Replies

butterdezillion left out this piece of information from Okubo:

"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."

Obama claims he was born in Honolulu. So his filed and accepted dates would be the same as noted above by Okubo?

butterdezillion also left out this little nugget.

It is difficult for me to respond to your request because I do not possess a legal background. I can verify that sufficient evidentiary requirements must be met for the DOH to issue a certificate of live birth.

If Obama's online COLB is not a forgery, then the above statement indicates that he submitted sufficient evidence to obtain a COLB, does it not?

You don’t seem to be comprehending that the combination of date filed and certificate number, when compared with a birth certificate we know is legitimate (the Nordyke certificates), is shown to be an impossible combination.

The Factcheck COLB is absolutely a forgery.

What Okubo is saying here is that they used to have a “date accepted” and a “date filed” on their COLB’s. They’ve abandoned that because for most people the number was the same anyway since most births were on Oahu AND because birth certificates are filed electronically now, so the information goes from the hospital to the health offices instantaneously.

That doesn’t change the fact that the certificate number is given by the DOH on the “date filed”. There were no pre-numbered certificates getting mixed up in different piles at the hospital or at the DOH - which was the previous explanation for why Obama’s cert# was later than Nordykes’ even though it was filed 3 days earlier than theirs.

In case you haven't seen this, I'm posting it again for you to review.

The theory that the Nordyke twins should have certificate numbers higher than Obama based upon dates is a non-starter. The premise assumes that:

all hospital paperwork was processed in pristine chronological order without regard for the availability of nurses and physicians for signatures
government clerks processed received paperwork in a first-in-first-out (FIFO) order.

That simply isn’t plausible given the human factor that would have been involved in 1961.

I worked as a title clerk at an automobile dealership during college. The Sales and Finance staff brought up stacks of paperwork every couple of days for vehicles that needed to be titled. Paperwork never went through their offices in an orderly manner. There was always something missing or incomplete: missing signatures, incomplete odometer statements, etc.

I didn’t process paperwork by the date a vehicle was sold/purchased. I processed stacks of paperwork from the top of the stack to the bottom of the stack setting aside any paperwork for which I still needed something. That meant that vehicles were assigned tag numbers according to when I received the paperwork, their order in the current stack I was processing, and when I was finally able to complete the titlework. The date of sale had little correlation with the assigned tag number.

The paperwork for two separate vehicles purchased on the same day and sold by two different salesmen weren’t automatically processed and titled on the same day or even the same week.

84 posted on Tuesday, February 02, 2010 3:00:05 PM by BuckeyeTexan (Integrity, Honesty, Character, & Loyalty still matter)

http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_3.jpg
BR>

Nordyle Long Form: http://nocompromisemedia.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/090728birthcert.gif

What does this mean? If Obama's birth was registered on August 8 1969 the Certificate number: 151 1961 010641 would have come before the Nordyke twins which was registered on Aug 11th 1961. The Nordyke BC shows a certificate number of: 151 61 10637. You can I think discount the difference between 61 and 1961 because MY Long form has a 69 there and a 1969 on the Computer printed COLB. Same PERHAPS with the first 0 in the third set of numbers (010641 and 10637). On MY Documents, that third set of numbers is identical, both are 6 digits long. Take that for what it is worth, it raises my eyebrow, but not that far.

Now what Butter is saying here is that is Obamas birth was accepted by the state and FILED on August 8, his Certificate number would have come BEFORE the Nordyke BC which was accepted and FILED 3 days LATER.

Obama Born Aug 4 Filed Aug 8 Cert #010641 Nordyke Born Aug 5 Filed Aug 11 Cert #10637 Obama's filed BEFORE Nordyke and given a certification number on that day (Aug 8)... has a Cert number AFTER Nordyke which was given a Cert # that is lower, three days later (Aug 11)?

If the FILED day is the day that the state issues a certification number onto a record, then it is impossible that the number on Obama's supposed COLB is correct. If it WERE, then his number would have come BEFORE the Nordyke BC, because the state issues the numbers in order in the way they are received.

Nordyke can't have a number that falls before the date it was filed, or Obama's can't have one that falls after Nordyke. The numbers do not jive. A =/= B

Just checked in. Looks like you are being the party pooper again. Hey, that would be a good superhero name, The Party Pooper....

I think I read all this date stuff on the COLB before. Didn’t fly then either, as I recall.

parsy, er uh Captain Quest!

butterdezillion also left out this little nugget. It is difficult for me to respond to your request because I do not possess a legal background. I can verify that sufficient evidentiary requirements must be met for the DOH to issue a certificate of live birth. If Obama's online COLB is not a forgery, then the above statement indicates that he submitted sufficient evidence to obtain a COLB, does it not?

Yes, but that evidence is really not that difficult. It's listed on the DOH website. Basically a signed statement from his Grandmother would have been sufficient.

I can verify that sufficient evidentiary requirements must be met for the DOH to issue a certificate of live birth.

No, it doesn't say Obama did anything to his or anyone else's BC. She is merely stating that there are requirements must be met. The end. Nothing more. Basically, she beat around the bush and didn't answer anything.

In other words she says there's a law that everyone must stop at a stop sign. Ok, but we don't know if there any stop sign had been place at the corner, or if there was a stop sign at one time but two years ago Hussein changed it to a yield sign, or is there even a sign there today, or was the road diverted so the sign is of no consequence, or did granny speed past the sign at 2 AM and no cop was around to ticket her, or Hussein did sneak by it and just waved at the cop, or are we even at the correct corner. All she acknowledges is there are rules concerning stop signs.