Replies

“And yet it says right on the document that they did not. So were they lying in their public statement, or were they lying in their statement on the document?”

No, they’re not the ones lying. You don’t like the truth, so you smear people for answering your questions.

The previous Republican state administration had also confirmed Barack Obama’s birth there, as you can see linked on the same page.
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html

It was phoned in Blade.

Stanly Ann was in Washington, a few miles from the Canadian border, two weeks after the birth, stepping out with the new baby.

I have had several children with several women. Getting a woman to travel thousands of miles, on their own, less than two weeks after giving birth is like getting an elephant to do a back flip. He was born in Canada or Washington.

No, they’re not the ones lying. You don’t like the truth, so you smear people for answering your questions.

Officials at the Hawaii Department of Health have been caught lying on multiple occasions. One of the more notable lies coming from that office was the claim that Obama could not by law request a copy of the long-form birth certificate, the Certificate of Live Birth, because the short-form, Certification of Live Birth, was the only birth certificate supplied by that office aft 2000-2001. We know those statements were baldfaced lies, because a number of people presented the long-form birth certificates they received only a few days before and after those statements were issued by the Health Department officials. In fact, the Health Department did not stop issuing the long-form certificates until people recently complained about these lies.

Governor Lingle relied upon the statements of the officials in the Department of Health, but the officials in the Department of Health evidently lied to the Governor and to the public. When it came down to Democrat Governor Abercrombie in December 2010, not even he could get anyone in the Health Department to cough up the original birth certificate, yet months later it allegedly and magically appeared upon the request of Obama after being declared missing by Governor Abercrombie. Yet, you find no reason to even suspect someone in the Hawaiian Government lied. Under such extreme circumstances, the only reasonable conclusion is that you choose to not question the validity of the statements and evidence of the Hawaiian Government no matter how egregious the false statements from them become.

No, they’re not the ones lying. You don’t like the truth, so you smear people for answering your questions.

Do you not have the intellectual capacity to comprehend the difference between "Record on file" and "Original record?" Do you not know that one can be changed by a process while the other cannot? What was it they said in the "Forrest Gump" movie? "Are you stupid son?"

The previous Republican state administration had also confirmed Barack Obama’s birth there, as you can see linked on the same page. http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/obama.html

"Are you Stupid son?" I am not disputing that Barack has a birth RECORD. I am questioning whether we have seen his ORIGINAL record. The one which PROVES something as opposed to the one that just says whatever the court ordered to be put on it. Till we see assurances from Hawaii that his birth "record" has not been subsequently modified by court order or other process, they are not proving anything in their public statements or with their little rubber stamp.

If you do not posses the mental capability to understand the distinction between the two very different things, then I feel sorry for you. You have my sympathies, and you should leave these complicated arguments for adults. If you do understand the difference, but persist in trying to make them out to be the same, then you are lying for the benefit of your argument, and I feel nothing but contempt for you.