Posted on 02/20/2010 4:16:53 PM PST by hennie pennie
More than a year after his historic election, requests for President Obama's birth certificate continue to pour into the state's understaffed Health Department from people on the Mainland who refuse to believe he was born in Honolulu in 1961.
In an attempt to stem the flow of requests, the agency recently set up a special page on its Web site devoted to the issue of Obama's birth certificate and who is eligible to get the records.
But the requests for the president's birth certificate keeping coming at a rate of 40 to 50 a month, according to Health Department spokeswoman Janice Okubo, who has been handling the requests since Obama became a serious presidential candidate in 2008.
"They're spurred on by these 'birther' blogs who direct them to bombard the Health Department even though they have no legi.....
(Excerpt) Read more at honoluluadvertiser.com ...
I don’t understand how Obama is legally able to stonewall everyone on his birth certificate. Can ANYONE just move into the White House without proof of birth or citizenship?
“Can ANYONE just move into the White House”
Only if you are the hopey changey dude, have the backing of unions, have ACORN in your corner and initials BHO.
Iyt helps if (D) follows your name because and rules that splly to everyone else do not apply to BHO (D)
“Can ANYONE just move into the White House without proof of birth or citizenship?”
No, but the 43 men who have assumed the presidency each moved in to the executive quarters wiithout showing a BC.
Okubo is trying to cover up what people are really accomplishing with this the ‘UIPA endeavor.’
Each time someone makes a UIPA request for this record or that, we are establishing a pattern AND at the same time uncovering bits and clues about Obama’s vital records based on their answers.
That’s just two ways that UIPA serves the people. We get to know how the government follows the law and how agencies follow the rules.
For example:
Did they collect money for the amendment to Obama’s BC? Yes.
Does it matter if I know whether or not Obama amended his BC before I ask that question? Nope.
The UIPA says that I still get to find out if it was collected and recorded in accordance to policy even if I can’t see the receipt and invoice.=)
This convenience for we, the people, is now a HUGE thorn in THEIR side so the Hawaiian legislature is going to change the UIPA to suit their needs:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2454976/posts
It’s an abuse of power and another piece of the ‘pattern’ that emerging.
SO, this HA article appears to be an OBVIOUS cover for that abuse.
They better hope the truth never comes to light.
Maybe their backgrounds were much more typical. Obama has a questionable background, what with two Muslim fathers (one from Kenya, one from Indonesia), a Muslim name, a Muslim upbringing (he went to a Muslim madrassa), he's a radical Marxist -- all of these make his background questionable. He should have been the first to step up and prove his eligibility, without all of this legal wrangling -- unless of course he's NOT eligible, which is what many of us suspect. And the Dems are going out of their way to protect and shield him.
HIPAA is much more restrictive than most people realize. I had to learn about it for work, and I've never heard of exemptions for births or deaths. Most hospitals are so worried about HIPAA fines that they will go to great lengths to avoid giving out any information that might violate HIPAA. Even after a patient is deceased, information can't be given unless there is a release from the executor of the estate. If any hospital employee was caught looking up a politician or celebrity's records, they'd be disciplined or even fired.
No, one has to be elected first.
I do not seem to recall a “Typical Background” clause in the Constitution.
I just meant that most of them were born in the U.S. Who knows where Obama was born? He refuses to show us his birth certificate. So he must be hiding something.
Thanks for the information. I got slightly more results from a slightly less cursory search than my original search.
"Health information includes any information . . . that relates to the past, present, or future physical or mental health or condition of an individual; the provision of health care to an individual; or the past, present, or future payment for health care to an individual. "
A PDF file, What_is_HIPAA. Yale U.
"HIPAA’s regulatory provisions apply to the use and disclosure of protected health information (PHI) [defined as individually identifiable health information].
PHI is considered individually identifiable if it includes such information as name, address, telephone number, SSN . . . .
Included in PHI is "All elements of dates (except year) for dates related to an individual, including: birth date, admission date, discharge date, date of death . . . ."
Researchers share PHI under slightly different rules and birth dates are exempt -- that may be the nuance I missed in my original post. The name was already known. Thanks again.
But it still seems to me that we are being hornswoggled because:
the hospital in question can deny being the birth hospital w/o violating HIPAA; otherwise they are admitting it because there appears to be nothing in HIPAA that prevents denial.. or more likely IMO they are covering for Obama by not denying it thus leaving the tumult in intact purposefully (or out of fear of the Chicago thugs and the thug in chief, TIC).
It's obvious that our fellow citizen Barack H. Obama feels he's above us little people who are required to release our long-form b.c. or we don't get no respect or service . . . What's the big deal?
All we are saying♩♪♫
is give release a chance♩♪♫
Yes, but all of them, except maybe one(?) and the founders were all NBC and that’s the BIG difference!!!
“Hiding something” is NOT important to an ‘”AFTER-BIRTHER” you see they are paid “Obama 2.0” brigade member and they got what they wanted, an usurper illegal alien in the W.H. and that’s only what matters to them!!!
Isn’t it the case that when they DID released the COLB to the public that the privacy rule NO longer apply to that particular B.C.???
Things change often for good reason. Tens of millions of citizens past were not required to prove citizenship/eligibility to get a job here. But we must.
The I-9 form. I wonder. Are members of Congress required to sign? The president? Citizenship is specified by the Constitution; 7 years for representatives, 9 years for senators; and natural born for president.
But wait! there's a new I-9 Form required as of August 7, 2009 -- if anyone is interested. (Looks to me that it's being phased out).
New employees will not be required to provide their Social Security Number except where the employer participates in the E-Verify program. (E-Verify also being phased out?)
The requirement for federal contractors to participate in the E-Verify program has been postponed. It's now up to the Obama Administration to decide. Ans: federal contractors will not be required to participate in the E-Verify program (soon to defunct anyway?).
No longer required for I-9:
* Certificate of U.S. Citizenship (Form N-560 or N-561)
* Certificate of Naturalization (Form N-550 or N-570)
* Alien Registration Receipt Card (I-151)
* Unexpired Reentry Permit (Form I-327)
* Unexpired Refugee Travel Document (Form I-571)
If the COLB is reflective of the truth, then the information within is no longer private.
The law allows Fukino to issue a noncertified copy of the COLB, she CHOOSES not, too.
Then they complain that they get repeated requests.
Nothing slipping by you. You are just to clever for the rest of us.
Your king awaits your next pary.
“Yes, but all of them, except maybe one(?) and the founders were all NBC and that’s the BIG difference!!!”
And that is a very big “maybe,” but he did seem to satisfy the requirements for the office to the Electoral College, the Congress, Dick Cheney and Chief Justice John Roberts.
Why thank you for your insightful and generous reply!
You are welcome. :-)
The law should not require the candidate to produce a birth certificate. Rather, it should require the candidate to sign an authorization allowing the state’s election commission to obtain it directly from the state where the candidate was born.
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.