Posted on 02/23/2010 8:02:16 AM PST by butterdezillion
I've updated my blog to include the e-mail from Janice Okubo confirming that they assign birth certificate numbers in the state registrar's office and the day they do that is the "Date filed by state registrar".
The pertinent portion from Okubo's e-mail:
In regards to the terms “date accepted” and “date filed” on a Hawaii birth certificate, the department has no records that define these terms. Historically, the terms “Date accepted by the State Registrar” and “Date filed by the State Registrar” referred to the date a record was received in a Department of Health office (on the island of O’ahu or on the neighbor islands of Kaua’i, Hawai’i, Maui, Moloka’i, or Lana’i), and the date a file number was placed on a record (only done in the main office located on the island of O’ahu) respectively.
MY SUMMARY: As you can see, Okubo said that the “Date filed by the State Registrar” is the date a file number was placed on a record (only done in the main office).
There are no pre-numbered certificates. A certificate given a certificate number on Aug 8th (Obama’s Factcheck COLB) would not be given a later number than a certificate given a number on Aug 11th (the Nordyke certificates).
There is no way that both the date filed and the certificate number can be correct on the Factcheck COLB. The COLB is thus proven to be a forgery.
I said federal judge in Dallas. That limits it to a handful of judges. There’s no way I’m dragging my mother’s judge into the birther conspiracy by identifying him by name.
You left off the /s. Around here that is dangerous. You will end up on the birther ping list and they will bug you at 2 in the morning excited because a judge just signed off on the case and they don’t understand, it was the Order Of Dismissal.
parsy, the droll
“She was placed at our table on the ship,” Nordyke said. “She sat with us on that ship for three weeks. She told us that her daughter had passed away and that she had raised her grandson, and he was a social worker in Chicago.”
Very interesting since Obama was an IL State Senator at the time of that cruise.
However, it could be said that he was a practicing ‘social worker for the Chicago mafia’ in Springfield, IL from 1997-2004.
You would get the chance. I’d take you out before you were able to raise your “long colt” anywhere close to my ear.
You’ve generally been fair in your postings, but you create an untouchable argument and therefore fallacious argument by introducing a phantom expert whom you refuse to identify.
Yes, and certain Race was, wasn’t he as he said he couldn’t be certain it was Obama and he wouldn’t bet his life on it.
But, and this is some great birther logic here, who else could it have been?
parsy, who can’t believe anybody would fall for that...well maybe Orly....but wait even Orly didn’t go that far...except on Eric Holder...
So you seem to have the same problem your ‘WON’ has,
You can’t produce the proof.
His handmaidens on these threads are certinaly sweating it. Getting frazzled, they are.
Although you are a composer of lovely blog posts, and unflappable, and probably a very good lawyer — you are wrong on this one.
Obama’s birth legend stunk a year and half ago and it still stinks today. That alone is amazing.
It’s like a closet they can’t afford to open even a crack.
And his house has a whole lot of closets like that.
I think it’s odd for you to say that you would consider my claims if I put it in the format you want me to put it in. You’re a capable person; I don’t think that format of presentation should make any difference.
What the DOH and OIP have confirmed is that the best evidence they have regarding Obama’s birth claims is not prima facie evidence. It’s not just a deal where they’ve shown the Factcheck COLB to be a forgery. What they’ve shown is that even what they DO have is insufficient to prove the claims regarding Obama’s birth.
That’s a pretty serious defect there. Especially since in Hawaii they had THREE MONTHS to get the information in without any penalty. Why didn’t Ann take her baby for a check-up within the first 3 months after the birth? (Besides the fact that, contrary to Obama’s books and official narrative, Ann was in Washington State a couple weeks after Obama’s birth)
There were relatively few items absolutely required on a birth certificate in 1961. If Ann and the baby had gone in for an exam within 3 months of the birth the doctor could have provided what was needed on the certificate but wasn’t provided by Ann (or whoever swore to having knowledge regarding the facts of the birth).
parsifal,
I think its unwise for non lawyers like myself to engage in debate with trained lawyers over the meening of very long legal texts.
I have a question for you that is a tangent to your reply to the other poster, but still on topic for the thread as a whole. Its not about words at all.
Below is a link to two images side by side, this was posted earlier in the thread. Both are claimed to be Hawaii DOH COLB seal impressions for the same year:-
http://i284.photobucket.com/albums/ll1/BecJul/obamaseal.jpg
Please disregard the dogmatic headings, and concentrate on the images themselves.
In one Seal the two snakes spiralling up the staff are represented with a near solid single line, in the other the snakes are represented by a hollow shape enclosed by two black lines to form the bodies of the snakes as they spiral up the staff.
If one of the images is correct for a Hawaii COLB of the claimed year [both claim the same year], then the credibility of the other will be damaged, do you agree?
Was the Advertiser the source on both those stories? Specifically Dan Nakaso?
Many U.S. printed free birth announcements (and engagement/wedding/obit info) for many years, and many still do. My kids’ announcements were NOT paid for. There may have been an opt-out in the hospital paperwork — I just don’t remember.
And I’m not in Hawaii, so my experience may not count.
I suspect that Barry’s granny filled out the required paperwork for a non-hospital birth, submitted it to the Dept. of Vital Statistics, which then included it in the weekly report sent to the Honolulu papers.
That announcement confirms only two things: a male child was born prior to Aug. 8, 1961 and Stanley Ann Dunham and Barak Obama claimed him.
I am ignoring you on Wong, until you read Wong. And yes, please communicate in a different language. Let’s try English, as opposed to Birtherese!
If you make an intelligent comment, I will, of course respond. But I do not think it unreasonable for you to read the case before trying to act like you know what is going on.
bp2 went ahead and read the case. It will not hurt you.
parsy, who asks if you need a link?
I am ignoring you on Wong, until you read Wong. And yes, please communicate in a different language. Let’s try English, as opposed to Birtherese!
If you make an intelligent comment, I will, of course respond. But I do not think it unreasonable for you to read the case before trying to act like you know what is going on.
bp2 went ahead and read the case. It will not hurt you.
parsy, who asks if you need a link?
"Danae and rxsid posted on Leo’s blog too. They may remember what I’m talking about or have more information."
You may recall that I also posted on Leo's blog and I was one of those that he repeatedly slammed for suggesting that his NBC theory might collapse if the Dunham-Obama marriage couldn't be proved or was bigamous. Leo suddenly became interested in proving the marriage existed via obtaining the HI index, which was a great investigative success when it was found.
While I have the highest respect for and interest in Leo's NBC research, Leo has "jumped the shark" on several occasions by overstating his conclusions relative to the "evidence".
Claiming "affirmation" based on "refusal to deny" and other Boolean gymnastics may be warranted in logic theory, but bureaucratic reality tends to be far more messy because of the human factor.
"Show me Obama's HI vital records!"
Don’t worry she’s no lawyer. However, Parsy there sees a doctor for $200 dollars an hour...
A rational American will say, "So?...This president should spend the $15 to produce his birth certificate, and if other presidents are asked for their birth certificates and other documentation, they should TOO!"
Is a "duh!" necessary?
Americans will (and are concluding) that it is IRRATIONAL to use DOJ attorneys to prevent the release of documents that common Americans release every day for all sorts of reasons. It is not only irrational it is keeping these attorneys from the important work of defending our nation against enemies that would bomb planes out of the sky,and shoot our soldiers on their bases and recruitment centers.
To suggest that Obama is not releasing this **common** documentation because he doesn't want to "inconvenience" future presidents is more than laughable. It is UNBELIEVABLE! This is why nearly 50% of Americans doubt Obama's eligibility. His behavior is UNBELIEVABLE!!!
The DOJ will need to come up with a better talking point that that.
I know Nakaso wrote the Nordyke story ... and it was under a headline about the birth certificate being real, even though it was completely undermined by the pictures of the Nordyke certificates which look nothing like Obama’s alleged COLB. Amazing how a reporter can be so oblivious unless he was intentionally carrying water for Obama.
Ooops. My mistake. Thats what I get for assuming.
parsy, who blames it on patlin and the TDS
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.
