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.
Hey, that gets me to thinking...(uh oh, here it comes)
Maybe the Birthers need an “Obotomy”. You know, remove that part of the frontal lobe that obsesses about birth certificates.
parsy, who notes this thread is over 500 on the issue of statutory construction of state employee oral statements and press announcements
I’ve posted the late birth certificate form which Okubo sent me a while back upon request, at
Line 18 says: “This record is valid only if it has been accepted by and filed with the State Registrar at Honolulu, HI.”
And the registrar has to sign a certification saying that the documentation has been reviewed and supports the registrant’s claims of date, place of birth, and parentage. No medical information necessary. But this form can only be used - now - to report births that happened at least a year earlier.
Anyway, I just thought it was interesting that the form doesn’t just say it must be filed; it says it must be ACCEPTED by the state registrar. That supports the idea that at least in 2001 when this form was last revised (and continues now) there was a difference between accepted and filed.
Could be that the word “filed” on the COLB is NOW meant to mean both, since a COLB could only be printed if it had been accepted. Do you remember reading about the couple that refused to report the racial information for their kid’s BC and got a bunch of grief from the DOH because the BC was incomplete so they couldn’t print out a COLB for the baby?
There’s more detailed info about that at
http://cc.bingj.com/cache.aspx?q=employees+at+hawaii+ohsm&d=5058947555725187&mkt=en-US&setlang=en-US&w=6f9a8385,9a10fc6d
But she is the head of the birther snake. It doesn’t do to knock off a rattle or two here and there.
parsy, who says “Don’t desert your leader in her hour of need as she is being harassed, vandalized, and targeted for assassination via busted vacuum hoses
I would love to see Pelosi and Nobama run out of the country!
Did you have to check for completeness or to see whether standards were met, or is that done only at the state registrar’s office? Or were you at state registrars’ offices?
And plus, you little “apples” haven’t fallen too far from the Orly Tree.
parsy, who wonders how that “U N thingie” is working out for you!
He said that there were no copies of old procedures that he knew of, so he could not show me anything from the 60s. He said that nobody there had been around long enough to remember for sure what they did in the 60s. He did say that until the registration system went on-line (first at the Department of Health and then connected to hospital “ADT” systems a few years later) there were actually different procedures used to get the records from different outer islands at the same time, and they were not finally standard until some time after he arrived.
I asked him where the numbers were assigned, and he said it depended. For a number of years, hospitals with busy oby/gn practices got preassigned blocks of numbers from the state so that they wouldn’t duplicate each other. For a while before he got there the state actually issued hospitals the stamps that had those blocks of numbers in them, but that became too expensive, so they went back to just assigning the blocks.
Once the paperwork got to Honolulu, the numbers were entered into the state ledgers and the certificates filed. When I asked him if there was a local number too, he said no. The state number was the local number, so you could right to the hospital and find the same record under the same number.
The correspondence, excerpted from the Hawaiian DoH.
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.
HISTORICALLY, most often the “date accepted” and the “date filed” is the same date as the majority of births occur on O’ahu (the island with the largest population in our state). In the past, when births were recorded on paper they may have been accepted at a health office on an island other than O’ahu, such as Kaua’i. The paper record would then need to be sent to O’ahu to have a file number placed on it, and the filed date would then be sometime later (as you know, the state of Hawai’i is comprised of multiple islands with miles of water in between). The electronic age has changed this process significantly, and it was determined some time ago that one date would suffice.
Janice Okubo
Hawaii State Department of Health
- - - - - - - - -
The Hawaiian DoH didn't assign numbers to hospitals or give out pre-stamp birth certificates with the control numbers on them at anytime as they where added at the MAIN office after the paper work was completed. And BuckT, no nurse at the hospitals acted as a local registrar stamping dates in the date filed box since that was when the birth certificates were RECEIVED at the DoH.
You've been caught in a lie Ed WiggOut.
(You need to be more concerned about the CREDIBILITY
of Barry Obama. He cannot be trusted, nor can any
paperwork he or his campaign can offer.)
Case in point: Remember this?
Screen shots were saved here: http://theplaintruth.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=3563052
BORN IN THE USA?
News sites swap Obama’s birthplace like magic
UPI, Snopes change location within hours of WND report
Posted: July 09, 2009
12:27 am Eastern
By Joe Kovacs
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
If you happened to read online news sites such as United Press International or the popular hoax-busting Snopes.com anytime up until Tuesday night, you would have seen definitive statements that President Obama was born at the Queen’s Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii.
But checking back now, both sites are suddenly providing an entirely different location, the Kapi’olani Medical Center for Women and Children, also in the capital of the Aloha State.
Within hours of a WND report revealing Obama’s birth being reported at two different Hawaiian hospitals, both sites changed their information to suddenly fall in line with the president’s claim that he was born at Kapi’olani.
Here is the screen shot from Snopes on July 7, before WND’s report was posted: http://theplaintruth.websitetoolbox.com/post?id=3563052
Every now and again your real side comes out, Parsi. You’re a nasty nya nya littleman.
When has Obama *himself* ever said he was born in Hawaii?
Got a quote for us, chief?
This must get to The Post & Email pronto, he does some excrutiatingly good work too.
I will be updating all the forged photoshopped (shooped) Obama history pictures again too.
The very fact that team obama had “shoopers” (shitty shoopers at that, since their quality is so bad) means that he’s entirely a fraud.
Any alteration, makes him a total fraud.
It could have been worse. I could have bwahahahahaha-ed!
Hey, by the way, did you see my “Ode to Orly Taitz” thread. You can sing and play it like the Bobby Gentry song.
parsy, who will probably tinker with the rhyme a little to make it easier to sing. Could have swore it had some weird E chord and A chord thingie going on with D7 on the turnaround
> And plus, you little “apples” haven’t fallen too far from the Orly Tree.
You flatter youself, Parsnip, being an ACORN that has sprouted
from the Obama Tree.
And ironically, ACORN too is rumored to be changing
their name like their Obama before them.
And if by chance you personally are overwhelmed with mirth, the destruction of the rule of law and the Constitution, by a marxist usurper, isn’t actually a laughing matter. To sane people
________________
Amen
I know. I won the renaming contest.
People Interested in Making Positive Steps & Helping Our Society.
aka-——PIMPS & HOS.
parsy, who thinks he has won a date with Hanna Giles
I wonder if Piggy Wiggy will get a new screen name now that he has been slamdunk debunked.
And the cherry on the cake is the office was closed February 5.
Now that’s funny!
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.