Posted on 09/08/2010 7:21:00 PM PDT by butterdezillion
Nancy Pelosi signed one certificate of nomination which was sent to 49 states and another - saying that Obama is Constitutionally eligible - to Hawaii. People have asked why she didn't send the eligibility-certifying one to all the states, but the more pressing question is, "Why did the Hawaii Democratic Party refuse to certify Obama's eligibility?"
This is on my blog but I'll post the whole thing in the first response and the link to the blog post in the 2nd response so the links will be (hopefully) clickable.
Thanks Danae, it slipped my mind, hopefully Bark Obama’s obots here will point that out to him...maybe he will pucker up a little..no waygu beef or lobster in the gray bar hotel...lol
No, I don’t want to see Obama’s birth certificate, long or short form. There’s nothing on it that I need or that would change my opinion. I believe he’s ineligible because he didn’t have two citizen parents.
Even so, he’s the sitting POTUS and no lawsuit is going to change that. It’s impeachment, failed re-election bid, or nothing. Those are the options at this point. The second of which is a good possibility.
I agree with you on the options for getting rid of Obama but you left out a viable third option: resignation as happened with Richard Nixon.
I don't see the problem. It would prevent people from walking in off the street and going through the records and it restricts staff (other than the director) from making excessive disclosures and handing out copies of records to anyone and eveyrone.
But I do know that Fukino has been using HRS 338-18a as the catch-all reason for not releasing anything.
Right, hoping people didn't read the rest of the law and see that there were legal exceptions and allowances. It's not like they volunteered the release of index data. It was dedicated people like you who started reading these laws and realizing the DOH wasn't telling the whole story and the whole truth.
The newspaper announcements were a continuous-running thing. Announcements were printed as much as a month after the birth so space issues wouldn’t have been the deciding factor.
I don't think it's safe to make this assumption. Filling a newspaper is a day-to-day decision. All the advertisements are placed first, and then whatever space is leftover is filled according to how much space is leftover. I don't think you can assume there was a consistent policy of trying to include every birth announcement and making good several days later for things that didn't originally fit. I'm sure they might fill up spaces with older announcements. It just kind of depends on what was available for whoever was editing that particular page. For a city of that size and for as many birth as should have occurred per day, it doesn't seem realistic to assume they tried to print every birth announcement and certainly not a regular, timely basis.
Yep, I’m awae of that ruling. I believe it was in error and would not be upheld by SCOTUS were they to hear it, which isn’t going to happen.
I hadn’t thought about a resignation. That’d be spectacular. If only ...
I’ve certainly spent hours of blah, blah, blah because of the formatting at Wordpress. lol. Not sure why it double-spaces everything, but it makes it hard to read IMHO. So then I have to go take out the double spaces.
Somebody did post how to do that once before and I tried it. I think my problem may have been that I was trying to copy a PDF. I couldn’t get the drop-down box to give my the options I needed. I’ll have to experiment with it and see what I can do.
I would never have guessed that was what your tagline meant. Thanks for the translation. So what I thought I understood (anal) actually means something more like “dragon breath”. My younger brother’s pet name for me when he teased me. I think Freud must be chasing me with a vengeance this morning. lol.
I wish there was a way to clarify these issues. If what you’re saying is true, then the only information that Fukino can’t divulge for anybody is birthdates, (for people born after UIPA was passed) and addresses. The very two things the birth announcements contained - although the addresses required a parent’s consent, at least after 1976. The birth date and certificate number used to be REQUIRED index data and so were intended to be grandfathered in for release when UIPA was passed.
Talk about screwy.
There may be a possibility that she couldn’t reveal a person’s requests regarding their own records to somebody besides that person. The OIP hasn’t directly ruled on that but referred to a possibility that the info could be restricted.
This is obviously at odds with how the HDOH interprets the law, at least out of one side of their mouths. lol. I wish there was a legal ruling. I wonder what the OIP Opinion Letters might say about it.
I sent an e-mail to Marsha McFadden, the editor of The Advertiser, asking for clarification regarding their procedures for birth announcements from the HDOH and what documentation there might be or what sources she relied on regarding the procedures in 1961. She never responded.
I work at a newspaper office with an old guy who’s been printing for the last 60 years, mostly with small-town newspapers so that’s a little bit different. I’ve asked him lots of questions about linotype. I asked him if it was especially difficult to decide what all to include because of space limitations. I was surprised that he actually said it was easier to make those decisions with linotype than when you have all kinds of editing options. With linotype you just started making the frames (I forget what he called them) and went until you were done. Because it was so laborious casting everything in lead they didn’t worry about trying to squeeze stuff in but just processed what they had and if they had to add some filler they had plenty of molds they could use for stock filler type stuff.
Like I said, that’s with smaller papers so they might have done it differently with large newspapers. Maybe somebody here knows.
The pressure we can bring to bear on this issue - especially if calls of impeachment become more common - could convince the dems they need Obama to fall on his sword. If the dems think that their own responsibility for what has happened could just go away if Obama went away, they might think it the better option than losing everything.
As far as I’m concerned, there is no way I want to let them get away with dumping Obama and thinking they’re done with the issue. They need to dump Obama ASAP. But even doing that should not allow them to escape justice. I want my country back - with government, media, and law enforcement foundations intact and freed from the corruption that got us into this mess in the first place.
A legal copy of the COLB has never been released to the public. That’s why a long-form would be valuable and necessary to corroborate Obama’s claim of constitutional eligibility.
The public has the option of voting against any candidate for whom they feel that they don’t have enough personal information.
You’re about a year and a half too late in seeking corroboration and the Governor of Hawaii, the Attorney General and the Director Health have confirmed Obama’s birth there on multiple occasions.
There is only one of our Presidents for whom I know the exact time of his birth (7:24 p.m.) and the address of his parents(6085 Kalaniana’ole Highway) and for whom I have seen the newspaper birth announcements. That’s Barack Hussein Obama II.
I do not need to know if he was born in a hospital, his parents’ occupations, his parents’ birthplaces or whether the newborn was part of a multiple birth. The Constitution does not require that information to confirm eligibility.
A confirmation/authentification deposition or a notarized letter from any of those officials of the state of Hawaii would be accepted by any Court in the land.
If anyone MUST see the actual original document, go get a subpoena for it and then Obama will have no impact on its release.
Yep, I’m awae of that ruling. I believe it was in error and would not be upheld by SCOTUS were they to hear it, which isn’t going to happen.
I hadn’t thought about a resignation. That’d be spectacular. If only ...
Copying from a PDF is a LOT harder. You have to change the toolbar settings and enable the copying function. It takes me 10 minutes every time I have to do it... :)
That makes me feel better. Not that it’s hard for you, but that maybe I’m not as clumsy or problem-prone as I had feared. lol
NH agreed to investigate this and then magically 2 weeks later they said they couldn’t investigate this because there wasn’t any money to do it...
Post & Email has some stories on this too...
You misunderstand me. That case was rightly dismissed.
When I say the ruling, I really mean the definition of “natural born citizen” in the decision. I don’t believe the court properly interpreted the Constitution or WKA. If the SCOTUS were ever to hear a case to decide once and for all who exactly is and is not a natural born citizen, I don’t think they would uphold the definition from that ruling.
That Congress is considering legislation to address birthright citizenship (anchor babies) speaks volumes about the erroneous interpretations that exist today regarding the 14thA and WKA. If Congress realizes that birth on this soil to foreign citizens shouldn’t automatically grant citizenship, then it most certainly should not grant natural born citizenship for Constitutional purposes.
Actually what happened is they realized that Canadian story had bad information. The reporter misrepresented what was actually sent out to the states.
Thanks for the info...
NH? My mind is fuzzy. What is NH? Sorry.
No, actually they haven't ... not in a legal sense ... and you know that. Plus those people have stated demonstrable falsehoods compromising their credibility.
There is only one of our Presidents for whom I know the exact time of his birth (7:24 p.m.) and the address of his parents(6085 Kalaniana’ole Highway) and for whom I have seen the newspaper birth announcements. That’s Barack Hussein Obama II.
Barak Sr. didn't live at 6085 Kalaniana’ole Highway and you don't know if the 'exact time of birth' is accurate. It wasn't included in the newspaper birth announcements ... just like a place of birth was not included.
I do not need to know if he was born in a hospital, his parents’ occupations, his parents’ birthplaces or whether the newborn was part of a multiple birth.
We understand that you take it on blind faith and unauthenticated jpgs (hence the term 'faither'). Rational people prefer to see verifiable birth information from an original legal birth document.
Rather than.. than.. uh.. rather than what is is now?
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.