Supreme court case pending???

[NDS]

Originally Posted by tattedupboy

You still can't see that he is doing his best to hide something? Why else would all this stonewalling be going on?

That is the unfortunate truth. After years of complaining about the Bush administration not being open enough, working behind closed doors, and ...


We now have an 'anointed' President elect who has hidden almost everything of his (and his wife's) past. We can't read papers and dissertations. Health, birth, and education records are kept from the public.


He's hiding something--too bad we don't have someone who can check this out; dig through records and expose the truth.

Maybe we need a free and open press...

[Steelhorse]

Originally Posted by magicman007

Steelhorse, much of your questioning is true. Unfortunately, much of it has been investigated, and the Obama legal brigade has blocked every legal avenue to pursue. Obama himself has told every legal, health, and educational agency to not let ANYONE examine ANY of his records. Not even from the Ivy League schools. Why? Why would ANYONE want to not let you look at his/her records from an Ivy League school? Talk about prestiege!! If I had graduated from one of them, I'd be carrying the diploma around WITH me, as well as my transcripts! But then, I have nothing to hide. ;)

As for the medical records, they are all covered by HIPAA, which does not allow ANY information to be released that could identify the patient to anyone who does not need it for continued medical care or reimbursement thereof. And, the patient can still deny that access to anyone who DOES have a legal right to access it. Therefore, no one can see or access any medical records related to his birth or any other visit to a hospital EVER.

Fortunately, or unfortunately, depending upon how one views the matters discussed, snoopy reporters and those looking to make a quick buck by violating confidentiality, are always around to circumvent the system. In the end game, law protecting privacy really don't seem to matter. So much for Roe v. Wade and the inherent constitutional right to privacy.

While medical records are, in fact, protected under HIPAA; this law only applies to entities which electronically transfer medically related information. Given his year of birth, the law may not apply as such. However, as I've commented upon supra, laws related to privacy really don't seem to matter in the end game, because confidential information is usually retrieved "anonymously", and the "media" seems to appreciate taking a moral 1A high ground when it involves exclusive coverage. After all, the press didn't break the law, as they are merely reporting it in the matter of public interest. That and the fact that costs and fines often times can't touch advertising and sponsorship dollars, particularly if the government takes legal action after the news agency.

[ronwill]

Originally Posted by magicman007

Ronwill, I looked at your evidence concerning Mr. Obama's birth records. The digital copy posted on politifact.com states across the top "CERTIFICATION OF LIVE BIRTH". The legal definition of "certification is as follows:
certification - confirmation that some fact or statement is true through the use of documentary evidence

The legal definition of "certificate" is as follows:
A document (such as a birth certificate) prepared by an official during the course of his or her regular duties, and which may be used as evidence for certain purposes.

Well I wasn't going to post responses here anymore (I'm not taking a very popular stance) but thought I would answer this one. Yes I know the difference. My copy says the following: " I hereby certify this to be a true and correct copy of an original certificate filed with the division of vital statistics." (bold mine) Not an original but a certification of birth. Notice also on Obama's certification the city, town or location of birth, the island of birth and the county of birth. Here comes the "it's a fake" part of the argument, even though many have verified it and accept it. Just as many of you wish to believe the conspiracy theories surrounding Obama, I choose to believe the evidence points at his birth in Hawaii.

[magicman007]

Originally Posted by ronwill

Well I wasn't going to post responses here anymore (I'm not taking a very popular stance) but thought I would answer this one. Yes I know the difference. My copy says the following: " I hereby certify this to be a true and correct copy of an original certificate filed with the division of vital statistics." (bold mine) Not an original but a certification of birth. Notice also on Obama's certification the city, town or location of birth, the island of birth and the county of birth. Here comes the "it's a fake" part of the argument, even though many have verified it and accept it. Just as many of you wish to believe the conspiracy theories surrounding Obama, I choose to believe the evidence points at his birth in Hawaii.

Again, the only thing that piece of paper says is that in the State of Hawaii, in the city, etc. that they certify Mr. Obama was, in fact, born. Not that he was born IN Hawaii, but that The city/State, etc. recognizes he was born. I'm not into conspiracy theories, but the semantics of the paperwork tend toward ambiguity. That's my point. Obama is a lawyer and knows how to play the word game. That's what this paperwork does. It plays on the meanings of the words and most people won't know the difference between the two. If he was actually born in Hawaii, then just let us see the birth certificate that is on file. Plain and simple. No games, no double entendres, no hidden meanings. Just put out a digital picture of the real thing. That would shut up everybody who's crying foul and end 20+ lawsuits in their tracks. He wants to help the economy? Then if he really IS a natural born citizen stop wasting the taxpayers monies and end the lawsuits. It's really that simple

[Glock Fan]

He's stimulating the economy by putting numreous attorneys, process servers, private investigators, etc. to work. It's not that he refuses to produce the paperwork, it's that he can't produce paperwork that doesn't exist.



gf

[wolfhunter]

Originally Posted by Glock Fan

He's stimulating the economy by putting numreous attorneys, process servers, private investigators, etc. to work. It's not that he refuses to produce the paperwork, it's that he can't produce paperwork that doesn't exist.



gf

GF, did the hut in Kenya burn down? You know, where the records were kept?

[tattedupboy]

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

GF, did the hut in Kenya burn down? You know, where the records were kept?

It's not that it burned down. It's that he doesn't want anyone to know that that's where the records are being kept.

[Glock Fan]

Originally Posted by wolfhunter

GF, did the hut in Kenya burn down? You know, where the records were kept?

I was talking about the U.S. birth certificate. I know what the one "on file" says here in PRHI.



gf

[tattedupboy]

Originally Posted by Glock Fan

I was talking about the U.S. birth certificate. I know what the one "on file" says here in PRHI.



gf

Whose U.S. birth certificate? Not Obama's? Remember, we've agreed that there probably isn't one.