If I have to Put up with a Bazillion Trump aka neuveua Palin Threads ....

[LadyGunSlinger]

Why?

Because that's how logic works. You make a claim, you must support it with evidence, or it's not worth being accepted.

Whatever evidence I produce, you will spin and throw right back at me.

You haven't provided ANY evidence. You've offered nothing more than hearsay, speculation, and some logical fallacies.

I dont need to conviince you...I am an employer...I have the I-9 complaince forms right here with me...and NO WHERE does it say that a dpocument drafted by a hospital is acceptable....it clearly states original or certified copy of BC issued by the state..

And I'm a Republican appointed federal judge who knows way more about the law than you or the auditor you've mentioned.

Now...if you want to argue who drafts the CoLB......pretty logical.....can someone in a state capital assert that the child born was born alive? Wouldnt it be logical that someone who witnesses it has to assert it? Can someone in the state capital be aware of every child born in every location? Wouldnt there need to be SOMETHING submitted to the state by SOMEONE?

You're a republican appointed federal judge who has a clown for an avie using the word FUCK??? ROFLMAO I've got some land I'd like to sell you out in the middle of the Atlantic. Asswipe~

 

[Jarhead]

Why?

Because that's how logic works. You make a claim, you must support it with evidence, or it's not worth being accepted.

Whatever evidence I produce, you will spin and throw right back at me.

You haven't provided ANY evidence. You've offered nothing more than hearsay, speculation, and some logical fallacies.

I dont need to conviince you...I am an employer...I have the I-9 complaince forms right here with me...and NO WHERE does it say that a dpocument drafted by a hospital is acceptable....it clearly states original or certified copy of BC issued by the state..

And I'm a Republican appointed federal judge who knows way more about the law than you or the auditor you've mentioned.

Now...if you want to argue who drafts the CoLB......pretty logical.....can someone in a state capital assert that the child born was born alive? Wouldnt it be logical that someone who witnesses it has to assert it? Can someone in the state capital be aware of every child born in every location? Wouldnt there need to be SOMETHING submitted to the state by SOMEONE?

You're going off on a tangent here. It has nothing to do with the validity of Obama's birth certificate.

Well? What do you think that would be calkled.....perhaps a "Certification of Live Birth"?[/QUOTE]

It can be called a Howdy-Doodah form for all it matters. It does not change the fact that Hawaii state law explicitly provides that the state shall issue a "Certificate of Live Birth" as a birth certificate.[/QUOTE]

Perhapos...but a Cetrificate of live birth makes sense to be draqfted off of the form known as a "certification of live birth"

I think we are at odds over that mnore than anything else.

He told me that a certification of live birth is useless becuase it is drafted by the hospital.

It certifies the birth took place....but the certificate of live biurth, in hawaii perhaps, is then waht si drafted from it.

Does that not make sense?

 

[gekaap]

Becuase the word "live" is the key....

...did the OSHA handbook say a Certificate of Live Birth is appropriate or a Ceritfication of live Birth?

There is a monumental difference.

One "certtifies"...the other is a state document (certificate).

I guess it all depends on what your definition of "is" is.

 

[Ravi]

Becuase the word "live" is the key....

...did the OSHA handbook say a Certificate of Live Birth is appropriate or a Ceritfication of live Birth?

There is a monumental difference.

One "certtifies"...the other is a state document (certificate).

I guess it all depends on what your definition of "is" is.

OSHA accepts certificates of live birth and birth card certifications...all of which state they are true records of birth, just like Obama's BC does.

 

[Jarhead]

Becuase the word "live" is the key....

...did the OSHA handbook say a Certificate of Live Birth is appropriate or a Ceritfication of live Birth?

There is a monumental difference.

One "certtifies"...the other is a state document (certificate).

I guess it all depends on what your definition of "is" is.

Hey dickhead..I am fl;attered you used my line as part of your sig...

But do a little research....you will see they are competely different....

If you have trouble with Google, I will gladly give you the link.....but my guess is you can find it.

Asshole...and you calim to be a judge....LMAO....sure.....

 

[Liability]

You ARE a Birther.

Nope.

But I will take that as your concession that you are unable to address the arguments against your absolutist, close-minded position.

My position is the sound of mind position.

Yours requires too many Variables falling into place, too much incompetence which has to all fall perfectly together, a few liars on an Official level risking their livelihoods, in effect, and a Country of 300mil where not 1 person has any evidence to the Contrary of where he was Certified born.

And I'm the closed minded person.


No, I'm rational. We have wiretaps the size of a speck of dust and you're trying to say that we can't figure out where our President was born. You're insane.

Your position is the CLOSED of mind position. End of story. In your petty either-or universe, one either agrees with your facile analysis OR one is a conspiracy nut, etc.

You are actually irrational because you run from arguments you cannot handle.

Kinda a pussy maneuver you employ.

We COULD easily figure out where our President was born without having to rely on the suspect COLB. But the guy who has the power and ability to set any question aside instead obfuscates intentionally.

I do kinda wonder what's on his Birth Certificate that he so dearly insists on concealing.

I'm not insane. You are a gutless puss.

 

[WorldWatcher]

Perhapos...but a Cetrificate of live birth makes sense to be draqfted off of the form known as a "certification of live birth"

I think we are at odds over that mnore than anything else.

He told me that a certification of live birth is useless becuase it is drafted by the hospital.

It certifies the birth took place....but the certificate of live biurth, in hawaii perhaps, is then waht si drafted from it.

Does that not make sense?

Jarhead,

I think you two are talking about two different documents.

Please go back and look at this post -->> LINK


A document supposedly issued by a hospital, would not pass muster for I-9 purposes as the instructions for the I-9 ((LINK) clearly state that "Original or certified copy of a birth certificate issued by a State, county, municipal authority or territory of the United States bearing an official seal". As such, a hospital issued "Certification of Live Birth" would not meet the standard. However birth documents issued by a State, county, municipal authority or territory of the United States which bears an official seal would.

The fact that Hawaii (and many other states which now issue computer generated birth documents) call them "Certifications of Live Birth" are not part of the issue. If you, as an employer accepted hospital "Certification of Live Birth", then gigging you on that would have been correct. However if you would not have been gigged for accepting a State issued birth certificate which the State calls a "Certification of Live Birth".


See the difference?


I work in Human Resources for a major employer (our average employee count is about 4,500) and we've had our audits and never once taken a gig for accepting an original Certification of Live Birth from a State that issues them.

>>>>>

 

[bigrebnc1775]

On the long form why is there two lines for signatures?

What does it matter?

Why do the other two BC's have accepted by state registrar and obama's doesn't?

What does it matter?

Filed does not mean accepted. When someone is one death row and files for a stay of execution is it accepted when it's filed or is it accepted or denied when the govenror approves it? File does not mean accepted.

That the most absurd comparison I've ever heard. A court of law is not a record keeping body. Courts hear cases for their merits. When a person "files" for a stay of execution (which, BTW is not the right terminology) they are making a request for a court action. Meanwhile, when a vital record is "filed" with the state registrar, they are recording that document in their record. You're committing fallacy of equivocation, using completely different contexts, trying to apply a meaning that does not actually fit.

You are the one who has presented this theory of "filed" and "accepted." It is YOU who has the burden to prove that the state of Hawaii is in the practice of recording vital records that they have not "accepted" and that they are in the practice of reproducing and distributing those records, and that they are in the habit of assigning the full faith and credit of the government's word to such records that they have not "accepted." But, this you cannot do, so instead all you've done is invent your own fantasy world of explanations that have no basis in fact.

What does it matter?

Why do the other BC's have it and obam's don't?

What does it matter?

Why do the other BC's have it and obam's don't?

That the most absurd comparison I've ever heard. A court of law is not a record keeping body. Courts hear cases for their merits. When a person "files" for a stay of execution (which, BTW is not the right terminology) they are making a request for a court action.

OJFC still the paper work has to be filed and accepted.

 

[hortysir]

I have a question.....

Why do all 3 documents, regardless of date, say 'Revised Version Nov. 2011' ??????

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I have a question.....

Why do all 3 documents, regardless of date, say 'Revised Version Nov. 2011' ??????

Thats when Hawaii revised there BC's and the date should be 11/01

 

[hortysir]

I have a question.....

Why do all 3 documents, regardless of date, say 'Revised Version Nov. 2011' ??????

Thats when Hawaii revised there BC's and the date should be 11/01

Thanks....didn't have my glasses on

 

[Ravi]

Perhapos...but a Cetrificate of live birth makes sense to be draqfted off of the form known as a "certification of live birth"

I think we are at odds over that mnore than anything else.

He told me that a certification of live birth is useless becuase it is drafted by the hospital.

It certifies the birth took place....but the certificate of live biurth, in hawaii perhaps, is then waht si drafted from it.

Does that not make sense?

Jarhead,

I think you two are talking about two different documents.

Please go back and look at this post -->> LINK


A document supposedly issued by a hospital, would not pass muster for I-9 purposes as the instructions for the I-9 ((LINK) clearly state that "Original or certified copy of a birth certificate issued by a State, county, municipal authority or territory of the United States bearing an official seal". As such, a hospital issued "Certification of Live Birth" would not meet the standard. However birth documents issued by a State, county, municipal authority or territory of the United States which bears an official seal would.

The fact that Hawaii (and many other states which now issue computer generated birth documents) call them "Certifications of Live Birth" are not part of the issue. If you, as an employer accepted hospital "Certification of Live Birth", then gigging you on that would have been correct. However if you would not have been gigged for accepting a State issued birth certificate which the State calls a "Certification of Live Birth".


See the difference?


I work in Human Resources for a major employer (our average employee count is about 4,500) and we've had our audits and never once taken a gig for accepting an original Certification of Live Birth from a State that issues them.

>>>>>

Yep. Don't expect the birfers to see your point.

 

[washamericom]

Becuase the word "live" is the key....

...did the OSHA handbook say a Certificate of Live Birth is appropriate or a Ceritfication of live Birth?

There is a monumental difference.

One "certtifies"...the other is a state document (certificate).

I guess it all depends on what your definition of "is" is.

clowny you're like the little boy who's finger is stuck in the dyke...

 

[Zona]

Why would someone pay an attorney 2 million dollars to hide all of their background?? Common sense tells us they're hiding something.. But not according to liberal nitwits.. DingleBarry is the exception you see. He doesn't have to submit a legal birth certificate cuz he's half black and liberal. He can hide all of his entire childhood and that's cool because, well.. he's a leftist. Anyone who dares to question Al Baraqi Hussein is just a racist!! LMFAO~ Do any of you dodo brains on the left think America is actually falling for your BULLSHIT any longer? I have NEVER been involved in the BC issue.. NOT EVER until now.. Even now I think this dickweed is hiding something.

He didn't you fucking idiot.

You cited his total Legal Price, which includes his Campaigning in General, you fucking rick.

Show us the itemized bill that went towards "hiding his background," or admit you don't have it. It's that fucking simple, really.

Fuzzy navel anyone? LMAO.

 

[hortysir]

Becuase the word "live" is the key....

...did the OSHA handbook say a Certificate of Live Birth is appropriate or a Ceritfication of live Birth?

There is a monumental difference.

One "certtifies"...the other is a state document (certificate).

I guess it all depends on what your definition of "is" is.

clowny you're like the little boy who's finger is stuck in the dyke...

Dykes don't go for little boys

 

[gekaap]

Your position is the CLOSED of mind position. End of story.

'Nuff said.

 

[RachelMadcow]

Impeach the Muslim

 

[Tank]

Donald Trump said today he is troubled by President Obama's high standing among African Americans, suggesting he probably wouldn't get support from black voters that he believes he deserves.

Donald Trump: 'Great relationship with the blacks' - On Politics: Covering the US Congress, Governors, and the 2010 Election - USATODAY.com

 

[Zona]

Impeach the Muslim

This breaks it down perfectly for your side. It really does. This is the heart of everything from that side.

 

[Toro]

The best thing Obama has got going for him right now is the Republicans candidates for President!

Donald Trump is now tied with Mike Huckabee for first place when Republicans are asked who they support for the GOP presidential nomination in 2012, according to a new national poll. ...

"More than four in ten Republicans say they would not like to see Trump toss his hat in the ring," says CNN Polling Director Keating Holland.

Nineteen percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents questioned in the poll say that as of now, they'd be most likely to support Trump for next year's GOP presidential nomination. Trump says he'll decide by June whether he runs for the White House. An equal amount say they'd back Huckabee. The former Arkansas governor and 2008 Republican presidential candidate says he'll decide by later this year if he'll make another bid for the White House.

Twelve percent say they'd support former Gov. Sarah Palin of Alaska, who was the party's 2008 vice presidential nominee, with 11 percent backing former Massachusetts Gov. and 2008 White House hopeful Mitt Romney and the same amount supporting former House Speaker Newt Gingrich. Seven percent say they are backing Rep. Ron Paul of Texas, another 2008 presidential candidate, with five percent supporting Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, who enjoys strong backing from many in the Tea Party movement. Everyone else registers in the low single digits.

Trump jumped from 10 percent in a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll conducted last month, with Romney dropping from 18 percent to 11 percent.

CNN Poll: Trump tied for first in GOP horserace – CNN Political Ticker - CNN.com Blogs

Awesome!