Main Menu

Onaka’s verification wording

imageBlogger Butterdezillion along with Mr. Hendershot have made a big deal about the wording of a series of verifications of the information on Obama’s birth certificate. One commenter here raised the issue succinctly.

Hermitian: The last sentence in SOS Bennett’s request for verification was:

“Additionally, please verify that the attached copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama is a true and accurate representation of the original record in your files.”

Onaka was unable to verify this as fact. Instead he responded as follows:

“Additionally, I verify that the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for Mr. Obama that you attached with your request matches the original record in our files.”

Birthers have focused on the wording of these three verifications, trying to find hidden meaning in what was not said, trying to make what was not said contradict what they clearly intended to say, but in a sense, Hermitian is technically correct. Onaka couldn’t verify the photocopy; however, this was because of the law, not because the photocopy isn’t an accurate image copy of the original.  The verifications are worded as they are because of the law governing such verifications:

§338-14.3  Verification in lieu of a certified copy.  (a)  Subject to the requirements of section 338-18, the department of health, upon request, shall furnish to any applicant, in lieu of the issuance of a certified copy, a verification of the existence of a certificate and any other information that the applicant provides to be verified relating to the vital event that pertains to the certificate.

(b)  A verification shall be considered for all purposes certification that the vital event did occur and that the facts of the event are as stated by the applicant.

(c)  Verification may be made in written, electronic, or other form approved by the director of health.

(d)  The fee for a verification in lieu of a certified copy shall be a maximum of one half of the fee established in section 338-14.5 for the first certified copy of a certificate issued.

(e)  Fees received for verifications in lieu of certified copies shall be remitted, and one half of the fee shall be deposited to the credit of the vital statistics improvement special fund in section 338-14.6 and the remainder of the fee shall be deposited to the credit of the state general fund. [L 2001, c 246, §1; am L 2010, c 55, §1]

Dr. Onaka said in the verifications that the certificate existed and was in their files, and that the “information contained” in the White House long form image matches the original. That is precisely what he is allowed to do by law, and nothing else. The law states:

§338-18  Disclosure of records.  (a)  To protect the integrity of vital statistics records, to ensure their proper use, and to ensure the efficient and proper administration of the vital statistics system, it shall be unlawful for any person to permit inspection of, or to disclose information contained in vital statistics records, or to copy or issue a copy of all or part of any such record, except as authorized by this part or by rules adopted by the department of health.

This blanket prohibition on the release of information constrains Department of Health Officials in what they may and may not do, and gives them no flexibility to deal with the crazy idea that the certificate is a forgery even if everything on it is correct. Rather than looking for hidden meaning, birthers ought to look at the plain requirements of the statute.

Print Friendly

, ,

76 Responses to Onaka’s verification wording

  1. avatar
    john January 2, 2013 at 11:04 am #

    Butter is right. Onaka would not state the the White House BC is a “true and accurate representation” only that is it “matched”. Just because it matches doesn’t mean its a “true and accurate representation” which what Onaka was specifically asked. There’s nothing under that statute to prevent him from doing this and yet Onaka refused to say it.

  2. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 2, 2013 at 11:07 am #

    That’s not how the statute works. I’m updating the article with details.

    john: There’s nothing under that statute to prevent him from doing this and yet Onaka refused to say it.

  3. avatar
    john January 2, 2013 at 11:07 am #

    In addition, Onaka refers to “information” contained in White House BC and the original record. One could make the argument that “Information” is too vague to be of any value. Onaka had to specify and verify each piece of information on the BC as a “True and Accurate” representation of the original file, something Onaka did not do.

  4. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 2, 2013 at 11:13 am #

    One could make that argument, but it would be a specious one.

    john: One could make the argument that “Information” is too vague to be of any value.

  5. avatar
    john January 2, 2013 at 11:14 am #

    verification (vr-f-kshn)
    n.
    1. The act of verifying or the state of being verified.
    2.
    a. A confirmation of truth or authority.
    b. The evidence for such a confirmation.
    c. A formal assertion of validity.
    3. Law An affidavit that attests to the truth of a pleading.

    So yes, Onaka certainly has the ability to state for the record that the White House BC is a “True and Accurate” representation of the original. However, Onaka did state this and only stated that it “matched” which goes against the very definition of “Verification”.

  6. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 2, 2013 at 11:16 am #

    But the statute does not say “verification of the certificate” it says verification of the “information.” Try to respect context.

    john: verification (vr-f-kshn)

  7. avatar
    Scientist January 2, 2013 at 11:22 am #

    Can anyone enlighten me with a rationale as to why someone would laboriously “forge” a certificate with the same information as the original, rather than simply photocopying it? Anyone? Bueller?

  8. avatar
    Joey January 2, 2013 at 11:23 am #

    Birthers love to parse words to try and bolster their 198 times in a row failed legal arguments.

    But Judges are well aware of the Federal Rules of Evidence and Dr. Onaka’s wording is in perfect sync with Federal Rule of Evidence 1005 which states in its entirety:
    RULE 1005. COPIES OF PUBLIC RECORDS TO PROVE CONTENT

    “The proponent may use a copy to prove the content of an official record — or of a document that was recorded or filed in a public office as authorized by law — if these conditions are met: the record or document is otherwise admissible; and the copy is certified as correct in accordance with Rule 902(4) or is testified to be correct by a witness who has COMPARED it with the original. If no such copy can be obtained by reasonable diligence, then the proponent may use other evidence to prove the content.”

    Dr. Onaka is a witness who has COMPARED the copy to the original that is on file in HIS office and lo and behold, he found out that they MATCH.

    The bottom line is ACTIONS. Two Republican Secretaries of State in their statutory capacities as Chief Elections Officials asked for and received Letters of Verification from Hawai’i and after they received those letters they immediately cleared Barack Obama for their deep red states’ ballots (Arizona & Kansas) as being eligible as a natural born citizen. THE END

  9. avatar
    donna January 2, 2013 at 11:26 am #

    the long form birth certificate could have been handwritten on toilet paper with crayons

    it’s the CONTENT that was verified

    besides, the COLB is “prima facie evidence of the fact of birth in any court proceeding”

  10. avatar
    Andy January 2, 2013 at 11:27 am #

    John:

    Onaka did exactly as the law stated. He verified the existence of the record, and all the information provided by the applicant.

    Can you provide a law that allows Onaka to do any more?

  11. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater January 2, 2013 at 11:35 am #

    john: verification (vr-f-kshn)n.1. The act of verifying or the state of being verified.2.a. A confirmation of truth or authority.b. The evidence for such a confirmation.c. A formal assertion of validity.3. Law An affidavit that attests to the truth of a pleading.So yes, Onaka certainly has the ability to state for the record that the White House BC is a “True and Accurate” representation of the original. However, Onaka did state this and only stated that it “matched” which goes against the very definition of “Verification”.

    But according to your definition of Verification and the wording that Onaka used saying he verified the information. According to 2. a. Onaka did exactly what you wanted he verified the information was true.

  12. avatar
    JPotter January 2, 2013 at 12:07 pm #

    How could any entity ‘verify’ a photocopy of any document it had issued? Unless they made the photocopy (in which case it would be a copy of a copy, but rather a certified copy of the original), they have no way of knowing the provenance of any copies that turns up. All they can do is verify that information matches that recorded on the original which is on file. It could be tapped in via Morse code, copied out long hand, set in a tile mosaic presented in the form of an audio recording, or written on a truck stop mirror in lipstick. The requestin party presents a cause for requesting information be verified, and, if the request is justified, they get exactly what they ask for.

    This isn’t a special Hawaii thing. The statutes of every state I’ve bothered looking up are remarkably similar on these points, as they are all driven by identical concerns: privacy, information security, preservation of records.

  13. avatar
    john January 2, 2013 at 12:40 pm #

    It’s not only the BC but host of other problems. I have contacted by my Senator and Congressman and have told them to Object on Friday. I informed them of Orly Taitz’s suit to prevent the Joint Session of Congress from Certifying the vote. I basically told them it’s like the movie “12 Angry Man”…..”I guess we sit down and talk about it” as paraphrased by Henry Fonda.

  14. avatar
    john January 2, 2013 at 12:42 pm #

    In addition I told them that they have the backing of millions of people. I told them when Senator Barbara Box objected in 2004, she received 5,000 roses for her courage and effort on Valentine’s Day.

  15. avatar
    CarlOrcas January 2, 2013 at 12:50 pm #

    john:
    In addition, Onaka refers to “information” contained in White House BC and the original record.One could make the argument that “Information” is too vague to be of any value.Onaka had to specify and verify each piece of information on the BC as a “True and Accurate” representation of the original file, something Onaka did not do.

    So Johh……..as the New Year begins please tell us – in a sentence or two – exactly what it would take to settle your concerns about Obama.

  16. avatar
    john January 2, 2013 at 1:01 pm #

    “So Johh……..as the New Year begins please tell us – in a sentence or two – exactly what it would take to settle your concerns about Obama.”

    As Sheriff Arpiao remarked….”Show me the Microfilm.”

  17. avatar
    donna January 2, 2013 at 1:02 pm #

    JPotter:The statutes of every state I’ve bothered looking up are remarkably similar on these points, as they are all driven by identical concerns: privacy, information security, preservation of records.

    to refute a birther ages ago, i called the DOH of either wisc or mich and was told they did away with issuing “long form” birth certificates when they got rid of their copying machines and i was told that too much info was divulged on the long forms leaving constituents open to identity theft

    the state dept issues the requirements for birth certificates:

    Full name of the applicant
    Date of birth
    Place of birth
    Raised, embossed, impressed or multicolored seal of issuing authority
    Registrar’s signature
    The date the certificate was filed with the registrar’s office (must be within one year)
    Full names of applicant’s parent(s)

  18. avatar
    roadburner January 2, 2013 at 1:38 pm #

    john: It’s not only the BC but host of other problems. I have contacted by my Senator and Congressman and have told them to Object on Friday. I informed them of Orly Taitz’s suit to prevent the Joint Session of Congress from Certifying the vote. I basically told them it’s like the movie “12 Angry Man”…..”I guess we sit down and talk about it” as paraphrased by Henry Fonda.

    the minute they got to the part where you informed them youre a follower of oily, they probably chucked your letter in the file marked `crazy after they had picked themselves of the floor and retrieved their ass

  19. avatar
    Rickey January 2, 2013 at 1:42 pm #

    john:
    .However, Onaka did state this and only stated that it “matched” which goes against the very definition of “Verification”.

    v. matched, matching, matches
    v.tr.

    To be exactly like; correspond exactly.

    What is it about “exactly like” which you do not understand?

    john:

    ”Show me the Microfilm.”

    How do you know that there is microfilm? And even if there is microfilm, how could it be reviewed without compromising the other birth certificates which are on the same roll?

  20. avatar
    Steve January 2, 2013 at 1:46 pm #

    john:
    “So Johh……..as the New Year begins please tell us – in a sentence or two – exactly what it would take to settle your concerns about Obama.”

    As Sheriff Arpiao remarked….”Show me the Microfilm.”

    I understand you don’t care about President Obama’s privacy rights and I can understand how you could make a persuasive argument that because he chose run for President, he forfeited any protection from any and all privacy laws. You’re wrong about that, but I can understand how some people could think that way.
    But what about the other people whose birth certificates are on that same roll of microfilm? Did they forfeit their rights to be protected by Hawaii’s privacy laws simply because their birth certificates happen to be on the same roll as the President’s?

  21. avatar
    CarlOrcas January 2, 2013 at 1:48 pm #

    john:
    “So Johh……..as the New Year begins please tell us – in a sentence or two – exactly what it would take to settle your concerns about Obama.”

    As Sheriff Arpiao remarked….”Show me the Microfilm.”

    What microfilm?

  22. avatar
    CarlOrcas January 2, 2013 at 1:51 pm #

    john:
    It’s not only the BC but host of other problems.I have contacted by my Senator and Congressman and have told them to Object on Friday.I informed them of Orly Taitz’s suit to prevent the Joint Session of Congress from Certifying the vote.I basically told them it’s like the movie “12 Angry Man”…..”I guess we sit down and talk about it” as paraphrased by Henry Fonda.

    In other words, John, just seeing the “microfilm” along with Sheriff Joe wouldn’t satisfy you……right?

  23. avatar
    JPotter January 2, 2013 at 1:59 pm #

    john: ”I guess we sit down and talk about it”

    You presume too much. Effecting a pause in the affairs of state requires a damn good reason, and you’re all out of crappy ones. Ever see a damn good one?

    How about any pink unicorns?

  24. avatar
    Scientist January 2, 2013 at 2:00 pm #

    john: I have contacted by my Senator and Congressman and have told them to Object on Friday

    Now that’s interesting. I understand that you live in Florida, so one of your Senators is Marco Rubio, a guy that you birthers believe is ineligible, yet who is almost certain to run for President in 2016. So, if he were to object to Obama now and then were to run and win next time, wouldn’t he have to object to himself?

  25. avatar
    scott e. January 2, 2013 at 2:13 pm #

    does anyone else sense the counterintuitive nature of going again and again on this rehash merry go round… and round and…

    it doesn’t make sense for normal people to behave this way. or does it. am i missing something here?

    and it’s both sides, with one side always calling the other crazy. wtf ??

  26. avatar
    American Mzungu January 2, 2013 at 2:19 pm #

    john: It’s not only the BC but host of other problems.

    Unable to continue his arguments on the birth certificate in the face of the facts, John tries to divert the discussion to something—anything—else.

  27. avatar
    Rickey January 2, 2013 at 2:31 pm #

    Scientist: Now that’s interesting.I understand that you live in Florida, so one of your Senators is Marco Rubio, a guy that you birthers believe is ineligible, yet who is almost certain to run for President in 2016.So, if he were to object to Obama now and then were to run and win next time, wouldn’the have to object to himself?

    John’s other Senator is Bill Nelson, a Democrat, so John (if he is being truthful) must have contacted Rubio’s office.

    I would be happy to bet any amount with John that Rubio will not file an objection on Friday.

  28. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 2, 2013 at 2:57 pm #

    The purpose of this site is to examine the theories and debunk the misinformation. If the misinformation keeps being repeated, it seems appropriate to remind folks of the debunking. What you may have heard a dozen times is not necessarily what someone else has heard. Over 40% of the visitors here last month had not visited before, and something buried 500 articles back isn’t much good to someone landing on the home page.

    scott e.: does anyone else sense the counterintuitive nature of going again and again on this rehash merry go round… and round and…

  29. avatar
    Majority Will January 2, 2013 at 3:05 pm #

    scott e.:
    does anyone else sense the counterintuitive nature of going again and again on this rehash merry go round… and round and…

    It makes perfect sense to continually and consistently repeat the truth for obstinate and extremely slow learners, “Bernardine”.

  30. avatar
    Rickey January 2, 2013 at 3:33 pm #

    scott e.:

    it doesn’t make sense for normal people to behave this way. or does it. am i missing something here?

    If you were to ask me, it doesn’t make sense for writers to refuse to use capital letters. As Edmund Wilson said about E.E. Cummings, “Mr. Cummings’s eccentric punctuation is, also, I believe, a symptom of his immaturity as an artist. It is not merely a question of an unconventional usage: unconventional punctuation may very well gain its effect… the really serious case against Mr. Cummings’s punctuation is that the results which it yields are ugly. His poems on the page are hideous.”[

  31. avatar
    bovril January 2, 2013 at 4:11 pm #

    John,

    If you are going to make up specious BS, at least be consistent,

    The Sad Shurrif demanded to see the “microfiche” not the “microfilm” and without ANY proof that either manner of record keeping exists at the HDoH.

    Oh and by the way, since you keep on vomiting it out, when oh when are you going to get it through that pointy headed skull of yours that the objections at the counting of the EC votes are and only ever can be about the votes.

    They are not and never can be some bizarre open ended extended whine about ether the President or the Presidency.

    At the EC, a WRITTEN objection is required by a Senator and a Congress critter to object to the EC votes of a SINGULAR state. Then they break up, debate the EC votes for that state for a maximum of 2 hours, only about the EC vote for that state, vote on the EC vote and nothing else and then carry on with the count.

    No great frog marching debate on the President.

    Want that you get to try and convince the Senate AND Congress to go ahead with impeachment,

    Read the fecking Constitution will you !!

    Prat

  32. avatar
    Horus January 2, 2013 at 4:23 pm #

    john:
    It’s not only the BC but host of other problems.I have contacted by my Senator and Congressman and have told them to Object on Friday.I informed them of Orly Taitz’s suit to prevent the Joint Session of Congress from Certifying the vote.I basically told them it’s like the movie “12 Angry Man”…..”I guess we sit down and talk about it” as paraphrased by Henry Fonda.

    Prepare yourself for a MAJOR Disappointment!
    No one is going to object, they do not believe you because you are insane!
    No one in their right mind believes what you believe.

  33. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater January 2, 2013 at 4:27 pm #

    john: It’s not only the BC but host of other problems. I have contacted by my Senator and Congressman and have told them to Object on Friday. I informed them of Orly Taitz’s suit to prevent the Joint Session of Congress from Certifying the vote. I basically told them it’s like the movie “12 Angry Man”…..”I guess we sit down and talk about it” as paraphrased by Henry Fonda.

    Oh so you’re going to move away from the verification now? There are no “host of other problems” just as there is no problem with the BC

  34. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater January 2, 2013 at 4:29 pm #

    john: In addition I told them that they have the backing of millions of people. I told them when Senator Barbara Box objected in 2004, she received 5,000 roses for her courage and effort on Valentine’s Day.

    So then you lied? There were no millions of people on your side. You guys can’t even get 50 people to show up at one gathering. You overstate your numbers consistently.

  35. avatar
    Dr Kenneth Noisewater January 2, 2013 at 4:30 pm #

    john: “So Johh……..as the New Year begins please tell us – in a sentence or two – exactly what it would take to settle your concerns about Obama.”As Sheriff Arpiao remarked….”Show me the Microfilm.”

    The microfilm is a copy it’s not the original and would have been created after the original.

  36. avatar
    Northland10 January 2, 2013 at 6:19 pm #

    They are tired of the old PDF forgery bit and want a new microfiche forgery to play with. It’s that whole attention span of a gnat thing.

    Dr Kenneth Noisewater: The microfilm is a copy it’s not the original and would have been created after the original.

  37. avatar
    Hermitian January 2, 2013 at 7:13 pm #

    Mr. C’s weasel worded interpretation of the Hawaii Laws, if true, would prevent the HDOH from verifying even a certified copy of an original certificate if the copy was in the possession of law enforcement. They could only verify that the information on the certified copy matches the information on the original. Hence the HDOH could never testify that their own certified copies are prima facie evidence that the birth occurred. The only true logic that fits this contorted Obot interpretation is that Onaka knows that the WH LFCOLB PDF image is not a duplicate copy of the original.

    CCP Detective Zullo has provided sworn affidavit that Assistant AAG Nagamine refused to verify that the WH LFCOLB was a copy of the original certificate.

    “15. At our insistence we did have an opportunity to speak with Deputy
    Attorney General Jill Nagamine. During our meeting Ms. Nagamine
    refused to verify the authenticity of the PDF file released by the White
    House. As a matter of fact Ms. Nagamine would not provide us with any
    confirmation that the document was created by the Hawaii Department of
    Health.

    “16. Ms. Nagamine accused us of trying to get a verification of a birth record
    without legal authority to do so, even though the document has been
    offered for public view via the World Wide Web. She constantly evaded
    answering every question about the legitimacy of the document by hiding
    behind State statutes.”

    Mr. C also conveniently ignores the fact that Onaka also did not verify the facts contained in the HDOH request form submitted by SOS Bennett. He was required by the same Hawaii laws to independently verify each fact provided by the requester.

  38. avatar
    Hermitian January 2, 2013 at 7:56 pm #

    But now for the rest of the story.

    The request letter of SOS Kobach contained the following request:

    “Based on the above information, can you provide verification of the following statements?”

    “3. The information contained in the “Certificate of Live Birth” published at
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/rss_viewer/birth-certificate-long-form,pdf
    and reviewed by you on the date of your verification, a copy of which is attached to this
    request, is identical to the information contained in the original Certificate of Live Birth
    for Barack Hussein Obama, II on file with the State of Hawaii Department of Health.”

    Onaka responded with:

    “3. The information contained in the “Certificate of Live Birth” published at
    http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2011/04/27/president-obamas-long-form-birth-certificate and reviewed by me on the date of this verification, a copy of which is
    attached with your request, matches the information contained in the original
    Certificate of Live Birth for Barack Hussein Obama, ll on file with the State of
    Hawaii Department of Health.”

    Thus, Onaka could not verifiy that the information on the WH LFCOLB “is identical to” the information on the original certificate.

    The term “matches” that Onaka substituted for “is identical to” is subject to legal interpretation.

    “”matches” — 3rd person singular present, plural of match”

    “Verb

    “Correspond or cause to correspond in some essential respect; make or be harmonious: “she matched her steps to his”.”

    Hardly an acceptable standard for prima facie evidence.

  39. avatar
    scott e. January 2, 2013 at 8:51 pm #

    Rickey: If you were to ask me, it doesn’t make sense for writers to refuse to use capital letters. As Edmund Wilson said about E.E. Cummings, “Mr. Cummings’s eccentric punctuation is, also, I believe, a symptom of his immaturity as an artist. It is not merely a question of an unconventional usage: unconventional punctuation may very well gain its effect… the really serious case against Mr. Cummings’s punctuation is that the results which it yields are ugly. His poems on the page are hideous.”[

    i use capital letters. i think cummings was a racist, i never cared for poetry that much.

  40. avatar
    scott e. January 2, 2013 at 8:52 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    The purpose of this site is to examine the theories and debunk the misinformation. If the misinformation keeps being repeated, it seems appropriate to remind folks of the debunking. What you may have heard a dozen times is not necessarily what someone else has heard.Over 40% of the visitors here last month had not visited before, and something buried 500 articles back isn’t much good to someone landing on the home page.

    i guess so, that makes sense.

  41. avatar
    BillTheCat January 2, 2013 at 9:16 pm #

    John sure loves grabbing them straws :D Hermi isn’t too far behind on that front.

    I don’t think he’s met an Obama birther conspiracy theory he didn’t like! Kind of like how Orly is throwing in the kitchen sink tomorrow (to no avail, she’ll be allowed no witnesses)

  42. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 2, 2013 at 9:17 pm #

    You might reasonably infer that from what I said. The State of Hawaii doesn’t have forensic document examiners. I daresay there are forgers around good enough to fool anybody at the HDOH. Law enforcement COULD obtain a certified copy and compare it themselves.

    The HDOH can verify the information. And they COULD say that a document was a fake if it lacked one of the security features of their certificates. There’s nothing in the statute about secrecy on fake records. I’m reasonably confident that Hawaiian law enforcement and the US Department of State are fully briefed on the security features of Hawaiian certificates.

    I talked to a vital records registrar who showed me some of the security features on their certificate. She said that she could show me other ones, but if she did she would have to kill me.

    Hermitian: Mr. C’s weasel worded interpretation of the Hawaii Laws, if true, would prevent the HDOH from verifying even a certified copy of an original certificate if the copy was in the possession of law enforcement.

  43. avatar
    CarlOrcas January 2, 2013 at 9:49 pm #

    Hermitian: CCP Detective Zullo has provided………………..

    Zullo is not a detective…..with or without a capital D. He is a non-sworn (no police powers….zip….nada) member of one of Sheriff Arpaio’s posses.

    You do understand that and what it means, don’t you?

  44. avatar
    Benji Franklin January 2, 2013 at 10:01 pm #

    john: Butter is right. Onaka would not state the the White House BC is a “true and accurate representation” only that is it “matched”. Just because it matches doesn’t mean its a “true and accurate representation” which what Onaka was specifically asked. There’s nothing under that statute to prevent him from doing this and yet Onaka refused to say it.

    John, reminiscent of the birth certificate coffee cups and sweat shirts which helped fund Obama’s successful reelection campaign, the Obama Presidential Library will surely include some oblique references to Birther idiocy.

    Your habit of poorly argued and inane accusation, bereft of any clue about what constitutes compelling evidence, makes you a candidate for inclusion at the library representing the common ostentatious screed-posting Birther loudly drowning in a meme pit of their own intellectual filth.

    But I’m afraid that your chance to be part of an exhibit there too heavily depends on the fact that every such public building needs at least one John, so you may get stiff competition from other entries like Mario’s Usurper-Outhouse or the Orly Taitz PayPal Toilet.

  45. avatar
    Rickey January 2, 2013 at 10:23 pm #

    scott e.: I use capital letters. I think Cummings was a racist, I never cared for poetry that much.

    FIFY

  46. avatar
    G January 2, 2013 at 11:33 pm #

    It is NOT both sides. Birthers keep bringing the same stupid dead-horse topics back up.

    You can say that responding to crazy people (i.e. you birthers) is an utter waste of time. However, responding is NOT the same as initiating, so spare us the “both sides do it” false equivalence BS.

    And yes…the Birthers ARE saying crazy things, so calling them crazy for it is a reasonable response.

    scott e.: and it’s both sides, with one side always calling the other crazy. wtf ??

  47. avatar
    G January 2, 2013 at 11:42 pm #

    Millions John? Of course you can substantiate that “backing” with “millions” of verified signatures, right?

    …Or let’s just admit that you are pleading with hyperbole to try to influence them and pulling large numbers out your arse in order to sound impressive and hoping they are gullible enough to bite.

    We have one valid statistic of “millions” at that is the election itself. …But just because over 60 million people voted for someone OTHER than Obama doesn’t mean that the lunacy and infantile denialism that is Birtherism is something those 60 million would support…

    …Nor have you taken into account how a majority event (such as an ELECTION, which this very meeting you are trying to influence is certifying…) works….

    …Because over 65 MILLION people voted FOR Obama…and that majority’s will is what WILL be certified.

    Look, I’ve been fairly “kind” to you on your little personal adventure here and I don’t mind you contacting your reps and trying to persuade them to go on your bitter fools errand with you…

    …But when you resort to childish embellishing of “millions” behind you in order to bolster your case, you deserve the obvious smack down staring you in the face…once you get into using support numbers…they go against you. You folks are the MINORITY

    john:
    In addition I told them that they have the backing of millions of people.I told them when Senator Barbara Box objected in 2004, she received 5,000 roses for her courage and effort on Valentine’s Day.

  48. avatar
    misha marinsky January 2, 2013 at 11:59 pm #

    Hermitian: CCP Detective Zullo

    He is a used car salesman, like Randall Terry. If he is a deputized law officer, please provide legitimate documentation.

    Zullo and Randall Terry – birds of a feather.

  49. avatar
    misha marinsky January 3, 2013 at 12:05 am #

    scott e.: i think cummings was a racist, i never cared for poetry that much.

    It’s all above you.

  50. avatar
    G January 3, 2013 at 12:13 am #

    Well said!

    misha marinsky: He is a used car salesman, like Randall Terry. If he is a deputized law officer, please provide legitimate documentation.

    Zullo and Randall Terry – birds of a feather.

  51. avatar
    AlCum January 3, 2013 at 12:18 am #

    john:
    Butter is right.Onaka would not state the the White House BC is a “true and accurate representation” only that is it “matched”.Just because it matches doesn’t mean its a “true and accurate representation” which what Onaka was specifically asked.There’s nothing under that statute to prevent him from doing this and yet Onaka refused to say it.

    Do you realize that everything you just said there is incorrect?

    Hint: Look up “matches.”

  52. avatar
    bobj January 3, 2013 at 5:56 am #

    Hermitian: “”matches” — 3rd person singular present, plural of match”

    “Verb

    “Correspond or cause to correspond in some essential respect; make or be harmonious: “she matched her steps to his”.”

    Hardly an acceptable standard for prima facie evidence

    Here is how the OED defines match:

    Match: noun.

    (subset 3 of definition 3) the fact or appearance of corresponding:

    Match: verb.

    2. be equal to (something) in quality or strength.

    Please learn how to use a dictionary properly. If matches is used as a plural then it is a noun.

  53. avatar
    Majority Will January 3, 2013 at 6:13 am #

    Speaking of matching,President Obama signed the fiscal crisis bill passed by Congress using an autopen while on vacation with his family in Hawaii.

    That should blow these tiny, paranoid birther bigot minds.

  54. avatar
    Majority Will January 3, 2013 at 6:26 am #

    Hermitian:

    The term “matches” that Onaka substituted for “is identical to” is subject to legal interpretation.

    “”matches” — 3rd person singular present, plural of match”

    “Verb

    “Correspond or cause to correspond in some essential respect; make or be harmonious: “she matched her steps to his”.”

    Hardly an acceptable standard for prima facie evidence.

    Where did you get your law degree?

    Here’s a word that sums up the pointless paranoid posturing of birtherism.

    asinine
    adj.
    1. Utterly stupid or silly: asinine behavior.
    2. Of, relating to, or resembling an ass.
    [Latin asinnus, of an ass, from asinus, ass.]
    asininely adv.
    asininity n.

  55. avatar
    Keith January 3, 2013 at 6:54 am #

    AlCum: Do you realize that everything you just said there is incorrect?

    Hint: Look up “matches.”

    You really shouldn’t encourage children to play with matches.

  56. avatar
    Hermitian January 3, 2013 at 9:42 am #

    “Author: Dr. Conspiracy
    Comment:
    You might reasonably infer that from what I said. The State of Hawaii doesn’t have forensic document examiners. I daresay there are forgers around good enough to fool anybody at the HDOH. Law enforcement COULD obtain a certified copy and compare it themselves.”

    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    Wrong! The laws of Hawaii prevent even law enforcement from inspecting an original birth certificate or from obtaining a certified copy without a court order. So your interpretation of the law would make it impossible for law enforcement to obtain a court order even when they have acquired a purported certified copy.

    No court would accept a certified copy produced by law enforcement unless the HDOH could testify that it’s an authentic certified copy and therefore is prima facie evidence that the birth occurred as indicated by the information contained in the copy.
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

  57. avatar
    Hermitian January 3, 2013 at 9:48 am #

    “Author: CarlOrcas
    Comment:

    “Hermitian: CCP Detective Zullo has provided………………..

    “Zullo is not a detective…..with or without a capital D. He is a non-sworn (no police powers….zip….nada) member of one of Sheriff Arpaio’s posses.

    “You do understand that and what it means, don’t you?”

    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
    Prove it !!!

    Here’s a hint. You will have to read the Arizona constitution.
    HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

  58. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy January 3, 2013 at 10:15 am #

    All they would need is a court order.

    Your second remark is ludicrous since the certificate itself says that is is prima facie evidence (as does the statute).

    Hermitian: Wrong! The laws of Hawaii prevent even law enforcement from inspecting an original birth certificate or from obtaining a certified copy without a court order. So your interpretation of the law would make it impossible for law enforcement to obtain a court order even when they have acquired a purported certified copy.

    No court would accept a certified copy produced by law enforcement unless the HDOH could testify that it’s an authentic certified copy and therefore is prima facie evidence that the birth occurred as indicated by the information contained in the copy.

  59. avatar
    JPotter January 3, 2013 at 10:45 am #

    CarlOrcas: Zullo is not a detective…..

    Carl no likey play cops’n’robbers?

    The whole CCCP charade is very much playtime at the daycare. It boggles my mind to see birfers take it so seriously, especially after being strung along so blatantly. Herms is the ultimate party mouthpiece. A newspeak talking, doublethink thoughtin’ Zen master.

  60. avatar
    bovril January 3, 2013 at 11:10 am #

    Hermie, Hermie, Hermie,

    Do try and be a little more on point and not just babble like some 5 year with a severe sugar withdrawal.

    AZ Constitution

    http://www.azleg.gov/Constitution.asp

    Guess what nowhere is there ANYTHING about posses, legal or otherwise.

    Now Hermie, in AZ, the law says that an elected sheriif can request VOLUNTEER assistance in the form of a “posse” that’s all.

    They are NOT LEO’s, they have only minor levels of delegated police powers and only then when under the immediate and direct supervision of a real sworn officer.

    Guess what Zullo isn’t a LEO he’s a deluded little wannabe with zip authority as an officer of the law.

  61. avatar
    JPotter January 3, 2013 at 11:21 am #

    bovril: Guess what Zullo isn’t a LEO he’s a deluded little wannabe with zip authority as an officer of the law.

    And in a supposedly self-funded position. Like a missionary of the Birf.

    Can’t wait for the finances to be exposed. A good effort was made to rip the lid off of Arpaio’s reimbursement scheme (law enforcement for sale! law enforcement for sale!), and the Deep Reds in Maricopa still reelected him.

    I thought they were ‘fiscal conservatives’?

    Perhaps they are, whenever sound accounting, due diligence, and ethics aren’t interfering with their bedwetting xenophobia (or is it generalized anthropophobia?).

  62. avatar
    CarlOrcas January 3, 2013 at 11:39 am #

    Hermitian: Here’s a hint. You will have to read the Arizona constitution.

    I’ve read the Arizona Constitution a number of times. First time was in 1961 in 8th grade civics class.

    Just to make sure my memory was right I used some current technology and, guess what? There is only one mention of county sheriffs in it:

    http://www.azleg.state.az.us/const/12/3.htm

    And the word “posse” does not appear in it.

    Posse members are not certified peace officers in Arizona. Hence Zullo has absolutely no authority, no police powers. He can’t write a parking ticket.

  63. avatar
    JPotter January 3, 2013 at 1:38 pm #

    CarlOrcas: I’ve read the Arizona Constitution a number of times.

    Heh. Hermes doesn’t touch primary sources. Much to his continual, unintentional embarrassment, he always relies on 2nd- (and 3rd-, 4th-, 5th-, ad nauseua)-hand (mis)interpretations, whatever he can find that will tickle his fancy.

    Hermes is the birfer I have mentioned that ‘discovered’ the Articles of Confederation last year. I was dragging my jaw along the floor for a week after that one. I couldn’t wrap my head around the combination of audacity and ignorance he was operating with. He truly doesn’t even know what he doesn’t know, and actively avoids finding out.

    So, of course he believes, as birfers do, that Arizona is the Last Frontier of Real ‘Merica. Where the right of every God-anointed* shurrif to appoint vigilantes for life is enshrined right thar in the state con-stee-too-shun. Vigilantes with unlimited power, constrained in no way by such PITA concepts like “jurisdiction”.

    I thnk they’d even go so far as to dump the Constitution in place of the AZ one.

    So, I ask the CCCP fans a question, and I ask it of Herms now:

    “When a man shows up at your door, flashes a dime store badge, and explains he’s a posse detective from the Arid Zone, will you prostrate yourself and invite him to examine the contents of your underwear drawer? Will you even pause long enough to request to see a warrant (which he won’t have)?”

    Now, they might answer yes, either because they’re running a Say Anything campaign, or overwhelmed by the thought of their idol at their door. So, the follow-up is:

    “What If I show up at your door and present a ‘warrant’ written in crayon. How will you react? Please explain the difference in your reception.”

    ____________

    * In fundamentalist, evangelical Wingerworld, all authorities are, by definition appointed by God. Except the ones wingers don’t like. More auto-masochistic wingers believe even those are appointed by God, as test for the wingers own sins. Puts them in the odd position of opposing God’s plan. Hate the sin, love the sinner, Hate the plan, love the God.

  64. avatar
    CarlOrcas January 3, 2013 at 2:57 pm #

    JPotter: “When a man shows up at your door, flashes a dime store badge,

    Unfortunately the badges and ID cards they are issued by Arpaio look quite official and, for the most part, look just like those issued to commissioned deputies.

    And if you look at the main website section for posses at the website you won’t find any clear explanation that they aren’t peace officers.

  65. avatar
    JPotter January 3, 2013 at 3:41 pm #

    CarlOrcas: And if you look at the main website section for posses at the website you won’t find any clear explanation that they aren’t peace officers.

    I know, I know, just poking fun. Arpaio has been sued (successfully) for allowing yahoos to terrorize the populace in the name of his office. He was required to institute sufficient training programs, etc. I’m sure that cleaned it right up, right?

    The really awful things about his posses is that they have no accountability, at least not in comparison to an paid officer. What are they gonna do, kick them off the volunteer gig? Losing their gig as an official bully is a threat, but nothing like being unemployed (and potentially unemployable) would be.

  66. avatar
    Dave B. January 3, 2013 at 3:50 pm #

    JPotter: I thought they were ‘fiscal conservatives’?

    Arpaio sums up his own fiscal policy in two words: “So what?” Yet the Tea Party loves him. Go figure.

  67. avatar
    CarlOrcas January 3, 2013 at 4:08 pm #

    JPotter: I know, I know, just poking fun. Arpaio has been sued (successfully) for allowing yahoos to terrorize the populace in the name of his office. He was required to institute sufficient training programs, etc. I’m sure that cleaned it right up, right?

    The really awful things about his posses is that they have no accountability, at least not in comparison to an paid officer. What are they gonna do, kick them off the volunteer gig? Losing their gig as an official bully is a threat, but nothing like being unemployed (and potentially unemployable) would be.

    I don’t recall a lawsuit but I do recall a couple big stinks when he used posse members (as opposed to certified deputies and reserve deputies) for some jobs like DUI and illegal alien roadblocks and they did pull back.

    Accountability is a problem with posse members, you’re right. At least reserve deputies (unpaid but trained and certified to state standards) can have their certification suspended or cancelled by Arizona POST (Police Officer Standards and Training).

    Most of the posse’s are pretty benign but some of them – the lake and search and rescue units – do a great job. The Cold Case Posse is just a bunch of nonsense.

  68. avatar
    G January 3, 2013 at 5:52 pm #

    Yep. Pretty much sums up their small-minded authoritarian mindset…and its inherent flaws…

    JPotter: * In fundamentalist, evangelical Wingerworld, all authorities are, by definition appointed by God. Except the ones wingers don’t like. More auto-masochistic wingers believe even those are appointed by God, as test for the wingers own sins. Puts them in the odd position of opposing God’s plan. Hate the sin, love the sinner, Hate the plan, love the God.

  69. avatar
    aesthetocyst January 3, 2013 at 6:21 pm #

    G:
    Yep.Pretty much sums up their small-minded authoritarian mindset…and its inherent flaws…

    JPotter: I know it is…I heard it from the pews back in the early Clinton era! Although not thought thru to the conclusion I presented here, of course!

    [please excuse the change in handles]

  70. avatar
    aesthetocyst January 3, 2013 at 6:23 pm #

    CarlOrcas: I don’t recall a lawsuit

    I don’t recall if it was a suit specifically about the Posses, or a side-effect of one of the racial-profiling suits.

  71. avatar
    CarlOrcas January 3, 2013 at 6:33 pm #

    aesthetocyst: I don’t recall if it was a suit specifically about the Posses, or a side-effect of one of the racial-profiling suits.

    Yes, there were several suits that followed his “sweeps” in Guadalupe and other areas that did bring about some changes in procedures for the use of posse members…..among other things.

  72. avatar
    Hermitian January 4, 2013 at 8:21 am #

    “Author: bobj
    Comment:

    “Please learn how to use a dictionary properly. If matches is used as a plural then it is a noun.”

    Onaka’s statement was as follows:

    “Additionally, I verify that the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for V
    Mr. Obama that you attached with your request matches the original record in our files.”

    “matches” is the verb for the noun “information”

    Dumbski !!!

  73. avatar
    sfjeff January 4, 2013 at 1:36 pm #

    Hermitian: The only true logic that fits this contorted Obot interpretation is that Onaka knows that the WH LFCOLB PDF image is not a duplicate copy of the original.
    CCP Detective Zullo has provided sworn affidavit that Assistant AAG Nagamine refused to verify that the WH LFCOLB was a copy of the original certificate.
    “15. At our insistence we did have an opportunity to speak with Deputy
    Attorney General Jill Nagamine. During our meeting Ms. Nagamine
    refused to verify the authenticity of the PDF file released by the White
    House. As a matter of fact Ms. Nagamine would not provide us with any
    confirmation that the document was created by the Hawaii Department of
    Health.

    Only in Birther logic.

    There is no reason to assume that Ms. Nagamine has ever seen the original.

    Nor is there any reason to assume that Ms. Nagamine would have the authority to confirm or deny any such thing.

    Birthers see things where they aren’t- and refuse to see the things that everyone else can see.

  74. avatar
    Dr Kennerth Noisewater January 4, 2013 at 1:55 pm #

    Hermitian:
    “Author: bobj
    Comment:

    “Please learn how to use a dictionary properly. If matches is used as a plural then it is a noun.”

    Onaka’s statement was as follows:

    “Additionally, I verify that the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for V
    Mr. Obama that you attached with your request matches the original record in our files.”

    “matches” is the verb for the noun “information”

    Dumbski !!!

    verify [ver-uh-fahy] Show IPA
    verb (used with object), verified, verifying.
    1.
    to prove the truth of, as by evidence or testimony; confirm; substantiate: Events verified his prediction.
    2.
    to ascertain the truth or correctness of, as by examination, research, or comparison: to verify a spelling.
    3.
    to act as ultimate proof or evidence of; serve to confirm.
    4.
    Law.
    a.
    to prove or confirm (an allegation).
    b.
    to state to be true, especially in legal use, formally or upon oath.

  75. avatar
    gorefan January 4, 2013 at 2:30 pm #

    Over at FreeRepublic Butter has revealed the legal minds that verified her theory of a non-valid birth certificate – Larry Klayman, Mario Apuzzo, and Larry Elgin.

    And she says she got indirect confirmation from the attorneys for the MDEC.

    Comment #47

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2974657/posts?q=1&;page=1

  76. avatar
    bobj January 5, 2013 at 12:50 am #

    Hermitian:
    “Author: bobj
    Comment:

    “Please learn how to use a dictionary properly. If matches is used as a plural then it is a noun.”

    Onaka’s statement was as follows:

    “Additionally, I verify that the information in the copy of the Certificate of Live Birth for V
    Mr. Obama that you attached with your request matches the original record in our files.”

    “matches” is the verb for the noun “information”

    Dumbski !!!

    no . matches in the statement is NOT used as a plural. It is used as a third person form of the verb, which is NOT a plural. If the word match is used as a plural it is a noun.

    Again, please learn how to use a dictionary. Especially if you are trying to argue semantics. Dumbski? Are you 10 years old?

99999 00000
?????????