Posted on 07/27/2009 11:12:35 AM PDT by Danae
Done. I posted his heritage
Ridiculous. Obama was never worried about the black vote, and 95% of blacks have probably never seen his BC, much less cared what ethnicity was typed on it for his father.
You theory conforms to many of the facts we think we know relevant to the core issue, “Why doesn’t Obama release his birth certificate?” It would come down to a political ploy.
Your theory would make life easy for Obama, he could plausibly deny any involvement in any “inaccurate” COLB issued by Hawaii.
Interestingly, your theory survives even if Hawaii’s mail room is not involved.
The findings by expert document examiners that the COLB is a fabrication supports involvement by other than the mail room.
Further, there is the assertion that Hawaii has indicated it did not issue an Obama COLB in 2007, but the evidence for that assertion is unclear.
As it is, O is “in up to here” with the forged (fraudulent) document appearing on the internet. His attorney informed the court on January 26, 2009 that O had published a birth certificate on the internet, and this was confirmed during the same approximate time by WH spokesman Gibbs.
I agree with PhiKapMom, send it to Orly, every little piece helps and she can decide whether and how it fits into her legal theory.
“I did not mean to imply that she was some big mucky muck.”
That is the only reasonable inference from what you said:
“Grandma is VERY well connected in Honolulu. You don’t get to the position of VP of Hawaii’s largest bank and NOT be connected. In Hawaii connections are everything. With connections, you can do just about anything, a favor is a favor, and Grandma likely had more than just a few to pull in.”
The vast majority of bank vice presidents are hardly “VERY well connected.” They will know a lot of folks, and they may have a very little pull with some folks not high in the social food chain. That doesn't make them "VERY well connected."
“With connections, you can do just about anything, a favor is a favor, and Grandma likely had more than just a few to pull in.”
Unlikely. Most bank vice presidents have little leeway to do actual favors for folks that they can “pull in” later on. I've been dealing with my current bank for 18 years, and the folks at my local branch are very nice to me, including any and all the vice presidents. They never hold deposited checks as long as they might legally, although I've nearly never had a deposited check bounce on me. They're always trying to show me new and [to them] interesting banking products, always ready to extend more credit to me and other local businessfolks, and they are generally nice people.
But in 18 years, none of them have ever done anything for me approaching a favor that they could later “pull in” for a reciprocal favor on my part. ESPECIALLY if the favor had anything to do with cutting legal corners.
This part (along with other parts, as noted by other posters) of your tale isn't credible.
sitetest
“My theory was that it was “father unknown” or “bastard”, depending on how Hawaii phrased it in those days,....”
++++++++++++++++++++++++
This could mean that the last two democrat “Pres__ents” can legitimately called illegitimate, birth-wise, if not completely. At the very least they could be called real bastards.
Ya know, by the standard of al-taqqiyia, I spect it would be ok for him to lie about being a Christian his whole life. That would explain why there have’nt been any fatwas against him for being an apostate. If a muslin lieth to gain favor with the infidel so to be promoted into the position of Grand Mufti, the Supreme Caliph of the USA, Allah smiles.
Just wait till he flies a muzln flag over the white house to celebrate some occasion. This too will be a signal.
There IS no birth certificate anymore. It does not exist. An electronic record exists. Also, Obama is under no legal mandate to prove to us anything. There is no law implementing the natural-born citizenship requirement. Only Congress can determine if he fails to qualify, and only when it counts the Electoral Votes.
“Major error: The baby’s race is not listed on the COLB.
Also, whatever point you made about 2000 vs. 2007 on your COLB is not coming through in what you began your piece with.”
+++++++++++++++
Ok, let me point out that I have BOTH a Long form that my mom filled out in her own handwriting, and the COLB from the state of Hawaii. It has a SPECIFIC place on the COLB that states “Race”. Not just ONCE, but TWICE. This is one of the things that sort of gets my attention, there is only ONE section asking for a race designation on Obama’s Factcheck COLB. Perhaps Hawaii in recognition of mixed parentage by 1969 and got more specific. I can’t answer that question. All I can tell you is exactly what I see, which is:”Mother’s Race” and “Father’s race”. Underneath both sections my race is listed as “Caucasian”. I am looking directly at my OWN COLB, which is directly from the HDH AND has the raised stamp, it is an official document. So I don’t know where you come off saying that.
Now as for the 2000 date, I was told by the HDH office that my COLB was ordered by my mom in Feb of 2000 off a record made in the computerized system. Which is correct, I had my wallet stolen in 2000 during a move and I needed to re-create my official identity, so I had my mom order me the COLB so I could do that. When the office printed out my COLB to send to my mom, it was SUPPOSED to be dated with the real date it was printed on. Which should have been Mar 6. 2000. Instead it says Mar 6. 2007. It is very distinctly different. I was told that I could sent my current COLB in and they would send me a new one with a proper date on it. The point is, it was somehow miss-dated in 2000. It should have had a 2000 date on it because that is the year and the day that it went through the machine.
You don't convince people with such nasty derision. Interesting, coming from a poster with a lot of Christian stuff on your home page. As I read this post, it was obvious to me that it is a first draft, and the author was asking for constructive criticisms to refine the theory, if indeed it is plausible. You have hooted and repeatedly flung poo, but have provided no constructive proofs of your flat assertions.
Learn to debate properly.
Blah blah blah
Try reading instead of writing. I posted the constructive proof directly to you.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2302120/posts?page=64#64
His fact check has only ONE slot for Race, which underneath that, says African.
Stanley is Ann Duhams father, Ann’s first name is also Stanley. Yea confusing.
Ummmm, I think I did. Because he had a “New” colb printed with the race listed as “African” to show to the Black Community. Meanwhile his Long Form has Caucasian or something else on it. It would mean proof of a forgery, even if legitimately printed on a Hawaii Machine from the Office of Vital Statistics... and possibly mean some serious consequences for the state of Hawaii and the person who did the deed and sent it to Obama.
I guess nothing can be proven until documents are released. Sealed documents only lead to people filling in the blanks with their own theory. I can only absorb what is given as fact and throw out what I see as not fact by assumption. We all can only assume unless proven wrong. I haven’t seen any evidence (true evidence) of who or what this man actually is.
Kind of irritating to say the least! So, I guess we all can agree to disagree and cross our fingers that someone one day will shed light on all of this and give us the facts plain and simple.
Good luck on your quest too!
I am curious why Obama asked for a copy of his birth certificate in May/June of 2007. Why didn’t he have a COLB before this time? Wouldn’t he have had to have one for a passport, a driver’s license, his law license, as a state senator, as a US senator?
Obama announced his candidacy in Feb, 2007 then requests a birth certificate in May/June 2007. Why?
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.