Bill Would Force Obama To Reveal Birth Documents

[nodoginnafight]

And as I've said repeatedly...if it is looney to ask why and it is foolish to question the motivations of our elected leaders, then there is a vast minority of Americans who are not looney and foolish by your definition.

That's not what you are doing (no matter how many times you repeat it). You are not questioning motivation, you are beating a dead horse. Don't blame me just because I agree with the 99.99% of Americans who agree that this is a looney non-issue.

 

[Missourian]

I showed you in another thread that the use of the COLB by the Hawaiian DOH has the force of law, and that is the ONLY document they provide upon request of a birth certificate. So in order for them to release the long form would indeed require a change in the current law.

I understand that Emma, and as I said before, I have seen no evidence that the release of an archival copy of the long form is in any way against the law.

If you have a link that say releasing a copy of the long form birth certificate is against the law, I'd be more than happy to read it.

For vital records of events that occurred seventy-five years or less prior to the current year, the applicant must establish a direct and tangible interest in the records.

A certified copy of a vital record (birth, death, marriage, or divorce certificate) is issued only to an applicant who has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons are considered to have such an interest:

• the registrant (the person whom the record is concerned with);
  
• the registrant’s spouse;
  
• the registrant’s parent(s);
  
• a descendant of the registrant (e.g., a child or grandchild);
  
• a person having a common ancestor with the registrant (e.g., a sibling, grandparent, aunt/uncle, or cousin);
  
• a legal guardian of the registrant;
  
• a person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;
  
• a personal representative of the registrant’s estate;
  
• a person whose right to obtain a copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction;
  
• adoptive parents who have filed a petition for adoption and need to determine the death of one or more of the prospective adopted child’s natural or legal parents;
  
• a person who needs to determine the marital status of a former spouse in order to determine the payment of alimony;
  
• a person who needs to determine the death of a nonrelated co-owner of property purchased under a joint tenancy agreement; and
  
• a person who needs a death certificate for the determination of payments under a credit insurance policy.

If you are not able to establish a direct and tangible interest in the record, you are ineligible and will not be issued a certified copy of the record.

Hawai‘i State Department of Health

Try again August 5, 2036.

And Obama meets the very first requirement.

So where is the link that release of an archival copy of the long form is in any way against the law?

 

[Emma]

I understand that Emma, and as I said before, I have seen no evidence that the release of an archival copy of the long form is in any way against the law.

If you have a link that say releasing a copy of the long form birth certificate is against the law, I'd be more than happy to read it.

For vital records of events that occurred seventy-five years or less prior to the current year, the applicant must establish a direct and tangible interest in the records.

A certified copy of a vital record (birth, death, marriage, or divorce certificate) is issued only to an applicant who has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons are considered to have such an interest:

• the registrant (the person whom the record is concerned with);
  
• the registrant’s spouse;
  
• the registrant’s parent(s);
  
• a descendant of the registrant (e.g., a child or grandchild);
  
• a person having a common ancestor with the registrant (e.g., a sibling, grandparent, aunt/uncle, or cousin);
  
• a legal guardian of the registrant;
  
• a person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;
  
• a personal representative of the registrant’s estate;
  
• a person whose right to obtain a copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction;
  
• adoptive parents who have filed a petition for adoption and need to determine the death of one or more of the prospective adopted child’s natural or legal parents;
  
• a person who needs to determine the marital status of a former spouse in order to determine the payment of alimony;
  
• a person who needs to determine the death of a nonrelated co-owner of property purchased under a joint tenancy agreement; and
  
• a person who needs a death certificate for the determination of payments under a credit insurance policy.

If you are not able to establish a direct and tangible interest in the record, you are ineligible and will not be issued a certified copy of the record.

Hawai‘i State Department of Health

Try again August 5, 2036.

And Obama meets the very first requirement.

So where is the link that release of an archival copy of the long form is in any way against the law?

Above. The COLB is what the DOH has chosen as the certificate they issue when a request is made for a bc, and that is all they issue. And their decision to do so has the force of law.

 

[Missourian]

And as I've said repeatedly...if it is looney to ask why and it is foolish to question the motivations of our elected leaders, then there is a vast minority of Americans who are not looney and foolish by your definition.

That's not what you are doing (no matter how many times you repeat it). You are not questioning motivation, you are beating a dead horse. Don't blame me just because I agree with the 99.99% of Americans who agree that this is a looney non-issue.

I am asking and have repeatedly asked why Obama refuses to release his long form birth certificate.

 

[Emma]

And as I've said repeatedly...if it is looney to ask why and it is foolish to question the motivations of our elected leaders, then there is a vast minority of Americans who are not looney and foolish by your definition.

That's not what you are doing (no matter how many times you repeat it). You are not questioning motivation, you are beating a dead horse. Don't blame me just because I agree with the 99.99% of Americans who agree that this is a looney non-issue.

I am asking and have repeatedly asked why Obama refuses to release his long form birth certificate.

Because the state no longer issues them.

§338-11 Form of certificates. The forms of certificates shall include as a minimum the items required by the respective standard certificates as recommended by the Public Health Service, National Center for Health Statistics, subject to approval of and modification by the department of health.

PART II

§338-41 Issuance; procedure. (a) The department of health may make regulations respecting the form of Hawaiian birth certificates and certified copies of such certificates and other matters relating to Hawaii birth certificates as appear necessary and the regulations, when approved and made in accordance with chapter 91, shall have the force of law. The department shall furnish the form of the certificates and copies made therefrom.



("Our Certificate of Live Birth is the standard form, which was modeled after national standards that are acceptable by federal agencies and organizations," Okubo said.

i.e. the law gives the state DOH legal authority to determine the form they will issue as long as they fit those standards, and their determination has the force of law. They only issue COLB, as provided by LAW)

 

[Missourian]

For vital records of events that occurred seventy-five years or less prior to the current year, the applicant must establish a direct and tangible interest in the records.

A certified copy of a vital record (birth, death, marriage, or divorce certificate) is issued only to an applicant who has a direct and tangible interest in the record. The following persons are considered to have such an interest:

• the registrant (the person whom the record is concerned with);
  
• the registrant’s spouse;
  
• the registrant’s parent(s);
  
• a descendant of the registrant (e.g., a child or grandchild);
  
• a person having a common ancestor with the registrant (e.g., a sibling, grandparent, aunt/uncle, or cousin);
  
• a legal guardian of the registrant;
  
• a person or agency acting on behalf of the registrant;
  
• a personal representative of the registrant’s estate;
  
• a person whose right to obtain a copy of the record is established by an order of a court of competent jurisdiction;
  
• adoptive parents who have filed a petition for adoption and need to determine the death of one or more of the prospective adopted child’s natural or legal parents;
  
• a person who needs to determine the marital status of a former spouse in order to determine the payment of alimony;
  
• a person who needs to determine the death of a nonrelated co-owner of property purchased under a joint tenancy agreement; and
  
• a person who needs a death certificate for the determination of payments under a credit insurance policy.

If you are not able to establish a direct and tangible interest in the record, you are ineligible and will not be issued a certified copy of the record.

Hawai‘i State Department of Health

Try again August 5, 2036.

And Obama meets the very first requirement.

So where is the link that release of an archival copy of the long form is in any way against the law?

Above. The COLB is what the DOH has chosen as the certificate they issue when a request is made for a bc, and that is all they issue. And their decision to do so has the force of law.

A request isn't being made for a birth certificate.

A request is being made specifically for an archival copy of the long form birth certificate.

Where is the link that states release of that document is illegal ?

 

[Luissa]

Bill Would Force Obama To Reveal Birth Documents​

State senator: 'Why wouldn't they be available to the public?'

Posted: August 07, 2009
12:30 am Eastern

By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2009 WorldNetDaily

Hawaii state Sen. Will Espero, a Democrat, has confirmed plans to introduce legislation through which the state's lawmakers would force the public disclosure of all President Obama's birth documents held by the Hawaii Department of Health, including President Obama’s long-form original birth certificate.

Espero told WND his bill is aimed at "giving citizens access to birth records" under a standard of government transparency which would permit journalists to request in writing the public disclosure of vital birth records including long-form birth certificates of all persons born in Hawaii. He said it would include the release of birth records on those previously born in Hawaii.

"My decision to file the legislation was primarily a result of the fuss over President Obama's birth records and the lingering questions," Espero said.

Espero told WND that he believes President Obama was born in Hawaii.

"My motivation is strictly to promote transparency," he said. "When I found out that Hawaii birth records were not available to the public my first thought was, 'Why wouldn't they be available to the public?'

"As far as I am concerned, records regarding whether a person was born here or not should be in the public domain," he said.

Asked specifically about Obama's birth records, including the original long-form birth certificate, Espero said, "Whatever birth records regarding President Obama that the Hawaii Department has on file should be made public."

Story continues here...

A state senator passing a bill to trump federal law (HIPAA)?

Good luck with that.

BTW, if Jerome Corsi says it, it's most likely distorted.

I think he forgot the right to privacy part of the constitution also. There is no way they can pass a bill demanding someone to release their medical or private records. I will love to see them try.

 

[nodoginnafight]

I am asking and have repeatedly asked why Obama refuses to release his long form birth certificate.

And I agree with the 99.99% of Americans who think it is a looney question. Emma has provided all the documentation, explanatiions, and applicable law. It's not new - you've surely heard all of it before.

So it begs the question - since all of these issues have been put to rest - what is YOUR motivation? WHY continue to beat a dead horse and pretend that there is any question at all?

Is it to smear a political opponent? I've seen absolutely nothing from you that would indicate any other explanation.

And why should an attempt by amatuer hackers to smear a political opponent carry any sort of credibility?

 

[nodoginnafight]

I WANT the Republican Party to regain some credibility. I used to be a registered Republican and I am sad to see what the party has degenerated into. I think we need a credible give and take - but the GOP is not keeping up their end of the "credible give and take." They are wallowing around in BS like this and "just say no" to the point that they have almost NOTHING to offer the public debate right now.
It's sad and imho it is NOT good for our nation.

Let's see a Republican draft some legislation, let's see some Republicans offering some solutions, let's see Republicans try to build up something good for America rather than just trying to tear down everything, smear everything, whine about everything, namecall and shout down opposing ideas.

Then the GOP stands a chance of regaining myself and millions of others in the middle.

 

[bodecea]

Until Obama releases a coconut with an imprint of his baby feet, the birthers will not be satisfied

Even then. They will say it was flown illegally to Hawaii from Kenya by an African Swallow.

 

[bodecea]

That is a lie, and you know it. Every time a vote is put to the public over pervert, homo agendas, you lose, every time. Homosexuality is disgusting to the vast majority, and it will always be that way. It's normal, and you can't change it.

So, I guess, just like the reality of Obama being a natural born American citizen, you want to ignore the reality that more and more states (how many now?) recognize gay marriage. What was that # 10 years ago? 20 years ago? 30 years ago?

Sorry, but our reality is bulldozing right over your fantasies. Maybe that's the source of your anger....reality.

But on the flip side of that, the number of people wanting obama to release his birth certificate is growing by leaps and bounds. Those of you who want to dismiss it and spit your insults at the growing number of those who don't, soon will be the MINORITY.

The ONLY reason you perverts are allowed to marry is because of liberal activist judges that legislate from the bench. What I said was 100% correct. WHEN EVER YOUR HOMO AGENDAS ARE PUT TO A REFERENDUM V0TE, YOU LOSE, and you know it. You even lost in your own state of fruits and nuts, kullyfornia. So your lies won't hold water here.

Did that rant feel good? Glad to have given you some way to vent...no matter how divorced from the reality of 2009 you may be. I suspect the next decade or so is going to be very rough for you. You're already fraying around the edges.

(BTW...how'd that Legislative vote in MA turn out?)

 

[bodecea]

Now - giving this issue all the serious attention it deserves .... how come he hasn't produced the coconut foot imprint??????????

Don't forget the bird of paradise water mark.

 

[bodecea]

How appropriate!

 

[Missourian]

I am asking and have repeatedly asked why Obama refuses to release his long form birth certificate.

And I agree with the 99.99% of Americans who think it is a looney question. Emma has provided all the documentation, explanatiions, and applicable law. It's not new - you've surely heard all of it before.

So 99.99% of American believe it is a looney question? LINK?


According to the Honolulu Advertiser, who broke the story on the DOH having an original copy of Obama's long form reported:

One thing that remains unclear is whether Obama has a copy of the original 1961 Certificate of Live Birth, or if he would even be allowed to see it if he asked.

Hawai'i's disclosure law (Hawai'i Revised Statutes 338-18) states that "it shall be unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or to disclose information contained in vital statistics records, or to copy or issue a copy of all or part on any such record ... "

The law further states that the Health 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."

Hawaii officials confirm Obama's original birth certificate still exists | HonoluluAdvertiser.com | The Honolulu Advertiser
​

These journalist are closer to this story, both literally and figuratively, than anyone else.

If they say it is unclear...I believe that the issue has not been decided and that Emma's 'only issue' theory is just that...one theory.

So it begs the question - since all of these issues have been put to rest - what is YOUR motivation? WHY continue to beat a dead horse and pretend that there is any question at all?

Is it to smear a political opponent? I've seen absolutely nothing from you that would indicate any other explanation.

As for my motivation...it is to not allow Obama to hide the truth, whatever that truth may be.

What is Obama's motivation is to bury and hide?

As for me, I'll stick with the revealer...the hiders are often up to no good.

Your assumptions reveal more about you then they do about me.

 

[Missourian]

Time to go fishing...I enjoyed the debate...once it materialized.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Still no evidence to support anything other than a smear-attempt. Keep repeating the same discredited and disproven theories in order to smear a political opponent. Pretend (and beg the rest of the folks to pretend with you) that there is some legitimate question....

It's sad to see what "political discourse" has degenerated into.

 

[Missourian]

Still no evidence to support anything other than a smear-attempt. Keep repeating the same discredited and disproven theories in order to smear a political opponent. Pretend (and beg the rest of the folks to pretend with you) that there is some legitimate question....

It's sad to see what "political discourse" has degenerated into.

If you believe it is a smear-attempt merely to ask why, it is you who needs a lesson in discourse.

 

[bodecea]

Still no evidence to support anything other than a smear-attempt. Keep repeating the same discredited and disproven theories in order to smear a political opponent. Pretend (and beg the rest of the folks to pretend with you) that there is some legitimate question....

It's sad to see what "political discourse" has degenerated into.

If you believe it is a smear-attempt merely to ask why, it is you who needs a lesson in discourse.

Missourian, I can speak only for myself, but you've been quite civil and I've enjoyed reading your posts even tho I disagree with you.

 

[kwc57]

You know, I've changed my position on this. I want to see the BC for two reasons. One, it will be so fun watching the wind go out of the birfers sails and two, so they will finally !!!

 

[bodecea]

You know, I've changed my position on this. I want to see the BC for two reasons. One, it will be so fun watching the wind go out of the birfers sails and two, so they will finally !!!

They wouldn't, you know.