Posted on 04/23/2011 4:26:06 PM PDT by TommyDale
Snopes' Certification of Live Birth shows supposedly issued in August, 1961 but the Revision date is 11/01. What is REALLY interesting is the light blue time stamp that reveals the actual date of issuance as Jun 6 2007. See the picture for the highlighted area showing the time stamp from the back side where it bleeds through. Hold it up to a mirror and you can see the date!
(Excerpt) Read more at msgboard.snopes.com ...
McCain bears the responsibility for not going after Obama harder on economic issues.
That said, the issue of Obama, his terroristic/communistic/shady past was an issue as it should have been. It was not the only issue, but what are we to do, ignore it? Are we that stupid we can't chew gum and walk at the same time? I firmly believe ALL issues that are relevent should be issues. We can't just pick a few and leave the others undiscussed.
In the end, Obama was going to win no matter what. The MSM was in love with him, Succer Moms everywhere were in love with him, he had the "white guilt" vote, and nearly all the votes from all major minorities. Add in the Acorn and Acornesque cheating going on and you have a RAT victory with Barry.
This was an issue for our side. It wasn't for the lefties. That left the middle, and they were more concerned about the economy than anything.
I believe they still are, and I predict that if the economy doesn't improve, the left will try to run on the "peace and prosperity" of "Clinton's economy". We need to have answers ready.
I do agree with you that McCain failed to go after Obama harder on economic issues.
The second image is also rotated about 90 degrees.
`Hawaii race classification in 1961.`
``A poster over at World Net Daily found Hawaii government information from way back in 1961 in which Hawaii explained how it classified race and ethnic groups.
Below is an excerpt from that Hawaii government information.
I'm not sure what it means, but the classification of "African" as is found on the Obama Hawaii birth certificate that we see on the internet is NOT found in the Hawaii government classification. *****
Race and color
Births in the United States in 1961 are classified for vital statistics into white, Negro, American Indian, Chinese, Japanese, Aleut, Eskimo, Hawaiian and Part-Hawaiian (combined), and "other nonwhite."
The category "white" includes, in addition to persons reported as "white," those reported as Mexican or Puerto Rican. With one exception, a reported mixture of Negro with any other race is included in the Negro group; other mixed parentage is classified according to the race of the nonwhite parent and mixtures of nonwhite races to the race of the father.
The exception refers to a mixture of Hawaiian and any other race, which is classified as Part-Hawaiian.
In most tables a less detailed classification of "white" and "nonwhite" is used.
Completeness of birth registration in 1961 for "white" births is estimated to be 99.3 percent and for "nonwhite" births, 96.6 percent.
The most recent figures for other groups are from the 1950 test which indicated registration completeness at that time to be 85.1 percent for American Indians and 97.4 percent for ''other races," chiefly Chinese and Japanese.
Both figures are probably higher for 1961, but more precise estimates are not available.
A comparison of the race designation in matched sets of birth certificates and census records from the 1950 registration completeness'test indicates very high agreement for white persons and Negroes. There were, however, substantially fewer American Indians recorded on birth records than on census records.``
http://www.alipac.us/ftopic-162990-0-days0-orderasc-.html
========= http://www.google.com/search?q=washington+times+1961+negro&btnG=Search&hl=en&source=hp&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=
``The 1970 census racial categories included: Chinese, Filipino, Hawaiian, Indian American, Japanese, Negro or Black, other, White, Hispanic origin of any race, and White, not of Hispanic origin.``
``The 1980 census racial categories included Aleut, Asian Indian, Black or Negro, Chinese, Filipino, Eskimo, Guamanian, Hawaiian, Indian American, Japanese, Korean, other, Samoan, Vietnamese, White, Hispanic origin of any race, and White, not of Hispanic origin.`` http://www.understandingrace.org/history/gov/begin_end_affirm.html
Lame Stream Media version of Spam.
As a Mulatto his race would have been typed out as “other nonwhite.”
Maybe they really meant “African,” since Obama Sr. was an African.
Negro was the name used by African-Americans before they were called African-Americans.
So an African who was not African-American might have been called an African, not a Negro.
See?
You could show the media his long form birth certificate with his original hoof print notarized in Hell and they wouldn't care.
At this point, busting him for not being an American (he never was) makes about as much sense as busting the Bent One for getting a Lewinski.
Hit him on the big stuff: ObamaCare / Libya / Contempt of Congress for Pete's sake.
I sense that soon the Donald will play the Trump card.
Not if the father literally is an African, which BO Sr. was.
American blacks were called Negroes before they were called African-American, but Africans could have been called African.
People who get adopted get revised birth certificates.
However, Obama was apparently adopted by Soetoro. So it is said.
Yep.
Theresa Heinz is “African” also.
Wow. I don’t remember anyone ignoring the economy and the problem with the Ayers thingie was that HARDLY ANYONE would even give it a listen.
We can walk and chew gum at the same time. It takes nothing away from the economy as a political issue to also talk about birtherism, for whatever reason.
Also missing is Obama’s (zeeeero’s) brains.
““african” is the word used by a PC person who mocked up this “certification””
I think you are right.
Unlike the infamous TANG letter, Obama's CoLB does not claim to be an original document. It only claims to summarize some facts on file with the State of Hawaii. The way to tell if it's valid is to ask the State of Hawaii if those are true facts (hard to do because of their privacy law). Unlike the TANG letter, there is simply no point in document analysis. Either he was born in Honolulu on 4 August 1961 or he wasn't. Either he has owned the Hawaii DoH since Jun 2007 or he hasn't. To prove the document false, you have to prove he has.
Race= AFRICAN shows the amateur status of the people who produced this
People averse to using the term “negro”
The document is basically a database printout. Who knows what set of descriptions exist in the race table? Depending on how they set it up, all someone would have had to do is type update race set description = 'African' where description = 'Negro', and subsequent CoLBs with black parents would now read African
instead of Negro
.
Of course, we don't know what's on the original document. It also wouldn't surprise me if the original actually lists African
as his race. He was apparently something of a Kenyan nationalist at a time when Kenya was bucking for independence from Britain (which it got a few years later). If you'd asked him his nationality, he likely would replied Kenyan
, not English. And I rather imagine he would have preferred to list his race as African
, not negro
, like those folks Bull Connor was oppressing.
Also, Hawaii had a much more relaxed attitude about race than the other 49, especially the more southerly of the 49. So, if he asked to be listed as African, they were probably the least likely of the 50 states to give him an argument.
So it could be that PC do-gooders in Hawaii changed
Since the requirement for a valid COLB is that the information be drawn directly from the LF/BC on file, if the “PC do-gooders” changed the race designation, they immediately invalidated it as a valid COLB.
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.