> parsy, who clobbered two Birther Myths yesterday
Bwa-ha-ha.
Palsy, which myths would that be that you think Wiggy "clobbered"?
All I've seen is a Troll showing us the extent of his knowledge
on Obama's Presidential Eligibility.
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.
With parsnip, it’s always about HIM. Attention grabber and sucker. Trickster. I never read anything he writes. Pure drivel.
It’s a troll. They throw reason and truth into the trash. They hate reason and truth.
That said, Leo's in the Seventh Circuit.
IMO, the Quo Warranto to watch is Kerchner’s case in the Third Circuit:
Court Grants Motion for Leave to File Overlength Brief in Kerchner Appeal (eligibility)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2458738/posts
You seem to keep forgetting that this is a Constitutional issue, not a political one.
This jumped out at me - I bet we’ll this and similar statements a lot now. New talking point. It’s been said before, but something tells me HQ issued it as a talking point to repeat now.
WEAK WEAK WEAK WEAK!!!
So how do you propose to solve this apparently conundrum? With your sagacity?
A law which requires a candidate to produce his/her long form birth certificate before being placed on the ballot.
Bwa-ha-ha.
Palsy, which myths would that be that you think Wiggy "clobbered"?
All I've seen is a Troll showing us the extent of his knowledge
on Obama's Presidential Eligibility.
When people are dishonest, no amount of laws will change the situation. While such a law (actually I wouldn’t say specifically this document or that, just prove with any and all relevant documents) would certainly be “nice”, the fact that in order to be President he or she must fulfill certain elgibility requirements is already accepted, and still the usurper is sitting in the White House busily destroying our country, means that one little law is not the solution.
The solution right now is to vote as many Dems out as possible, everywhere, and force the usurper to prove himself in court.
Both are needed. (Of course the Repugs need to get their act together but that’s not the main point in this discussion.)
Dancing on the head of a pin legalisms are not the sole remedy here. Right now there is a cipher in the President’s seat. He’s an unknown. But one thing IS known - he’s a freaking LIAR.
What possible reason would there be for Obama to fail to authorize release of the incredibly historically significant image of his birth “vital statistics” in the Kapiolani “bound ledgers” as well as his HI DOH vital records? p>
The Dr. West story, while interesting, by itself without hospital or vital record corroboration, is inadmissible hearsay as evidence that Obama was born in HI.
In the story Dr. West does not say that he personally delivered Obama, but merely recounts that “Stanley gave birth to Barack Hussein Obama”. If true, West may have simply seen or heard of the same HI vital record, perhaps of a home or foreign birth, which was reported to the HI newspapers.
So how do we get him out of the WH?
>> New talking point.
Yeah, it’s like when in the 90s when the Trolls went from
“Bill Clinton did not have sex with Monica Lewinski” to
“Well, that’s a private matter.”
A MUST for every constitutionalist library!
A Treatise on citizenship, by birth and by naturalization, with reference to the law of nations, Roman civil law, law of the United States of America, and the law of France; including provisions in the federal Constitution, and in the several state constitutions, in respect of citizenship; together with decisions thereon of the federal and state courts (1881)
http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924020027870
Exactly.
“We”?
You could begin by educating yourself.
The Dr. West stuff is merely collateral information having little to do with the major points. A lady said she knew the doctor, had lunch with him IN HAWAII, and he said that he had delivered Obama.
SOOOO, the Birthers get to work and think they find that the good doctor retired in 1956 so therefore he could not have delivered Obama. But, apparently, he didn’t retire in 1956, and in fact worked up in the mid-70s. So he could have.
However, in the Birther Universe, there is no sense of perspective. Birthers get all caught up in the most minute of little details and each one gets the full conspiratorial treatment.
So, there’s a conspiracy because Dr. West couldn’t have done it, but the only reason why anyone thinks he was the doctor was the lady, and frankly, who cares what the lady said. It isn’t “inadmissible hearsay evidence” because there isn’t a trial and no one is seeking to enter it as evidence.
Frankly, if there was a trial, it would not be necessary to call the lady, but if one did, her testimony could probably be introduced as an exception to the hearsay rule.And depending on the legal venue, hearsay rules may not even apply.
But, as far as I am concerned, an HONEST Birther could no longer claim that Dr. West could not have delivered the baby because he was retired. But, I will bet you we see the claim made a whole bunch more times before this is over.
parsy, who puts little past the Birthers
| Until you come up with evidence to contradict it, it is conclusive. That's pretty reliable. Wiggy, are you saying the reliability of the "evidence" that What are you trying to say, Wiggy? |
About what? The fact that a candidate is not required to produce proof they are eligible to be president?
No it’s not impossible. You’re assuming that each hospital would receive the same size block of numbers. That isn’t necessarily the case.
When I titled cars, we received blocks of tag numbers based on our sales volume. So some dealer in po-dunk Texas with low sales volume had a smaller set of numbers and didn’t require a new set as often as a large dealer in DFW with extremely high volume.
Yes, we had our own identifiers to locate a vehicle in our records, but the tag number was generate by the state.
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.