How does the race of his father effects his eligibility. why do you need to know that? How does that effects your vote?
Do you even read the posts here before you reply? I'd suggest re-reading throughout this thread. Take your time!
Ok fair enough. I as an Obama supporter am obviously going to give him the benefit of the doubt on that and that's just where we're not going to agree. I think combined with the physical presentation of it the fact that the Hawaii Dep of Health has record of it as well should alay any doubt. My frustration stemmed from the multiple assertions that he was trying to hide something in light of the fact that he has allowed access to his birth certificate and that that very document is certified by the health department of the state in which he was born. It just begs the question, what more would you like for him to do in order for you to be satisfied that he's done all he can?
Really? Despite all evidence to the contrary, the term used to describe his fathers race is enough to make you doubt it's authenticity? PolitiFact.com did extensive research to determine whether or not the certificate was posted...there assessment was linked to in the snopes article, but in case you didn't read it, here's a link: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jun/27/obamas-birth-certificate-part-ii/ But, if you still want to believe it's a fake because his father is listed as "African", so be it.
It just so happens that my 7 year old daughter was born in Hawaii while I was in the military. So unlike I'm guessing ANYONE else in this thread I actually have a physical copy of a Hawaii state birth certificate. I went and looked at it last night. I am Black/Latino. On her birth certificate it says BLACK PUERTO RICAN for the father. Now.... why didn't it say BLACK LATINO? Why did it say PUERTO RICAN. Doesn't that imply a place and not an ethnicity? Like AFRICAN? I will gladly grab it out of my file box and snap a photo for you. What does this prove? That the birth certificates are typed by a human being and not generated with that field being generated by a race category. So of course different copies created years apart (say one created before computer databases and one after) can have different labels.
I did read it, and have read just about every article and book and news story on the subject. That is why I have my questions. Yes, the term used to describe the race of an African American, black person, etc. is enough because its a term that would not have existed in 1961. No. I said I am suspect. Some have said it is a fake. Some have said it is doctored, others have stated it's got some oddities. What I am saying is that all these questions and everything I have read has aided in my "doubt". Can you all just remove yourselves from your love of Obama for a minute and step back and look at things objectively for once? What year if you do not mind me asking. Just curious to put this into perspective. Yes, it would appear you have more to say than anyone else on the subject, and I really appreciate someone actually coming forward and helping answer the question I am posing. Ok. Interesting. Ok, why does it not say "African Puerto Rican"? To answer your question, what implies "Race" is the title "Race of the Father" on the birth certificate. Its not location of the father. "African" today is used to describe a race, not a place in our PC world, because as we know, not everyone listed as "African American" actually came from Africa proper. Its a term used to describe what was formerly, negro, black, colored. Puetro Rican, now-a-days is "HispanAmerican" or "Latino", etc... I don't think that Puerto Rican was meant per say to indicate location or country of origin, but rather a Race, though Latino in nature, that term Latino may have have existed back then in as so much as African did not exist as a description of the race of "negro". I think there is a difference and similarity between, location, ethnicity and race in many cases, so its really hard to define what was implied. So I again, rely on the definition of the titled description on the birth certificate that states "Race of the Father", which in 1961 would most likely have been "Negro" or "black", not "African". You see a similar change in the use of "white" vs. "caucassion" to describe white people with no distintc enthinc, racial origin. No need to do that, and again, thank you for sharing that. That information is invaluable. No, I think what it proves is that there were various classifications at the time each birth certificate was issued and again, in 1961, I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone referring to a black man as an African American, which has become the accepted and prevelant description of race for blacks today in America. However, again, as I mentioned previously one could certainly argue that Obama's father being from Kenya (Africa), was an "African" and if he had citizenship in the US, coule quite possibly have been considered by all rights, "African American". However, even if that definiation were used to define his ethnicity, and citizenship, it almost certainly would not be used to define his race. At least not by the standard classification of the day. What I would really like to see are several similar birth certificates for children born of either black mothers/white dad or black dads/white mothers in that same year (1961) to see what the "race of the mother" and "race of the father" is listed as.
Big up to you George B. Change is a very difficult thing to achieve and you have done a great job to defend it here.
When did Obama change his Muslim status? Oh when he started attending the radical anti-American church. He can not escape that he was influenced and Guided by Wright. The certificate will surface and it will be amusing indeed to see the spin.
I am trying to see it from your point of view. It's just that the man has a birth certificate validated by the state he was born in.... 2001 Good point but the point I was making is that they ASK you your race. I told them black latino and explained that my father was Puerto Rican. So all these people making the claim that they would have HAD to have called him a negro on the certificate because African didn't exist is absurd. They obviously asked, and he or the mother said African. And that's what the nurse or clerk typed. See that's what I mean. You guys are acting like we're talking about the stone age. It doesn't matter what you say "existed back then". They probably asked what is the father and she probably said "African". Just like I said I'm black puerto rican and they put black puerto rican. Again, that argument is really thin because as shown by my own situation, they don't force you into one of their pre-defined categories. They put what you tell them the father is. Well I'm gonna do it anyway. I know people grasping at straws will try to say I'm lying just because I didn't post it. So here, I snapped a quick pic with my iPhone. http://img261.imageshack.us/my.php?image=k1le8.jpg And a pick of the top to show it's from Hawaii. http://img517.imageshack.us/my.php?image=k2eh4.jpg You can even see the name Boone on there. I have no privacy concerns because most people here know the B in GeorgeB is Boone Then why wasn't I listed as African American in 2001? There are no classifications. If you say Black they put Black.
Also I want to point something else out for these lunatic nut jobs trying to say that because the received date is 4 days after the birth date that means he could have been born in Kenya and then she jumped on a plane with her new infant baby and flew back to register him. The certificate I posted shows it was received Feb 14th 2001 My daughter was born Feb 8th 2001. It takes time to process these things. They actually got it done sooner than I did and that was back in 1961!
I must have missed that validation from the image posted on his web site. It's simply not there. Ok, was looking for something closer to that point in history. A lot has changed in the way the birth certificates are issued. Sure, they ask you your race. So again, is that what they were "told" in 1961, or is that what someone put down? I'm not saying you would have called him a "negro" because "African" did not exist. I am saying that in 1961 a person of color on a form that required race (even in the military) stated Negro, not African as a choice. We are just speculating here as to whether this was something that was specified by the mother in those words, or whether it was altered. No, I'm not acting like this is the stone age. I'm stating that it is 1961 (kinda the stone age) in terms of racial distinctions and classifications. But the fact remains, that "African" was not a term used when describing the race of a black person. Negro was, again, at that time. It's not thin, its reality. There were only a few choices when it came to describing race. Black/Negro, White/Caucassion as a for instance. There was no need to post it. Again, I'm not grasping at anything here. I'm merely stating a historical fact with regard to the way race was stated at one time. Again, you are showing us a birth certificate from 2001. Where are the ones from 1961. This is not a comparison of apples to apples here. Because as you already stated, you are not African American, you are a Black Puerto Rican. Like you said, they put down what you asked. Again I don't disagree that Obama's mom could have said the same, and as I pointed out previously several times that Obama's father being "African" would make sense to use the "African" terminology. I just question whether it was a decision based on country of origin or race. If race, then it is most certainly suspect. If not, whatever. Either way, I'd really like to see similar 1961 birth certificates with interracial parents listed and the race classification listed. That or Obama could just come clean and explain it once and for all.
Ok and that's the core of our disagreement. It looks like you're saying it's absolutely plausible that Obama's mama (pause for juvenile lolz ) could have been asked the father's race and she said African and that's what they put..... So where does "African" being under the father's race section become a problem for you if that's the case? We're talking about some nurse or hospital clerk here just doing her job. And if the mom said African I just don't see how you are visualizing her saying no he's a Black. Or a negro. I won't put African. And again man you're basing your entire point of view on the very unlikely assumption that they forced you to be put in a "classification" even back then. And that there has since been some type of classification abolition and in 2001 they just put whatever you say. So I've shown proof that there is no classification as long ago as 2001. Where is your proof that there WAS forced classification in 1961? Because without even the slightest incling of proof other than that people were more racist back then it's not even an argumentative position. It's just an unbased opinion. You know, at some point after so many outrageous attacks it just becomes pointless. He has provided all the proof you need and anyone who wants to can contact the Hawaii Dept of Health and verify it can do so! Getting up there and defending himself against every outrageous attack is what was the undoing of Kerry in 2004 and is frankly counterproductive. You will continue to see it as suspicious. I will continue to see it as strong confidence and conviction with the added benefit of knowing you're right.
Because no one has indicated that is the case, and several have cast doubt on that possibility. I'm not. I'm saying that I've found other Birth certificates of the time online that all say Negro or Black, but none that say African. Its not that anyone was forced to do anything. Its just that's what people said back then. Its about a point in time where a particular PC term did not exist. Kinda like Flight Attendant. You'd NEVER have heard that in 1961. It was still Stewardess. Man, 2001 and 1961 are a world apart. I was born in 1971 and that's a world apart from 2001. I never said there was a forced classification. What I said was, the term African or African American did not exist in 1961 as a way of describing "color". And I really don't think people were racist for using "negro" back then. Though it is and has been used repeatedly as an ethnic slur, as such, its become entirely inappropriate to use in almost any context, and I would agree with that. Source wikipedia No, you cannot. I've tried. I even have the certificate number that was blacked out on the form. I cannot obtain someone else's birth certificate without their permission. Kerry had no defense for most of his issue because quite frankly he made a lot of things up that were disprovable without obtaining proof of birth. I don't think it is suspicious. I think it and the secrecy has raised some doubt. I also do not think it is a question of right or wrong. I believe there are some unanswered questions.
The website itself had some great points that it's a fake. Here is the short list • Where is the embossed seal and the registrar’s signature? • Comparing it to other Hawaii birth certificates, the color shade is different. • Isn’t the date stamp bleeding through the back of the document “June 2007?†(Odd since it was supposedly released in June 2008.) • There’s no crease from being folded and mailed. • It’s clearly Photoshopped and a wholesale fraud.
According to the law, Obama has admitted that he was born in Kenya. Ahh but whats the law? Whats the constitution? Nothing to "The One" He is above the law apparently. Read for yourself http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=78671 Also here is a record of all the law suit activities http://news.justia.com/cases/featured/Pennsylvania/paedce/2:2008cv04083/281573/ What i want to know, is why is it mainstream media doesn't show any interest in A law suit on Obama and his eligibility, yet they are all over Sarah Palins wardrobe. Just doesn't make since to me.
dammit I don't have time for this. Umm... no, they actually claim that by not participating in their ridiculous lawsuit that he is admitting he was born n Kenya. In other words, Obama brushed them off like fleas and they're pissed. Umm... because they need to provide the viewers with newsworthy content and not waste time with ridiculous lawsuits? Why is Fixed News not covering it? Because they don't rely on sillyness either perhaps?
Apparently you do have time for it. Like i said Obama thinks he is above the law. But according to the law, he has admitted exactly what the plaintiff claims, by not responding. He had until the 15th of oct. to respond. There is plenty of evidence to at least cause reasonable doubt
Ah because they all want Obama to win... Now you know how I feel. I don't think the law suit is ridiculous, but the "forfeit rule" is kinda. You really cannot brush off court subpoenas however, and that is likely the reason that rule is in place. All they have to do is follow the letter of the law and this goes away. Newsworthy like, Brittney, OJ, or bitching about Fox News? How did I know that was coming. Actually Fox did cover it when they interviewed Corsi.