Posted on 10/13/2009 11:46:01 AM PDT by theruleshavechanged
It's starting to look very much like that statement fits obama, what with his enormous efforts and expense to keep from simply proving that he is an American citizen by showing his long form birth certificate.
It makes me wonder "What's so hard about that?" I've had to show mine several times in my lifetime.
Seems like there is something very fishy going on and maybe this judge has lost his scene of smell, or maybe he was paid to wear a clothes pin on his nose.
Thank you, and expect flames.
But, given the distaste for orly, would the judge allow this kind of discovery?
*******
I believe that Obama is a fraud and a liar, because he won't release his 1961 long form birth certificate and his Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard college records.
I wish Orly would start a defense fund to help her pay off this $20,000 fine.
I am far from rich, but maybe I could contribute to such a fund, because I think she does great things in trying to get Obama to release his long form birth certificate and his Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard records.
“I believe that Obama is a fraud and a liar, because he won’t release his 1961 long form birth certificate and his Occidental, Columbia, and Harvard college records”
Your reasoning is sound, but your conclusion remains unproven.
“I wish Orly would start a defense fund to help her pay off this $20,000 fine.”
Perhaps she has more integrity than intelligence?
You probably think todays is Tuesday, too.
“You probably think todays is Tuesday, too.”
I do think today is Tuesday. Do you go by a special Birther calendar?
That fact that today is Tuesday is no more obvious than the fact that Orly’s case has no merit.
I see.
Your reasoning is sound, but your conclusion remains unproven.
“I wish Orly would start a defense fund to help her pay off this $20,000 fine.”
Perhaps she has more integrity than intelligence?
********
On Obama's short form birth certificate that we see on the internet, there is this phrase stamped on the bottom:
"Date filed by registrar" and the date "Aug. 8,1961."
1. "Date accepted by registrar": But as I understand it---and from what I have seen on other Hawaii birth certificates displayed on the internet---a valid Hawaii birth certificate up to at least 1985 should have the following: "Date accepted by registrar".
2. As I understand it, the phrase "Date filed by registrar" could mean that the person was not born in a hospital.
3. One question I have is this: If Obama's birth certificate is stamped with "Date filed by registrar" on "Aug. 8,1961", at what point in the past 50 years was Obama's 1961 birth certificate moved up into the more legally important category of "Date accepted by registrar"?
a. 50 years is obviously a very long time, so I would think that sometime in those long 50 years, Obama's birth certificate would move up from status of "Date filed by registrar" to the more legally important status of "Date accepted by registrar."
b. To those people reading this post, especially if you were born in Hawaii: Go ahead and check your short form birth certificate if you have one, and tell us if there is a stamp like "Date filed by registrar" like on Obama's short form, or if there is a more important stamp like "Date accepted by registrar."
c. Suggestion: If your short form birth certificate has "Date filed by registrar" instead of the more serious "Date accepted by registrar"---"accepted" is the key word here---then I suggest that you contact your state officials and demand to know why your birth certificate has "Date filed by registrar" instead of the more serious "Date accepted by registrar.
4. My point is this: If the Obama short form birth certificate we see on the internet has "Date filed by registrar" instead of the more legally important "Date accepted by registrar", then there is something seriously wrong with the Obama birth certificate, because it only has the worthless "Date filed by registrar."
5. So, in my opinion, resolving the "Date filed by registrar" vs. "Date accepted by registrar" issue could go a long way in answering the question of whether Obama was or was not born in Hawaii.
6. That is, if Hawaii officials are holding an Obama birth certificate with "Date accepted by registrar" stamped on it, then they have a moral and ethical duty to release it to the public.
7. But if Hawaii has no Obama birth certificate with the stamp "Date accepted by registrar", then Hawaii officials have even more of a moral and ethical duty to tell us, because Obama could be in a lot of trouble if there is NO Obama Hawaii birth certificate that is stamped with "Date accepted by registrar".
8. NOTE: If you were born in Hawaii, do you have a Hawaii short form birth certificate like the one Obama displays on the internet? Does it have "Date filed by registrar", or does it have "Date accepted by registrar"? Let us know.
9. Born in a non-Hawaii state: Do you have a short form birth certificate from a state other than Hawaii? Does it have something like "Date filed by registrar" on it, or does it have something like "Date accepted by registrar"? Let us know.
10. If you were born in a hospital in a non-Hawaii state, does your short form birth certificate say something like "Date filed by registrar", or does it say something like "Date accepted by registrar"? I'm asking because I read on the internet somewhere that "Date filed by registrar" could mean that the person was NOT born in a hospital.
11. Myself, I guess I'm lucky, because I have been able to save my long form birth certificate, the one with the names of the doctor and the hospital on it, so I have never had the need to order a short form birth certificate.
I think she takes PayPal on her site.
Just before retiring I chanced to over hear the name Orly Taitz. My liberal/socialist spouse (bless her) had on Joy Behar. Then on comes Orly. Well at least she is on there. Now sweet dear Joy, who has her work cut out in her new venture, is very jerky.
What I mean by that is being a host and this Joy can be pretty nice, Joy seemed very agitated, but was holding this down quite well.
Orly is, of course somewhat clipped and the words come out quickly. Now as I wait for some form of discourse with Joy examining the statements by Orly, I have no luck. Joy switched to that now happily retired one George W. Bush. What the former President has to do with it, is beyond my comprehension.
The introduction to the show, by Joy's staff (I presume) was of an irate lady at a town hall meeting, described as a "birther". The sound was bad and most of it lost as a coherent statement. Nothing to do with Orly of course.
Then on came Orly. Joy jumped in again and again to interupt. The whole tone of the show was to show Orly, yet absolutely obscure anything she said.
Liberals!
That’s nice. You are making an argument that I agree with in my heart. It takes more than that in a court of law.
“I think she takes PayPal on her site.”
Then I stand corrected.
LOL! The nutters could write a script to type "U R A TROLL! GO BACK TO DU!!" replies.
Very good post and well put!!! The CONSTITUTION matters and Orly Taitz is putting her money and life on the line to defend Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 “NO PERSON BUT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN SHALL BE ELIGIBLE FOR PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATUS.”
OBAMA has spent over one million dollars to prevent the release of any information that will or will not prove that he is eligible for POTUS.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.