Replies

"The Certification of live birth posted by Obama on the internet doesn’t even qualify in Hawaii as equivalent to the original certificate (not certification) for all purposes, as has been pointed out numerous times."

It's been pointed out numerous times that this is a false allegation.

"So your statement that the certification is, paraphrased by me, “legally equivalent to the original certificate for all purposes,” is false."

"Backers of the idea that Mr. Obama isn't a natural-born citizen say Mr. Obama's certification of live birth doesn't quell the issue. They say a certification can be obtained after birth."
"But the Hawaii State Department of Health said Monday that there is no difference between a certificate and a certification of live birth in the eyes of the state. For instance, either can be used to confirm U.S. citizenship to obtain a passport or state ID, said Alvin Onaka, a research and statistics officer at the Department of Health."
THE WASHINGTON TIMES Thursday, August 28, 2008

"Since you are so interested in defending Obama’s suspect documentation,..."

I'm interested in countering a mythology that has a small segment of conservatives off chasing their tails.

"I will let you put in the effort to find out which particular purposes the certification of live birth is insufficient for. If I remember correctly, it has something to do with homesteading or land ownership."

Old news. It's program for persons with native Hawaiian ancestry, indigenous people, to qualify for a homesteading program. The program does not reject birth certificates, but they do require additional information about one's ancestry. This program has been misrepresented by the Obama ineligibility myth.

My, you are a trusting soul.

And a great apologist for Obama.

Isn’t it great that those who clamour loudest for transparency in others are the least likely to be willing to provide it in regard to themselves.

Keep believing my friend. I wouldn’t in the least be surprised to see your bubble popped when someone in our legal system decides they have enough intestinal fortitude to simply require that Obama actually document his citizenship status, whatever it is.

Hawaii claims to have Obama’s “original”, whatever it is, while Obama claimed his posted copy is “all” there is. Both cannot be true, unless there is no “original” certificate.

You quoted, “The program does not reject birth certificates, but they do require additional information about one’s ancestry.”

While not rejecting Obama’s certification, the American people (at least some of us) “require additional information about (the) one’s ancestry.” Like an original birth certificate which could reconcile the conflicting statements about where Obama was born: Mombasa, Kenya, or one of two different hospitals in Hawaii.

As long as Obama’s transparency pills are for others and not himself, I will take as a lie anything that comes from his mouth that cannot be independently, and thoroughly, verified.

By the way, do you, personally, believe that Obama was born in Hawaii?

Also, do you think he travelled on a foreign passport, not as an American, after becoming an adult (18 or over)?

Lastly, do you think he attended college as a foreign student?

You appear to be siding with the Democrat position?