zuch: However, it would not be remarkable for someone to say, “I’ve had three children, one natural, and two adoptive….”

I think it would be “remarkable.” Parturition isn’t something that goes on for very long. It happens at some point in time, then it is over. So, one might say that a woman “had” x number of children, meaning she delivered that number of children, but they wouldn’t say it meaning what you would have it mean for your purposes.

My wife delivered (her obstetrician assisted) two healthy babies, so it may be said she “had” them. Now, I can happily say we “have” children, because it is a continuing thing, and will be until such time as we or they die, hopefully the former coming long before the latter. Otherwise, one might ask, “Oh, you ‘had’ children, then what happened to them?”

zuch: However, it would not be remarkable for someone to say, “I’ve had three children, one natural, and two adoptive….”

Now you’re suggesting that adoptive children are unnatural? Geez.

zuch: Yes. But why should I care what you believe? More importantly, how is such germane to the discussion?
Cheers,

Dunno. I was just trying to answer your question. Feel free to not care at all. I’m not sure I care what I believe on the subject. And I don’t think it’s germane to the descussion. As I keep saying, I’m not sure why folks like you and Brown’s questioner keep bringing it up.

q:

[zuch]: Not exactly. Michelle Obama said “when she had” Barack. Which usually means “gave birth” but could be construed to encompass a wider timespan.

I don’t think I’ve ever heard someone say “had” to mean anything wider than time of birth. I do think Mrs. Obama misspoke (which, let’s be honest, is pretty common for interviews) and had Barack’s single-parent upbringing in mind.

You’re probably right, I’ll grant you that.

However, it would not be remarkable for someone to say, “I’ve had three children, one natural, and two adoptive….”

There is some uncertainty there, as well as the point that “single” and “not married” are not the same.

Cheers,

ShelbyC: I believe that if someone is currently married and marries again, the marriage is never valid.

Yes. But why should I care what you believe? More importantly, how is such germane to the discussion?

Cheers,

zuch: Not exactly. Michelle Obama said “when she had” Barack. Which usually means “gave birth” but could be construed to encompass a wider timespan.

Wow. Ya gotta admire a man that’s not afraid to reach like that. :-)

… to distinguish the two cases, after Brown brought up Obama’s mother.

When Brown brought up Obama’s mother, it was to compare Bristol’s situation favorably to her, as no one can doubt Obama has become quite successful despite his single-mother upbringing. It wasn’t until the interviewer brought up Obama’s mother’s marriage status that the “circumstances of Obama’s birth” became an issue. Unless you’re telling me the following is not a ridiculous conversation:

A: I don’t think that child will ever grow up to be successful since his mother is a teenager.
B: Obama’s mother was a teenager when she had him.
A: Why do you people on the right obsess so much about the circumstances of Obama’s birth?!
B: o_o???

zuch: That is true, but is the marriage automatically annulled? Or does it require dissolution? In some states, marital community property and other incidents of marriage survive even an annulled marriage, and as I pointed out, in Hawai’i, progeny are deemed “legitimate” even for an invalid or annulled marriage.
Does this law recognise all marriages elsewhere (say, like in Kenya … or a SSM marriage in Massachusetts)? And other than statements that Obama Sr. was “married” previously, what evidence have you that he was … and that he was not divorced?

I believe that if someone is currently married and marries again, the marriage is never valid. Otherwise you would have a situation where polygamous marriage was recognized until one of the parties chose to seek an annulment. But I don’t know. And I still don’t know why it matters.

Not exactly. Michelle Obama said “when she had” Barack. Which usually means “gave birth” but could be construed to encompass a wider timespan.

I don’t think I’ve ever heard someone say “had” to mean anything wider than time of birth. I do think Mrs. Obama misspoke (which, let’s be honest, is pretty common for interviews) and had Barack’s single-parent upbringing in mind.

FWIW, any disputes about the legal status of Obama’s mother’s marriage avoid the fact that, as far as she knew (and as far as her behaviour went), she was married. Which distinguishes her from Palin’s daughter, and makes his comments irrelevant at best.

What? Obama was conceived when his mother was clearly not married, same with Bristol’s child. “As far as her behavior” goes, that’s really the only relevant decision. Unless you’re talking about a decision not to abort based on the availability of the father. In which case, that opens up a whole host of other issues and I really doubt that’s what Brown and his interviewer had in mind, as they were talking about Bristol’s adherence to “family values” and abortion because of conception out of wedlock certainly does not adhere to the usual definition of “family values.”

Dave N.: And now who are YOU smearing by equating the Tea Partiers with the Birthers?

Both? ;-)

Do you deny an affinity there?

Cheers,

q: Err, it was the Democratic-leaning interviewer who brought up Obama’s mother’s marriage status

… to distinguish the two cases, after Brown brought up Obama’s mother.

Cheers,

q: Mrs. Obama is clearly saying Obama’s mother was single at the time of his birth. Brown said that he doesn’t know whether Obama’s mother was married at the time of birth (at best, he thinks she wasn’t).

Not exactly. Michelle Obama said “when she had” Barack. Which usually means “gave birth” but could be construed to encompass a wider timespan.

FWIW, any disputes about the legal status of Obama’s mother’s marriage avoid the fact that, as far as she knew (and as far as her behaviour went), she was married. Which distinguishes her from Palin’s daughter, and makes his comments irrelevant at best.

Cheers,

Let me get this straight. The context of what Brown said in 2008 (while defending Bristol Palin) is relevant because he may have hung out with Tea Partiers in 2009 (NOT Birthers, mind you, but Tea Partiers)? And now who are YOU smearing by equating the Tea Partiers with the Birthers?

That is true, but is the marriage automatically annulled? Or does it require dissolution? In some states, marital community property and other incidents of marriage survive even an annulled marriage, and as I pointed out, in Hawai’i, progeny are deemed “legitimate” even for an invalid or annulled marriage.

Does this law recognise all marriages elsewhere (say, like in Kenya … or a SSM marriage in Massachusetts)? And other than statements that Obama Sr. was “married” previously, what evidence have you that he was … and that he was not divorced?

All very good questions. All indications that whether or not Obama’s mother was married at the time of his birth is hardly a slam-dunk. It’s pretty unreasonable to suggest Brown have thought through all the legalities when he made his two second, off-the-cuff comment dismissing the irrelevant distinction between Obama’s mother and Bristol Palin.

While Michelle Obama may have her timing off a bit, it is true that Obama’s mother was a single mother; both separated and then divorced. That’s not claiming that she was never married

Brown never claimed Obama’s mother was never married either.

(or not married at the time of birth).

Mrs. Obama is clearly saying Obama’s mother was single at the time of his birth. Brown said that he doesn’t know whether Obama’s mother was married at the time of birth (at best, he thinks she wasn’t).

Now I’m curious as to why the circumstances of Obama’s birth have such resonance with a certain cadre on the right….

Err, it was the Democratic-leaning interviewer who brought up Obama’s mother’s marriage status and it was “those on the left” who started the Brown = birther meme. So you should direct your ire at them for starting this ridiculously irrelevant discussion.

Dave N.: By the way, I hadn’t thought much about it at all until the lefist blogosphere started playing “gotcha” with a 15 second soundbite that had absolutely no context.

The context is Brown’s affinity for the likes of TPers/”birthers” or their ‘theories’.

Cheers,

ShelbyC:

[zuch]: Even if this were true, can you show how this legally invalidates Obama’s mother’s marriage? 

This has been hashed out on another thread, here’s Hawaiian marriage law on the subject. It’s pretty well established that a bigamous marriage is invalid.

That is true, but is the marriage automatically annulled? Or does it require dissolution? In some states, marital community property and other incidents of marriage survive even an annulled marriage, and as I pointed out, in Hawai’i, progeny are deemed “legitimate” even for an invalid or annulled marriage.

Does this law recognise all marriages elsewhere (say, like in Kenya … or a SSM marriage in Massachusetts)? And other than statements that Obama Sr. was “married” previously, what evidence have you that he was … and that he was not divorced?

Cheers,

zuch: Even if this were true, can you show how this legally invalidates Obama’s mother’s marriage?

This has been hashed out on another thread, here’s Hawaiian marriage law on the subject. It’s pretty well established that a bigamous marriage is invalid. But maybe I’m not sure I understand your claim. You say you’re not claiming Brown slammed Obama’s mom, what are you claiming? If it’s simply that Brown didn’t know Obama’s mom’s marital status, so what? I don’t think any of us do. And I’m not sure why it matters.

David Nieporent:

[zuch]: But where (outside of BirtherLand™) do you get the idea that Obama’s mother (perhaps) wasn’t married? I’m curious….

I’m curious how you’ve ignored the multiple links to Michelle Obama saying the same thing.

While Michelle Obama may have her timing off a bit, it is true that Obama’s mother was a single mother; both separated and then divorced. That’s not claiming that she was never married (or not married at the time of birth).

Now I’m curious as to why the circumstances of Obama’s birth have such resonance with a certain cadre on the right….

Cheers,

ShelbyC: Zuch, you understand that your interpretation of events requires us to believe that Brown, it the middle of defending Brisol Palin for being a single 18 year old mom, decided to suddenly slam Barack’s mom for being a single 18 year old mom?

No (although, with some type folks, such is quite possible). Where did I say he “slam[med]” Omama’s mother?

Cheers,

egd:

zuch: (despite the fact that “tea bag” seems to have first arisen from a TPer).

From the link:

“I think I’ve traced the meme’s birth back to February 27th, when blogs like Instaputz and Wonkette started using it independently of one another. They were inspired by a photo that the Washington Independent’s David Weigel shot of one protester carrying a sign that was, if you knew that second meaning, pretty funny: ‘Tea bag the liberal Dems before they tea bag you !!’ (sic).”

Instaputz & Wonkette are now TPers?

No. The guy who wrote the sign is. Do you need it explained in small words? Let me know and I will see if I can accommo… — ummm, “help” — you.

Cheers,

ShelbyC:

[zuch]: But where (outside of BirtherLand™) do you get the idea that Obama’s mother (perhaps) wasn’t married? I’m curious…. 

The suggestion that BO senior may have been already married is pretty well documented, in Time and the WP.

Even if this were true, can you show how this legally invalidates Obama’s mother’s marriage? It may be true that Obama’s mother could ask for an annulment if it was found to be that case that Obama Sr. was previously married … but I’m not at all sure that any such purported prior marriage (in Kenya) would automatically make the marriage null and void. I’d note that Hawai’i law currently makes any progeny even of annulled or prohibited marriages “legitimate”.

Cheers,

I have no idea why folks like yourself and Brown’s questioner keep bringing it up.

I do. Its a great distraction when you can’t defend the indefensible. Seems to work… maybe not as well as screaming Ann Coulter, but pretty well.

What Coakley said was stupid. If you don’t know something, say you don’t know it. That’s what Brown did.

It involves a bit of humility and knowing what you don’t know. Certainly, everyone knows that Barack’s mother was rather young when she gave birth to him; people are also aware that Obama’s father was not always a constant presence in his life. Given the “gotcha” journalism played by the Left, I’m not surprised that someone who does not have an encylopedic knowledge of Obama’s biography would decline to comment.

As a final question: how many of the people who think that Obama’s snide “lipstick on a pig” comment was not meaningful, but think that Scott Brown was implying something negative about Barack with his comment?

zuch: But where (outside of BirtherLand™) do you get the idea that Obama’s mother (perhaps) wasn’t married? I’m curious….

I’m curious how you’ve ignored the multiple links to Michelle Obama saying the same thing.