Look: Hawaii Statute Giving Obama Born In Kenya a Hawaii Certificate of Live Birth

August 14, 2009 at 10:47 pm 51 comments


Here is cut and paste of Hawaiian legal statute §338-17.8 proving that Obama could get a Certificate of Live Birth from Hawaii AND be born in Kenya:

State of Hawaii Statute §338-17.8  Certificates for children born out of State.  [[or out of country]]
(a)  Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.
(b)  Proof of legal residency shall be submitted to the director of health in any manner that the director shall deem appropriate.  The director of health may also adopt any rules pursuant to chapter 91 that he or she may deem necessary or proper to prevent fraudulent applications for birth certificates and to require any further information or proof of events necessary for completion of a birth certificate.
(c)  The fee for each application for registration shall be established by rule adopted pursuant to chapter 91. [L 1982, c 182, §1]”

Everybody get that?

As long as an adult can walk into Hawaii’s version of the Department of Records and provide proof that they are a legal resident of Hawaii, the document is issued.

The child, on the other hand, could have been born in Hawaii, Kenya, or a back-alley in Budapest.

How much more proof do you disciples of the Messiah need before you will admit that there are legitimate reasons to demand answers on this issue?

Of course the fact that Obama may have been elected to our nation’s highest office in direct violation of the United States Constitution is not something that would greatly trouble a dedicated Kool-Aid drinker.

 

<!– –>
Reprinted from great  website: http://freedomedium.com/

Advertisements

Entry filed under: Barack Obama, Blogroll. Tags: , , , , .

Obama and Congress Must Get Same Health Plan As They Give Us Barack Obama, the newest banana republic’s top banana made it legal for rotten bananas to spoil the barrel

51 Comments Add your own

  • 1. Twitchy  |  August 15, 2009 at 9:12 am

    Note the notation “[L 1982, c 182, §1]”. That law was passed in 1982. Obama’s birth was recorded in 1961. Still batting zero.

    Also, that law gets you a Certificate of Foreign Birth, which will list the actual place of birth and will bear a notation that it is not proof of citizenship.
    http://gen.doh.hawaii.gov/sites/har/AdmRules1/11-120.pdf

    With that, you can get a Certification of Foreign Birth, not a Certificate of Live Birth, which will state your actual birthplace and the same notation about citizenship..

    Reply
    • 2. ngoldfarb  |  August 16, 2009 at 6:10 pm

      I know, I know, it is so hard for you Kool Aid drinking progressive liberals to actually read the citations which you falsely claim support your ravings.

      The citation you quote for a Certificate of Foreign Birth specifically says that the scope of that section applies to ADOPTED CHILDREN ONLY.

      Does that mean you are now claiming that Obama was adopted?

      I really enjoy your ravings because you show how disconnected from reality the Messiah Worshipers truly are.

      Reply
      • 3. Paulo  |  August 16, 2009 at 9:30 pm

        First of all, do you deny the law you cite was written in 1982? You have not addressed this point that I have seen.

        Secondly, Janice Okubo – the Hawaii State Director of Communications for the Department of Health says:

        “If you were born in Bali, for example,” Okubo explained, “you could get a certificate from the state of Hawaii saying you were born in Bali. You could not get a certificate saying you were born in Honolulu. The state has to verify a fact like that for it to appear on the certificate…”

        http://washingtonindependent.com/51489/birther-movement-picks-up-steam

        Looks like it’s time to switch arguments again. This one is dead and buried.

      • 4. ngoldfarb  |  August 17, 2009 at 6:05 pm

        Paulo please try reading all the comments.

        The Statute that you are basing this on applies to ADOPTED children

      • 5. Paulo  |  August 17, 2009 at 6:12 pm

        My point stands. Even if a child was ADOPTED (and the law only cites that as one example) after 1982 (not sure how that has anything to do with Obama’s situation, but I’ll play along), the actual birthplace would still be on the birth certificate. You can’t just have the state put down anything you want. The birthplace would need to be verified by the state regardless.

      • 6. ngoldfarb  |  August 18, 2009 at 7:21 pm

        Another twisting of language. Actually that Statute is Titled as appplying only to Adopted Children, not as you misrepresented, using Adopted as an example.

        And the whole point is that for Obama’s Certification of Live Birth the State does NOT VERIFY the place of birth.

        The State DOES verify the place of birth for a Birth Certificate, which is what we want and waht Obama cannot produce, precisely because a Birth Certificate does list the VERIFIED place of birth.

        One would think that after half a year as President, Barry could have used his High Office to have coerced a good forgery of a Birth Certificate by now.

      • 7. Paulo  |  August 18, 2009 at 11:07 pm

        “And the whole point is that for Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth the State does NOT verify the place of birth.”–nancy

        False. See the quote from Okubo above. I hate having to repeat myself.

        Secondly, the bill you quoted said, “…one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.”

        So you see it is not just referring to “adoption”. It also refers to “birth”. Why do you quote the law, but not read it?

        I read that as saying if, hypothetically, Mrs. Obama was abroad when she had Barrack, she would just show her information where he was born (Kenya or Indonesia) and the state would issue a COLB listing Obama’s place of birth as the place where he was born (again following the documents from Kenya or Indonesia). Putting Honolulu (what it really says on Obama’s COLB) in that instance would be an utterly needless fraud. Even if Obama was born in another country (which there is zero credible evidence of), Obama would still be a US citizen at the time – from his mother’s citizenship – just not natural born (which only matters if you run for president in the future). How on Earth could anyone have imagined that in 1961? It defies all common sense and reason – especially considering Maya Soetoro was born outside of the country (in Jakarta). Would Obama’s mother care more for Obama than for Maya not to perpetrate the same (needless) fraud? Again, it defies common sense AND reason.

      • 8. ngoldfarb  |  August 20, 2009 at 11:38 am

        Boy do you ever twist the statute and adminsitrative rule.

        The “or birth” which you quote refers to a baby born other than in Hawaii!

        Thank you for proving my point. Obama was not born in Hawaii.

      • 9. Paulo  |  August 20, 2009 at 11:43 am

        Nope. You are still clueless. The State of Hawaii verifies the place of birth. As the State of Hawaii Health Dept. Director of Communications, Janice Okubo said, If you were born in Bali, the COLB will say you were born in Bali. Duh? Obama’s COLB distinctly says “Honolulu” as his place of birth.

        Give it up Nancy. You do not know what you are talking about.

      • 10. ngoldfarb  |  August 20, 2009 at 12:19 pm

        Really?

        Then, why can’t and won’t Obama produce the real thing?

      • 11. Paulo  |  August 20, 2009 at 12:44 pm

        He does not need to. He has done even better than that. The State of Hawaii has officially verified that the vital records indicat Obama was born in Hawaii. That is more than even a COLB can even do.

        If you are not satisfied by that, then nothing will satisfy you.

      • 12. ngoldfarb  |  August 20, 2009 at 4:08 pm

        “The State of Hawaii has OFFICIALLY verified…”

        Really?
        All I have seen is an office holder speaking informally who appears to have been violating the Hawaii laws of privacy that prevent me from obtaining the real birth certificate.

      • 13. Twitchy  |  August 20, 2009 at 8:12 pm

        Actually, it was an official statement.

        And she didn’t reveal any personal information, just verified that BO is a natural born citizen, according the the original records on file with the Hawaii Department of health.

      • 14. ngoldfarb  |  August 21, 2009 at 10:54 am

        Actually it as not “official” and disclosing information on a private person is a violation of hawaii privacy statutes.

        Twisty, you have become so dishonest, illogical and abusive that you are banned for unacceptable behavior, just like your Messiah who constantly violates the Constitution which he claims to have taught.

      • 15. Twitchy  |  August 22, 2009 at 12:08 am

        It was an official statement. And she did not disclose any of the information in the birth records. What she said was that the information in the birth records proved that BO is an NBC.

        And thank you for demonstrating your commitment to the free exchange of ideas. I’m being banned because you can’t respond to rational arguments, except with paranoia and lies. My “unacceptable behavior” is not being one of your sheeple.

        As for abusive, your “thoughts” are abusive of the very concept of reason.

      • 16. Twitchy  |  August 20, 2009 at 2:57 pm

        Perhaps because the State of Hawaii says that all you need is the Certification of Live Birth, and thus they no longer issue copies of the Certificate of Live Birth.

        The information on the Certification of Live Birth comes from the Certificate of Live Birth, your fantasies notwithstanding.

      • 17. ngoldfarb  |  August 20, 2009 at 4:02 pm

        The President cannot get the real thing?

        Really now.

      • 18. Twitchy  |  August 18, 2009 at 11:32 pm

        You continue to confuse the statute that you posted with the Administrative Rule that I posted.

        And not only are you confusing terminology (“Certificate” vs. “Certification”), you don’t seem to understand the first thing about Certificates and Certifications. A Certification of Live Birth is not a source document. It is, quite simply, a certification that the State of Hawaii has a Certificate on record, and that the information on the Certification matches what’s on the Certificate.

        So your statement “And the whole point is that for Obama’s Certificate of Live Birth the State does NOT verify the place of birth” is not only actually talking about the Certification, it is complete nonsense, because the information on the Certification comes straight from the Certificate.

      • 19. ngoldfarb  |  August 20, 2009 at 11:34 am

        Are you an attorney?

        Paid by Acorn?

        Who else would go to all the trouble of your endless wordgames to avoid the fact that Obama will not publish the real thing?

      • 20. Twitchy  |  August 17, 2009 at 11:18 pm

        It didn’t look like Paulo was relying on the Administrative Rule that I quoted. He was relying on the statement from the Department of Health and the actual statute that you continue to misinterpret.

        OTOH, it looks like the applicable Administrative Rule would be 11-117. However, that doesn’t seem to exist yet. There’s just a reference that they are “Converting from Public Health Regulations Chapters 8, 8A, and 8B to Administrative Rules.” so, what we really need to look at is Public Health Regulations Chapters 8, 8A, and 8B. Which don’t seem to be online.

        As to how you are misinterpreting the statute, it clearly prohibits “fraudulent applications”. That would mean that any resulting birth certificate would have to list the actual place of birth. So, if Obama was born in Kenya, and got a birth certificate under this law (impossible, since he was born in 1961 and this law took effect in 1982), the birth certificate would say that he was born in Kenya, not Honolulu.

      • 21. ngoldfarb  |  August 18, 2009 at 7:17 pm

        It prohibits “fraudulent applications!”

        Hooo!

        Kool Aid Drinkers forevere!

      • 22. Paulo  |  August 18, 2009 at 11:13 pm

        True the application could indeed have been fraudulent, but so could yours or George W. Bush’s or anyone’s application for that matter. You are just speculating and that is not worth anything at all.

        It is easy to argue based on speculation. Arguing based on evidence and facts is much more difficult as evidenced by the observation I am seeing less and less of it in your posts.

      • 23. ngoldfarb  |  August 20, 2009 at 11:36 am

        My original posts are the facts, and your comments are the speculation.

        You use the tired old Clinton tactics of derision and name calling when you cannot muster facts to support your errors.

      • 24. Twitchy  |  August 20, 2009 at 2:59 pm

        Your original posts contain some facts, which you then twist to create lies.

      • 25. ngoldfarb  |  August 20, 2009 at 4:01 pm

        That from Twitchy the Twister.

        As I said, the Clinton/Alynsky strategy that you practice has always been to accuse the others as doing what you do. Look in the mirror.

      • 26. Twitchy  |  August 18, 2009 at 11:26 pm

        This from someone who has no hard evidence, no rational explanation of their position, and who is backed up by numerous frauds.

        Birthers are wackos, plain and simple. Conspiracy theorists and their foolish and gullible sheep on a witch hunt to destroy the rule of law. Mob rule.

      • 27. ngoldfarb  |  August 20, 2009 at 11:35 am

        Calling people with whom you are paid to disagree “wackos” and “gullible sheep” is the old Clinton game of accusing you opponenets of the verey characteristics of which you are guilty.

        Look in the mirror.

      • 28. Twitchy  |  August 20, 2009 at 2:53 pm

        Assuming that people who present rational arguments for the other side are paid to oppose you is a sign of paranoia.

        Birthers have no facts, no evidence. Their entire argument is based on hate and paranoia. ‘Wackos’ is one of the mildest terms that accurately describes them.

      • 29. ngoldfarb  |  August 20, 2009 at 4:04 pm

        You do not deny it.

        Thank you for degrading the discussion with name calling.

        Look in the mirror.

      • 30. ngoldfarb  |  August 20, 2009 at 11:45 am

        Dear Paulo, twister of all that is good, I never denied the law was written in 1982, but your focus on this proves that you are either an attorney hired by the far left, or are on a staff directed by such an attorney.

        Removing you twist, the law was written in 1982, and the Certification of Live Birth supplied by factcheck.org is dated 2007, so I am correct, the bad document did rely on the law.

        The law does not apply according to date of birth, but to the date on hich one request the Certification, and that was after the terrible law was written.

        You lose. Obama was not born in America.

      • 31. Twitchy  |  August 20, 2009 at 3:05 pm

        So why does the Certification say that his birth was registered in 1961?

        You continue to wander farther and farther from reality.

        This forum software is very strange. Base-level posts often seem to be added in random order, and replies are often inserted as base-level posts.

      • 32. ngoldfarb  |  August 20, 2009 at 4:00 pm

        His mother registered him when she got back from birthing in Kenya and he requested the current form in 2007.

      • 33. Twitchy  |  August 20, 2009 at 7:47 pm

        You’re contradicting yourself. First he can’t get registered until after 1982, when the law supposedly allowing him to get a Hawaiian birth certificate somehow saying that he was born in Hawaii when he wasn’t (which would be a fraudulent document, therefore against the law) took effect. Then he was registered in 1961, when there was no such law.

        How are you going to twist the facts this time?

        And you seem to think that the President is above the law. If you’re a Bushie, that makes sense, in a twisted kind of way. Given your twisted logic so far, at least that would be somewhat consistent.

        And if people keep spouting off nonsense, when all the actual facts say otherwise, what’s left but to make fun of them?

        Again, you’ve got no facts, no evidence, not even a reasonable basis for suspicion. All you’ve got is a dislike for the current President of the United States. Sorry, but that’s not enough to convince any rational person, whether or not they like BO.

      • 34. ngoldfarb  |  August 21, 2009 at 11:00 am

        Again, you twist my words. You are a true Democratic lawyer.

        I do not think the President is above the law, as you falsely imply, but Obama thinks he is, an opinion with which I disagree.

        I did not say he could not get registered until after 1982. I said the phony certification is dated after 1982, which you can verify on your phony site factcheck.org.

        Also, you are confusing the different forms, when you had accused me of doing that.

        Twisty Twitchy, your verbiage is deteriorating, just like the approval ratings of the false Messiah.

      • 35. Twitchy  |  August 22, 2009 at 12:16 am

        Your words twist themselves. Look in your own mirror.

        You claimed that Obama can obtain a document that the State of Hawaii no longer issues copies of, just because he is President.

        If his birth was already registered in 1961, what effect do you imagine that the law that took effect in 1982 would have. If his birth was registered in 1961, then he has a Certificate of Live Birth from 1961. The Certification of Live Birth that he obtained in 2007 was based on that Certificate of Live Birth, as verified by the listed registration date. The 1982 law is totally irrelevant.

      • 36. Twitchy  |  August 22, 2009 at 12:04 am

        So she registered him, to get a Certificate of Live Birth, in 1961, when there was no law that said he could have a Certificate of Live Birth (using your unsupported allegation that he was born in Kenya) and he got a Certificatio of Live Birth, based on his Certificate obtained in 1961, in 2007 because of a law that took effect in 1982.

        Do you begin to see how irrational your position is?

        Probably not.

      • 37. ngoldfarb  |  August 22, 2009 at 10:07 am

        Not at all hat I said

  • 38. Twitchy  |  August 16, 2009 at 12:28 am

    For someone who is “a biomedical scientist and absolute genius with IQ 188”, you don’t check your sources or facts very well.

    Reply
    • 39. ngoldfarb  |  August 16, 2009 at 6:03 pm

      So how am I misreading the statute

      Reply
  • 40. Dashark  |  August 16, 2009 at 9:37 am

    IS OBAMA A SERIAL KILLER?

    The Following is a list of the persons that Obama has allegedly murdered:

    1.-NATE SPENCER, A gay man from Rev. Wright Church’s choir had homosexual relations with obama in Church offices. Shot dead in the back of the head. Silenced forever.

    2.-LARRY BLAND, Another gay man from his Church’s choir had sexual relations with Obama in Church offices. Shot dead in the back of the head. Silenced forever.

    3.-DONALD YOUNG, Choir Director, a gay man from his Church’s had homosexual relations with obama in Church offices. Shot dead in the back of the head.
    Mr Young gave Chicago police and affidavit saying Obama wanted him dead. The next day he was shot and killed. Silenced forever. The Affidavit is avaliable in Chicago police offices.

    4.-MADELYN DUNHAM, Obama’s Maternal grand mother, who knew Obama was Kenyan born and she was prepared to talk and was in good health. Obama Traveled to Hawaii and suddenly his Granny was dying, no Doctor was allowed to see her. We wish neighbors in the building where Madelyn Dunham lived or her bridge game friends and others from the bank where she worked so long would come forth and verify some of the statements Obama and his sister have made about the grandmother’s health. ——Why did they keep her isolated in her apartment? Why did Maya Ng care for her…to administer medicine and make sure she took it?
    –Where is the pharmacy that dispensed the drugs given to her? She died and Obama ordered her body cremated to erase poison traces. Granny Dunham was silenced forever.
    5.-The Man who forged Obama Birth Certificate was found dead. Shot in the back of the head execution style. Silenced forever.
    6.- Obama used to be a male whore in Studio 54, a bartender remembered him and wanted to talk to the media. He was found dead shot in the head.
    All the persons who knew Obama’s past are dead!
    –What was the motive for these murders?
    A.- To capture the US Presidency by all means necessary for Islam.

    http://www.americanfreepress.net/html/members_of_obama_s_church_kill.html

    http://freedomtalk.lefora.com/2009/08/07/here-is-obamas-true-father-frank-marshall-davies-p/page1/

    Reply
    • 41. Paulo  |  August 16, 2009 at 9:35 pm

      Thank you. I was wondering when the crazies were going to rival the birthers for un-self-aware parody. Looks like you are a great candidate.

      This an old wacky scheme of conservatives. Anybody who lived through the nineties remembers the nutjobs claiming falsely that the Clintons killed hundreds of people.

      http://www.snopes.com/politics/clintons/bodycount.asp

      Reply
  • 42. Twitchy  |  August 22, 2009 at 2:02 pm

    So, perhaps you could explain what you meant, ’cause what you said made no sense.

    If they “issue a birth certificate” under this statute, then the date they issue the BC is the date the birth is registered, and it will so state on the BC. If the birth is already registered, then the child already has a BC, and can get a Certification of Live Birth based on that BC, and this statute is irrelevant.

    So, what did you mean?

    Reply
    • 43. ngoldfarb  |  August 23, 2009 at 11:38 am

      I make no sense? Ha ha. According to your comment Obama’s birth was not registered until 2007!

      Reply
  • 44. Sunnstarr  |  August 25, 2009 at 1:17 am

    Cross-reference the ‘Orly Taitz’ document with the ‘Lucas Smith’ birth certificate (See below.) and just wait for the experts in document forensics to speak.

    Make sure you are looking at the actual ‘original images released’. There are many people on the Internet playing games with these images. Ultimately, analysis of these documents will be performed on the actual paper originals and not photographs or scans.

    Take a look at the latest Youtube video released on August 22, 2009:

    If you follow enough of these websites, you’ll keep coming across the same names – people that are apparently on Obama’s or Acorn’s payroll that do nothing all day but spread disinformation.

    Seek out the truth! Under this mountain of deception and corruption lies the heart of clever Muslim using ‘Taquiya’ Trojan horse tactics and trying to run out the clock.

    The American people’s good nature and generosity of heart has been used against them – Just as predicted by a Russian leader so long ago.

    It’s not too late to take our country back. Stay positive. God bless America.

    Reply
  • 45. Mike  |  November 2, 2009 at 10:05 am

    I also have a Hawaiian COLB. It is very easy to get. The COLB is merely a doc. representing another doc. That is all it is. I use my COLB every chance I get when I am asked for my BC. I usually end the conversation with , ” If it’s good enough for the highest office, why wouldn’t it be good enough for your agency?” By the way, I was born in Albany NY, not Honolulu. God save us from the Usurper.

    Reply
    • 46. Twitchy  |  December 23, 2009 at 5:11 am

      So, Mike, does your Hawaiian COLB say you were born in Honolulu? What other doc does your COLB represent?

      Reply
  • 47. Tobias Funke  |  November 20, 2009 at 1:31 pm

    Oh the irony of this blog’s title…

    Reply
  • 48. CDR Kerchner  |  April 17, 2010 at 2:39 pm

    Newspaper Birth Announcement Ads in 1961 in two Hawaiian Newspapers do NOT prove Obama was physically born in Hawaii.

    http://puzo1.blogspot.com/2010/04/newspaper-birth-announcement-ads-in.html

    CDR Kerchner

    Reply
    • 49. Twitchy  |  April 20, 2010 at 4:18 pm

      CDR Kerchner,
      Puzo is just as wacky as you are.

      What do you have to prove that Obama was born anywhere except Hawaii?

      Reply
  • 50. freckles  |  March 24, 2011 at 6:21 pm

    Certificate of live birth now we know how he did it!Nancy Pelosi
    and Harry Reid ought to stand TRIAL along with Obama because
    they knew all along that he was illegal but they used him for their
    PLEASURE our DEMISE!!
    FRECKLES

    Reply
    • 51. Twitchy  |  July 2, 2011 at 3:26 pm

      Go back and at least get your GED. That won’t teach you how to think (it’s probably too late for that), but at least it will be easier to understand your wackiness.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to the comments via RSS Feed


Blog Stats

  • 51,584 hits

%d bloggers like this: