Hillarysworld

Well, the birth certificate controversy does provide another diversion from many, many issues that the country is facing.  Perhaps, that is what he intends . . . the timing of many of the "discoveries" take place at odd times, like right in the middle of the heathcare debate . . ., but maybe I am just overly suspicious.  There is just so much being thrown at us, it is hard to sort it all out at times.  I like hard facts to support my conclusions.

I don't know.  Frankly, I feel that the BC and other documents are under "lock and key", not because he was or was not born in Hawaii, but some other detail that they do not want exposed.  But, that is just my opinion. 

Calico wrote:

---

Well, the birth certificate controversy does provide another diversion from many, many issues that the country is facing.  Perhaps, that is what he intends . . . the timing of many of the "discoveries" take place at odd times, like right in the middle of the heathcare debate . . ., but maybe I am just overly suspicious.  There is just so much being thrown at us, it is hard to sort it all out at times.  I like hard facts to support my conclusions.

I don't know.  Frankly, I feel that the BC and other documents are under "lock and key", not because he was or was not born in Hawaii, but some other detail that they do not want exposed.  But, that is just my opinion.

---

I agree with you, and there are some other troubling developments with regard to this issue. The timing is always one that would favor Obama. The more he drags it out the more it can be used as diversion. I do think there may be something in his papers from the past that will surely expose his real agenda and views that he does not want known. I do think it's something other than the place of his birth but, those things are not the issue. I think the entire thing is being played from both sides for political gain. These parties and politicians have been doing this for a long, long time.

I don't think you are overly suspicious at all. We just can't be too aware, and diligent in these times.

 

Alice Paul wrote:

---

 

Calico wrote:

---

Well, the birth certificate controversy does provide another diversion from many, many issues that the country is facing.  Perhaps, that is what he intends . . . the timing of many of the "discoveries" take place at odd times, like right in the middle of the heathcare debate . . ., but maybe I am just overly suspicious.  There is just so much being thrown at us, it is hard to sort it all out at times.  I like hard facts to support my conclusions.

I don't know.  Frankly, I feel that the BC and other documents are under "lock and key", not because he was or was not born in Hawaii, but some other detail that they do not want exposed.  But, that is just my opinion.

---

I agree with you, and there are some other troubling developments with regard to this issue. The timing is always one that would favor Obama. The more he drags it out the more it can be used as diversion. I do think there may be something in his papers from the past that will surely expose his real agenda and views that he does not want known. I do think it's something other than the place of his birth but, those things are not the issue. I think the entire thing is being played from both sides for political gain. These parties and politicians have been doing this for a long, long time.

I don't think you are overly suspicious at all. We just can't be too aware, and diligent in these times.

 

 

---

AP, looks like we are on the same page.

It is too coincidental that the BC issue happens at such crucial times.  It is meant to distract and it is doing that very well.  Last time I looked, freerepublic had well over 4,000 responses to the BC thread.  The focus needs to be not on whether he was born in Hawaii, but what he is trying to hide from the public.  There lies the answer.

Yes, it is being played by both sides.  And, they know exactly what they are doing. 

These are very troubling times that we are living in now . . . America is changing before our eyes.

 

Alex the main room is to post new articles.  There is no rule as far as the BC issue. Post it here then when it runs its course We will file it away.  Its not off topic so it can be posted here.

Annab wrote:

---

Wow....this is huge. For her to voice this at Huffington Post means a lot. Amazing how this story has grown, it will be interesting to see how it ends. It is definitely starting to snowball. I'm sure that the WH strategy is to ignore it and it will go away. Doesn't look like that's going to happen.

---

It is very significant that a HuffPo blogger would post this call for BO to produce  his BC.  It's also a little suspicious.  Those guys try to make The Fraud seem flawless, regardless of how weak he is, or how far removed his policies are from his promises to the so-called progressives.  It is also true that if there's nothing to the BC issue, all Obama has to do is produce the papers.  There is no logical reason why he would not do something so simple in order to put this issue to bed, if he does, in fact, have a valid BC from this country.

It is a diversion. Keep on with current activities. Huffpo not our friends.

Here's the comment I just posted to the CBS News blog, after that ridiculously biased news story:

by Carolyn_Rodham August 4, 2009 6:08 PM EDT
Soooooomuch ignorance and misinformation! I spent months trying to understand the details of this controversy, so here is the fruit of my labors, in case anyone is interested in facts:

The document posted on Daily Kos and subsequently on Obama's Fight the Smears website as Obama's "official birth certificate" -- and the same document subsequently examined by fackcheck.org and Politifact -- is called a "CERTIFICATION of live birth" (COLB) or so-called "short form" document. The COLB, also known as a "computer copy," is a short transcript of a person's birth record that only includes some of the information from the original "certificate of live birth". It usually states only the name, sex, date of birth, place of birth, parents' names, and the state file number.

The COLB is different from the "CERTIFICATE of live birth" (aka, the traditional, "long-form" birth certificate) which is the original certificate completed at the time of the child's birth. The certificate of live birth is prepared by the hospital and includes the signatures of at least one of the parents and usually the physician or another witness to the birth.

When you order a copy of your birth certificate in Hawaii, in place of actual photocopies of the original, long-form birth certificate, Hawaii's Department of Health now issues the "Certification of Live Birth." When duly certified, the COLB can be used for all intents and purposes for which a regular birth certificate might be used.

FactCheck.org announced last August that its staffers had "seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate," but if you look at their photographs, what they are holding is the COLB. Some have claimed the COLB examined by FactCheck was altered and forged, but let's skip over that whole debate for now, and concede that the COLB examined by factcheck and posted on the Fight the Smears website is authentic. The major problem with this is that under Hawaiian law, a foreign born child can be registered as a naturalized (but not "natural born") U.S. citizen following application of the parents. Hawaii Revised Statute 338-17.8 allows registration of birth in Hawaii for a child that was born outside of Hawaii to parents who, for a year preceding the childs birth, claimed Hawaii as their place of residence. The parents would be issued a Certification of Live Birth. This is not proof of where the child was born. It only proves that the parents claimed Hawaii as their main place of residence for the prior year. Thus, if Obama was actually born in Kenya, his mother could have registered that birth with Hawaii's Health Department when she and her son returned to the island, and his place of birth -- on the COLB -- would be listed as "Hawaii." Only the original "vault" birth certificate would contain the actual date and place of birth, but Obama has thus far elected not to authorize release of that document.

On October 31, 2008 (just before the election), the Hawaii Department of Health director released a statement verifying the legitimacy of Obama's birth certificate. DOH Director Dr. Chiyome ****** and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate. However, in their official press release they conspicuously failed to state whether it is an original birth certificate from Hawaii and refused to confirm that the information on the "original" certificate conforms to what has appeared on the COLB produced in 2007. They also reiterated that state law bars release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who does not have a "tangible interest."

In short, the document posted by Obama does not contain all the information needed to conclusively verify that he is a natural born citizen and legally eligible to hold the Office of President.

But I will repeat once more, for the record: even if the original vault birth certificate confirmed that Obama was indeed born abroad, he would still have met criteria as a "natural born citizen" by virtue of being born to a US Citizen IF his mother had lived in the US for a period of ten years at least five of which occurred after the age of 14. Alas, she gave birth at 17 or 18 (I've heard conflicting reports) and missed the residency requirements by a few years.

Should that be enough to disqualify Obama from holding the office of POTUS? Not in my opinion, but it would pose a legitimate constitutional question that I think the SCOTUS should rule on. But they won't -- too much of a hot potato and they got burned eight years ago.

Carolyn_Rodham wrote:

---

Here's the comment I just posted to the CBS News blog, after that ridiculously biased news story:

by Carolyn_Rodham August 4, 2009 6:08 PM EDT
Soooooomuch ignorance and misinformation! I spent months trying to understand the details of this controversy, so here is the fruit of my labors, in case anyone is interested in facts:

The document posted on Daily Kos and subsequently on Obama's Fight the Smears website as Obama's "official birth certificate" -- and the same document subsequently examined by fackcheck.org and Politifact -- is called a "CERTIFICATION of live birth" (COLB) or so-called "short form" document. The COLB, also known as a "computer copy," is a short transcript of a person's birth record that only includes some of the information from the original "certificate of live birth". It usually states only the name, sex, date of birth, place of birth, parents' names, and the state file number.

The COLB is different from the "CERTIFICATE of live birth" (aka, the traditional, "long-form" birth certificate) which is the original certificate completed at the time of the child's birth. The certificate of live birth is prepared by the hospital and includes the signatures of at least one of the parents and usually the physician or another witness to the birth.

When you order a copy of your birth certificate in Hawaii, in place of actual photocopies of the original, long-form birth certificate, Hawaii's Department of Health now issues the "Certification of Live Birth." When duly certified, the COLB can be used for all intents and purposes for which a regular birth certificate might be used.

FactCheck.org announced last August that its staffers had "seen, touched, examined and photographed the original birth certificate," but if you look at their photographs, what they are holding is the COLB. Some have claimed the COLB examined by FactCheck was altered and forged, but let's skip over that whole debate for now, and concede that the COLB examined by factcheck and posted on the Fight the Smears website is authentic. The major problem with this is that under Hawaiian law, a foreign born child can be registered as a naturalized (but not "natural born") U.S. citizen following application of the parents. Hawaii Revised Statute 338-17.8 allows registration of birth in Hawaii for a child that was born outside of Hawaii to parents who, for a year preceding the childs birth, claimed Hawaii as their place of residence. The parents would be issued a Certification of Live Birth. This is not proof of where the child was born. It only proves that the parents claimed Hawaii as their main place of residence for the prior year. Thus, if Obama was actually born in Kenya, his mother could have registered that birth with Hawaii's Health Department when she and her son returned to the island, and his place of birth -- on the COLB -- would be listed as "Hawaii." Only the original "vault" birth certificate would contain the actual date and place of birth, but Obama has thus far elected not to authorize release of that document.

On October 31, 2008 (just before the election), the Hawaii Department of Health director released a statement verifying the legitimacy of Obama's birth certificate. DOH Director Dr. Chiyome ****** and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate. However, in their official press release they conspicuously failed to state whether it is an original birth certificate from Hawaii and refused to confirm that the information on the "original" certificate conforms to what has appeared on the COLB produced in 2007. They also reiterated that state law bars release of a certified birth certificate to anyone who does not have a "tangible interest."

In short, the document posted by Obama does not contain all the information needed to conclusively verify that he is a natural born citizen and legally eligible to hold the Office of President.

But I will repeat once more, for the record: even if the original vault birth certificate confirmed that Obama was indeed born abroad, he would still have met criteria as a "natural born citizen" by virtue of being born to a US Citizen IF his mother had lived in the US for a period of ten years at least five of which occurred after the age of 14. Alas, she gave birth at 17 or 18 (I've heard conflicting reports) and missed the residency requirements by a few years.

Should that be enough to disqualify Obama from holding the office of POTUS? Not in my opinion, but it would pose a legitimate constitutional question that I think the SCOTUS should rule on. But they won't -- too much of a hot potato and they got burned eight years ago.

---

Carolyn, JOB WELL DONE!!! Perfectly described the issue at hand.

 

Alex01, Mslas4hillary.....thanks for clarification.

I need it for when I go to battle with the many bots I encounter.

As for it being a diversion, I don't see that it diverts attention from his broken promises, or the lack of jobs or the battle over health care. I think it places a cloud of doubt over him. If he eventually shows it, and it's authentic, then why did he wait so long? And what's on that BC that he doesn't want people to see. But the galling part of it all.....why so much scrutiny on Hillary's hair and the Bosnia non-incident and etc. And Sarah's shoes and her children and etc. And this man skates through totally unchecked. It's irritating beyond words.

Carolyn_Rodham wrote:

---

I missed this announcement on 07/28/2009 from the Hawaii DOH Director, saying what she should have said nine months ago: "I, Dr. Chiyome ******, director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai'i State Department of Health verifying Barrack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen."

Do we really think she was paid off by Axelrod to lie about it? Or that someone at the Office of Vital Statistics back in 1961 was paid off to falsify Obama's birth record?

Alex wrote, "you need TWO U. S. citizen parents to be a natural born citizen." You're right in the sense that at the time of McCain's birth, the laws had not yet been enacted specifying that children born abroad to at least ONE US citizen are considered natural born (if the parent meets the residency requirements I desribed above). By the time of Obama's birth, those statutes were law. In any case, if Fukimo is telling the truth, Obama was not born abroad.

The other issue you raise -- that Obama is not a natural born citizen because his citizenship status at birth was also governed by the British Nationality Act of 1948 -- potentially has more legs, but the relevant courts, including the SCOTUS, have declined to render a judgment on that.

And now we have the following: On July 27th, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives passed H.R. 593, commemorating the 50th anniversary of Hawaii's statehood, including the text, "Whereas the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961." The vote passed 378-0.

---

I don't know how Obama's goons are influencing people, or if they have to do anything at all.  I do know that with only one U. S. citizen parent, you can be a CITIZEN, but not a natural born citizen.  Obama has only ONE U. S. citizen parent, thus he is a citizen, but not a natural born citizen.  Barry thus does not meet all three of the requirements to be president of the United States.  F-u-k-i-n-o is talking out of her @$$.

 HR 593 means, in my opinion, absolutely nothing.

I'm surprised that you think Obama's minions would not do something nefarious to influence people like Dr. F, or the outcome of a race.  I thought you were aware of what happened during the primaries, and the caucuses in particular.

Unfortunately, Democrats (remember Howard Dean and Donna Brazille brushing us off their shoes?) are capable of the lowest behavior imaginable these days.

Everyone in the media and in politics is treating Obama like the 'crazy' rich uncle in the family.