (even if you don't like his choice of church). I suspect that Birthers want him to be muslim because it proves some grand islamic conspiracy. But were he a "muslim" at birth, he actually is that thing that fundumentalist chrisitians should love, he is an apostate and Islam abhors apostates.

In any event, and this is what I don't get, what difference does it make if, hypothetically, his father did put down "muslim"? People change. I was born into a cahtolic family. I am not catholic. I know people who have converted to Judism, and I know at least one person who was born Jewish who is a practicing catholic.

Even this is a completely vain hope, since no "religion" field appeared on the "long form" of 1961 (we have examples issued at the time - issued the very day after Obama's birth, actually, and there is no field for religion of the parents).

 

[BeAChooser]

Hey BAC, you missed this bit:

(a) To protect the integrity of vital statistics records, to ensure their proper use, and to ensure the efficient and proper administration of the vital statistics system, it shall be unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or to disclose information contained in vital statistics records, or to copy or issue a copy of all or part of any such record, except as authorized by this part or by rules adopted by the department of health.

You missed the part in bold. And you again missed this from item (b) which you first quoted: "unless it is satisfied that the applicant has a direct and tangible interest in the record."

Obama certainly has a direct and tangible interest and it seems to be that the bolded part gives the department of health an out to allow the release.

Why are you so afraid of this supposedly innocuous document, KDL?

 

[beren]

For the good of the country. Wouldn't you agree it would be in the interest of the country if people like Trump could be reassured about Obama's citizenship?

Did you read my last post? You know, the one you quoted?

Iunequivocally said that NO, id DO NOT think it would be in the best interest of the country for the president to release it. I DO NOT think it would be in the best interest to stop the controversy.

I absolutely, positively, and in every way think it is GOOD that he refuses to "prove" his citizenship and lets people like Trump wonder about it.

Wouldn't it be best if such a large fraction of the American population had no doubts?

No, it would NOT be best.

LOL! You'd be amazed at the number of laws that have been bent for Presidents.

No. I would not.

And in point of fact, it would be within Obama's power to issue an Executive Order directing the release of the document in the interests of national security.

That would be a lie. I do not support lying.

Surely this needs to be resolved, once and for all, without delay, because we are at war, whether the left wants to call it a war or not.

No. It DOES NOT. I completely reject the idea that this unsettled "controversy" is bad for the country. In fact, I positively assert that it is GOOD and BENEFICIAL for the country.

 

[BeAChooser]

Be honest now, BAC.

Sure. I'm amazed to watch democrats hiding behind "the law."

But I'm not surprised that democrats are now ignoring what the law clearly states. That the Department of Health can indeed release material if they feel the person has a direct and tangible need to have it released. Because the DoH gets to set the rules for such releases, according to the wording of the law itself. It's there in black and white as I already pointed out.

Why do you fear the contents of Obama's so-called "long form" so much, ANTPogo? Hmmmmmm?

 

[headscratcher4]

Doubts about the legitimacy of the President are the seeds of anarchy. They need to be addressed and the easiest way to do that is simply copy and publish this one long form document. No harm no foul. What possible damage could it do Obama or any of his kin? None, if all is as you claim. But now we have multiple court suits, soldiers refusing to serve because of their doubts, half the people in one of the country's two largest party's saying they aren't sure he's a citizen, and numerous top leaders and media people (including some on the left) expressing these doubts. Surely, in this case, Obama could see the wisdom of asking the Hawaiian authorities to release his so-called "long form" birth certificate that they have stated exists? Why are you folks so afraid of this issue, ANTPogo? Hmmmmmm?



We're talking about a matter of national security here, ANTPogo. And when it comes to national security, Federal rules trump state rules. The President can pretty much do what he wants if the stakes are high. And it seems to me the stakes are quite high in this case.

And I find YOUR newfound respect for the law fascinating. You sure didn't have much respect for it where the Clinton administration was concerned. For example in the case of Filegate, which was also a privacy matter. In fact, prior to Filegate, illegally obtaining just ONE raw FBI file put a man in prison for 10 years. Yet Clinton adminstration officials (led by Hillary, according to sworn testimony) illegally obtained over a thousand and loaded the information into DNC databases (another crime) and that didn't raise an eyebrow where democrats were concerned. I detect the whiff of hypocrisy.

1. The document issued by the state is legally certified and dispositive. There is nothing more that any "form" could provide. The form issued by the state says he was born in the state. That is all that can ever be shown by any document issued by the state. As noted above, the form issued by the state and released by Obama has all of the same essential information that would have been on any form available at the time of his birth. So what is your problem with it?

2. It is a matter of national security, and every security agency in the Governmetn would accept the Hawaii certified COLB for the purposes of proving where a person was born. So, this argument is not only stupid, it is funny.

 

[A'isha]

Doubts about the legitimacy of the President are the seeds of anarchy. They need to be addressed and the easiest way to do that is simply copy and publish this one long form document. No harm no foul. What possible damage could it do Obama or any of his kin? None, if all is as you claim. But now we have multiple court suits, soldiers refusing to serve because of their doubts, half the people in one of the country's two largest party's saying they aren't sure he's a citizen, and numerous top leaders and media people (including some on the left) expressing these doubts. Surely, in this case, Obama could see the wisdom of asking the Hawaiian authorities to release his so-called "long form" birth certificate that they have stated exists? Why are you folks so afraid of this issue, ANTPogo? Hmmmmmm?

Why do you think releasing the form will even fix this problem? The Republican-appointed Director of Health has said in official statements that the documentation on file shows that Obama was born in Honolulu. She and other state officials (including the Republican governor who appointed that DOH and who was a McCain supporter and gave a speech introducing Sarah Palin at the Republican convention) have stated in interviews that all the records show that Obama was born right there in Hawaii with a physician attending.

Do you think they're all lying, BAC?

We're talking about a matter of national security here, ANTPogo.

No, we aren't, actually. The country and military have functioned just fine all this time.

And when it comes to national security, Federal rules trump state rules. The President can pretty much do what he wants if the stakes are high. And it seems to me the stakes are quite high in this case.

That's because your perspective is so warped you'll apparently believe anything, no matter how idiotic, as long as it confirms and reinforces your preconceived notions.

That's why you completely ignore the statements of actual Hawaii state officials (including those who opposed Obama's election) regarding the birth documentation, while totally and uncritically accepting anonymous hearsay regarding that documentation, just because the latter agrees with you and the former doesn't.

And I find YOUR newfound respect for the law fascinating. You sure didn't have much respect for it where the Clinton administration was concerned. For example in the case of Filegate, which was also a privacy matter. In fact, prior to Filegate, illegally obtaining just ONE raw FBI file put a man in prison for 10 years. Yet Clinton adminstration officials (led by Hillary, according to sworn testimony) illegally obtained over a thousand and loaded the information into DNC databases (another crime) and that didn't raise an eyebrow where democrats were concerned. I detect the whiff of hypocrisy.

Edited by Tricky: 

Edited for response to modded portion of post.

 

[BeAChooser]

Why should Obama or any citizen of Hawaii have to provide more?

Because Obama is the President and these doubts are significantly damaging the country, as I've noted. Surely you will acknowledge that?

BUT more importantly, Obama and all citizens born in Hawaii who no longer have an copy of their birth certificate of COB from prior to the state going electric with their records CAN NOT provide more.

Except the Hawaiian DoH official stated that the form people want to see does exist so it could be provided if the DoH and Obama agreed. Surely the DoH wouldn't stand in the way of a request from President of the US regarding his own birth certificate? Surely.

I suspect that that some birthers hope (you?) that somehow some imaginary form says that he was a "muslim."

Perhaps that's what YOU fear? Me? I'd just like to see this resolved once and for all so we can focus on the real problems and not have US soldiers wondering if they are getting orders from an illegitimate President.

Even were it true, what would it matter?

So why not release the long-form? What would it matter?

 

[BeAChooser]

Iunequivocally said that NO, id DO NOT think it would be in the best interest of the country for the president to release it. I DO NOT think it would be in the best interest to stop the controversy.

Yes, I read that. Why? Why would you want something so potentially disruptive to continue? Unless, perhaps, you wish the US ill.

In fact, I positively assert that it is GOOD and BENEFICIAL for the country.

In what way?

 

[A'isha]

Sure. I'm amazed to watch democrats hiding behind "the law."

But I'm not surprised that democrats are now ignoring what the law clearly states.

You misspelled "Republicans" there, BAC. Or have you forgotten who appointed Dr. Fukino in the first place?

That the Department of Health can indeed release material if they feel the person has a direct and tangible need to have it released.

And Obama received and showed to the public the only thing that can be released.

Because the DoH gets to set the rules for such releases, according to the wording of the law itself. It's there in black and white as I already pointed out.

No, you completely misread the law. Unless you think you know Hawaiian law better than Republican-appointed state officials do.

Why do you fear the contents of Obama's so-called "long form" so much, ANTPogo? Hmmmmmm?

There's nothing in it to fear. In fact, the state certified and state verified form that Obama has released already contains all the relevant information, and virtually all of the rest of it is already known from other sources (the hospital he was born at and the addresses of his parents).

What, specifically, do you think is on that so-called "long form" that might cause "fear" (snrk) to anyone?

 

[A'isha]

Except the Hawaiian DoH official stated that the form people want to see does exist so it could be provided if the DoH and Obama agreed. Surely the DoH wouldn't stand in the way of a request from President of the US regarding his own birth certificate?

"Why won't Obama ask Hawaiian officials to break state law?"

Your "question" doesn't get any less stupid the more you ask it, BAC. Just the opposite, really.

 

[BeAChooser]

1. The document issued by the state is legally certified and dispositive. There is nothing more that any "form" could provide.

Not true.

The form issued by the state says he was born in the state. That is all that can ever be shown by any document issued by the state.

Not true.

As noted above, the form issued by the state and released by Obama has all of the same essential information that would have been on any form available at the time of his birth.

Not true.

Why do you fear the contents of this so-called "long form" so much?

 

[A'isha]

Not true.

Nope. Totally true. In fact, the form itself says "This copy serves as prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding."

Every single court in the US will accept that document and the information contained on it as given, automatically.

Not true.

Nope, true. As verified by the Republican-appointed head of the Department of Health, as well as the Republican who appointed her.

Do you think they're liars, BAC?

Not true.

Nope, true again. The form released shows where Obama was born, when he was born, and to whom. In other words, the important stuff.

Three strikes, BAC. Tsk.

 

[headscratcher4]

I hate the so-called long form so much because it is a side-show argument by credulous morons. It is exactly true that the so-called long form and the COLB issued by the state of Hawaii contain the same information. I.E. and the only relevent point: place of birth. The imaginary long form -- which the State does not issue --contains no more real information than that and that information is reflected in the COLB the state certifies and issues.

What is your problem with a "certified" State document acceptable to every State and Government agency -- including the FBI, CIA and NSA and the passport office?

And, again, if you don't accept this document for what it is certified to be...are not ALL Hawaii State certified documents than suspect? Or, is it just Obama?

 

[beren]

Yes, I read that. Why? Why would you want something so potentially disruptive to continue? Unless, perhaps, you wish the US ill.



In what way?

Well, I find it very healthy and useful to be able to so easily identify the bat **** crazy racists.

I assert that anything that drives them out of hiding where they can be properly dealt with is a GOOD THING.

 

[sts60]

For the good of the country. Wouldn't you agree it would be in the interest of the country if people like Trump could be reassured about Obama's citizenship?

I consider myself a patriot, but I don't consider reassuring pompous self-promoters like Trump to be a significant part of the national self-interest. So, no, I don't agree with that.

Wouldn't it be best if such a large fraction of the American population had no doubts?

Yes, it would also be best if over a fifth of Americans weren't so ignorant that they think the Sun revolves about the Earth. But I consider those who entertain the "birther" conspiracy idiocy to be culpable for their own ignorance and bias, rather than blaming the educational system as in the case of the accidental geocentrists.

Sure, there would always be some who would not accept any proof,

And here we come to the real issue, that defines the mendacity and stupidity and craziness of "birtherism". I do not believe for a second that most of those people would suddenly say, "Oh! Here's another form certified by the State of Hawaii that confirms the birth certificate he released several years ago! I guess I was wrong, then!" No, they'd simply start another list of reasons they didn't believe the latest form. The vast majority of those who say they'd accept the form, in my opinion, are simply lying.

What's scarier, in a way, is those who actually would believe a whatever form even if it confirmed what we already know. So they are willing to believe a vast conspiracy to conceal the Awful Truth, but this same conspiracy is unable to forge a slightly different piece of paper? That's sublimely ridiculous. What person with an IQ at least in the double digits could seriously believe such a thing?

(I also think there is a group of people who are "casual" birthers, that is, they say they disbelieve or doubt that the President is an American citizen, who might be equally casually convinced by a different certificate. But they only carry this memetic virus without spreading it and without developing the full-blown symptoms themselves; they ascribe no more significance to it than any other urban legend they repeat in casual conversation.)

but by publishing the so-called "long form", Obama in one fell swoop could completely marginalize them as utter kooks … no different than the 9/11 Truthers.

They are utter kooks, right now. The fact that any politician with national stature right now gives them the time of day speaks very poorly of the state of the electorate.

Right now, many ordinary people, like myself, like Trump, like Chris Matthews, would just like to be reassured.

Sorry, but I simply don't believe you. I don't believe, for a second, that you would accept a "long form" as authentic if it confirmed what we already know: that Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii to an American mother.

Look at your claim. You try to have it both ways:

Because there is sooooo much about Obama that we still don't know … that he seems to be actively trying to hide. ...

LOL! You'd be amazed at the number of laws that have been bent for Presidents.

But this same President that has been protected by this giant conspiracy and who is "actively trying to hide" the Big Secrets and can bend the law so readily, couldn't easily have them whistle up a fake "long form"? That is an absurd argument.

And in point of fact, it would be within Obama's power to issue an Executive Order directing the release of the document in the interests of national security. Presidents have that much power.

I would be furious if the President wasted time and misused the power of the office to entertain the paranoid fantasies of a group that wouldn't believe him anyway. He has already released a certified birth certificate, years ago.

Because these doubts are the seeds of foment. We even have soldiers now refusing to fight because they are doubting the citizenship of the President. Surely this needs to be resolved, once and for all, without delay, because we are at war, whether the left wants to call it a war or not.

First, I'm not "the left". Second, I know of only one soldier who shirked his duty as you described, and his career properly ended in court-martial and disgrace for it. I don't follow this that much - perhaps there are others - but clearly there is no rising birther tide of disobedience in our Armed Forces.

Third, yes, we are at war, and wasting time on this pernicious twaddle only detracts from serious debate on the real challenges this country faces.