Posted on 06/23/2011 5:46:53 AM PDT by arthurus
To establish the legitimacy of a President is not sufficient reason to "dig out the fragile (micro) fiche" ? What would be a good enough reason for you to trouble a lazy bureaucrat to do their job? This I gotta hear!
“All master microfilm created today uses a polyester plastic backing. Under proper storage conditions, today’s film has a 500 year Life Expectance (LE). The older acetate films have no more than a 100 year LE. “
Under proper storage conditions, any records that were microfilmed in the 1960’s would still have a very viable Master. Even the service copies of the newspapers that obama’s “birth announcements” are in are, for the most part, still legible. I refer to the ones in the very worst condition of course.
Microfilm Masters are not terribly fragile if stored properly.
Here is a site that has good info:
http://www.heritagemicrofilm.com
******
So why do you think that President Obama went to all that trouble to order a new Hawaii long form birth certificate if he already had one?
Do you think that the President of the United States simply lost his long form in 2007 or earlier, because Obama's short form we see on the internet is stamped with 2007 on the back?
I’ve no idea but it seems that people across this country are ordering copies of their birth certificates all the time quite legitimately. Why is Obama ordering one so problematic for you?
Unbelievable!!
No, for this Administration.... totally believable.
Send this video to everyone you know.
Unflippingbelievable. I have been on the fence, but no longer. Obama needs to be impeached.
.........Seal Team Six !!!!..........Yes, report to wherever original BC is
******
Aren't you even a tiny bit curious why then Senator Obama ordered a short form Hawaii birth certificate in 2007 when he could have easily ordered a long form birth certificate?
Aren't you even a tiny bit curious why now President Obama went to so much trouble to order a long form birth certificate in April 2011---he sent his private lawyer all the way to Hawaii from Washington to personally pick up his long form copy?
1. Do you really believe that then Senator Obama back in 2007 was so careless that he simply lost his copy of his long form birth certificate that he stored away safely with other family important papers?
2. Come on now, we are talking about the President of the United States here, not about the thousand of average voters---like me---who have carelessly lost their birth certificate and had to order a new one.
3. Most people go to the trouble of ordering a new birth certificate when they somehow lose the one they had, so why did President Obama order a new one?
4. Is it possible that then Senator Obama never lost his long form bach in 2007, but 2008 presidential candidate Obama knew that information on his long form birth certificate---the one that he stored in a safe place all these years in his Chicago home with his other important family papers---would damage his 2008 presidential chances?
5. I would like President Obama to explain why he had to order a Hawaii long form birth certificate in April 2011.
6. That is, I would like President Obama to tell us that he simply lost his long form birth certificate in 2007 or earlier, and that is why he had to order a new one in April 2011, when Trump was putting so much pressure on him to release his long form birth certificate.
7. I say this: I don't believe that President Obama ever lost his long form birth certificate, the one he talks about in one his books.
8. Rather, I believe that President Obama could have easily run upstairs to his family's living quarters in the White House and quickly retrieved his copy of his long form birth certificate and shown it to reporters, because I don't believe that either Senator Obama or President Obama would been so careless when it came to taking care of his copy of his long form birth certificate.
9. To me, it looks very suspicious if President Obama already had a copy of his long form birth certificate stored safely away in his White House living quarters upstairs, but yet President Obama goes to all that trouble to get ANOTHER long form birth certificate from Hawaii in April 2011 to counter-attack Trump's demand that Obama release his long form birth certificate.
Well, he has released the long form. What is there on it which is embarrassing or damaging?
******
Again, why do you think Senator Obama in 2007 and President Obama in April 2011 went to all that trouble to order new birth certificates?
1. For instance, in April 2011 he sent his private lawyer all the way to Hawaii to personally pick up a copy of Obama's long form birth certificate.
2. Do you think he lost his long form birth certificate? Surely, you must have some thoughts on why Obama went to all that trouble to get a copy of his long form birth certificate in April 2011.
3. It sounds like you believe that President Obama's long form is authentic and not a forgery.
4. On the other hand, as you obviously know, many people---some of whom are experts in document scanning and computers---are claiming that Obama's long form birth ceetificate is a forgery.
5. ELECTION DAY NOV. 2012: So I guess we will have to wait to find out on election day Nov. 2012 how many people believe that Obama's long form birth certificate is authentic, and how many people believe it is a forgery like I do, because if a lot of people believe that the long form certificate is a forgery on election day Nov. 2012, Obama will surely lose.
Some other thoughts on Obama's long form certificate:
6. OBAMA'S MOTHER'S SIGNATURE: Myself, I have a hard time believing---after looking at several of Obama's mother's signatures on the internet---that Obama's mother's signed her name by putting her first name "Stanley" in the bizarre looking parenthesis.
7. ONAKA SMILEY FACE: I have trouble understanding how there is an obvious "face" in the "O" of "Onaka", while on other Hawaii birth certificates on the internet, the "face" is missing from the "O" in "Onaka."
8.. OBAMA AND KAPIOLANI HOSPITAL OFFICIALS: Of course, President Obama and Kapiolani Hospital officials would go a long way to prove that Obama's long form is authentic if only President Obama would allow Kapiolani officials to let reporters examine Obama's Aug. 4, 1961---Obama's claimed birth date---hospital records today, but don't hold your breath.
9. April 27, 2011 to June 24, 2011: It has been just about 2 MONTHS and counting since Obama released his long form birth certificate to great fanfare at a White House press conference, but still Obama has not given Kapiolani Hospital officials permission to allow reporters to examine Obama's Aug. 4, 1961 records. Why is that?
10. As I understand it, Kapiolani records would contain the same routine information that we already see on Obama's long form birth certificate, so why won't Obama give Kapiolani permission to allow reporters to look at Obama's records? We want to examine Kapiolani's records in order to have a second party verify that Obama was indeed born at Kapiolani as is stated on Obama's long form birth certificate.
11. So if Obama had no problem in contacting Hawaii officials and obtaining his long form birth certificate, then why in the world is Obama playing hardball when it comes to allowing Kapiolani to let reporters examine his Aug. 4, 1961 records?
12. Is the answer a simple one: There are no Kapiolani records to release, because Obama was not born there on Aug. 4, 1961 as is stated on the long form birth certificate.
13. In my opinion, the longer Obama and Kapiolani hospital officials play hardball and don't release Obama's records, the more VOTES Obaam will lose on election day Nov. 2012.
14. NOTE: If Obama is planning to spring a deadly trap on birther nation by waiting for just the right moment to allow Kapiolani officials to release his Aug. 4, 1961 records, he better not wait too long, because a lot of VOTERS may become so angry with Obama for waiting so long that they will take out their anger in the VOTING booth on election day Nov. 2012 by voting AGAINST Obama.
“Again, why do you think Senator Obama in 2007 and President Obama in April 2011 went to all that trouble to order new birth certificates?”
I know why he ordered one in April this year. Don’t you? Why he ordered one in 2007? I haven’t got the foggiest idea, probably for one of the thousand reasons that everyone else does; the dog ate it, it had a coffee stain on it, it got lost, it was battered and torn.
The State of Hawaii has said that “on April 27, 2011 President Barack Obama posted a certified copy of his original Certificate of Live Birth.” It’s a legally valid document.
******
Excuse me for laughing at your statement above about Obama.
But as I see it, if then Senator Obama had told reporters during the 2008 presidential campaign that the dog ate his long form birth certificate and that is the reason why he had to order a short form in 2007, then I believe that Senator Obama might have had a problem being nominated for president by the Democratic Party.
I make the statement above because I believe that Obama would have raised a lot of VOTERS' eyebrows and concerns, and presidential candidate Senator Hillary Clinton would have jumped all over Obama's crazy remark to the point that Obama would have become a national laughingstock and a weak Democratic Party candidate for president.
In addition, the Republican Party would have also jumped all over Obama and his bizarre remark that the dog ate his long form birth certificate.
For instance, Republicans might have made fun of Obama with something like the following during the 2008 campaign:
1. "How can anyone expect Senator Obama to safeguard the country's assets as president when he can't even take care of his own long form birth certificate?"
2. "Isn't it so convenient that candidate Senator Obama happens to have his long form birth certificate eaten by his dog just as he is getting ready to run for president and just as the public is starting to cry to see his long form birth certificate. What is Senator Obama trying to hide that is on his long form birth certificate?"
3. "Did the dog eat the same birth certificate that Obama wrote about in one of his books, where he wrote that when he was a very young man, he accidentally came across his birth certificate in the same place as his vaccination records?"
4. "And where in the world was his long form birth certificate so that the dog was able to get to it and chew it up? How could Senator Obama be so careless with such a valuable and important family document?"
5. "If Senator Obama is so careless with his own very valuable long form birth certificate that his dog could get to it, then how careless will candidate Senator Obama be with the nation's business if he were to be elected President of the United States?"
Yes. I believe that Hillary Clinton and Republicans would have had a wonderful time during the 2008 presidential campaign making fun of Senator Obama ans his bizarre excuse that the dog ate his long form birth certificate.
Yep, I’m sure a lot of people would have laughed about that but I didn’t say I thoight it was THE reason just an example of the countless number of reasons why people order new birth certificates every year. To claim it’s a suspicious act is delusional.
And you are in that group of people you designate as "some here". Read Loretta Fuddy's letter that accompanied the LFCOLB, where she states that she witnessed the copying of the original document and attests to the authenticity of the copies being sent.
Fascinating in many ways, including that this is the first I’ve seen of it.
*****
Could someone help me? I am still confused about the steps taken by the Obama people to take the 2 certified copies of Obama's long form birth certificate and pass it on to reporters at the April 27, 2011 White House press conference to great fanfare.
My main question is this: Why hand out PDF copies ?
That is, why didn't Obama's staff simply take one of the two copies and pass it through a type of simple scanner that we have at home, and then pass out those simple scanned copies to the reporters?
Thanks for anyone's help.
As far as I can tell from the PDF and circumstantial evidence, what was released was a regeneration of an old low tech scan of the original. AFAIK there is no true original document any more, just confusingly old tech legally equivalent I age files. There seems little official commentary about the PDF’s history.
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.