Values Voter News

I am going out on a limb on this one. But after I have had a chance to review the ligitimacy of this case I found that it was necessary to report my findings in context of FactCheck and Snopes misinformation. Hopefully this blog will show that FactCheck and Snopes have not properly dealt with this and that they have only gone out to disprove some of the crazy emails circulating out there but no answers concerning the ligitimate legal concerns as I hope you will see.

Until FactCheck and Snopes revise their sites this argument remains unanswered by them. I am going to send this in an email to friends as a fun challenge to Snopes and FactCheck so that one of you can submit it to Snopes so they can then answer the concerns more properly.

Please follow the points to there end. If you stop anywhere but at the end you will misunderstand. Trust me. You will see why...

Key point 1)

All agree that Obama has posted "a birth certificate" on his web site at The Truth About Barack’s Birth Certificate. It is there for all to see. However, that is not the original birth certificate as all agree as will be shown below.

So one key point of distinction in this discussion is to carefully distinguish what birth certificate people are talking about. The original or the one posted on Obama's web site.

This may sound silly but do keep this in mind as we explore below.

Key point 2)

Nobody has seen Obama's original birth certificate but Dr Fukino. All agree on this...

Snopes agrees at http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp. It is stated that "in October 2008, Hawaiian officials reported that they had personally verified the existence of Barack Obama's original birth certificate".

FactCheck.org agrees at http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html. "Update Nov. 1: The Chiyome Fukino as saying that both she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama's original birth certificate."

So Obama's original birth certificate has been confirmed. But...

Key point 3)

Both FactCheck.org and Snopes.com are not truely informing the public on the question in dispute which only fuels the concern on this issue and confuses the distinction made in Key point 1). Please follow...

FactCheck.org says, "Update, Nov. 1: The director of Hawaii’s Department of Health confirmed Oct. 31 that Obama was born in Honolulu."

Snopes.com says, "State officials say there's no doubt Barack Obama was born in Hawaii.".

FactCheck.org and Snopes.com need some FactChecking and Snoping themselves on these two statements. Here is what state officials did officially release: http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2008/08-93.pdf. I will quote the statement here:

“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record.

“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.

“No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawai‘i.”

So Dr. Fukino says that she has "personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures." Not that Obama was born in Hawaii. This is key in the argument that Snopes and FactCheck are not understanding and thus misinforming the public and confusing the matter but there is more please do follow to next Key points...

Now let us put the two statements side by side.

Snopes and FactCheck said, "The director of Hawaii’s Department of Health confirmed Oct. 31 that Obama was born in Honolulu and State officials say there's no doubt Barack Obama was born in Hawaii"

When in actuality Dr Fukino said, "Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures."

Please continue to follow...

Key point 5)

All Obama needs to do is get the orginal certificate which is verified to exist by Dr Fukino to proper authorities like Congress, Supreme Court, the Electoral College and or the Federal Elections Commission. I am sure there are situations in which they require the physical evidence for like a passport and so how much more should Obama understand the skeptics concern for his ligitimate title of the President of the United States. If there is nothing to hide then let the questions be answered and verified by proper authorities what is the big deal!!! That is what really fuels the concern here. But why this is even more concerning is the next key point which is entirely ignored at FactCheck and Snopes as far as I can tell and because they ignore it really confuses things....

Key point 6)

Now on to a case in California that was filed on 11/12/2008. Here is actual case request at http://americamustknow.com/Documents/Final%20writ%20Keyes%20v%20Bowen.pdf (maybe 10 pages double spaced and that's it. The first 8 or so pages are just names in the case and so forth. It won't take long!!!). Scroll down to page 11 and point 74. It says that the statement made by Dr Fukino "failed to resolve any of the questions raised...Being "on record" could mean either that its contents are in the computer database of the department or there is an actual "vault" original."

Now check out the next point 75 in contention. This neither FactCheck.org nor Snopes.com deals with either!!! "The vault...birth certificate...allows the birth in another State or another country to be registered in Hawaii."!!!! But check this out..."Box 7C of the vault Certificate of Live Birth contains a question, whether the birth was in Hawaii or another State or Country." (Update 12/5/2008 I may be wrong but I think this statement should be corrected to say that Box 7c contains a question as to the Usual Residence of Mother not whether the birth was in Hawaii see http://www.wethepeoplefoundation.org/PROJECTS/Obama/Evidence/SAMPLE-HI-BirthCertificate-circa1963.htm. At least not what I can tell from this 1963 copy although in 1961 it could have been different. But the fact that Hawaii "allows the birth in another State or another country to be registered in Hawaii".) So if this is the original vault certificate or a certified copy of the original vault certificate of live birth then we can get this issue over with. I am guessing it is not or else then it would quickly be released but we need to know whether it is or not. Not allowing the proper authorities to view this only fuels more concern!!!

Neither does FactCheck.org nor Snopes.com deal with the complaint below as far as I know...

Now scroll down to section 79 on page 13. "From August 21, 2008, for over two months, Senator Obama has refused to provide his original birth certificate, even though, in his book, Dreams of my Father, page 26, he state, "....I found the article folded between my birth certificate and old immunization records..." which shows that he clearly has his birth certificate..."

Now on to another recent case in Hawaii...

Key point 7)

There are other cases posted here at http://americamustknow.com/default.aspx (Update: 12/3/2008 09:39 PM exact page of other cases actually at http://americamustknow.com/lawsuits.aspx) and also, a Hawaiian case that sparked a petition after it's filing in on 10/17/2008 and decision on 11/18/2009.

The Hawaiian case actual ruling is here at http://americamustknow.com/andymartincase.aspx (just a couple of paragraphs. Again it won't take long) in which the court responded that "IN ADDITION, THERE IS INSUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO INDICATE THAT THE PUBLIC INTEREST SUPPORTS THE GRANTING OF THE RELIEF SOUGHT AND THERE IS A REASONABLE BELIEF THAT THE PUBLIC WOULD RATHER PRESERVE THE CONFIDENTIALITY OF VITAL HEALTH RECORDS." which in response to those statements the petition was started that you can sign on to at http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=81550. But before you decide to sign on please continue to follow...

However, I do agree with the courts decision that said, "BASED ON THE LIMITED AMOUNT OF EVIDENCE PRESENTED, THE COURT FINDS THAT IT IS UNLIKELY THAT PLAINTIFF WILL PREVAIL ON THE MERITS AS IT APPEARS THAT THE PLAINTIFF DOES NOT HAVE A DIRECT AND TANGIBLE INTEREST IN THE VITAL STATISTIC RECORDS BEING SOUGHT, NAMELY THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE OF PRESIDENT OBAMA." I agree that a journalist shouldn't be able to obtain this information but the petition is not that the public or just anyone gets this original birth certificate but rather that it goes "To: Electoral College, Congress of the United States, Federal Elections Commission, U.S. Supreme Court, President of the United States, other controlling legal authorities". This is why the California case will be more interesting when it is decided cause it is not a journalist seeking the certificate but a presidential candidate and certified California electors.

This petition has been signed by over 145,000 petitioners (Update 12/4/2008 11:04 AM Now over 153,000 petitioners Update 12/5/2008 now over 161,000) and counting since Hawaii made public its ruling on 11/19/2008. Before you decide to sign please continue to follow...

In another case/concern on December 5th the Supreme Court will have a conference concerning this issue in which this same news organization that organized this petition also has made available for $10.95 for you to petition the Supreme Court by fed ex that will discuss this issue this Friday. In less then 24 hours they have rallied up over 31,000 (Update 12/5/2008 this fed ex petition ended with over 60,000) petitioners willing to pay to fed ex a physical petition to the Supreme Court since the Supreme Court justices can not be called by phone or email. If you wish to be included in this fed ex petition you have till noon on the 4th to do so. Click https://shop.wnd.com/store/item2559.html.

Just so you know if you sign on the petition you are not asking for just anyone to obtain Obama's original birth certificate. You are asking the certificate to be given to proper authorities. This is key. There is no reason why Obama should not be willing to do so if he wishes to be perceived as constitutionally able to be president. And why the proper authorities should not physcially confirm the evidence of the issue. If it's so ridiculous then why not!!! Settle the concern of the petitioners to not do so is to spark further demand and cause of concern of the credibility of our system.

Update: 12/3/2008 09:34 PM Note that the conference that is being held on 12/5/2008 is about another issue other then the birth certificate but concerning Obama's qualification as a natural born citizen via dual citizenship at birth. Again these cases are located in the above links for you to view each and everyone. They all have different angles but one goal of verifying the eligibility of Obama to be president.

Key point 8)

Lastly, it is very possible that Obama has something ligitimate to hide from the public. Not necessarily that he is or is not a natural born citizen but rather that maybe there is some information on the birth certificate that could put his family members in harms way in Kenya or elsewhere. Or maybe he is protecting some information about something that has nothing to do with his eligibility but may be a private matter of some sort. There are many other reasons why one would not want information that may be on a birth certificate to the general public I am assuming for possible ligitimate argument sake.

Maybe it does expose something about Obama that contradicts his campaigning or something but if so this is not a ligitimate reason for release. Politicians always contradict what they campaign on for obvious and sometimes not so obvious reasons. It must be to stick to the main issue as to whether or not Obama is qualified to be our president and proper authorities should be called on to do so. It's as simple as that to put this issue to rest.

The focus should not be on rumours, slander or gossip that come resulting from the question as to why Obama has yet to provide the requested information but rather on getting Obama to provide it as he should and for the proper authorities to hold him responsible for doing so. Hopefully this will occur and all will be settled one way or the other.

Key point 9)

Pray about it and pray for our leaders and be sure you're sins are forgiven and paid for at the cross of Christ for as Christ said "what would it profit for a man to gain the world yet lose his own soul".

Boy was that out of context. Maybe on purpose!!! :) Take care all....

"This is a faithful saying, and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners; of whom I am chief."-I Timothy 1

"I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty."-I Timothy 2