[Chongo]

What happens if BO does not comply with SC Justice Davis Souter's order to produce his birth certificate by December 1st? (Not this one shown on factcheck.org)

I have one like this, the Department of State WILL NOT accept it for the purpose of obtaining a passport.

Justice Souter wants one like this(Elvis')

[ort888]

He will finally be exposed for the secret Muslim he is?

[GSixZero]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

I have one like this, the Department of State WILL NOT accept it for the purpose of obtaining a passport.

That's the kind of certificate I used to get my passport.

http://travel.state.gov/passport/get...first_830.html
A certified birth certificate has a registrar's raised, embossed, impressed or multicolored seal, registrar’s signature, and the date the certificate was filed with the registrar's office, which must be within 1 year of your birth. Please note, some short (abstract) versions of birth certificates may not be acceptable for passport purposes.

[SpaceMonkey]

And in any case, Obama is not applying for a passport. The test is whether he is a "natural born citizen," and the state of Hawaii has already verified the authenticity of his birth certificate. Case closed.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

I have one like this, the Department of State WILL NOT accept it for the purpose of obtaining a passport.

Why not?

(BTW, you forgot to link to the whole page on factcheck.org. I'm sure it was just an oversight on your part.)

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2...n_the_usa.html

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

What happens if BO does not comply with SC Justice Davis Souter's order to produce his birth certificate by December 1st?

I'm hoping for a contempt of court with prison time to follow. It'd be highly amusing.

But of course, nothing will happen. Someone will have a quick word in the judge's ear.

[SpaceMonkey]

Can someone find a link to an actual news story about this (or better yet, the order itself)? All I can find are right-wing blog posts quoting each other, with no original source.

[Doofy]

As I understand it, a "certification of live birth" is generally only issued when nobody can find the original birth certificate. I'm sure if they looked for it in enough places, they'd find it.

[RAILhead]

Zing!

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

As I understand it, a "certification of live birth" is generally only issued when nobody can find the original birth certificate. I'm sure if they looked for it in enough places, they'd find it.

It depends on the state, but generally it's issued in lieu of the original birth certificate. The state keeps its copy of the original in its vaults. In some cases, you can request an exact photocopy of the original, but getting the "certification of live birth" is usually faster and easier.

And again, the state of Hawaii has already confirmed that they have the original and it checks out.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

And again, the state of Hawaii has already confirmed that they have the original and it checks out.

Let's have a photo of it then. The original, not the copy.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

As I understand it, a "certification of live birth" is generally only issued when nobody can find the original birth certificate. I'm sure if they looked for it in enough places, they'd find it.

I know that in New York state you can only get a "certification of live birth"; You cannot get access to the original first-filed birth certificate created at birth.

I had to get a duplicate of my birth certificate for some legal reasons and that required me to go to the clerk's office in the small town where I was born. They pulled out a big book from 1970 with all their certificates for births from that year and even their official copy was a "certification" of the record kept by the state health department and not the original. In fact, my duplicate copy was virtually identical to the official copy kept by the clerk's office except for slight differences in the type of paper it was printed on. So, AFAIK, in New York state it is not possible for a citizen to get access to or to get a duplicate of their original birth certificate.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Let's have a photo of it then. The original, not the copy.

Are you accusing the state of Hawaii of incompetence? Or malice? I haven't found a verifiable source for the supposed Souter order, but why should Obama be held to a higher standard than other presidents-elect?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

I know that in New York state you can only get a "certification of live birth"; You cannot get access to the original first-filed birth certificate created at birth.

I'm sure they'd make an exception for a president-elect who's still to prove his natural citizenship.

[ort888]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Are you accusing the state of Hawaii of incompetence? Or malice? I haven't found a verifiable source for the supposed Souter order, but why should Obama be held to a higher standard than other presidents-elect?

Pssst... He's b. l. a. c. k.

You didn't think the man was gonna make it that easy for him? Just like when the colored folks get hassled at the DMV by the man, they are going to put up similar road blocks for any negroes trying to enter the white house. It's all a ploy to keep them down. Like having to pass a literacy test to vote.

This isn't over yet by a long shot.

At the very least we still have to figure out what this guy is all about. I mean... just who IS Barack Obama? What is he trying to hide behind that black skin of his? What's his game?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Are you accusing the state of Hawaii of incompetence? Or malice?

I'm accusing them of not having Obama's birth cert in their records. It takes, what, couple of minutes to take a pic and upload it to the NYT?

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

why should Obama be held to a higher standard than other presidents-elect?

Higher standard? No - the same standard: A natural US citizen. Doubts have been raised, so let's see that cert.

Heck. It'd take me about 30 seconds to put my hand on mine (the original, not a copy).

[dcmacdaddy]

Just to follow up on SpaceMonkey's request, is there a news article or court statement that references this order? I checked the website for the SCOTUS and found no references to Obama.

<edit>
Google's got a much better search engine than the Supreme Court website itself. Here is a link to the docket info (Docket for 08-570). Does anyone know what this legalese means?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by ort888 

just who IS Barack Obama? What is he trying to hide behind that black skin of his?

Revealed:

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

I'm accusing them of not having Obama's birth cert in their records. It takes, what, couple of minutes to take a pic and upload it to the NYT?

The state is prohibited from releasing it to the public. So do you think they are lying?

Higher standard? No - the same standard: A natural US citizen. Doubts have been raised, so let's see that cert.

No, I'm talking about the standard of having to provide the original birth certificate as if it's some kind of required procedure. Did Bush produce his? Obama has lived his entire life as a natural born citizen in the eyes of the state of Hawaii. No legitimate doubts have been raised, which is why the Berg suit and a half dozen or more other suits have all been thrown out of U.S. and state courts at a variety of levels (until this supposed Souter order, which I'm still waiting on a citation for).

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

No legitimate doubts have been raised, which is why the Berg suit and a half dozen or more other suits have all been thrown out of U.S. courts (until this supposed Souter order, which I'm still waiting on a citation for).

See my post two above yours for a link to the docket filing record. I don't know what it means to say they are waiting for a Writ of Certiorari?


<edit>
This law journal site explains what is a Writ of Certiorari (Definition: Certiorari, Petition for Writ of Certiorari.).

[ort888]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

Revealed:

No. Tony Blair has milky white skin to match his pure Christian soul. This Barack Obama character is some sort of nomadic desert savage who just happened to wander into our borders looking to steal the white man's riches. You can tell by the color of his skin and his funny name.

Is it any coincidence that they still can't find his birth certificate? That his mom and dad are both dead? That he had his own "grandmother" killed to preserve his twisted secret? I think not.

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

No, I'm talking about the standard of having to provide the original birth certificate as if it's some kind of required procedure. Did Bush produce his?

No. But then Bush didn't have a Kenyan grandmother stating that she was present at his birth in Kenya.

I mean, it's not like anyone's fussed about foreigners being prez - it paves the way nicely for the Prezinator in 2012. But let's have the truth out.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

What happens if BO does not comply with SC Justice Davis Souter's order to produce his birth certificate by December 1st?

From what I have read on the docket filing before the SCOTUS and what it means to have a request for a Writ of Certiorari, Justice Souter is NOT deciding whether or not Barack Obama has to "produce his birth certificate". Rather, he is deciding, by December 1st, whether or not the SCOTUS will review a lower court's decision (the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit) in the case of Philip J. Berg, Petitioner v. Barack Obama, et al (et al includes the Federal Election Commission). So, what will happen on 01 December is Justic Souter will decide whether or not the SCOTUS will consider reviewing the decision of the lower court. If he agrees to the request for a Writ of Certiorari that means he will agree to review the case. Only after reviewing the lower courts decision in the case will a decision be made.

So, Justice Souter will NOT issue a decision as to whether or not Barack Obama has to "produce his birth certificate"; He will only issue a decision as to whether or not he will review a lower courts decision related to Barack Obama's birth certificate.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

No. But then Bush didn't have a Kenyan grandmother stating that she was present at his birth in Kenya.

Actually, what we have is Philip Berg claiming that Obama's grandmother told a 3rd individual that she was present at Obama's birth in Kenya, but the records he has provided on this are sketchy (sworn affidavits by people whose names have been changed to protect the innocent, that kind of thing).

This is versus the official judgment of the state of Hawaii.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

From what I have read on the docket filing before the SCOTUS and what it means to have a request for a Writ of Certiorari, Justice Souter is NOT deciding whether or not Barack Obama has to "produce his birth certificate". Rather, he is deciding, by December 1st, whether or not the SCOTUS will review a lower court's decision (the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit) in the case of Philip J. Berg, Petitioner v. Barack Obama, et al (et al includes the Federal Election Commission). So, what will happen on 01 December is Justic Souter will decide whether or not the SCOTUS will consider reviewing the decision of the lower court. If he agrees to the request for a Writ of Certiorari that means he will agree to review the case. Only after reviewing the lower courts decision in the case will a decision be made.

So, Justice Souter will NOT issue a decision as to whether or not Barack Obama has to "produce his birth certificate"; He will only issue a decision as to whether or not he will review a lower courts decision related to Barack Obama's birth certificate.

I think it's actually that the respondents (Obama, the DNC, and the FEC) have until December 1 to respond to Berg's petition, after which the Supreme Court will decide whether to hear the case. So far the FEC has waived their right to respond.

[ort888]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Actually, what we have is Philip Berg claiming that Obama's grandmother told a 3rd individual that she was present at Obama's birth in Kenya, but the records he has provided on this are sketchy (sworn affidavits by people whose names have been changed to protect the innocent, that kind of thing).

This is versus the official judgment of the state of Hawaii.

Yes, but how long had Hawaii even been a state at that point? Only 2 years! It was barely even America.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by ort888 

Yes, but how long had Hawaii even been a state at that point? Only 2 years! It was barely even America.

Makes all that controversy about McCain's birth in the Panama Canal Zone seem quaint, doesn't it?

[kd]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

And again, the state of Hawaii has already confirmed that they have the original and it checks out.

Could you humor me and provide the exact quotation that you are relying upon here? The reason I ask that is because the quotes I've seen from the Hawaii Secretary of State say only that they have an original birth certificate on file, not that it "checks out", or proves anything in particular.

I don't think Hawaii has said (nor should they without his permission say) anything about the contents of the birth certificate. Secondary sources, including factcheck.org, seem to be reading more into the Secretary's words than they actually say.

In my opinion, the most likely explanation for Obama's willingness to spend major dollars fighting lawsuits to keep his birth certificate under wraps is not that it would reveal something disqualifying, but that it would reveal something embarrassing.

[besson3c]

My theory: the major 24/7 cable news outlets are extremely sensational - that much I hope we can all agree upon. When not even they cover a story like this, there probably isn't anything there. See Larry Craig. See besson3c's suggestions for some focus and coherence to your crusade against Obama.

[ort888]

John McCain was born wrapped in an American flag.

Barack Obama came to the United States on a mission to return a Coke bottle to his heathen gods. He got confused by all the bright lights and colors and decided to make this his home. The rest is history.

Or at least, that's what I read somewhere. It has to be true.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by kd 

Could you humor me and provide the exact quotation that you are relying upon here? The reason I ask that is because the quotes I've seen from the Hawaii Secretary of State say only that they have an original birth certificate on file, not that it "checks out", or proves anything in particular.

I don't think Hawaii has said (nor should they without his permission say) anything about the contents of the birth certificate. Secondary sources, including factcheck.org, seem to be reading more into the Secretary's words than they actually say.

In my opinion, the most likely explanation for Obama's willingness to spend major dollars fighting lawsuits to keep his birth certificate under wraps is not that it would reveal something disqualifying, but that it would reveal something embarrassing.

You are correct that Hawaii has not said anything about the contents of the birth certificate, only that it is authentic. However, the only reason that the state of Hawaii would have the original birth certificate is if Obama had been born in the state.

[ort888]

The Associated Press quoted Chiyome Fukino as saying that both she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate.

So now we are accepting the word of people with names like "Chiyome Fukino" and "Alvin Onaka" on this? Does this seem fishy to anyone else? Sounds like some sort of vast foreign conspiracy to place one of their own in office and steal all of our goats and nubile women.

[Big Mac]

Wow, so even lefty Souter is interested in this challenge. Can anyone say Constitutional Crisis?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

the only reason that the state of Hawaii would have the original birth certificate is if Obama had been born in the state.

If they have it, let's see it. Pics plz.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

Wow, so even lefty Souter is interested in this challenge. Can anyone say Constitutional Crisis?

Umm...Souter hasn't said if he is interested in it. The record shows he has denied Berg's application for an injunction, though.

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by Doofy 

If they have it, let's see it. Pics plz.

Again, they cannot release it to the public. Do you think they are lying? So far we have:

An official certification of live birth, produced by the state of Hawaii.
An official statement by the state of Hawaii that the original birth certificate (which the "certification of live birth" is based on) is in its possession and is authentic.

The tack that most of the petitioners like Berg are taking in this is that unless Obama produces the original birth certificate, then he is in effect admitting defeat and this "proves" that he was not born in the United States. This argument has been rightly thrown out of several courts already, and it seems likely that the Supreme Court will decline to hear the case at all.

[kd]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

You are correct that Hawaii has not said anything about the contents of the birth certificate, only that it is authentic. However, the only reason that the state of Hawaii would have the original birth certificate is if Obama had been born in the state.

I don't think that's a given, at least for the period from 1911 through 1972. Hawaii would issue a "Certificate of Hawaiian Birth" to people who did not have a birth certificate recorded at the time of their birth, based on nothing more than the word of family friends as to when and where the child was born.

Important Documents for Hawaiian Research
Hawaii Dept. of Health

We can only speculate as to the nature and contents of the document that Hawaii has on file for Obama.

[goMac]

And these people called Democrats whiners...

[goMac]

Originally Posted by kd 

I don't think that's a given, at least for the period from 1911 through 1972. Hawaii would issue a "Certificate of Hawaiian Birth" to people who did not have a birth certificate recorded at the time of their birth, based on nothing more than the word of family friends as to when and where the child was born.

Important Documents for Hawaiian Research
Hawaii Dept. of Health

We can only speculate as to the nature and contents of the document that Hawaii has on file for Obama.

The newspapers in Hawaii have his birth on record because at that point hospitals automatically sent birth notifications to newspapers.

This is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've seen in years.

[kd]

Originally Posted by goMac 

The newspapers in Hawaii have his birth on record because at that point hospitals automatically sent birth notifications to newspapers.

This is quite possibly the dumbest thing I've seen in years.

The purpose of my post was to refute a previous poster's assertion that "the only reason that the state of Hawaii would have the original birth certificate is if Obama had been born in the state". I make no claim about whether Obama was or was not born anywhere in particular. If you read the thread, you'll see that I believe the most likely reason that Obama is fighting to avoid release of the document is that it contains something he finds embarrassing, not that it would somehow disqualify him from the presidency.

What exactly is it that you think is "the dumbest thing [you've] seen in years"?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Again, they cannot release it to the public.

They can with Obama's say so. So let Obama say so. Nothing to hide, nothing to fear, right?

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Do you think they are lying?

I believe *everyone* connected with political high office in any way is lying *all the time* unless proven otherwise.

Pics or it didn't happen.

[SpaceMonkey]

Were you clamoring to see Bush's original birth certificate? How could you just take his word for it like that?

There's no reason for Obama to answer to this ridiculous double standard, so I guess you'll just have to live with it. The state of Hawaii and whatever other government agency (IRS?) that has had to verify it over the years says that Obama is a natural born citizen. Sorry.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by kd 

The purpose of my post was to refute a previous poster's assertion that "the only reason that the state of Hawaii would have the original birth certificate is if Obama had been born in the state". I make no claim about whether Obama was or was not born anywhere in particular. If you read the thread, you'll see that I believe the most likely reason that Obama is fighting to avoid release of the document is that it contains something he finds embarrassing, not that it would somehow disqualify him from the presidency.

What exactly is it that you think is "the dumbest thing [you've] seen in years"?

The amount of evidence that Obama was born in the US is overwhelming, yet people still file dumb suits expecting Obama is going to show up, or even give a damn.

And what do believers of Obama not being a US citizen do in response? They come up with even more ridiculous rumors such as that he wasn't even born in the US at all...

Obama does not legally need to release his birth certificate, even if there is something embarrassing on there. It's entirely within his rights. If Hawaii says they have a birth certificate on hand, that is enough. My father works in passports, and trust me, that would be enough to get a passport.

Even so, Obama handing over his birth certificate to get a passport is confidential. There is absolutely no reason a private citizen needs to see his birth certificate. It's entirely *********ery for people to file suits just so that Obama can show up with his birth certificate.

Hawaii has verified left and right he's a citizen. So why is the lawsuit still continuing?

[SpaceMonkey]

Originally Posted by kd 

I don't think that's a given, at least for the period from 1911 through 1972. Hawaii would issue a "Certificate of Hawaiian Birth" to people who did not have a birth certificate recorded at the time of their birth, based on nothing more than the word of family friends as to when and where the child was born.

Important Documents for Hawaiian Research
Hawaii Dept. of Health

We can only speculate as to the nature and contents of the document that Hawaii has on file for Obama.

The "certification of live birth," which is based on the information in the birth certificate, says Obama was born in Honolulu. If, as the state of Hawaii has indicated, the original birth certificate is authentic, then it should say the same.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

What happens if BO does not comply with SC Justice Davis Souter's order to produce his birth certificate by December 1st? (Not this one shown on factcheck.org)

I have one like this, the Department of State WILL NOT accept it for the purpose of obtaining a passport.

Originally Posted by GSixZero 

That's the kind of certificate I used to get my passport.

You can't in Arizona.
I misplaced the one(like above) I obtained for my first trip to Canada. I went to get another for my last trip (2006), and there was a sign advising that the type above was only acceptable for enrolling a child in school. A certified photocopy is required for passports and border crossings into Canada and Mexico.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

The state is prohibited from releasing it to the public. So do you think they are lying?



No, I'm talking about the standard of having to provide the original birth certificate as if it's some kind of required procedure. Did Bush produce his? Obama has lived his entire life as a natural born citizen in the eyes of the state of Hawaii. No legitimate doubts have been raised, which is why the Berg suit and a half dozen or more other suits have all been thrown out of U.S. and state courts at a variety of levels (until this supposed Souter order, which I'm still waiting on a citation for).

The NYT questioned if McCain was eligible because he was born in the Panama Canal Zone, (sovereign territory of the US at that time). Barry Goldwater's eligibility was also question since he was born in Arizona before it was a state.

BO could end this with one stoke of his pen by authorizing Hawaii to release a certified photo copy.

[goMac]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

The NYT questioned if McCain was eligible because he was born in the Panama Canal Zone, the sovereign territory of the US. Barry Goldwater's eligibility was also question since he was born in Arizona before it was a state.

So? Did anyone sue McCain?

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey 

Were you clamoring to see Bush's original birth certificate?

No. But then, as I explained before, Bush doesn't have a grandmother in Kenya who claims to have been at his birth in Kenya.

There's no double standards here - in political life, if someone throws a doubt like this you do all you can to dispel that doubt - you go grab a TV camera and show the original certificate to it and say "there yer go, doubters". Which Barry isn't doing. Which is highly suspicious.

[ShortcutToMoncton]

Originally Posted by goMac 

And these people called Democrats whiners...

Shhhhhhhhhhh. "Real conservative men don't whine" Doofy is busy screaming for proof every 4 posts, don't disrupt his game. He gets sulky when you do that.



greg

[Doofy]

Originally Posted by ShortcutToMoncton 

Shhhhhhhhhhh. "Real conservative men don't whine" Doofy is busy screaming for proof every 4 posts, don't disrupt his game. He gets sulky when you do that.

I'm not whining. I'm procrastinating.