A Colb does not identify the root document.
The root document of a Certification of Live Birth is a Certificate of Live Birth.
Posted on 03/05/2009 1:52:30 PM PST by rxsid
ORDER For the reasons set forth in an accompanying memorandum, the defendants' motion to dismiss [#9] is granted, and John D. Hemenway is ordered to show cause within eleven days of the date of this order why he should not be sanctioned under Rule 11(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/13033216/Dismissed
How? Where exactly does the Constitution specify that the president must prove his eligibility? And to whom must he prove it?
That does NOT include giving 2 different Colb's to lefty websites.
He made a physical copy available at his campaign headquarters to any members of the press willing to come and inspect it. Only one outlet (factcheck) bothered to go look at it.
Do you bother READING the links?
Yes I did. One of them says the following:
"An amendment may be made upon application, but only with the submission of required documentary evidence in support of the amendment."
http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/vital-records/amendment.html
You can't just amend your birth record to read whatever you want. That would be preposterous.
He has access to it and should produce proof that he is Constitutionally eligible. Why doesn't he? Hm?
Because the short form is sufficient proof.
You have inside info? Another made up talking point.
No. I simply looked at the Hawaii Department of Health website. He got what everybody gets.
We're talking Constitutional proofs. He's been in Hawaii several times. He is the only one that can get a copy of his vault certificate. And he refuses. Why?
Because he doesn't need one. The COLB he has is sufficient to prove his eligibility.
It's on the COLB. The date filed with registrar is 4 days after his birth. Is your math so bad that you can't figure out 4 less than 365?
And you can't figure out why Obama's Colb isn't sufficient proof?
Why is it insufficient? It meets all the criteria set out by the State Department. 1) Brith registered in under 1 year 2) Location of birth within the USA 3)Raise Seal 4) Registrar's signature.
What am I missing?
The COLB tells you the date of registration and date of birth. The state of Hawaii assumes that whoever is reading the COLB knows how to subtract.
Give the birthers a break. The economy is rough. They need some way to put food on the table. :)
Because it is simply unnecessary. The COLB is sufficient. That's why.
Just to nit-pick: the root document of a Certification of Live Birth could technically be a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth or a Delayed Certificate of Birth. However, in that case, the Certification of Live Birth would show a date filed by registrar one year or more after the date of birth.
Only people who parents or guardians failed to register their births within one year were given a COHB or DCB.
Since Obama's COLB shows a registration date within four days of the birth date, its root document must be a Certificate of Live Birth.
Yeah, I know. It's a big waste of time, and I think I'm becoming adicted to it. There's something about debunking tinfoil hat conspiracy theories that I find very stimulating.
Maybe I should give up posting on birther threads for lent.
I’m neither a lawyer nor a judge, but the Judge Robertson Opinion has raised some questions:
From the judge’s Opinion:
“The issue of the President’s citizenship was raised,
vetted, blogged, texted, twittered, and otherwise massaged by America’s vigilant citizenry during Mr. Obama’s two-year-campaign for the presidency, but this plaintiff wants it resolved by a court.”
Does that mean that our courts no longer require evidence as produced in discovery? Something as easy to produce as a certified copy of a party’s own birth certificate?
Has any court ever asked the defendant Obama to produce a certified copy of his birth certificate?
Is Judge Robertson saying it’s ok now to vet, blog, text, twitter and otherwise massage information about a presidential candidate to assure s/he meets Constitutinal muster?
........
Further from the Opinion:
“That case was the subject of a scholarly opinion by a
judge who took Mr. Berg’s claims seriously [as opposed to Judge Robertson] –- and dismissed them.”
I’ve tried to find the scholarly opinion through FindLaw and PACER, and get “IE cannot display the webpage” messages. Does anyone have that scholarly opinion ?
Hawaii issued a COLB to Sun Yat-sen who was born in China. Nice try on twisting the truth.
You're kidding, right? Or is this win the debate even you you have to say inane things?
He made a physical copy available at his campaign headquarters to any members of the press willing to come and inspect it. Only one outlet (factcheck) bothered to go look at it.
Bunk. Kos and Annenberg Factcheck posted them. Two lefty sites. Annenberg......hmmmm, where have I heard THAT name before?
"An amendment may be made upon application, but only with the submission of required documentary evidence in support of the amendment."
You can't just amend your birth record to read whatever you want. That would be preposterous.
The evidentiary requirements can differ
Amedment
An amended birth certificate will be prepared upon receipt of a certified copy of the adoption decree or the certificate of adoption, and payment of fees.
He was adopted by Lolo Soetoro and was known as Barry Soetoro in Indonesia. Then sent back to Hawaii. Wonder what he's hiding.
No. I simply looked at the Hawaii Department of Health website. He got what everybody gets.
In other words, you made an assumption even after knowing he has been to Hawaii and could get a long form BC in person. That does not help your credibility.
One of them? Which one. Specifically. The link I posted has this to say: Any person to whom a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth has been issued may submit a request to amend an entry, including a legal change of name, on an existing Certificate.
You can't just amend your birth record to read whatever you want. That would be preposterous.
You have a right to receive a copy of your long form BC. That is standard to all states. Benn there, done that.
Because he doesn't need one. The COLB he has is sufficient to prove his eligibility.
YOU pointed out that the State Dept won't accept a Colb. You think it's good enough to be prove eligibility for the highest office in the land?!
Of course not. David Lamb has an axe to grind.
Are you saying that the military lied?
And the WaPo is a lefty newspaper.
The birth certificate was signed by Captain W. L. Irvine
No case has made it far enough to justify discovery. There's that darned, pesky legal standing issue that keeps tripping you up.
I’ve tried to find the scholarly opinion through FindLaw and PACER, and get “IE cannot display the webpage” messages. Does anyone have that scholarly opinion ?
Right Here.
Nope. Get your facts straight.
The territory of Hawaii issued a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth, not a Certification of Live Birth, to Sun Yat Sen in 1921.
They did it because Sun Yat Sen presented fraudulant evidence to the territory that he was born in Hawaii.
Obama was never issued a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth. We know he has a standard Certificate of Live Birth because his birth was registered in less than one year. The Certificate of Hawaiian Birth was only granted to people whose births were registered more than one year after the fact.
The Certification of Live Birth that he posted and made available to the media is a certified copy of a subset of the all information on his certificate of live birth. It omits information about the hospital and attending physician, but it contains all information necessary to prove his eligibility (i.e. his place of birth). It is accepted as proof of birth in the United States by all courts and government agencies.
What am I missing?
The point.
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.