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.
How many black-white guys who were Obama’s age and hung around the military base do you suppose there were in 1961 who had been born in Mombasa, grew up in Indonesia, had spent little to no time on the mainland, wanted to be president (as Obama said to both his Indonesian and Hawaii teachers), and had a big toothy smile just like Obama’s?
I would think it’s a very selective group.
Do you sing Opera?
I do remember it, and I sent requests in as well. They were playing word games. Leo cleared his site because he is under retainer now. He has a pretty large number of clients he is representing, and so has to strictly limit what he puts up as his own opinions, in order not to give the incorrect perception that his opinions are that of his clients. He made a professional decision. I support that and completely understand.
The state of Hawaii revealed that they do have recordS, but did not reveal a single thing about what they were. Leo is literally working day and night on the Chrysler case. He just doesn’t have the time needed to nail down the DOH in Honolulu as well.
Besides, maybe if things go well he and pidgeon can get a subpoena for the records. That’s pure speculation on my part. I know nothing not already public about what Leo is working on. And thats how it should be. :)
That’s true. Considering hat what is available, we really know nothing.
What it says is that regardless of whether or not a statute exists defining someone as a natural born citizen (i.e. "In any event"), a statutory natural born citizen is not inherently a natural born citizen for Constitutional purposes. In other words, just because the law declares you a natural born citizen doesn't mean you're eligible for the presidency.
|
BELOW is one of the 30 or so proposed Bills since the 1870s where a Congressional Committee has ATTEMPTED to re-define "Natural Born Citizen". Understandably, it was an EPIC FAIL. This bipartisan-sponsored Bill CLEARLY demonstrates that IF Congress already felt ONLY the 14th Amendment's "subject to the jurisdiction thereof" was necessary to be considered a "Natural Born Citizen" for the Office of President, there would be NO NEED to bring this Bill up for consideration in the first place! Clearly, citizen parentage is a consideration, too. It also demonstrates that Congress erroneously believes they have the power to define "Natural Born Citizen" via a Congressional Statutory (Law) process versus the Constitutional Amendment process.
To define the term `natural born Citizen' as used in the Constitution of the United States to establish eligibility for the Office of President.
|
The Barbara Nelson story appeared here:
http://www.buffalonews.com/2009/01/20/554495/teacher-from-kenmore-recalls-obama.html
Error 404 - Page Not FoundThe page you have requested does not exist.
Suggesting that one has to provide a defense or be subject to a default judgment is neither a fallacious argument nor an untouchable argument. It’s common sense.
The UIPA requests got real messy when the DOH started claiming that applications, requests, receipts, post-it notes, etc. are PART of the vital record in question. In such a case, the index data becomes suspect, because it may represent a file folder containing nothing more than post-it notes and chewing gum wrappers. That’s why I wasn’t convinced that the alleged SAD marriage index data was proof of anything. It may just be a marriage license application. The best proof the couple was married was a divorce record, except that it lacks any tangible acknowledgment from the husband of the marriage or paternity. It’s like SAD created a paper trail that was woefully short of concrete evidence. Also, don’t most states require witness to sign the marriage certificates?? The story was there were no guests and no named witnesses of the marriage.
I agree that Barak Sr. may have been a bigamist whose marriage to SAD would legally be invalidated and thus make Barry II illegitimate. (This is Barry’s best shot at being a natural born citizen, except that it relies on the statutory definition of natural born.) The only problem is that there is no documentary evidence of Barak Sr.’s marriage to Kezia, which could mean he wasn’t really a bigamist. The perfect storm of missing documentations rolls on.
Proof of what, exactly? That a defendant who refuses to provide a defense is subject to a default judgment?
If you believe that concept has to be proven, then you know nothing about the law. Next time you get a speeding ticket, do nothing. You’ll understand the principle of a default judgment.
You can’t even ignore me without a nonsensical essay. I read the case long ago and I schooled you today ... free of charge. Thank me. Admit you were wrong and find a playground where you might be able to interact with your peers. You’re out of your league here.
In 1961 Obama was very young. This is also how birthers get it completely wrong on evidence. This stuff would not hold up 2 seconds in court particularly when the guy making the identification is pretty ambivalent about it.
Plus eyewitness IDs are notoriously untrustworthy. Plus there is some other fishy stuff about the statement that I will keep to myself, but birthers, who did their homework, would catch.
Who else could it have been is just a laughable logical basis in general.
parsy, who says look at that youtube thing I put up
That failed bill included everything except the de Vattel’s definition of a natural born citizen.
I didn’t say you had to provide a defense. You need to support your argument with a source that can be fairly scrutinized. “My mommy’s Judge who I won’t name” is a cop out.
Obama might have a secret twin: Baroque N. Neetugetpayde.
According to an article by WorldNetDaily, some of the claims in a Buffalo News interview with Barbara Nelson, the President’s English teacher in Hawaii, may have been more embellishment than factual:
A New York woman quoted as saying she “remembers” the birth of Barack Obama and who was hailed as independent evidence of the president’s eligibility to occupy the Oval office has told WND that’s not exactly how things happened.
Instead, she told WND she could provide no specifics about the birth.
OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL
Has newspaper really solved eligibility question?
Retired teacher cited as proof but she claims no first-hand knowledge
By Bob Unruh
© 2010 WorldNetDaily
A New York woman quoted as saying she “remembers” the birth of Barack Obama and who was hailed as independent evidence of the president’s eligibility to occupy the Oval office has told WND that’s not exactly how things happened.
Instead, she told WND she could provide no specifics about the birth.
The interview by the Buffalo News with Barbara Nelson was cited by the Democratic Underground website under the headline “Independent Confirmation of Obama’s Birth.”
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=87233
Haven’t you heard of HIPAA rules. My medical business is private! Where did you get this info anyway? I will sue you, and your little dog, too!
parsy, the indignant!
Funny, you seem to have scared away the defenders of the won.
I asked this on the Honolulu Advertiser comments section of the article about “Persistent Requests for Obama’s Birth Certificate”. The person I was conversing with wouldn’t respond but I know we’ve got some good, sound minds here so I’ll ask it here.
If the Hawaii DOH office in 1961 made a master list of births each week and sent it to the newspapers what would you expect to see in the actual newspapers?
Would the editors have the option of printing some, all, or none of the announcements? Would they have discretion to print the names at different times?
Given the requirement that birth certificates from the local registrar were to be delivered to the state registrar weekly except for the outlying islands which sent theirs in by mail on the 4th of the month, what patterns would you expect to see in the newspapers? What variables would create flukes?
Part of the scientific process is to come up with a hypothesis and then to test it by seeing how well it predicts the outcomes. A hypothesis that doesn’t accurately predict what is actually observed fails the test and has to be tweaked or outright abandoned.
So let’s do that with the birth announcements. The hypothesis is that the state DOH made up a master list of births for the week and sent the list to the newspapers which then published those announcements.
If that was true, what would we expect to see?
Please don’t misunderstand me. I support Leo’s efforts and understand why he took down his previous posts. My point was that the response he received from the DoH showed only one entry in the Birth Index not multiple. And that his request (or Terri’s, I can’t remember which) for index data regarding amended vital records resulted in the standard response that they had no records meeting that request.
I never read anything other than Terri’s suggestions that indicated there were multiple entries in the Birth Index for Obama, did you?
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.