Moderated Obama birth certificate CT / SSN CT / Birther discussion

[Robert Prey]

Yes, we're all well aware of the statute that spells out who may inspect the information contained in vital records. You, however, left out the important part. In your haste to quote paragraph (b), you neglected to quote paragraph (a) where the "rules of the department of health" come into play. There is no provision whatsoever in the Hawaii DOH rules, which are lengthy and detailed and discuss in great detail the preparation of certified copies, for any party of any kind to access the original record. There is no provision either in law or in regulation that allows anyone to specify the manner of inspecting vital information.

More double-talk. Part A was left out after being chided by Mr. Moderator to not cut and paste entire sections. Part A does not repeal Part B but includes the qualifier exceptions -- "except as authorized by this part or by rules adopted by the department of health."
And those rules include Part B, ) "A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;" Which means Obama could very well have admitted Gov. Ambercrombie to be such a person, but did not.

Which you know very well know, but refuse to admit.

 

[Robert Prey]

And who is it, or which agency is it, that is acting on behalf of the registrant, Robert?

Anyone so designated by the registrant. Obviously.

 

[Robert Prey]

Robert, you seem to think that "A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant" means that President Obama can just say to whomever he likes that they can go look. It's not as simple as that. A person or agency usually relates to someone acting in a legal capacity in representing the individual, which the President duly sent to Hawaii on his behalf.

Gov. Abercrombie is quite satisfied about Barack Obama being recorded as being born in Hawaii. http://articles.nydailynews.com/2011-01-19/news/27088112_1_birthers-political-agenda-president-obama

No comment about your 'expert' witness, Tim Adams?

I do not respect those who play the race card.

 

[Tomtomkent]

I do not respect those who play the race card.

Please hilight the line where you believe race is declared an issue.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Anyone so designated by the registrant. Obviously.

So you do not think these have any more specific legal definition?

 

[abaddon]

Anyone so designated by the registrant. Obviously.

That is not an answer. I asked you who precisely was so designated.

 

[Straw Man]

I do not respect those who play the race card.

Does that mean that Tim Adams' statements are racially motivated, and that you do not accept him as a credible 'witness'?

 

[BazBear]

And once again it is you who needs to be corrected as to Hawaii law. Anyone who is acting on behalf of the party is allowed to view the record.

Ҥ338-18 Disclosure of records...
(b) "The department shall not permit inspection of public health statistics records, or issue a certified copy of any such record or part thereof, unless it is satisfied that the applicant has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons shall be considered to have a direct and tangible interest in a public health statistics record:"


(7) A person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;

Oh, you mean someone like Obama's personal attorney, who went to Hawaii last year to obtain certified copies of the original birth certificate? Well, now that's finally settled I guess you can rest easy Obama was indeed born in Hawaii

 

[JayUtah]

More double-talk.

You missed the entire point of my post. The subject of a vital record may not designate the manner in which the Hawaii DOH transmits vital information. Now please try again, and this time address the points I actually made.

Which you know very well know, but refuse to admit.

Do not put different words in my mouth than what I said. I said, "As was previously told to you several times, while the subject of the vital record may designate a party to act on his behalf (and this is what Obama did in securing copies of his long-form certificate)..." (emphasis added). While you may fervently wish people to believe I have or haven't done something, the facts say otherwise. And you're back to your old trusty straw-man evasion.

Now for the fifth time, please cite statutory or regulatory authority that gives the subject of a vital record the power to compel the Hawaii DOH to release his vital information in the manner dictated by the subject.

 

[JayUtah]

I do not respect those who play the race card.

Well first that's an ad hominem argument. It's clear you don't respect us, but we don't ask you to. We ask you to respect and address the argument that's being made. You refuse to do that too.

And second, you played the race card yourself in the unmoderated "stolen election" thread, so let's dispense with the hypocrisy and moral posturing.

And third, Adams' racism is not a "card." It's a fact of the witness's life, which he proudly admits and wears on his sleeve. He's a card carrying white supremacist. He's not trying to hide his racial bias. If this damages his credibility as a witness, it's not because he's being unfairly impeached. It's because the witness has made himself non-credible. Your suddenly-discovered moral indignation simply does not remove fact.

It is a fact that WND solicited Adams' story and paid him for it. Adams admits this. It is a fact that WND actually wrote the affidavit for him. Adams admits to this as well. It is also a matter of documentary fact that material changes in Adams' testimony appear in the affidavit, given many months after his lecture and talk-show circuit -- changes that soften and undermine his previous claims. It remains a matter of legal fact that his testimony is hearsay.

To this day, Adams cannot or will not name a single individual who can confirm his sensational characterization of the Hawaii elections officials, specifically that they harbored an "open secret" of their claimed knowledge that Obama was not qualified to run for President. The only reason to believe Adams is his own ipse dixit, which rests entirely therefore on his credibility.

The facts are against you, Robert. Your witness admits he is biased in several ways, has given legally irrelevant testimony, and is testifying contrary to the established fact. Your unwillingess to rehabilitate this witness tells me everything I need to know about him, and about your ongoing approach to witness testimony.

 

[KDLarsen]

Here, it is probably also worth noting the (still ongoing, I believe) Sunahara v. Hawaii Department of Health case, where Duncan Sunahara, brother of Virginia Sunahara, is demanding that he be permitted to inspect the LFBC of his dead sister.

Regulars will remember that some of the birthers believe that President Obama used Virginia Sunahara's LFBC as a template for creating his own faked LFBC. They'll also remember that the birthers have been pestering the various members of the Sunahara family for a while, which made it all the more interesting that Duncan signed on for this case.

The Answering Brief sums up pretty well, why everyone can't just go and take a peek at the LFBC: http://www.scribd.com/doc/110606437/HI-APPEAL-Sunahara-v-HIDOH-et-al-State-Appellees-Answering-Brief

 

[JayUtah]

The Answering Brief sums up pretty well, why everyone can't just go and take a peek at the LFBC: http://www.scribd.com/doc/110606437/HI-APPEAL-Sunahara-v-HIDOH-et-al-State-Appellees-Answering-Brief

Indeed that's what I was alluding to when I said that the manner in which access to vital records occurs is a matter of executive regulation, not legislative intent. The law intends to regulate who may obtain vital information, but then also (cf. § -13) confers upon the executive office charged with enforcing that law the power to set regulations governing how they intend to enforce it.

The department of health rules going back to 1961 are a matter of public record. One can easily see how they have changed over the years to accommodate different needs and different technologies. The court decisions upholding both the statute being enforced, the rules by which DOH enforces them, and the statutory right of DOH to make and enforce those rules, are also matters of public record and obviously supersede Robert's personal interpretation.

And in those rules, from 1961 to 2011, one finds absolutely no provision for a third party -- even one duly authorized under section -18 to obtain vital information -- to view original documents held by the DOH. Lest anyone suspect that such topics are beyond the scope of the administrative rules and thus absent for that reason, let us note therein an historical litany of rules governing duplication technology and procedure, document handling policy, archival and retention policy, and rules for deciding whether the applicant is entitled to a full record or a redacted one.

The most anyone is allowed to obtain under Hawaii law is the certified facsimile copy, and Director still has statutory and executive authority to decide that your stated purpose entitles you to less; in general the department is to disclose as little information to the third party as possible while still satisfying the party's stated need. There is no authority whatsoever under Hawaii law that says the subject of a vital record may compel a government agency to satisfy his request in a particular way contrary to its laws and regulations. That is, frankly, daft on its face.

In short, Birthers remain demonstrably ignorant of the rules governing the release of vital information and the obligations and procedures of the custodian of the records of that information. Thus they continue to make up new rules and to beg the courts and public officials to enforce those made-up rules on their behalf. And when the organs of government properly refuse such outrageous and unlawful requests, the Birthers respond with infantile accusations of forgery and coverup.

 

[Robert Prey]

You missed the entire point of my post. The subject of a vital record may not designate the manner in which the Hawaii DOH transmits vital information. Now please try again, and this time address the points I actually made.



Do not put different words in my mouth than what I said. I said, "As was previously told to you several times, while the subject of the vital record may designate a party to act on his behalf (and this is what Obama did in securing copies of his long-form certificate)..." (emphasis added). While you may fervently wish people to believe I have or haven't done something, the facts say otherwise. And you're back to your old trusty straw-man evasion.

Now for the fifth time, please cite statutory or regulatory authority that gives the subject of a vital record the power to compel the Hawaii DOH to release his vital information in the manner dictated by the subject.

Already done that. If you refuse to accept the truth, I can't help you.

 

[Robert Prey]

So where's the Birth Certificate?

From time to time, we are all asked to submit a birth certificate to verify birth. It may be for employment, school entrance, apply for a new SS card, or Driver's license. But from time to time, it is asked from most of us. For me, and for most people, it's very simple. We simply go into our files, pull out the birth certificate, and show it to whomever. We don't need to go and ask the state medical center or hospital to find or create a copy. But not Obama. Why? The simple answer is, because he does not have a Birth Certificate. At least, not from Hawaii. And that is the plain, simple Occam's Razor truth. The man is an impostor from the very day one of his birth.

 

[JayUtah]

Already done that.

Nope. You keep citing a law that governs who may access vital information. Despite my many attempts to draw your attention to the laws, rules, and regulations governing how that access occurs, you remain uninterested.

If you refuse to accept the truth, I can't help you.

If you refuse to read the findings of Hawaii courts on the very subject you're talking about, then you can't be helped. You keep saying that it's possible for Obama to compel the Hawaii authorities to let someone see his original birth certificate. You can't seem to understand that the Hawaii courts have already ruled explicitly on this point.

There is no statutory or regulatory authority the compels the Hawaii Dept. of Health to allow access to its original records. That is a fact.

 

[Tomtomkent]

From time to time, we are all asked to submit a birth certificate to verify birth.

You are asked to supply your certified copy, not the original COLB.

Or are you in the habit of going to your record holder and asking to tear a page oput of their records?

 

[Straw Man]

From time to time, we are all asked to submit a birth certificate to verify birth. It may be for employment, school entrance, apply for a new SS card, or Driver's license. But from time to time, it is asked from most of us. For me, and for most people, it's very simple. We simply go into our files, pull out the birth certificate, and show it to whomever. We don't need to go and ask the state medical center or hospital to find or create a copy. But not Obama. Why? The simple answer is, because he does not have a Birth Certificate. At least, not from Hawaii. And that is the plain, simple Occam's Razor truth. The man is an impostor from the very day one of his birth.

I've noticed that 'Occam's Razor truth' has replaced 'Baloney', but your assertions that Barack Obama does not have a birth certificate is false. He does. He presented his short form birth certificate, which is, as I understand, the normal thing to do in the US when required.

This was not good enough for the Birthers.

President Obama took the unprecedented step of applying for a copy of his COLB and showing it to the world. Again, this wasn't good enough because it's a digital forgery, and various crackpot theories spring up.

It was created in Illustrator, which wasn't available in 1961 is one of them. I've posted Mitt's birth certificate here too, created via a word processing program and printed out via laser printer. Were they available in 1961? Something you still haven't answered.

The statements of the Hawaii Department of Heath are ignored, and more demands are made, and those who are making a buck off the back of the birther buffoonery are laughing. Those of us in the real world are laughing at the birthers.

 

[A'isha]

From time to time, we are all asked to submit a birth certificate to verify birth. It may be for employment, school entrance, apply for a new SS card, or Driver's license. But from time to time, it is asked from most of us. For me, and for most people, it's very simple. We simply go into our files, pull out the birth certificate, and show it to whomever. We don't need to go and ask the state medical center or hospital to find or create a copy. But not Obama. Why? The simple answer is, because he does not have a Birth Certificate. At least, not from Hawaii. And that is the plain, simple Occam's Razor truth. The man is an impostor from the very day one of his birth.

I, on the other hand, have actually had to do that. I lost my social security card, and when I was hired at my currently place of employment in 2001, I was required to obtain a replacement card. In order to get that replacement card, I needed my birth certificate...which I did not take with me when I moved out of my parents' house, and which they were unable to locate when I asked (since my parents had moved several times since then and probably lost it somewhere along the line). So I was forced to ask the state where I was born to send me a replacement 2001-generated birth certificate, so I could obtain a replacement 2001-generated social security card.

This is not only not unusual for a whole lot of Americans, it's so common that states (such as Hawaii) have long-established procedures to make it relatively simple and easy for Americans to obtain replacement birth certificates when they need them.

So no, the fact that Obama had to do the same thing I had to do once does not in any way, shape, or form mean he's an impostor who never had a birth certificate.

 

[BazBear]

From time to time, we are all asked to submit a birth certificate to verify birth. It may be for employment, school entrance, apply for a new SS card, or Driver's license. But from time to time, it is asked from most of us. For me, and for most people, it's very simple. We simply go into our files, pull out the birth certificate, and show it to whomever. We don't need to go and ask the state medical center or hospital to find or create a copy. But not Obama. Why? The simple answer is, because he does not have a Birth Certificate. At least, not from Hawaii. And that is the plain, simple Occam's Razor truth. The man is an impostor from the very day one of his birth.

Robert, all of your birther nonsense has been debunked ad nauseum. Repeatedly. Totally. Your figurative sticking your fingers in your ears won't change the facts. Obama was born in Hawaii, and Obama has now been elected twice to the highest office in the USA. Nothing you've said or will say can change that, no matter how much you hate the man. You're just going to have to suck it up and deal with it. Do yourself a favor and don't spend the next 4+ years stewing over it, it's not healthy.

 

[Robert Prey]

I, on the other hand, have actually had to do that. I lost my social security card, and when I was hired at my currently place of employment in 2001, I was required to obtain a replacement card. In order to get that replacement card, I needed my birth certificate...which I did not take with me when I moved out of my parents' house, and which they were unable to locate when I asked (since my parents had moved several times since then and probably lost it somewhere along the line). So I was forced to ask the state where I was born to send me a replacement 2001-generated birth certificate, so I could obtain a replacement 2001-generated social security card.

This is not only not unusual for a whole lot of Americans, it's so common that states (such as Hawaii) have long-established procedures to make it relatively simple and easy for Americans to obtain replacement birth certificates when they need them.

So no, the fact that Obama had to do the same thing I had to do once does not in any way, shape, or form mean he's an impostor who never had a birth certificate.

Funny, but I just don't seem to recall Obama ever claiming to have lost his.