Protester disrupts House over Obama's birthplace

oh noze...a typo -- was vs. wax....holy crap....the "s" is no where near the "x" on a keyboard

why don't you tell us why you didn't call out any dems for reading the us constitution?


You know what, when I read that I couldn't figure out what the hell you were even trying to say, but your explanation is eminently reasonable. I suspect you got your hands on a cocktail.

And I called out the whole damn thing. I didn't single out any person or party. It was and is a dumbass PR stunt, whoever was involved.
 
Now that its been exposed as a PR stunt Yurt keeps claiming it was the Democrats Idea to read the constitution....

Funny... He is so ashamed of his leadership he has turned a full 180 and now keeps claiming that just because a Democrat read part of the Consittution it was the Minority's idea and plan.
 
You know what, when I read that I couldn't figure out what the hell you were even trying to say, but your explanation is eminently reasonable. I suspect you got your hands on a cocktail.

And I called out the whole damn thing. I didn't single out any person or party. It was and is a dumbass PR stunt, whoever was involved.

The bit of political theater on the second day of the 112th Congress had been intended as a tribute by Republicans to the tea party movement. Tea party support in the November elections was pivotal to Republicans winning control of the House.
 
You know what, when I read that I couldn't figure out what the hell you were even trying to say, but your explanation is eminently reasonable. I suspect you got your hands on a cocktail.

And I called out the whole damn thing. I didn't single out any person or party. It was and is a dumbass PR stunt, whoever was involved.

yes, such a typo is indicative of drinking a cocktail....:rolleyes:

i already said you didn't call out pubs specifically, but its clear from your posts you didn't realize a dem had read the us constitution into the record
 
Now that its been exposed as a PR stunt Yurt keeps claiming it was the Democrats Idea to read the constitution....

Funny... He is so ashamed of his leadership he has turned a full 180 and now keeps claiming that just because a Democrat read part of the Consittution it was the Minority's idea and plan.

link

i never said that and i don't expect nigel to accuse you of having a cocktail :D
 
yes, such a typo is indicative of drinking a cocktail....:rolleyes:

i already said you didn't call out pubs specifically, but its clear from your posts you didn't realize a dem had read the us constitution into the record

(1) Such a reasonable explanation is indicative that you got your hands on a cocktail and relaxed.

(2) It's apparent from the OP that a Dem was involved. Please show me what specifically in my posts makes clear that I didn't realize a Democrat had read the Constitution into the record.
 
It's been a while since I addressed this issue, but as I recall the announcement in 1961 simply states that a grandchild was born, not where. The electronic copy can be issued to a foreign born. With regards to the registrar, he/ she was probably simply repeating what the electronic copy states.

However, the announcement isn't placed by the family, but by the Hawaii Dept. of Health, which gets the info from all the hospitals.

"On November 9, 2008, in response to persistent rumors, the Honolulu Advertiser posted on its web site a screenshot of its August 13, 1961 birth announcement taken from its microfilmed archives. Such notices were sent to newspapers routinely by the Hawaii Department of Health."[15]
 
However, the announcement isn't placed by the family, but by the Hawaii Dept. of Health, which gets the info from all the hospitals.

"On November 9, 2008, in response to persistent rumors, the Honolulu Advertiser posted on its web site a screenshot of its August 13, 1961 birth announcement taken from its microfilmed archives. Such notices were sent to newspapers routinely by the Hawaii Department of Health."[15]

They were also sent routinely by grandparents.
 
Obama’s ‘Certification of Live Birth’ form reveals his Birth Registration was FILED in 1961 but was never fully ACCEPTED by the Hawaiian State Registrar’s Office.

Born identity

By June Watanabe

POSTED: Saturday, June 06, 2009

Question: What is the state's policy for issuing a "Certification of Live Birth" versus a "Certificate of Live Birth"? My first, second and fourth children received certificates, but my third and fifth children received certifications. Why the difference? The certificate contains more information, such as the name of hospital, certifier's name and title; attendant's name and title, etc. The certification has only the child's name, date and time of birth, sex, city/island/county of birth, mother's maiden name, mother's race, father's name and father's race. Why doesn't the state just issue certificates? When did it stop issuing certificates? Is it possible to obtain certificates for my third and fifth children?

Answer: No, you can't obtain a "certificate of live birth" anymore.

The state Department of Health no longer issues copies of paper birth certificates as was done in the past, said spokeswoman Janice Okubo.

The department only issues "certifications" of live births, and that is the "official birth certificate" issued by the state of Hawaii, she said.


And, it's only available in electronic form.

Okubo explained that the Health Department went paperless in 2001.

"At that time, all information for births from 1908 (on) was put into electronic files for consistent reporting," she said.

Information about births is transferred electronically from hospitals to the department.

"The electronic record of the birth is what (the Health Department) now keeps on file in order to provide same-day certified copies at our help window for most requests," Okubo said.

Asked for more information about the short-form versus long-form birth documents, Okubo said the Health Department "does not have a short-form or long-form certificate."

"The birth certificate form has been modified over the years and decades to conform to national standards and models," she said.

Okubo also emphasized the certification form "contains all the information needed by all federal government agencies for transactions requiring a birth certificate."

She added that the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized the state's current certification of live birth "as an official birth certificate meeting all federal and other requirements."

The issue of what constitutes an official Hawaii birth certificate received national attention during last year's presidential campaign. Those who doubted Barack Obama's American citizenship called the copy of the Hawaii birth document posted on his campaign Web site a fake.

Asked about that document, Okubo said, "This is the same certified copy everyone receives when they request a birth certificate."

It says a "certification of live birth" is, in fact, a short-form official birth certificate. Information included in the document might differ from state to state.

http://archives.starbulletin.com/content/20090606_kokua_line
 
I hope PMP is reading this...

why?......I have no objection to the reading of the Constitution......yes, it was a PR stunt.....and based on the reaction of liberals, a successful one......after all, we have liberals saying reading the Constitution is objectionable.....what on earth could be better than that......
 
Last edited:
why?......I have no objection to the reading of the Constitution......yes, it was a PR stunt.....and based on the reaction of liberals, a successful one......after all, we have liberals saying reading the Constitution is objectionable.....what on earth could be better than that......

Liberals say it's objectionable to use the Constitution as a PR stunt.
 
Liberals say it's objectionable to use the Constitution as a PR stunt.

that's the beauty of a PR stunt.......you can claim that all you want, but all that's visible is liberals complaining about reading the Constitution.........if you wanted to keep it from being a PR stunt, you should have just kept your mouth's shut.............lol, just yesterday some liberal was complaining that it "cost" us over a million dollars to read the Constitution.....don't talk to me about PR stunts.....
 
Last edited:
that's the beauty of a PR stunt.......you can claim that all you want, but all that's visible is liberals complaining about reading the Constitution.........if you wanted to keep it from being a PR stunt, you should have just kept your mouth's shut.............lol, just yesterday some liberal was complaining that it "cost" us over a million dollars to read the Constitution.....don't talk to me about PR stunts.....

You'll be seeing another one when the House votes to repeal health care.
 
I love how the Liberals are willing to spout whatever they are told and to run around announcing how they think the Constitution is a "PR Stunt".

That isn't something that I would announce, even if I believed it. Taken out of context, as you have to know it will be, it will show a zillion liberals all saying that the Constitution is just a "PR Stunt"... You're making the 2012 commercials for them.
 
I love how the Liberals are willing to spout whatever they are told and to run around announcing how they think the Constitution is a "PR Stunt".

That isn't something that I would announce, even if I believed it. Taken out of context, as you have to know it will be, it will show a zillion liberals all saying that the Constitution is just a "PR Stunt"... You're making the 2012 commercials for them.

Who said that the Constitution is a PR stunt? Are you making shit up now....
 
Back
Top