And is probably no more accurate than what Bill Ayers wrote in "Dreams from my Father."
Everything which comes from the father of lies must regarded as suspect.
Posted on 09/23/2015 10:18:47 PM PDT by Ray76
Stop your whining. Grow up, and maybe someday you can join the adult table.
‘You’re making more claims that aren’t supported by the evidence...’
Second time I have asked you to iterate the unsupported claims I’ve made. Are you going to produce, or was this simply more bold-faced lies?
And last time I present the American original source that doesn’t say what your foreign source says. And yet you continue to use the foreign source.
Gee, I wonder why?
Again, here is the original American source, not that you will use it.
The question is, are you smart enough to process basic info? Let’s try a little test.
In 2008, Maraniss virtually copied info from the Ayers/Obama fictional book entitled Dreams from my Father. The acct Maraniss copied has since been discredited by manifold sources, but Maraniss’ 2008 WaPo article is credited with helping obama at a crucial stage in the election.
In 2012 Maraniss published a bio of Obama that completely contradicted his 2008 WaPo article. The reason it contradicted the older acct was bc Maraniss had in the interim journeyed to HI and turned up facts that showed beyond the shadow of a doubt that the Dreams acct was FALSE.
Now, which of these two versions seems most solidly based on facts and evidence to you: the OTT 2008 pro-Obama election-boosting WaPo article, or the far more thoroughly researched 2012 bio?
You pathetic, mewling liberal troll. This intellectually vacuous obsession of yours with the idiotically bogus charge of Internationalist is your far lefty obotulism coming out party. Thanks for making it public!
Conservatives have ROUTINELY turned to the British press for accurate reporting re Obama. This is bc the US press is Obama’s Palace Guard. Its job is not to print facts but to safeguard Obama. The only people who consider the American media accurate re Obama are flaming liberals.
Hundreds if not thousands of times I have seen British articles about Obama posted on FR with the byline, “The American media would never report this.” Conservatives LOVE these articles! It’s a breath of fresh air to get even an occasional taste of honest reporting where Obama is concerned.
You, as a far left liberal obot troll, screech like a scalded cat. For you, seeing the truth about Obama honestly reported is like Dracula falling into a vat of garlic juice. You scream, whine, moan, wail and pout like a baby. It’s cringe-inducing.
I know the truth hurts. If you could handle it, you’d cease supporting Obama. So continue on with your infant temper tantrums. Just don’t expect me to join you.
Here is Pennsylvania's (note 1.4 (a) does not require any documentation)
§ 1.4. Delayed registrations.
(a) If there is no record of birth on file with the Division of Vital Records and the birth occurred in this Commonwealth, a delayed registration of birth may be placed on file by the parents of a child up to 7 years of age without documentary evidence.
(b) Delayed registrations filed for children from 7 to 18 years of age or deceased persons may be executed by either parent or someone familiar with the facts of birth at the time of birth.
(c) Delayed registration for persons 18 years of age or older shall be filed by the subject.
(d) The face of the delayed registration form shall be completed and sworn to in the presence of a notarizing official and submitted to the Division of Vital Records in Harrisburg, together with one of the following pieces of documentary evidence:
(1) A certified copy of a county record showing the facts of birth.
(2) A notarized statement sworn to by the doctor or midwife who delivered the child.
(3) A baptismal certificate showing the facts of birth and certified by a priest or minister. The baptism shall have occurred 5 years prior to the date of application for delayed registration.
(4) A decree or certificate of adoption which shows the name of the child and the date and place of birth.
(e) In the event that none of the documents listed in subsection (d) are available, one recorded document at least 5 years old which conclusively establishes the correct name, date and place of birth shall be submitted.
(f) In every instance, there shall appear on the delayed registration of birth a notation as to the nature and date of the documentary evidence which was submitted and the certificate and copies thereof shall be marked ‘‘delayed.’’
Here is Ohio's (3701-5-04(B)(2) allowing anyone with knowledge of the facts of the birth to file an affidavit)
3701-5-04 Delayed birth registration. (A) Any birth certificate submitted for filing eleven or more days after the birth occurred constitutes a delayed birth registration. All such certificates of birth shall be filed with the local registrar who, at the time the certificate is filed, has jurisdiction over the registration district where the birth occurred. An out of institution birth certificate submitted for filing eleven or more days after the birth occurred shall be registered if it meets the requirements of paragraph (B) of this rule and the requirements of rule 3701-5-16 of the Administrative Code.
(B) A certificate of birth filed within one year after the birth occurred shall be registered if it meets the requirements of paragraph (E) of this rule and the following requirements, as applicable:
(1) If the birth was attended by a physician, the certificate of birth contains the physician's signature and date; or
(2) If the birth was not attended by a physician, or was attended by a physician who is deceased, the certificate of birth is supported by an affidavit of an individual, other than one of the child's parents, who has knowledge that the birth occurred at the time and place indicated on the certificate of birth. An affidavit required by this paragraph shall affirm that the birth occurred at the time and place indicated on the certificate.
(C) A certificate of birth filed more than one year but not more than seven years after the birth occurred shall be registered if it meets the requirements of paragraph (E) of this rule and the following requirements, as applicable:
(1) If the birth was attended by a physician, the local registrar shall submit the certificate to the office of vital statistics with a written request that the office search the state files to determine whether or not an original certificate of birth was filed at the time of birth. The local registrar shall register the certificate of birth if the office of vital statistics determines that no original certificate of birth was registered and the state registrar approves the registration; or
(2) If the birth was not attended by a physician, or if the birth was attended by a physician but the physician is deceased, the birth shall be established through the probate court in accordance with section 3705.15 of the Revised Code.
(D) The birth of any person whose birth was not registered within seven years after the birth occurred or whose birth record has been lost or destroyed, shall be registered upon receipt of an order from a probate court, issued pursuant to section 3705.15 of the Revised Code, ordering registration of the birth.
(E) In addition to the applicable requirements of paragraphs (B) to (C) of this rule, a delayed birth certificate, to be registered, shall meet all of the following requirements:
(1) The certificate shall be accompanied by all social security numbers that have been issued to the parents of the child, unless the office of child support in the Ohio department of job and family services, acting in accordance with regulations prescribed under the Family Support Act of 1988, 102 Stat. 2353, 42 U.S.C. 405 , as amended, finds good cause for not requiring that the numbers be furnished with the certificate;
(2) The parents' social security numbers shall not be recorded on the certificate;
(3) The local registrar of vital statistics shall transmit the social security numbers to the state office of vital statistics in accordance with section 3705.07 of the Revised Code; and
(4) No social security number obtained under this section shall be used for any purpose other than child support enforcement.
Texas allows anyone with knowledge of the birth to file an affidavit,
"If the birth occurred outside the mother’s primary place of residence, proof shall consist of an affidavit (notarized) along with a photocopy of an ID from a person having knowledge of the mother’s presence in the legistration district on the date of the birth."
And for delayed births they don't require much:
Not born in licensed institution, we require:
1. The Delayed Certificate of Birth (VS-122) signed by a parent; and
2. Proof of pregnancy and proof of mother’s residence in the registration district at the time of birth are the minimum requirements; and
3. The filing fee of $25.00 and if desired, the $11.00 fee for a certified copy.
Some states allow the owner of the property where the birth occurred to file affidavits for birth registration. All DL has shown is that Hawaii laws are the same as all the other states.
As to the 1982 statute (the territorial one contains no corresponding provision as to extra-territorial births), Hawaiian officials have emphasized that a certificate for a birth outside of the state will list the actual, outside-of-Hawaii location as the place of birth:
“It’s crazy,” said Janice Okubo, director of communications for the Hawaii Department of Health. “I don’t think anything is ever going to satisfy them.”
Okubo, who said that she gets weekly questions from Obama ‘Birthers’ that are “more like threats,” explained that the certificate of live birth reproduced by Obama’s campaign should have debunked the conspiracy theories. “If you were born in Bali, for example,” Okubo explained, “you could get a certificate from the state of Hawaii saying you were born in Bali. You could not get a certificate saying you were born in Honolulu. The state has to verify a fact like that for it to appear on the certificate. But it’s become very clear that it doesn’t matter what I say. The people who are questioning this bring up all these implausible scenarios. What if the physician lied? What if the state lied? It’s just become an urban legend at this point.” Source
Birthers, by repeatedly terming the document issued regarding a person born outside the state an "Hawaiian birth certificate," have just confused themselves into thinking that the certificate states that the birthplace is within Hawaii. Of course, the document isn't actually termed that, either in the statutes or on the official forms.
Ok, here is another example of obot stupidity. Can’t promise it will top yesterday’s sampling, but it’s right up there.
One of our onsite obots told me that congressional hearings are the answer to conservatives’ problems. Well yes, that in itself is stupid, but it gets better.
Namely, the obot offered an example to prove how effective and successful congressional hearings could be. Are you ready for this?
The Valerie Plame hearings.
No, I’m serious. The obot actually used the Plame hearings, on a conservative site, to illustrate how wonderful hearings can be.
Allow me to review. It was claimed that the cover of a non-undercover ‘agent’ was blown. The charge should have been ridiculed and dropped, but the hysterical media and BDS- crazed leftist pols howled for blood.
So the hearings commence. Immediately the party who had blown the non-cover of the non-undercover bureaucrat identified himself.
Hearings over, right?
Wrong. The ‘guilty’ party was not sufficiently close to Bush, so he was let of scott free.
Instead, a party that had NOTHING to do with blowing the bureaucrat’s non-cover was frog marched to prison.
Why?
Bc the scapegoat was close to Bushitler, thus satisfying the bloodlust of the yammering hyenas.
A disgusting travesty from start to finish. But just try to get your mind around the fact that there is an obot on FR sufficiently IQ-challenged to cite that debacle as example of a triumphant congressional hearing.
Mind boggling. That’s all I can say: mind boggling.
Why don’t Internationalist at least read the articles from their foreign sources?
The foreign paper cite to the Hawaiian newspaper and makes the claim that “in the same interview Abercrombie suggested that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health.”
The original interview in the Hawaiian newspaper makes no such statement.
Why do you continue to support the foreign source as somehow more accurate than the American source?
My point was that you were an idiot to claim that there was a law in effect in 1961 and then purport to support that assertion by linking to statutory law not enacted until 1982. And, as I've pointed out, this was all pointed out in effect two years ago. Though, curiously, back on that thread, you didn't say one peep about any territorial law supposedly saying the same thing as the 1982 law.
Now, in a desperate and futile attempt at saving face as I pummel you over this point, you finally dredge out some memorandum of law filed in a case by the losing party. You don't actually cite to any statute or attempt to show how it applies to Obama in 1961. In fact, it doesn't, as I've shown.
You can do your hand-wave and dance. But you can't really sustain the argument. Call it what you want; but you've stepped in it on this point in a big way, and the stench is all yours to enjoy.
And you can tell they were actually born in Hawaii how?
Are you going to post anything that actually addresses this point?
Look, we know from the bits of evidence we have that Stanley Ann Dunham was in Seattle Washington two weeks after Obama's birth date.
This makes the possibility of a birth in Hawaii much more problematic, and the birth elsewhere, such as across the border in a free Canadian hospital, more plausible.
This business of Hawaiian law allowing other people to register a birth after the fact allows for Obama to not actually be born in Hawaii, yet to still receive a Hawaiian birth certificate.
Since we can't see an original document, we can make no determination as to it's validity as proof that Obama was actually born in Hawaii.
See post 185.
And the more you call me an internationalist, the stupider it sounds.
History has shown that they WILL NOT certify anything without a legal loophole saying it could also be false. The only reasonable conclusion from this is that they are lying.
People who trade in lies, such as yourself, find this completely reasonable.
Rational people do not.
‘Nesbitt was part of a tiny circle of Chicago friends on whom the president relied to keep him anchored in a reality outside the Washington funhouse. The two men had bonded playing pickup basketball two decades earlier; their relationship was still firmly rooted in sports, talking smack, and all around regular-guyness.’
Are you trying to coyly reveal your orientation? Bc I don’t see how a straight male could post something that hagiograhical without heaving themselves to death with uncontrollable waves of nausea.
Double Down: Game Change 2012 was written by John Hellerman and Mark Halperin.
Anyone bringing up the Valerie Plame incident as a positive thing could only be a Liberal, but we figured that already.
To my knowledge, the only thing "congressional hearings" have ever done, is to advance Liberal causes.
When they are occurring to advance supposedly conservative causes, they are routinely ineffective and worthless.
The fact remains, Obama can have a fake birth certificate because the system is engineered to allow it.
Foreign births fall within this engineered-by-law, category, and Obama could very well be one of them, though the evidence indicates he was born in Canada, more so than anywhere else.
Grow up and quit dancing your little doggy dance because you think your little yap dog barking has chased away a car. No, the car pretty much just ignores you because you are trivial and irrelevant.
Kindly link me to the news conference in which Obama made his great discovery public. Bc of course it could only beat the birthers if it were made public, and since the title is, ‘How Obama Beat the Birthers,’ it HAD to have been made public. Must have been quite a dog and pony show. I can’t wait to read all the kneepad reporters’ ‘tough’ questions!
And is probably no more accurate than what Bill Ayers wrote in "Dreams from my Father."
Everything which comes from the father of lies must regarded as suspect.
‘To my knowledge, the only thing “congressional hearings” have ever done, is to advance Liberal causes.
When they are occurring to advance supposedly conservative causes, they are routinely ineffective and worthless.’
True!! But try explaining that to a liberal/leftist obot troll of limited intelligence. It can’t be done—any more than it can be explained to a similarly limited leftist that Obama ALWAYS favors foreign invaders over US citizens bc he IS a foreigner, and he hates the US as only a foreign-born anti-Westerner can.
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.