Posted on 10/02/2009 3:35:27 PM PDT by MissTickly
President Obama's original birth certificate was "record in accordance with state policies and procedures," but his vital records were "maintained on file."
Oct,31, 2008: “...Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures..."
July 27, 2009: "“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
July 27, 2009, I asked this question of the Hawaiian DoH: "Is the Director of Health for the State of Hawai'i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, able to state they have verified that the Hawai'i State Department of Health has President Barack Obama's AMENDED original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."
A careful parsing of words seems necessary because one COLB can say this: "Filed by Registrar" While another can say this: "Accepted by Registrar" Despite what you read online, or see presented by anonymous people that you've never met and you don't know-Hawaii must explain what this means. It's a procedural question that I cannot get an answer to. Why?
The last I communicated to Dr. Fukino, on October 1st, I wrote her the following, and she has not responded to correct any mischaracterizations. Please take note of that:
Dr. Fukino--
Per your press release statement on July 27, 2009, are you telling us that, in part, you saw "vital records" that include some kind of a representation of a stated "filed" and threfore pending application for an amended/corrected Birth Certificate (it was on file, not on record) and evidence filed to support an amendment/correction, but that evidence was still pending approval on July 27, 2009? I am sorry for the characterizations I give in lieu of knowing the legal jargon. Please correct me if I have mischaracterized anything.
I am finally realizing I really need to understand what 'on file' and 'filed with the registrar' means compared to "accepted by registrar" and "on record." Can you help me understand or direct me to one of your staff for explanation? If you don't already know--a woman has presented her own "filed with registrar" type COLB that she asserta represents a normal, indexed-at-birth, run of the mill Hawaiian birth certificate to natural parents with all information in pristine, original condition.
Is that possible? Should a record like I just described typically say "Accepted by Registrar?"
I have requested from the AG library archive, the opinion letter that I believe sets out the procedures for filing an application for an amended birth certificate. But I have not received it yet. If the DoH is able to provide a copy--please do.
If you meant for people to understand you in July, and if I am understanding things correctly without having the necessary AG letter. Woman, I seriously underestimated you. I want people like you working for government.
I don't know what you can answer that I just asked, if anything. But, if you can correct any mischaracterizations about policy and procedure--please do.
I am giving pause to all of this. You have been very candid, I believe. I just was too blind to see that you put it all out there for anyone paying attention. You've been as fair as can be to BOTH sides of this issue from what I can discern.
Thank you. T.
*
And I brought my question from July 27, 2009 full circle:
Aloha Dr. Fukino,
Please use THIS version of my questions. So very sorry--I am struggling with the difference between the words "on file" and "on record." I am going to go with "on record." I realize I might have to resubmit at some point with the "on file" language.
If you would please answer the following questions for me per your statement on July 27, 2009:
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
On July 27, 2009 per your issued statement, did you personally verify that the "vital records" you saw were NOT maintained on record in accordance with state policies and procedures?
On July 27, 2009 per your issued statement, did the Registrar of Vital Statistics personally see and verify that the "vital records" you saw were NOT maintained on record in accordance with state policies and procedures?
Thank you for your continued patience on this issue. If you would please answer the two questions above separately--that would be ideal. I am afraid that a blending of the answers will muddy your efforts to be forthcoming with the public. If you have already been forthcoming--that effort should be recognized and not distorted.
Sincerely, T.
*
CONCLUSIONS? Was the President's Natural Born Citizenship verified with a long form birth certificate, an application to amend his birth place and insufficient pending evidence of that amendment? On July 28th, did Congress sell us out with a Resolution that declared that President Obama was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961?
Did Congress provide the 'evidence' to amend the President's Birth Place.
Get answers from Hawaii. If need be, get answers from Congress.
Thanks for letting me post here FR.=)
Blackstone and English Common law were the two major sources of American legal definitions. Neither is entirely operative after the Founding though.
“Natural-born subject” (as per Black’s Law dictionary) In English law, one born within the dominions or rather within the allegiance, of the king of England.
This would mean one born within England not owing allegiance to another king say the king of France.
Thus, we have to interprete each birth as to determine if it is of a natural-born American.
No the “bottom line” is an English law cannot affect an American citizen’s citizenship. It means NOTHING in an American court of law. That whole line of pursuit is a red herring leading to NOTHIHG significant.
I conclude that since the Founding Fathers did not define the term “natural born” that it was considered by them to have a self-evident and commonly understood meaning and needed no definition.
It is my personal opinion, on the other hand, that no amount of exactness in defining law, or number of laws will corral evil. Evil will leak through whether the term “natural born” had no definition ( being commonly understood) or 30 pages of official definition and commentary in our Constitution. Evil will find a way to destroy the rule of law no matter how expertly laws are written.
Ultimately, it is my opinion, ( and I believe it was shared by some of our Founding Fathers in their letters) that our success in self-rule will depend on our moral character ( and fear of the Lord) .
It is evident to me that Obama and his minions are not honest people of goodwill with the motivation to make our experiment in self-rule work.
An honest man would have been HONORED to promptly provide **all** documentation regarding his natural born status and his eligibility to be president.
So?...What do you think of someone who defends a president who does NOT promptly provide all documentation regarding his natural born status? What does it say about their character? How can anyone defend this and call themselves honest or moral?
In you previous post you are conflating what is opinion on my part and self-evident fact. Also, since I never suggested that “Godliness” be included in the Constitution, I can not defend a strawman of your creation.
In a private conversation, by using debating tactics such as these two above, you may frustrate your debating partner to the point of his leaving. You might falsely believe that you “won” the argument. Ah! ...But we are living in a new world now. Your words stand for all the bright people here on Free Republic to see, evaluate, and judge.
No the “bottom line” is an English law cannot affect an American citizen’s citizenship. It means NOTHING in an American court of law. That whole line of pursuit is a red herring leading to NOTHIHG significant.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Well....Good luck with that argument in court. And...given Judge Carter, I expect you will have your chance to see your point argued before him.
By the way...I certainly do **not** believe that you are one of the paid DOJ trolls. No sir! Not me!
By your “logic” there was no reason to even write the Constitution. Obviously, the Founders had a different idea.
I pointed out earlier where the term “natural-born” comes from and said nothing about defining every jot or word. Somehow you got the idea that my pointing out that there was/is no definition within the document was calling for one. Instead it just shows why courts exist.
TANKS,ya’ll,,,catchin’ up...
I can not defend a strawman of your creation. I never said or even suggested the above.
In a private conversation, by using debating tactics such as these two above, you may frustrate your debating partner to the point of his leaving. You might falsely believe that you “won” the argument. Ah! ...But we are living in a new world now. Your words stand for all the bright people here on Free Republic to see, evaluate, and judge.
Hello, glad to see you here!
I wanted to share something with you that I think DOH is doing with Leo in responding to his index data request.
I see they, by their own tricky terminology, gave him the index data for Stanley Ann’s marriage certificate and did not give Leo the names of Obama’s parents listed on the birth certificate. Surely, Obama’s parents listed on the birth certificate came into consideration when deciding Obama’s status as a national born citizen. They are being played by “mistunderstandings of questions.”
Congress can not change the birth place of a citizen with an act of congress, and if they tried to do that for official records, it would not change the qualification of Obama concerning the NBC question. If we were to ask the Congress, under the freedom of information act, to provide any documentation associated with this resolution on Obama’s birth place that is on record, do we have the right to that information and documents?
This issue was thoroughly put to rest last fall when it first reared its head. Our courts ruled on it long ago and it is not in doubt except among those not caring enough to research it.
As for your stupid, snide remark WHEN are my checks coming? Easiest money I ever made.
I guess you are comfortable with the idea that a foreign nation could pass a law making YOU a citizen and depriving you of your American citizenship. How about North Korea? Sound good?
wish I could figure out how to post the picture instead of the html sorry but the picture was so nice I had to share it!!!
you are a voice of reason which brings hope and change to the PEOPLE!
They can if Congress oversees citizenship as directed by the Constitution.
They can declare him a natural-born citizen. WITH THE HYPHEN.
Furthermore, we don’t know what proof Hawaii accepts. That should be found out too. Ask Hawaii if they take congressional resolution declarations.
“Congress can not change the birth place of a citizen with an act of congress, and if they tried to do that for official records, it would not change the qualification of Obama concerning the NBC question. If we were to ask the Congress, under the freedom of information act, to provide any documentation associated with this resolution on Obama’s birth place that is on record, do we have the right to that information and documents?”
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Again...If the Founding Father felt the expression “natural born” needed a definition they would have given one. The expression “natural born” must have have had a self-evident and commonly understood meaning among the citizens of the time.
Also...if every word, term, phrase, sentence, and paragraph were to be a tightly defined as you seem to wish, the Constitution would be the size of a modern Democrat Party health care bill!
This is called a “red herring”: Changing the subject.
Sorry...I am not about to chase these two red herrings no matter how stupid they smell.
“wish I could figure out how to post the picture instead of the html sorry but the picture was so nice I had to share it!!!
you are a voice of reason which brings hope and change to the PEOPLE!”
Thank you. It’s important that people see how reasonable this is. If we get those tiny answers. Fukino has given us proof in her statement on 7/27. I think it’s already more than clear.
As for your stupid, snide remark WHEN are my checks coming? Easiest money I ever made.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Well...I certainly do NOT believe you are DOJ paid troll. NOPE! Not me!
btt
This may well have been answered numerous times before my posting hits, but you’re conflating “citizenship” with “Natural Born Citizenship.” Anyone born on U.S. soil is considered a citizen, but that doesn’t make them eligible to hold the office of President of the United States.
Please read what our founding fathers wrote about the subject and why they bothered to include the clause in the first place. Here’s a hint: It has something to do with divided loyalties.
btt
Just wondering. Since the communication was with you, why can you not ask those questions? Someone asking out of the blue, will give them wiggle room enough that the defination of the terms you need to know will never happen. What is going on?
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.
