Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: curiosity
Unless you have some evidence to the contrary, the law presumes that what's in the state's vital record is the truth.

We haven't seen any state's vital record yet. There's nothing to assume, except that Obama is hiding his vital records.

That is, if his long form says he was not born in the Hospital, but still says he was born in Hawaii (and the revelations of the Hawaii DOH don't leave any room to doubt that), then the presumption still is he was born in Hawaii.

Instead of assuming what the long form says, let's make it public for everyone to see.

If you want to say he was born elsewhere, you'll have to prove it. To this day, no credible evidence of a birth outside Hawaii has been produced (and no, transparently phony Kenyan birth certificates aren't credible evidence).

Sorry, but the Kenyan birth certificate with the footprint is at least as credible as Obama's redacted (and alleged) COLB. At least the Kenyan certificate contains signatures and information that can be cross-checked. Obama's alleged COLB, not so much.

Actually, I don't think that's true. It's not criminal fraud to lie in a book or to lie to the public in speaches.

Yes, but once you sign affadavits claiming to be eligible for president on the basis of your claims ... that is criminal fraud.

Besides, he could always claim his mother concealed the truth from him and didn't find out he was born at home until now, so he wasn't really lying. And, frankly, I don't see how anyone could possibly prove otherwise.

I think this is extremely possible. I really, truly think that Obama cannot prove where he was born and may not know.

And, frankly, I don't think many people would care wheher he was born in a hospital or at home. Though I doubt very much he was born anywhere other than Kapiolani medical center.

If he wasn't born at the hospital, he may not have been born in Hawaii. That's the point. Who can affirm where he was born?? At least in a hospital, the doctors are pretty reliable sources of information. An unattended birth reported by Granny, not so much. Based on his nonsequential certificate number, I think it's very, very, very unlikely Obama was born in a Hawaii hospital.

355 posted on 03/15/2010 10:16:03 PM PDT by edge919
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 348 | View Replies ]


To: edge919
We haven't seen any state's vital record yet.

State officials have verified that his vital record shows a birth in Hawaii.

Instead of assuming what the long form says, let's make it public for everyone to see.

No assumptions are required to know that the long form shows birth in Hawaii. We know this for two reasons: 1) state officials say his records show brith in Hawaii and 2) his birth was announced in the Hawaii papers in 1961. Hawaii did not register foreign births at the time, and the papers got the birth data for their announcements straight from the Health Bureau upon the registration of said births.

The only thing we don't know for sure without seeing the long form is the hosptial, doctor, or whether his birth was registered as a home birth.

Sorry, but the Kenyan birth certificate with the footprint is at least as credible as Obama's redacted (and alleged) COLB.

First of all, Obama made unredacted photos of the COLB available.

Second of all, there's corroborating evidence supporting the Hawaiian COLB: state officals confirm the state's record shows he was born in Hawaii, and there are birth announcements in the papers, and we know birth announcements were received directly from the department of health. Contrary to birther mythology, they were not phoned in.

There is no comparable corroborating evidence supporting the Kenyan BC.

Furthermore, birth records in Kenya are open to the public, so if Bamabi was born there, birthers would be able to prove it. The fact that they haven't is very telling.

If he wasn't born at the hospital, he may not have been born in Hawaii. That's the point.

No, it's not the point.

What you fail to grasp is that once a state registers a person's birth, even if it is a home birth, the law presumes the registration to be accurate and such registration is sufficient proof of birth in any court of law. The burden of proof the shifts to those who would dispute the birth's location written in the state's records.

Therefore, if his long form showed a home birth in Hawaii, and you wanted to dispute the location, you would have to prove someone committed fraud to register his birth in Hawaii.

Of course, you would never be able to do that. And then there's also the sticky point that there was no motive for anyone to have committed such a crime, even if he were really born in Kenaya.

374 posted on 03/16/2010 10:02:10 AM PDT by curiosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson