Posted on 12/09/2008 9:02:22 AM PST by ckilmer
Wrong. The Certificate of Live Birth is the "source document" and is issued under the circumstances listed above for the Certification, as well as for the usual birth in Hawaii less than a year before registration. The "Certification" is merely an extract of the information originally submitted on the "Certificate", although most likely the information is pulled up from a computer database, rather than by looking at the original "Certificate".
Sigh... it doesn't help matters any when the terminology is so messed up by folks "trying to help".
The main reason for needed the "Certificate" rather than the Certification, is for the history (and increased difficulty of forgery). The Certification only shows the current information, whereas the information on the Certificate can be changed for various reasons. The Certificate would show if it was a result of a "late filing" or for a birth outside the state of Hawaii. The Certification *should* show the correct birthplace, even if the parents names have been changed due to adoption, or even when a DNA test that shows the wrong father was listed on the original.
Because it's computer generated, contains much less information (no signatures of a parent, doctor, hospital official etc) and has no information on the source of the information, it's much easier to forge one with one or two entries having less "inconvenient" values.
Well, that sounds possible...there are photos of Ann D posing nude, allegedly for Davis, may still be on the net. But Zero could stop the lawsuits & suspicions by showing a copy of his true BC to the Court. It wouldn’t have to be seen worldwide. And the media much as they wanted would not ask many questions...or else...after all, he owns them. (Singing, ‘Chicago, Chicago—’)
Grandma, a banker, was familiar with the problems non-citizens in Hawaii were having with loan applications.
***That’s quite the conspiracy theory... ;-)
“...that’s why I said do you think you’re going to get those “many members” from that Democrat Congress.... LOL...”
Sounds like you may be behind the curve on this.
VP Cheney will act as the President of the Senate at the Jan 8 joint session. And the session has one purpose, counting the electoral votes.
All it takes is a single team of one Senator and one Representative to present an Objection to O’s qualification. In such event, O’s reps may or may not respond by producing evidence clearly proving O is a natural born citizen. Obviously, it would be more desirable to base any Objection on clear evidence O is not a natural born citizen.
If upon consideration of the evidence the Objection is sustained by a majority, the matter is concluded and VP elect Biden serves as acting Pres until a Pres shall be qualified. Such a vote is not inconceivable. For example, if Obama becomes entangled in criminal circumstances many Dems may see Hillary as a better choice.
If Obama has not produced acceptable evidence and the Objection is defeated by a majority of Dems, the argument will be the Dems have in essence improperly amended the Constitution, by ignoring its clear language and adopting an impermissble result.
That will likely (had better!) initiate a request for USSC review.
“Grandma, a banker, was familiar with the problems non-citizens in Hawaii were having with loan applications.
***That’s quite the conspiracy theory... ;-)”
O’s refusal and substantial effort to avoid producing the documents leads us to assemble what we think we know in any number of logical sequences.
Do I have first-hand knowledge G’ma was aware of any citizenship problems with loan applicants? Of course, not. However, when I read about that at another source it did not seem implausible.
Ann has been described as a “free spirit” and it was during the 60’s. I suspect G’ma, the well-connected banker, was involved with her grandchild’s welfare for any number of reasons.
If Obama has not produced acceptable evidence and the Objection is defeated by a majority of Dems, the argument will be the Dems have in essence improperly amended the Constitution, by ignoring its clear language and adopting an impermissble result.
***That seems like a likely scenario. Once it gets to congress we can expect no one to touch this issue with a ten foot pole.
That will likely (had better!) initiate a request for USSC review.
***I don’t see it as all that likely. I hope for our republic’s sake that I’m wrong.
“I don’t see it as all that likely. I hope for our republic’s sake that I’m wrong.”
Agreed.
I think it is not too soon to recognize that as of today, whether it is O or Hillary, we have a Marxist for a President.
I was being facetious. The liberal argument about the birth announcement was that gramma would have had to know that zer0bama was going to run for president 45 years ago... whereas your argument is very simple and highly likely. So it really isn’t quite the conspiracy theory. Sorry, I thought you’d see it but now I can see it’s a bit of a stretch.
No apology necessary. Having read your posts to others on this issue, I sensed your response was somewhat tongue in cheek.
Now I am trying to recall if I have read anywhere that Ann used the name Obama for herself or Barack during his younger days.
Ciao.
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.