Spokane7
32°
Anyone who thought questions about Barack Obama’s citizenship
were laid to rest by the election or a series of court decisions tossing out
lawsuits trying to challenge the election on that issue might have been
surprised by a question Chief Justice John Roberts got during his recent visit
to
When Roberts finished his prepared speech and opened the floor to questions at the University of Idaho this month, the first person to the microphone was a woman who said she’d travelled since 3 a.m. that morning to get from California to Moscow, so she begged for a little indulgence on the moderator’s rule that questioners be from the sponsoring College of Law so she could ask a question.
About “illegal activity in the Supreme Court.”
About her case being “erased from the docket” under circumstances that sounded, to say the least, suspicious.
About the president, whom she called Barack Hussein Obama aka Barry Soetero, not legally being president because he was “a foreign national at birth.”
The woman is Orly Taitz,
attorney for a case known as Lightfoot vs. Bowen, which does in fact seek to
remove Obama from office over questions about his birth, birth certificate and
the fact that his father was from
The dismissals tend to turn on the question of proof, as in, the people making the claim don’t really offer any. Instead, they want Obama to produce the proof that he is not, in fact, a foreigner. That seems to be a departure from the standard way lawsuits work, in which the aggrieved party comes up with something that at least has a chance of being judged a preponderance of the evidence.
While questions about Obama’s birth certificate may sound like “grassy-knoll” stuff to most people, Taitz and her clients do lay claim to a constitutional issue here. Article II of the U.S. Constitution sets up the qualifications for being president, among them being a “natural born citizen.” They say Obama should be required, under the constitution, to produce the proof he fits that qualification.
Chief Justice Roberts told Taitz he couldn’t respond, because he can’t talk about pending cases and she obviously was hoping to have a pending case. He suggested she leave any document for him to look at, and the moderator rather helpfully added that she give the documents to security guards who were approaching her and ultimately escorted her out of the auditorium.
In a later Web report, Taitz was able to say that she confronted Roberts and he promised to review the case. Whether that review will be a lengthy, in-depth analysis assigned to his best and brightest law clerks or something significantly less is up to Roberts, of course.
The Spokesman-Review’s March 14 story about the chief justice’s visit didn’t include this exchange because it seemed like he talked about several more important things, such as people not understanding the courts, his definition of justice and his suggestions that lawyers be honest public servants. Critics might argue that story was just a typical Main Stream Media attempt to hide the truth and would be entitled to that opinion, even if it’s wrong.
But the audio clip of Taitz inquiry and his response reposted above generated more “hits” than any previous sound clip, about 3,000 at last count. (Full disclosure: most of those came after a mention on Politico.com, which has a wider, national audience.) And the online column item generated some comments that amounted to a debate over who’s being duped, the people are so blind they can’t see that Obama stole the election or the people who need to get a life and drop this quest.
So clearly, there is some interest out there – more likely in the
Internet Empire than the
One would be wrong, of course. Because not only do some conspiratorialists believe this is a major issue, but a member of Congress agrees. Rep. Bill Posey, R-Florida, introduced a bill on March 12 that would require any presidential candidate to produce a birth certificate, “together with such other documentation as may be necessary to establish that the candidate meets the qualifications for eligibility to the Office of President under the Constitution.” H.R. 1503 has no co-sponsors, and has been assigned to the House Administration Committee for an as-yet unscheduled hearing.
It would only apply to future presidential candidates, but a
spokesperson for Posey apparently has suggested Obama could put an end to the
current questions by telling the state of
So here’s the question for greater minds to ponder: Which will happen first, the U.S. Supreme Court holding a hearing on Lightfoot vs. Bowen or the House holding a vote on H.R. 1503?
Jim Camden is a veteran political reporter for The Spokesman-Review.
Jonathan Brunt covers Spokane City Hall for The Spokesman-Review.
999 W. Riverside, Spokane, WA 99201
P.O. Box 2160, Spokane, WA 99210
Main switchboard: (509) 459-5000 • (800) 338-8801
Newsroom: (509) 459-5400 • (800) 789-0029
Customer service: (800) 338-8801
© Copyright 2012, The Spokesman-Review
Terms of use • Privacy policy • Copyright policy
Gary D Rhodes on March 22 at 7:54 a.m.
If the Constitution requires a person to be 35 years old when taking office, should that be enforced?
Why can’t a popular 20 year old with a national following after winning American Idol be President. They would just have to say they are 35. Seal all documentation away, so we just have to take this person’s word for it, just like Obama.
I guess this 20-year-old could have been born and reared in Tonga, or wherever, for that matter. Just say you were born in Hawaii, and get one of those certificates of live birth” they pass out on demand.
Yes, there should be some vetting process to make sure requirements for office are enforced. We are, supposedly, a nation of laws, not men.
edioparausa on March 22 at 9:59 p.m.
Mr. Camden: Thanks for this followup blog. I won’t hold my
breath, waiting for a SCOTUS hearing on Lightfoot v. Bowen.
I expect H.R. 1503 will die in committee this year but a law
such as this is sorely needed and may pass in a few years.
You again quote factcheck.org as an authority on so-called
proof Obama was born in HI. On www.factcheck.org/about/
the site claims to be nonpartisan & nonprofit, while clearly
stating it is an Annenberg Foundation Project.
Is this not the same Anneberg Foundation that a younger
Barack Obama and William Ayers worked for, together, in
the late 1990’s on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge?
Don’t you see a conflict of interest here? Many of us do.
But then many of us have read this, which MSM ignored:
“Obama’s Lost Anneberg Years” American Thinker 8/21/08
http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/08/obamas_lost_annenberg_years_co.html
idahogie on March 23 at 9:02 a.m.
Gary and Ed: Did you demand to see George W. Bush’s birth certificate? Why not? If it’s a matter of such importance, as Ed said in an earlier thread (http://www.spokesman.com/blogs/spincontrol/2009/mar/15/about-birth-certificate-mr-chief-justice/) - enough importance that we might as well shred the Constitution - shouldn’t someone have demanded to see his BC? Why didn’t you all demand to “uphold the Constitution” for any President before Obama? What is it about Obama that brings out this intense desire in you? Nobody demanded to see President Clinton’s BC, as I recall, so it can’t be because President Obama is a Dem. I wonder what it could be. What makes President Obama different than any other? Hmmm.
johnnyyuma on March 23 at 10:29 a.m.
Let’s see idahogie maybe what’s differant is that BO has a Kenyan citizen father? Maybe it is because he was adopted by his mothers second husband also a foreign citizen? They could be very real reasons huh idahogie! Your not trying to pull the *%&$ card are you?
Gary D Rhodes on March 23 at 11:31 a.m.
Kind of a rebel there Johnny U.
Love Cash
idahogie on March 23 at 11:37 a.m.
Plenty of our Presidents have had foreign-born and non-citizen parents. That’s not what this issue is about. It’s about his birthplace.
Did anyone demand to see George Bush’s BC to verify his birthplace?
idahogie on March 23 at 11:41 a.m.
Andrew Jackson (1829-1837) is the only president born of two immigrants, both Irish. Presidents with one immigrant parent are Thomas Jefferson (1801-1809), whose mother was born in England, James Buchanan (1857-1861) and Chester Arthur (1881-1885), both of whom had Irish fathers, and Woodrow Wilson (1913-1921) and Herbert Hoover (1929-1933), whose mothers were born respectively in England and Canada.
(from WikiAnswers: http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_former_presidents_had_foreign_parents)
Gary D Rhodes on March 23 at 2:07 p.m.
Obama has been asked to show his original birth certificate because there is a question about where he was born.
His grandmother supported this uncertainty, and an affidavit by a bishop further establishes reasonable doubt. Enough to investigate if the truth were sought.
Given this unclarity, someone who wants to be open and transparent should just settle the doubt and release his records no matter what has happened before.
This would show he was sincere about doing things a different way. Change we can believe in.
edioparausa on March 23 at 3:18 p.m.
Gee idahogie, - you give a nice history lesson, among other spin attempts, to divert attention from the basic question: “Is Obama Constitutionally Qualified to be POTUS and C in C?”
You keep spinning your top & I will keep tracking
Atty. Orly Taitz & other brave souls who are digging hard for an honest answer. ~ Ed Hensley
idahogie on March 23 at 6:52 p.m.
History is spin, huh? That explains a lot.
Obama was born in Hawaii. All the evidence says so, and nothing says otherwise (the grandmother you point to does not support your claim, Gary).
And nobody investigated Bush’s birth. Nobody sought out his relatives to ask whether he was born where he claimed. Nobody contacted his hospital. Nobody spent so much time trying to debunk the obvious.
So yes, it is clear that you have ulterior motives for your intense and unnatural interest in President Obama’s birth. Unless, of course, you can prove that an equal amount of effort was expended to prove Bush’s eligibility.
It’s your contention that President Obama must put forth effort to prove your accusations wrong. Therefore, prove me wrong. Prove that you’re not racists. Because that’s exactly what you appear to be.
Gary D Rhodes on March 23 at 7:44 p.m.
How much effort would be in contacting the Governor and saying she could release the BC.
Not much effort.
The MSM could have interviewed grandma Sarah when she was here for the inauguration, but to my knowledge no one did.
How does wanting the law followed make me racist?
edioparausa on March 23 at 9:51 p.m.
In staying on topic, for anyone interested, Orly Taitz
was in Washington D.C, today and appeared on the
early morning G. Gordon Liddy Talk Radio Show.
For a link to download the 48 minute podcast, just
visit > http://www.defendourfreedoms.us/ <. She
repeated some serious allegations on the show.
It’s worth a listen, even with the commercials still in
there. And, the search for truth continues. ~ Ed H.
idahogie on March 24 at 10:11 a.m.
Gary - Show me how you wanted the law followed when George Bush was inaugurated.
johnnyyuma on March 24 at 11:25 a.m.
Idahogie if it makes you feel any better I am not a Bush supporter, I think he belongs right up there with BO and Clinton when it comes to destroying this country. Bo’s grandmother said she was there when BO was born in Kenya. Why won’t BO produce a certified birth certificate and set the whole matter to rest? Why has so many of his school records disappeared?
edioparausa on March 24 at 11:51 a.m.
NEWS FLASH!!! Bush is no longer president. Obama is!
Question remains: Is Obama Constitutionally elgible to be
POTUS and C in C. I was born in the “Show Me State, of
Misourri. All that Obama has shown, to date, on his web
site, in his public statements and news releases, is a Spin,
Song & Dance, long on wind but short on hard facts.
idahogie on March 24 at 1:05 p.m.
Johnny,
President Obama’s grandmother in Kenya did not say she was there. She was interviewed via interpreter, and she misunderstood the question (or the interpreter garbled her answer). As soon as the other relatives participating in the interview realized that the interviewer had gotten the wrong impression, they corrected him. You are focusing on a single answer she gave, and not the entire answer.
Second, I wouldn’t produce a certified birth certificate either. Why should he? He was born in Hawaii, and is qualified to hold the position of President. He doesn’t have to jump just because some insane wingnuts demand that he jump. I would let them waste their time and money pursuing this nonsense for as long as possible. It isn’t a problem for President Obama, and it just makes them look like idiots.
Remember, President Obama is much, much smarter than all of them.
Finally, none of his school records have disappeared, as far as I know. But he doesn’t have to show you anything. Why should he? Secondly, if disappeared records are such a big concern to you, then show me where you thought Bush was ineligible because of all his lost National Guard records. If you called him a coward and a criminal for being AWOL because he couldn’t produce his Guard records, then I’ll accept that you aren’t a hypocrite. Otherwise, you are all pursuing President Obama on this subject because he is different than any prior President. And you haven’t said why. Therefore, I assume that it’s the one thing that does make him different.
johnnyyuma on March 24 at 2:26 p.m.
So when did BO lie Idahogie; when he said his name was Obama an American natural born citizen of the U.S. or; when he registered for school at Fransiskns Assisi school in Jakarta, Indonesia as Barry Soetoro an Indonesian? You have reverted to name calling with the “insane wingnuts” and your comments do not deserve a reply. I do not know why you keep bringing up Bush, we are not talking about Bush and I have not and will not stoop so low as to try to even begin defending Bush.
idahogie on March 24 at 3:51 p.m.
Don’t defend Bush. Defend yourself. If you’re so hot to see President Obama’s birth certificate - explain why nobody wanted to see Bush’s. Or explain why President Obama is the first and only President to be subjected to such hyper-interest and the first to have his BC demanded.
One thing is true - you will probably still cite the grandmother in your defense, even though you have been corrected. You people are not interested in the truth. This whole thing is another “swiftboat” job, and is equally bogus. You should be embarrrassed to be associated with it.
(And plenty of people use different names at different times in their lives. The fact that you accuse a President of the USA of lying because of a name he went by as a child proves just what kind of low-life scum you are. Again, you don’t want the truth, you want to smear. It’s unAmerican and pathetic. You should be ashamed of yourself.)
johnnyyuma on March 24 at 4:16 p.m.
Idahogie…..”low life scum”? name calling is so childlike, take your meds it will be OK.
Gary D Rhodes on March 24 at 5:45 p.m.
Johnny, glad to hear you are not a fan of Bush either.
We are on the wrong road and have been so for some time. De-Coupling from the gold standard in 1971 was the final straw. Our government became free to print as much money as they wanted.
Basic reform now means a complete change in direction.
Please bring your inteligence and passion to the Campaign for Liberty and the April 15 “tea Party”.
Before we lose more rights (second amendment) and freedoms, and become a member of the United World, we need to put up a fight.
You too Ed.
Jim, you can cover it, then put out damaging commentary like the racist hit piece you ran with your Ron Paul coverage.
idahogie on March 24 at 7:39 p.m.
Johnny,
As soon as you apologize for using despicable names against our President, without any basis for doing so, I’ll apologize for calling you a low-life scum.
You called him a liar for a name that he used as a child. One that his parents probably had everything to do with.
So not only are you slandering our President, you started the childish name calling. So I responded to you. Except that I have a basis for labeling you, and you deserve the terms I’ve used. You have displayed truly ugly behavior, and I have no use for lying, unAmerican swiftboat stooges such as you.
edioparausa on March 24 at 8:35 p.m.
For the record, I shall always be proud that I
donated $75, to http://www.swiftvets.com/ <.
That said, I pass on name calling games and
report news related to the subject of this blog.
Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. will be meeting with Sen.
Jon Kyl tomorrow at 12:00pm EST. Senator
Kyl is currently the Senate Minority Whip and serves on the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Thank you Senator Kyl!
Respectfully,
Ed Hensley, USN Retired - Viet Nam Veteran
Advocate for: http://defendourfreedoms.org/
Gary D Rhodes on March 24 at 8:54 p.m.
The vets that spoke the truth about John Kerry did the Lord’s work.
The truth is good.
That GWBush was not what many had hoped,and not a conservative, is well known. Education, increases in discretionary budget…
We advocate limited Constitutional government.
Honor the 9th and 10th amendment.
Stop international interventionism, unnecessary wars and nation building.
C4L
End the Fed, and all the bubbles.
edioparausa on March 24 at 10:15 p.m.
Rep. Bill Posey, R-Florida, explains H.R. 1503, in his blog & reports left wing attacks on him are
many, nasty and personal. Rep. Posey says>….
… Last Friday I introduced a bill that requires all future presidential candidates to file a copy of their birth certificate, along with all the other necessary documentation, to show that a candidate meets the qualifications for president under the Constitution.
What does the U.S. Constitution say about this –
Article II says there are three qualifications for
president:
1. Must be a natural born citizen
2. Must be at least 35 years old
3. Must have been a resident of the U.S. for at
least 14 years.
Why’d I do this? Well, for a number of reasons
and the more and more I get called names by
leftwing activists, partisan hacks and political
operatives for doing it, the more and more I think
I did the right thing. First, it’s easy to call people
names. This week, I’ve been called some pretty
nasty things. That’s fine. But none of these tolerant
people actually want to discuss the issue at hand…
whether or not a presidential candidate should
have to file these documents with the government.
>>
As I said, in answer to Jim’s two questions at the
end of this blog article, IMHO H.R. 1503, will die
a quick death in committee this year but something
like this or better may well pass in the years ahead.
U.S. Rep. Bill Posey’s blog may be read at >
http://www.tcpalm.com/blogs/us-rep-bill-posey-blog/2009/mar/20/poseypost16/
jimc on March 25 at 12:04 p.m.
Gentlemen,
I appreciate the interest in this topic, and the many comments, particularly in light of the fact that I’ve been out of the office for much of the last two days.
I’d like to ask you to keep it civil, and refrain from calling each other names. I realize passions run high on this topic, but please put your passion into your argument (You can call me names if that seems appropriate, because, as a reporter, I am somewhat used to it.)
That said, there is something that I don’t quite get on the argument that Barack Obama hasn’t proved that he was born in the United States. As I said in a previous post, I’m no expert on the Hawaiin birth certificate documentation, but I do go through many, many documents in the course of my regular work as a reporter. I looked at the jpg of the Certificate of Live Birth on factcheck.org, and I’d have to say it looks like a valid document to me. Clearly, it’s not the original, it’s the kind of standard document that one gets right now when asking for a certified copy of a birth certificate used to obtain a passport, which is an additional proof of citizenship.
Bear with me now on a short, personal digression. This document looks quite a bit like the documents I obtained to get passports for my kids when they were teenagers. My memory is a little hazy from their respective births in the 1980s, but I’m pretty sure their original birth certificates looked a bit different when they were filled out at the hospital. The point is, It’s not a photo copy, it’s a standardized form filled out when one needs a birth certificate copy and certified as correct.
I also have a certified copy of my birth certificate that was filled out in 1953 (OK, so I’m old.) It’s from another state, and it is quite a bit different in every respect. It is a copy made from a microfilm/microfiche file (it’s white on black, not the other way around, because clearly that was the printing process used decades ago when I obtained it.) But that also suggests that there is no original copy of my birth certificate that exists anywhere…it was likely copied for microfilm/microfiche for filing purposes and then destroyed because it and hundreds of thousands like it were taking up too much space in the large city where I was born in the middle of the Baby Boom.
So, if I were to run for president, (this is not, in any way shape or form, an announcement of intentions to do that) would the odd looking copy from the microfilm/microfiche machine, which is stamped and certified by a county official, be proof that I’m a natural born citizen?
Or would I have to produce the actual microfilm/microfiche? Because it seems like the latter is what some people want Obama to produce…
If one of my children wanted to run for president in a few years (after they are 35, of course) would the certified copy of their birth certificate be enough (it looks an awful lot like what’s on the factcheck.org site)? Or would they have to find a way for the folks who have the original over at the Health District Building to cough it up?
My reading of the Posey bill suggests my certified copy, or my kids’ certified copies, of birth certificates would be enough. And so would the copy that appears on factcheck.org. One can question factcheck’s funding (although they do point out mistakes that members of both parties make) but the basic fact remains that there is a certified copy of a document that says Obama was born in Hawaii. Wouldn’t that satisfy Rep. Posey’s bill?
Gary D Rhodes on March 25 at 1:04 p.m.
As I stated before Jim, the COLB is given out by the State of Hawaii to parents who apply, no matter where there children were born.
This would be obvious to you if you did some cursory research on your own.
The health department workers said they saw his legal birth certificate, but they DID NOT say it indicated he was born in Hawaii, as is claimed at the bias Factcheck.
The COLB can not be used to get a passport.
idahogie on March 25 at 2:57 p.m.
I wonder what President Obama used to get his passport. Hey! Maybe the passport office is in on the 45-yr-old conspiracy to get a Kenyan elected President of the USA!
edioparausa on March 25 at 4:14 p.m.
One problem here Jim. The COLB posted does not list
a hospital (or home) of birth. I can tell you that I was
unable to get a U.S. Passport, on a MO Short Form
Birth Certificate, nor was I able to start Social Security
and Medicare, without presenting my MO Certified
Long Form, duly signed and Sealed. Of course that
Navy Recruiter in Wenatchee, in 1956, was happy
with the short B.C. & my freshly minted WHS Diploma.
But….., it does appear that we beat a dead horse.
Appearances are sometimes decieving, so I think I
will keep tracking my fellow looney “Birthers.”
jimc on March 25 at 4:22 p.m.
Mr Rhodes (and other interersted parties)
I believe you have been misinformed about some aspects of the Hawaii Department of Health’s Birth Certificates. I don’t know your source, but I’m more than happy to share mine:
According to Janice Okubo, the communications director for the state Health Department, the Certification of Live Birth is used to get a passport by persons born in Hawaii. It is what is issued to anyone who applies for such proof. The Certification of Live Birth contains all of the data required by the federal government to prove citizenship and obtain a passport. (Ms. Okubo is doubly sure of this, first because she works for the department, and second because she used her certification of live birth … which sounds very much like the one that is shown on factcheckorg, although admittedly we were talking on the phone, not face to face… to get hers. She also uses it to prove American citizenship whenever going onto a military base, which is a requirement for civilians enterring military bases in Hawaii.)
It also contains information on race, which is not required by the federal government for a passport, but is required for some other things in Hawaii, primarily for persons applying for rights as Native Hawaiians. That is a separate department, and Ms. Okubo thinks there may be other steps involved in filing for Native Hawaiian status to claim certain property rights and educational services. But they do use this document as part of that process.
It is not possible for the parent to get a Hawaii Certification of Live Birth for a child who wasn’t born in the state, Ms. Okubo said.
“We wouldn’t certify they were a live birth in Hawaii if they weren’t born in Hawaii. That wouldn’t make any sense at all,” she said.
It is possible to get a different certification of birth for certain adoption situations, but those documents are clearly marked.
To see the actual record on file, state law requires a requesting person to submit a form that shows a tangible interest in that record. The law defines a tangible interest, but to make it simple, the person and his or her parents can easily show such an interest, but a stranger must get permission from the person who’s record is being sought.
This is exactly what happened last fall, when reporters from factcheck.org (and perhaps others, Ms Okubo wasn’t there and isn’t sure of the numbers) got permission from Obama, and saw the actual record. You may not trust them because of their source of funding, but that’s how they got the information that they reported in the story on the above link.
As for health department workers not saying he was born in Hawaii, they couldn’t. Under state law, a health department worker cannot confirm or deny something that’s on a birth certificate. Only the person who has it (the one with the tangible interest…either the actual person or relative) can divulge the information.
“We can’t say what’s contained in a vital record,” she said.
It’s a privacy law.
I don’t know if that satisfies all, some or none of the concerns, but it is really all I can do as a reporter sitting in Spokane about questions revolving around a document in Hawaii…unless my boss wants to buy me a plane ticket to Honolulu, in which case, I’d be happy to dig deeper.
Jim Camden/Spin Control
Gary D Rhodes on March 26 at 3:47 p.m.
So there IS another BC that will not be released. Why do you suppose that is Jim?
Did you listen to the link Ed provided about the SSI numbers?
What is your opinion on these two matters?
edioparausa on March 26 at 10:34 p.m.
Well Jim, - I doubt your boss will spring for trip to
Hawaii, for you unless the Spokesman Review is
walking in taller cotton than most newspapers.
So, I will spring for a free opinion for you, from a
retired Miami-Dade Homicide Captain turned
Book Author, Local Newspaper Columnist and
Blogger. Marshall Frank was a cop for 30 years,
did his fair share of investigative work and has a
few questions still, about Mr. Obama’s B.C.
LOOMING CRISIS: THE PRESIDENT’S ELIGIBILITY
Posted on March 26th, 2009 by marshallfrank in Politics & Government
http://www.marshallfrank.com/articles/?p=154
edioparausa on March 27 at 10:33 a.m.
For anyone who lays claim to an open mind, with the
ability to objectively & unemotionally view both sides
of an argument, please spend 30 minutes to an hour
on this long letter and attachments, to US AG Holder,
frrom Dr. Orly Taitz, Esq. dated Feb. 27, 2009.
Open letter, demand for investigation & immediate action
http://defendourfreedoms.org/letterHolder.htm
jimc on March 27 at 11:26 a.m.
Gentlemen,
I am, unfortunately, limited in the amount of time I can spend on this particular topic because of many other things that are my responsibility to handle for this newspaper. So while I appreciate the suggestion to read the various documents, I’m going to have to decline because, as a reporter in Spokane who covers primarily local politics, I don’t think I’m in the best position to investigate, make a decision and write about this further. I would note that edioparausa’s latest post mentions the person from whence this whole string started, Orly Taitz, so in a sense we’ve circled back around to that the issued raised when she posed that question to Chief Justice Roberts down in Moscow two weeks ago.
I will try to answer one of Mr. Rhodes questions, to the best of my ability, because it seems I may have not been clear in a previous post. You asked “So there is another BC that will not be released”? I don’t think that’s quite correct. I believe there is a record of Barack Obama’s birth that is in the State of Hawaii Depart. of Health’s records, and when someone with a tangible interest in that record requests a Certification of Live Birth from the Department, they get the kind of document that is shown on factcheck.org. That Certification of Live Birth is certified by an appropriate official as accurately showing the pertinent information the Department has on file. In this case, that would include the date, city, county and state where he was born. The original birth certificate for anyone is not released to anyone, it remains on file. I believe the process is similar in other states with which I am familiar, but I can’t speak to all 50 states.So I don’t have an opinion on “another BC that will not be released” because that’s not my understanding of the situation, and I don’t really have the time to debate it so I don’t think I can say any more about it.
And I don’t have an opinion about the SSI number because I don’t have the time to research it. You would expect, and certainly deserve, a well-considered opinion and I just don’t have the time to form one.
But thanks to all for the comments, which I hope will continue. And if anyone wants to send a link to this thread or the previous one to a national news organization with a big budget and/or a bigger staff, I’d say be my guest.
Jim Camden/Spin Control
edioparausa on March 27 at 2:44 p.m.
Fair enough Jim. FYI, I did link both your B.C. blogs on
http://www.marshallfrank.com/articles… And, I doubt you
will be surprised that my efforts to get your B.C. blogs
on DRUDGE and FOX News drew negative results.
Now, here’s a new local political story for you, less than
30 min. off the AP, that might get you some blog hits.
“Spokane residents smuggle suds over green brands”
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090327/ap_on_re_us/bootleg_detergent
Best wishes,
Ed Hensley
jimc on March 30 at 2:18 p.m.
Mr Hensley
Thanks for the efforts on getting more attention to the story.
Thanks for the link to the dishwashing detergent story, too, although we’ve written a fair amount on that and Doug Clark, our general columnist did a column on smuggling in phosphate soap several months ago.
Jim Camden/Spin Control
idahogie on March 31 at 7:43 a.m.
Hey, Ed -
What’s up with Dr. Mrs. Orly Taitz, PhD, LOL, FNC?
It’s been few days since I’ve heard of her exploits. I know she was recently walking the streets in DC, trying to figure out how to revive her lawsuits by nontraditional means. Has she done any more significant Supreme Court stalking in her efforts to get her case heard?
Here are some ideas for her, gratis: perhaps she can attach helium balloons to her briefs and float them into an open window at the Supreme Court Building (I’m talking about legal briefs, not underwear - although with Justice Thomas either might work). That may take a few months - the weather needs to warm up a bit. Or maybe she could bribe a copier repair guy to leave a few in the hall copier outside Justice Scalia’s office. Finally - summer’s almost here and that means interns! I’m sure she can find any number of Liberty University law students who would be happy to include her brief in their applications.
Man, there’s all kinds of legal avenues left! It’s not over yet! She’s going to bring down Obama, and you will have helped! You’ll be as proud as the folks in the Arkansas Project!
Good luck.