PHeebs wrote:Yes, but the head of the state department of health has verified that the information on the document lines up with the birth certificate, the place of birth is identical on both.
You're dead WRONG and full of shit, as usual.
The COLB document team Barry posted on the internet lists no place of birth (hospital), bitch.
That's sort of the point, too, you dumbASS.
Jsc wrote:The following are among those who have examined this issue, and reached the same conclusion:
1) Democratic candidates for President, including Senator Clinton;
2) Republican candidates for President;
3) mainstream media;
4) Snopes, FactCheck, and PolitiFact; and
5) at least 17 federal and state courts
But that's just because poptart hasn't explained it to them.
No, it's because you must be braindead, seeing as I've REPEATEDLY told you that I am not saying that Barry is not a citizen.
The point is, as OCmike touched on, Barry is not some "whitebread" guy from Omaha Nebraska who everyone already knew all about.
He happens to be a guy who, for presidential material, has quite a sketchy background, to say the least.
It's my take that ANY presidential candidate ought to have his BIRTH CERTIFICATE (not COLB), medical records and college records released and put before a bi-partisan congressional panel for examination before the people are allowed to vote for him.
That is not the case now, but Barry, seeing as his background IS very sketchy, ought to release these documents just to have everything clear before the people.
And I seriously doubt that YOU would hire an individual to work for you (in a serious job) who would not release such documents to you.
But you are willing to have the POTUS not release his.
Ponderous, to say the very least.
poptart wrote:it is possible for parents who have claimed Hawaii as their residence for over a year to list the state as the birth place of a child even if the child is born out of the country.
In such a case, a COLB would show Hawaii as the birth place, even though it really is NOT.
mvscal wrote:Link?
Let's backtrack for a short bit, first.
First, you are on record on this board as saying that what was posted on the internet by team Barry is a forgery.
I lean that way, also, but I'm not going to begin to get into all of that.
FactCheck says that they had the REAL document that team Barry posted and it is legit.
Jsc's beloved FactCheck "mis-spoke" (I guess) when they said that they have Barry's BIRTH CERTIFICATE and it is authentic.
They never did.
They had his COLB, and the COLB does not contain information that is found on the true long-form birth certificate.
But let's go along and say that Barry's COLB that they had is legit.
Ok, fine.
Here is what the State of Hawaii’s official government websites publish about their COLB's.
‘The Certification of Live Birth is a legal document, but it is TOTALLY INADEQUATE when it comes to proving an individual was born in Hawaii.
The State of Hawaii DOES NOT EVEN ACCEPT the Certification of Live Birth as valid proof that an individual was born in Hawaii.
The Hawaii Department of Homelands, which administers programs to encourage property ownership for native Hawaiians states the following on its website.
‘In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found ONLY on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth(a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL’.”
Why does Hawaii itself insist on the long-form as PROOF?
Maybe many reasons, but
You can read
THIS about Hawaii ACT 96, which was in effect from 1911-1972
As you can read, uncorroborated testimony of one person, with no corroboration from a hospital or attending doctor, could result in a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth being issued.
But of course on a legit long-form Birth Certificate, we can VERIFY things because important information such as the name of the hospital and attending doctor, as well as the doctor's signature are present on the document.
There is currently NO verification from a Hawaii hospital or doctor about the birth of B. Obama in that state.
Also very interesting reading is this ...
http://www.westernjournalism.com/?page_id=2697
... if you want to see the various ways that births were recorded in Hawaii in 1961.
If you read about the first half of that piece you get a pretty good picture of how things were done at that time.
The bottom line point is that it was, based on it being almost 50 yrs ago, the nature of the state, and the geographical location of the state, a fairly "murky" situation as far as Certificates being made up existed in Hawaii.
It's not NEARLY cut & dried simple like FactCheck tells us it is.
At this point we have exactly ONE person, Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, who is said to have seen Barry's long-form certificate.
ONE person.
lol
And this one person has given two statements on the issue and then said she will be making no further comments on it.
One of her statements was bordering on the surreal and the other one was at the very least "strange" in the wording that she chose to use.
Of course there is the "famous" case of Sun Yat-sen, a non-American, who was issued a Hawaii COLB way back in the day.
Google is your friend.
Given Hawaii's situation and it's methods and "standards" of handing out Certificates 50 yrs ago, it's not hard to imagine that there may be MANY non-Americans who were certified in that state.
Smackie wrote:Think about what you're saying here. Let's assume for the sake of argument that he is not a natural-born citizen, and that he is able to remain in office for at least one term with that dark secret kept intact. To whose benefit would it be to continue the witch hunt afterward in an effort to invalidate all the actions he took while in office? Do you think the Supreme Court would hear such a case?
There may not BE a Supreme Court anymore if the shit really hit the fan.
But if there is, why would they NOT hear the case?
I just find it amazing (or maybe not) that you would favor allowing a fraud, an usurper, to hold the highest office in the land, rather than getting his @ss OUT of there, on the basis of ... keeping things smooth.
UN fucking real point of view.
Barry can put the whole thing to bed by releasing his documents.
I'm not holding my breath.
Lawsuits will continue and at some point, many things regarding this will be revealed.
They always somehow seem to find a way to do that.
One last point, and it's just
my point of view -- Barry may not be a
natural born citizen regardless of whether or not he has a valid Hawaii birth certificate, due to his father being a citizen of Kenya and that citizenship being passed to him at birth -- dual citizenship equals not natural born.
http://larrymwalkerjr.blogspot.com/2009 ... tizen.html
Article 2, section 1 of the Constitution states, "No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of president; neither shall any person be eligible who shall not attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United Satates."
The addition of a grandfather clause in this paragraph says a lot as to the meaning of natural born. The first thing it says is that being born in the US is not enough to be natural born, otherwise the grandfather clause would not be necessary. The writers and delegates, having been born in the US, wanted to be eligible for the presidency, but most were the children of British subjects. Knowing that that eliminated them from being natural born and, thus, from eligibility, they included the grandfather clause which expired when the last person alive at the time of the ratification of the Constitution died. So, being a native born citizen is not the same as being natural born. If it were the framers would not have included the clause.
Jmo on that.