Posted on 06/07/2009 4:13:34 PM PDT by cycle of discernment
According to the Hawaii Star-Bulletin, the State of Hawaii, Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.
The department only issues "certifications" of live births, and that is the "official birth certificate" issued by the state of Hawaii, she said.
And, it's only available in electronic form.
Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in 2001.
"At that time, all information for births from 1908 (on) was put into electronic files for consistent reporting," she said.
Information about births is transferred electronically from hospitals to the department.
"The electronic record of the birth is what (the Health Department) now keeps on file in order to provide same-day certified copies at our help window for most requests," Okubo said.
Asked for more information about the short-form versus long-form birth documents, Okubo said the Health Department "does not have a short-form or long-form certificate."
"The birth certificate form has been modified over the years and decades to conform to national standards and models," she said.
Okubo also emphasized the certification form "contains all the information needed by all federal government agencies for transactions requiring a birth certificate."
She added that the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized the state's current certification of live birth "as an official birth certificate meeting all federal and other requirements."
The issue of what constitutes an official Hawaii birth certificate received national attention during last year's presidential campaign. Those who doubted Barack Obama's American citizenship called the copy of the Hawaii birth document posted on his campaign web site a fake.
Asked about that document, Okubo said, "This is the same certified copy everyone receives when they request a birth certificate."
Is Ms. Okubo trying to say that Hawaii no longer has a copy of Obama's original birth certificate on file? -- how convenient.
Is Ms. Okubo saying that the previous statement from Hawaii state health director Dr. Chiyome Fukino is not true?
"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."
Why does everyone in Hawaii have a different story?
Maybe Indiana Jones can find Obama's original birth certificate. After all, he found the Ark of the Covenant. COLB 6/7/09
New Billboard idea:
What is HE HIDING and WHY? ?
Quote me the Immigration (U.S.)law as it stood in 1971. Quote Indonesian Law in 1971 and then we can debate it. Otherwise from what I have read and researched, you are incorrect.
Obama Problems: I Birth Certificate II Selective Service Registration
*****Now this: What, Obama never registered for the Draft? ? http://www.debbieschlussel.com/archives/2008/11/exclusive_did_n.html If he’s not a citizen, then he couldn’t register for the draft? “if his Selective Service application is forged that is an impeachable offense. . a forged, back-dated Selective Service Registration form is a felony. As I understand it, a felon is likely ineligible for the presidency.” Forged signature? http://www.oilforimmigration.org/facts/?p=381 “Failure for men to register with Selective Services before turning 26, even if not prosecuted, will render them ineligible for student financial aid, U.S. citizenship, federal job training, jobs in the executive branch of the federal government and the U.S. Postal Service.”. . http://countusout.wordpress.com/2008/11/27/obama%e2%80%99s-signatures-are-different-on-his-counterfeit-selective-service-registration-and-his-statement-of-candidacy/ “A FOIA docu ment of Obama’s Selective Service Registration shows a 2008 sequence number for a supposed 1980 registration, an incorrect date of signature, an obsolete postal stamp and other discrepancies.” and http://nativeborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/03/27/was-obamas-selective-services-registration-form-doctored/ and Selective Service Update: Another FOIA Request http://www.therightsideoflife.com/?p=6293
So now what?
I suggest that you should quote it, since you made the claim that Obama's actions violated it.
Quote Indonesian Law in 1971 and then we can debate it.
Indonesian law is irrelevant. Indonesian law can no more strip a U.S. citizen of their citizenship than U.S. law can strip an Indonesian citizen of their's. If Indonesian law said that dual citizenship was not allowed and Obama's stepfather registered him as an Indonesian citizen then it was that citizenship which was fraudulent and not his U.S. one.
Otherwise from what I have read and researched, you are incorrect.
Then by all means present what you have read and researched and we can discuss it.
Weannie
You ducked.
Bubai.
OK, here's the text of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1953 which was in effect when Obama was born. Scroll down to Chapter 3 Section 349 and read what it says about relinquishing natural born citizenship.
Now you claim the law was different and that Indonesian law had something to say about it as well. The ball is back in your court. Post what you say the law was in both cases. Or are you a weannie?
the founders did not qualify due to non citizen parents (and were born here) so they had to qualify themselves in with the phrase and those who are citizens at the writing of this constitution - paraphrasing
but you knew that didn’t you.
And what does that have to do with McCain? Or Obama?
but you knew that didn’t you.
It's hard to tell from what you posted, but I'm guessing 'no'.
Still lurking the CoLB threads for your selfish amusement by tweaking posters I see, obamanoid. Being a contrarian on these threads has given you quite a rep. I’ll bet it takes a wheelbarrow to carry your ego, now.
Yeah. You see the strangest stuff posted on these threads. Most amusing.
Being a contrarian on these threads has given you quite a rep. I’ll bet it takes a wheelbarrow to carry your ego, now.
No, I'm still the same old modest, humble, lovable me.
You appear to be illiterate. There is nothing in Section 349 about natural-born citizenship.
Hope this helps.
Natural born and native born are synonymous, as anyone literate enough to have read the Constitution would know.
Hope this helps.
Not at all. Unless you can point out what part of the Constitution or what law differentiates between native born citizen, natural born citizen, and citizen from birth.
Suspect you are right.
Just in passing, I mean absolutely no disrespect to anyone and wish no ill will. But all this speculation about COLBs and states isusing COLBs to people not born there just seems off the mark.
I’ve gotten six legal copies of my birth certificate in the last three years, and they all look like the one Obama produced. I would imagine at this point almost every state, if not all, has transferred to electronic records. It’s just a database printout. It simply says what the original paper records transcribed to the electronic database said. Now some states offer long and short forms, but they’re still database printouts.
As far as states issuing birth certificates to people not born there, they do. But they don’t lie on them. My youngest son was adopted from a foreign country. The state of California has entered him into its database and issues him a birth certificate upon request. That’s a courtesy for convenience, and it states the actual country of his birth. Likewise, I know an adult adoptee born in Korea. She has a state of Hawaii COLB and it accurately states her country of birth as Korea. The only reason Obama could get a COLB that says he was born in Hawaii is because that’s what the original records transcribed into the electronic database said.
It all seems pretty striaght forward.
Thanks for your admitting your illiteracy and vicious anti-Americanism.
Thanks for admitting you've never read the Constitution, the relevant Supreme Court decisionss, or the applicable laws. It must be so much easier to operate from a position of ignorance.
Please cite where the Constitution distinguishes the moon from green cheese, shit from shinola, or your ass from a hole in the ground. Can you tell the difference between them? Is your ignorance genuine, or feigned? Why do you hate America?
It's apparent that your ignorance is very genuine.
FYI: weenie
” (5) making a formal renunciation of nationality before a diplomatic or consular officer of the United States in a foreign state, in such form as may be prescribed by the Secretary of State; or
(6) making in the United States a formal written renunciation of nationality in such form as may be prescribed by, and before such officer as may be designated by, the Attorney General, whenever the United States shall be in a state of war and the Attorney General shall approve such renunciation as not contrary to the interests of national defense; or “
This is EXACTLY what Obama would have done in order to get Papers and citizenship in order to go to School in Indonesia.
It goes further to state:
“(b) Whenever the loss of United States nationality is put in issue in any action or proceeding commenced on or after the enactment of this subsection under, or by virtue of, the provisions of this or any other Act, the burden shall be upon the person or party claiming that such loss occurred, to establish such claim by a preponderance of the evidence. Any person who commits or performs, or who has committed or performed, any act of expatriation under the provisions of this or any other Act shall be presumed to have done so voluntarily, but such presumption may be rebutted upon a showing, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the act or acts committed or performed were not done voluntarily. “
He could have done so, there is no record he did or did not. He might well have his citizenship back, but NOT as a Natural Born citizen. No where in this does it state or otherwise imply that he would get his native status back. In fact, he would NOT have then, nor would he today.
It is his IMMIGRATION status that is relevant.
Ping to post 99
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.