OT-Anybody know what kind of documentation got Obama his first passport...?

[Lone Haranguer]

Just reading the paper and stumbled on this.


http://traveltips.usatoday.com/can-stop-one-getting-passport-21216.html?UTM_SOURCE=obrain

"One of the key requirements for applying for a passport in the
United States is that the applicant provide proof of U.S.
citizenship. Primary proof includes a previously issued U.S.
passport that has not been damaged; a certified copy of a birth
certificate issued by the city, county or state; a consular
report of birth abroad or certification of birth; a
naturalization certificate; or a certificate of citizenship.
Secondary proof includes a combination of early public records
(such as a baptismal certificate, census record, early school
record, family Bible record, doctor's record of post-natal care),
which must be accompanied by a state-issued Letter of No Record."
*****************
Just wondering..........
LZ

[Hank]

On Jan 2, 10:31 pm, Lone Haranguer <linus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Just reading the paper and stumbled  on this.
>

> http://traveltips.usatoday.com/can-stop-one-getting-passport-21216.ht...

>
> "One of the key requirements for applying for a passport in the
> United States is that the applicant provide proof of U.S.
> citizenship. Primary proof includes a previously issued U.S.
> passport that has not been damaged; a certified copy of a birth
> certificate issued by the city, county or state; a consular
> report of birth abroad or certification of birth; a
> naturalization certificate; or a certificate of citizenship.
> Secondary proof includes a combination of early public records
> (such as a baptismal certificate, census record, early school
> record, family Bible record, doctor's record of post-natal care),
> which must be accompanied by a state-issued Letter of No Record."
> *****************
> Just wondering..........
> LZ

You worry about the dumbest shit. Face the fact that Obama is in
office for at least another year, maybe 5.

Hank

[Lone Haranguer]

Where do I appear worried? If you don't have the answer just sit
on your thumb.
It's a free country (so far) and I'm allowed to wonder..... From
reading the requirements above, it appears that
Obama's certificate of live birth does not meet the requirements
for a passport. So how did he get it?
LZ

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mfb53...@mid.individual.net>,

The previously published short-form Hawii birth certificate would have
been sufficient 'primary proof'.

That said, the only people whou know what was actually used would be
the Obamas, and U.S. gov't employees that processed the application.

Of course for a gov't employee to have disclosed that information
would be a felony,

Sounds like your best bet for a legal answer would be to write the
White House.

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mfgni...@mid.individual.net>,

You're wrong. The State Dept. has a PUBLISHED checklist of criteria
for an 'acceptable' U.S. birth certificate. and the Hawaii-issued
short-form certificate that has been widely published meets *every*one*
of those listed criteria.

[Hank]

He got his the same way everyone else gets theirs. At this point, who
really cares?

Hank

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<9mfb53...@mid.individual.net>,
> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Just reading the paper and stumbled on this.
>>
>>
>> http://traveltips.usatoday.com/can-stop-one-getting-passport-21216.html?UTM_SOURCE=obrain
>>
>> "One of the key requirements for applying for a passport in the
>> United States is that the applicant provide proof of U.S.
>> citizenship. Primary proof includes a previously issued U.S.
>> passport that has not been damaged; a certified copy of a birth
>> certificate issued by the city, county or state; a consular
>> report of birth abroad or certification of birth; a
>> naturalization certificate; or a certificate of citizenship.
>> Secondary proof includes a combination of early public records
>> (such as a baptismal certificate, census record, early school
>> record, family Bible record, doctor's record of post-natal care),
>> which must be accompanied by a state-issued Letter of No Record."
>> *****************
>> Just wondering..........
>> LZ
>>
> The previously published short-form Hawii birth certificate would have
> been sufficient 'primary proof'.

Short form? I thought what Obama has provided was merely a
certificate of life birth. As I interpret the requirements,
those are only acceptable when issued by a consular
official....which would mean the birth occurred on foreign soil.
What I've seen is NOT a certified copy of a birth certificate.
I've got those....even for children born in Spain and Germany (in
military hospitals) and they bear no resemblance to the Obama
document.

"a certified copy of a birth
certificate issued by the city, county or state; a consular
report of birth abroad or certification of birth;"

That said, the only people whou know what was actually used would
be the Obamas, and U.S. gov't employees that processed the
application. Of course for a gov't employee to have disclosed
that information would be a felony, Sounds like your best bet for
a legal answer would be to write the White House.

How much money has Obama spent obfuscating his early years?
LZ

[Lone Haranguer]

So the information I posted is bogus? Where is Obama's certified
birth certificate? Why wouldn't he use that instead of a
certificate of live birth.....which
is NOT the same thing as a certified copy of a birth
certificate? When my youngest son got his security clearance
working for Lockheed-Martin, a certificate
of live birth issued by our consulate in Spain was not
acceptable, they wanted the actual birth certificate, even though
it was issued by the Spanish government and the entire document
is in Spanish. It DOES, however, have his birth footprint, which
gives it more credibility. The Spanish government required the
military
hospital to furnish that information because as far as they were
concerned, he was a citizen of Spain. He was born the same year
as Obama claims.

I haven't seen any documents which prove that the doofus in the
White House was born where he says he was. Tell me how YOU know,
without a shadow of doubt, that the certificate of life birth can
be conclusively linked to El Doofus? You can't.
LZ
>
>

[Lone Haranguer]

No he didn't. I had to provide a CERTIFIED COPY OF MY ACTUAL
BIRTH CERTIFICATE. He hasn't done that even
when running for president. I had to provide a certified copy
for a number of things including enlisting and getting married.
LZ

[George Anthony]

"Lone Haranguer" <linu...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:9mfb53...@mid.individual.net...

I heard through the grapevine that the NYT editors vouched for him.

[Lone Haranguer]

Probably at least one of them would swear an oath that they were
present at his birth and observed a distinct birth mark.
LZ

[Hank]

On Jan 3, 10:32 am, Lone Haranguer <linus...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> So the information I posted is bogus?  Where is Obama's certified
> birth certificate?  Why wouldn't he use that instead of a
> certificate of live birth.....which
> is NOT the same thing as a certified copy of a birth
> certificate?  When my youngest son got his security clearance
> working for Lockheed-Martin, a certificate
> of live birth issued by our consulate in Spain was not
> acceptable, they wanted the actual birth certificate, even though
> it was issued by the Spanish government and the entire document
> is in Spanish.  It DOES, however, have his birth footprint, which
> gives it more credibility.  The Spanish government required the
> military
> hospital to furnish that information because as far as they were
> concerned, he was a citizen of Spain.  He was born the same year
> as Obama claims.
>
> I haven't seen any documents which prove that the doofus in the
> White House was born where he says he was.  Tell me how YOU know,
> without a shadow of doubt, that the certificate of life birth can
> be conclusively linked to El Doofus?  You can't.
> LZ

If I were you, I would go kick his ass out of the White House right
now! You don't have to put up with an illegal in our country. Turn him
in!

You are so funny it makes my sides hurt.

Hank <~~~~ thinks LZ needs some downers :-)

[Dean]

The "short form" was NOT accepted in Arizona in 2004. I applied with
mine and it was rejected out of hand.

--

(Some mornings, it's just not worth
chewing through the leather straps...)

[Dean]

On Tue, 3 Jan 2012 05:46:32 -0800 (PST), Hank <nineb...@aol.com>
wrote:

My experience belies your claim!

[Dean]

The AZ state bar accepted my COLB as did the US Supreme Court.

[Lone Haranguer]

That's your substitute for an honest answer? They could use you
for a missile avoidance system.
LZ

[LonVanOstran]

Hank wrote:
> If I were you, I would go kick his ass out of the White House right
> now!

<magic wand waved> You are him!

Lon

[pickerdon]

On Jan 3, 7:32 am, Lone Haranguer <linus...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Robert Bonomi wrote:

> > In article<9mfgniFj2...@mid.individual.net>,
> > Lone Haranguer<linus...@gmail.com>  wrote:

Loonis just can't let go of birther nonsense, can he? HawHawHaw!



Cheetah McGee

[Hunter Hampton]

On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 10:07:36 -0700, Lone Haranguer
<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:

>Probably at least one of them would swear an oath that they were
>present at his birth and observed a distinct birth mark.
>LZ

How do you explain the birth announcement in the Hawaiian newspaper
back when he was born?

I doubt his mother put it in thinking he would need it someday when he
ran for POTUS.

Hunter

[Lone Haranguer]

How about the passport question? I haven't seen the list of
PUBLISHED requirements that dispute the information I posted.
You up to researching that? Maybe your grandson could give you
some tips?
LZ
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheetah McGee

[Lone Haranguer]

Hunter Hampton wrote:
> On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 10:07:36 -0700, Lone Haranguer
> <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Probably at least one of them would swear an oath that they were
>> present at his birth and observed a distinct birth mark.
>> LZ
> How do you explain the birth announcement in the Hawaiian newspaper
> back when he was born?

Meaningless to the question of whether that announcement is
REALLY for the same person that occupies the White House.
But my question was what kind of documentation Obama used to
obtain his first passport?

>
> I doubt his mother put it in thinking he would need it someday when he
> ran for POTUS.

Did she include a footprint of the baby and does it match the
person in the White House is the question.
LZ
>
> Hunter

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mglda...@mid.individual.net>,

BZZT! thank you for playing.

I did _not_ say that the information was bogus.

I said that *YOU* were wrong in your interpretation "that Obama's
certificate does not meet the requirements for a passport".

As it happens, the usatoday.com summery _is_ inaccurate in a number
of details, but they are irrelevant to the current question.

Note: there was a minor rules change on the requirements for a birth
certificate, that went into effect on April 1, 2011. Needless to say,
since Obama got his first passport *BEFORE* that date, the rules
'now in effect' rules do NOT apply to his situation..

> Where is Obama's certified
>birth certificate?

Who the fuck cares? The U.S. Gov't doesn't.

The actual PUBLISHED requirements -- in 22 CFR 51.42(a) -- as of
December 31, 2011 are (verbatim quote):
"A person born in the United States generally must submit a birth
certificate. The birth certificate must show the full name of the
applicant, the applicant's place and date of birth, the full name
of the parent(s), and must be signed by the official custodian of
birth records, bear the seal of the issuing office, and show a
filing date within one year of the date of birth."

you can find this at the official U.S. gov't site:
<http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov>
and dig down through several levels of table-of-contents pages:
title 22
chapter 1
subchapter F part 51
subpart C section
51.42

Or use a respected 'unofficial' direct source:
<http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/22/51/42>

Note: The April 1, 2011 change was to add _one_ word in the language
above. Previous to that date, it just specified "... the name of the
parent(s) ..." vs. the current "... the FULL name of the parent(s) ...".


Obama's Hawaii short-form certificate meets every one of the "pre 4/1/2011"
requirements. to wit:
1) it has the full name of the applicant
2) it shows the place and date of birth
3) it shows the names of the parent(s) -- both parents, in fact.
4) it is signed by the official custodian of birth records for Hawaii
5) it bears the seal of the issuing office.
6) it shows a filing date within one year of the date of birth.

I haven't double-checked, but my recollection is that it has the 'full
names' of both parents, and thus would also meet today's requirements.

Note: the requirement that the certificate 'bear the seal' of the
issuing office means that you must submit a certificate obtained from
that office, and *not* a "copy' of of such a document.

Note: the signature of "the custodian of records" on the document
"certifies' that it is a 'true copy' of the orignal information on file,
and qualifies the document as a "certified" birth certificate, as
distinct from a 'copy" of said document.

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mhqbm...@mid.individual.net>,

They are published in the Code of Federal Regulations. Title 22,
Volume 1, Chapter I, SubChapter F, Part 51, SubPart C, Section 51.42,
subsection A. Quoting verbatim from the U.S. Government Printing Office:
"(a) Primary evidence of birth in the United States. A person born

in the United States generally must submit a birth certificate. The
birth certificate must show the full name of the applicant, the
applicant's place and date of birth, the full name of the parent(s),
and must be signed by the official custodian of birth records, bear
the seal of the issuing office, and show a filing date within one
year of the date of birth."

The State Dept passport page at:
<http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/first/first_830.html
uses the 'certified birth certificate' language. and defines that term as:

"*A certified birth certificate has a registrar's raised, embossed,
impressed or multicolored seal, registrar's signature, and the date
the certificate was filed with the registrar's office, which must
be within 1 year of your birth. Please note, some short (abstract)
versions of birth certificates may not be acceptable for passport
purposes."

That statement, saying that "...SOME short versions ... *MAY*NOT* be
acceptable for passport purposes" is a clear statement that some
short-form certificates *ARE* acceptable.

Obama's Hawaii short-version certificate _HAS_ all the required elements,
and thus qualifies as a 'certified birth certificate' under the rules of
the U.S. State Department.

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <rlf6g7tjm097rhu3n...@4ax.com>,

Did _your_ 'short form' certificate meet the State Department published
requirements? Some short form certificates do, some do NOT. See '22 CFR
50.42(a)', and <http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/first/first_830.html>

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mgkk...@mid.individual.net>,

Proving only that you "don't know what you don't know".

See: 22 CFR 50.42(a)

> .which would mean the birth occurred on foreign soil.
>What I've seen is NOT a certified copy of a birth certificate.

What _you_ consider a 'certified copy' and what the US. State Department
considers a 'certified copy' are two very different things.

The State Department officially states that some short form birth
certificates *DO* qualify as 'certified birth certificates' for
passport purposes. Quote;

*A certified birth certificate has a registrar's raised, embossed,
impressed or multicolored seal, registrar's signature, and the date
the certificate was filed with the registrar's office, which must
be within 1 year of your birth. Please note, some short (abstract)
versions of birth certificates may not be acceptable for passport
purposes."

source: <http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/first/first_830.html.

Obama's widely-published short-form certificate meets *all* those
official requirements, and hence _is_ a "certified birth certificate'
FOR THE PURPOSES of getting a passport.

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mgkk...@mid.individual.net>,

Demonstrating merely that you don't know what you don't know.
See: <http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/first/first_830.html>
for what the U.S. State Department considers a 'certified birth
certificate'. Including EXPRESS ACKNOWLEDGMENT that some short
versions of birth certificates *ARE* acceptable 'certified birth
certificates'.

See 22 CFR 50.42(a) for the complete requirements for what is an
acceptable birth certificate for passport purposes.

Obama's widely published short form certificate satisfies all the
listed requirements in the CFR, *AND* qualifies as a 'certified
birth certificate' per the State Department web-site.

[nothermark]

One can get sealed copies. In fact that is what one gets when
requesting a duplicate.

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<9mglda...@mid.individual.net>,

The usual 5,000 words of diversionary bullshit. You just proved
that when elected, Obama was not entitled to a passport based on
his certificate of live birth. Your first entry of "published"
requirements meant absolutely nothing to the central question.
LZ

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<9mhqbm...@mid.individual.net>,

As usual, you buried the central question under mountains of
bullshit. Your wordy answer has ZERO bearing on what kind of
documentation
Obama used to get his FIRST passport. Current rules do not
address that question. You need to do more research and reload
your bullshit cannon.
LZ
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Lone Haranguer]

In order to address my original question, you need to determine
WHAT documentation Obama used to get his first passport
and whether it was legal AT THAT TIME. Skip the extraneous and
non applicable bull poop.
LZ

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<9mgkk...@mid.individual.net>,

You admit the rules have been changed recently, therefore you
have failed to address my question. WHAT KIND OF DOCUMENTATION
DID OBAMA
USE TO GET HIS FIRST PASSPORT?

Repeating recent rules over and over FAILS to address that
question and my waders may not be able to handle any more
bullshit deposits.
LZ

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<9mgkk...@mid.individual.net>,

A certified birth certificate is a certified birth
certificate.....not what the State Department considers to be the
equivalent.
Have you seen a copy of Obama's certified birth certificate? As
I've mentioned above, I have yet to see that document.

>
> See 22 CFR 50.42(a) for the complete requirements for what is an
> acceptable birth certificate for passport purposes.
>
> Obama's widely published short form certificate satisfies all the
> listed requirements in the CFR, *AND* qualifies as a 'certified
> birth certificate' per the State Department web-site.

Are you 100% sure that he used that document to obtain his first
passport? Got anything to prove that assertion?
Endless bullshit about rules NOW in force fail to answer what
kind of documentation Obama used to get his first passport.

When you actually have the answer to that question, post it. In
the meantime you are wasting our time and bandwidth.
LZ
>
>

[LonVanOstran]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
>> Where is Obama's certified
>> >birth certificate?
> Who the fuck cares? The U.S. Gov't doesn't.

You are correct for a change, but those of us who respect the
Constitution DO care.

Lon

[Michael Dobony]

On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 04:20:51 -0600, Robert Bonomi wrote:

> In article <9mfb53...@mid.individual.net>,
> Lone Haranguer <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>Just reading the paper and stumbled on this.
>>
>>
>>http://traveltips.usatoday.com/can-stop-one-getting-passport-21216.html?UTM_SOURCE=obrain
>>
>>"One of the key requirements for applying for a passport in the
>>United States is that the applicant provide proof of U.S.
>>citizenship. Primary proof includes a previously issued U.S.
>>passport that has not been damaged; a certified copy of a birth
>>certificate issued by the city, county or state; a consular
>>report of birth abroad or certification of birth; a
>>naturalization certificate; or a certificate of citizenship.
>>Secondary proof includes a combination of early public records
>>(such as a baptismal certificate, census record, early school
>>record, family Bible record, doctor's record of post-natal care),
>>which must be accompanied by a state-issued Letter of No Record."
>>*****************
>>Just wondering..........
>>LZ
>>
>
> The previously published short-form Hawii birth certificate would have
> been sufficient 'primary proof'.
>

> That said, the only people whou know what was actually used would be
> the Obamas, and U.S. gov't employees that processed the application.
>
> Of course for a gov't employee to have disclosed that information
> would be a felony,
>
> Sounds like your best bet for a legal answer would be to write the
> White House.

Nope. Obama relies on abuser tactics to deflect the issue. He would have
provided a certificate of birth, NOT the same as a birth certificate and
NOT proof of birth in the US. The facts about air travel at the time of his
birth demonstrate it is highly unlikely that Obama was born in the US. The
established facts prove his mother was in Kenya days before the birth and
the airline rules at that time would prohibit her from flying, as they
didn't want to deal with giving birth in flight, especially an
international flight. She would have had to wait until after giving birth,
necessitating additional unfulfilled rules for Obama to acquire full
citizenship rights.

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mj8nj...@mid.individual.net>,

Linus is so full of it, that not only are his eyes brown, but the roots
of his hair are turning that color..

He claims that Obama has not produced a 'certified birth certificate',
as required by the State Department. He is provably incorrect on that
point.

By U.S. State Department rules, the widely-published Obama short form
Hawaii birth certificate qualifies as as "certified birth certificate'.

Which expressly answers the question he asked, quote "Where is Obama's
Certified birth certificate?"

The cited rules have changed by *ONE* word in the last 30+ years. That
change was made April 1, 2011. it changed "the name of the parent(s)"
to "the FULL name of the parent(s)".

Anything which satisfies today's requirements satisfies the
requirements that have been in place since since before Obama turned
21.

All I have claimed is that the Hawaii birth certificate would have been
SUFFICIENT,

If Linus wants to find out what was _actually_ used, he can ask the
White House, or file a FOIA act lawsuit.

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <7cj8g75skthnkn9el...@4ax.com>,

*sigh* Any such document produced 'on request' the government is an
_original_ certification of of the facts contained therein.

A 'copy', in the sense of the last line of my remark, refers to a
reproduction -- by xerographic, photographic, thermographic, or other
similar means -- of an 'original' copy (in the sense of 'artifact')
produced by the government, reciting the 'facts' on file with the
government.

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mj8s4...@mid.individual.net>,

Lone Haranguer <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Robert Bonomi wrote:
>> In article<rlf6g7tjm097rhu3n...@4ax.com>,
>> Dean<roa...@k7no.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 04:25:51 -0600, bon...@host122.r-bonomi.com
>>> (Robert Bonomi) wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article<9mfgni...@mid.individual.net>,
>>>> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:

>>>>> It's a free country (so far) and I'm allowed to wonder..... From
>>>>> reading the requirements above, it appears that
>>>>> Obama's certificate of live birth does not meet the requirements
>>>>> for a passport.
>>>> You're wrong. The State Dept. has a PUBLISHED checklist of criteria
>>>> for an 'acceptable' U.S. birth certificate. and the Hawaii-issued
>>>> short-form certificate that has been widely published meets *every*one*
>>>> of those listed criteria.
>>>>
>>> The "short form" was NOT accepted in Arizona in 2004. I applied with
>>> mine and it was rejected out of hand.
>> Did _your_ 'short form' certificate meet the State Department published
>> requirements? Some short form certificates do, some do NOT. See '22 CFR
>> 50.42(a)', and<http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/first/first_830.html>
>>
>>
>In order to address my original question,

I don't give a shit about your "original question"

I addressing your PROVABLY FALSE claim that "it appears that Obama's

certificate of live birth does not meet the requirements for a passport."

I have provided the _PUBLISHED_ official requirements for a birth
certificate to be accepted by the State Department. Including explicit
acknowledgment that "short version" certificates, such as Hawaii uses,
*ARE* acceptable if if they meet certain requirements. AND I have
shown that Obama's publicly available short-version certificate *does*
meet every one of the State Department's requirements.

You can continue to blow bullshit, and try to change the subject, or
you can just admit your error.

[Hank]

On Jan 4, 11:50 am, bon...@host122.r-bonomi.com (Robert Bonomi) wrote:

>
> I don't give a shit about your "original question"
>
> I addressing your PROVABLY FALSE claim that "it appears that Obama's
> certificate of live birth does not meet the requirements for a passport."
>
> I have provided the _PUBLISHED_ official requirements for a birth
> certificate to be accepted by the State Department.  Including explicit
> acknowledgment that "short version" certificates, such as Hawaii uses,
> *ARE* acceptable if if they meet certain requirements.  AND I have
> shown that Obama's publicly available short-version certificate *does*
> meet every one of the State Department's requirements.
>
> You can continue to blow bullshit, and try to change the subject, or
> you can just admit your error.

Lz in an extremist and needs a life. The bottom line is that his
wanting to prove O was/wasn't a citizen, is history. We can't change
history. O is president, he can fly anywhere in the world he wants to.
So, in reality (which LZ lacks), nothing matters in regards to this
subject.

Hank <~~~~ knows when the ship has sailed

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mj957...@mid.individual.net>,

You're blowing bullshit. The definition of a 'certified birth certificate'
has *NOT* changed. The requirements regarding some of the information
on the certificate have gotten a bit _stricter_. anything that meets
the present requirements meets the requirements that have been in place
for the last 30+ years.

Therefore, a showing of meeting the _present_ requirements is also a
showing of meeting the requirements that have been in place at any time

in the last 30+ years.

That aside, I don't give a damn about your question. I challenged
your 'interpretation' of the requirements -- and provided the official
State Department definition which _proves_ you are wrong.

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mj9gd...@mid.individual.net>,

I never said he _did_. All I said is that that document *WOOLY*HAVE*
BEEN* _sufficient_ "primary proof" (in the language of the State
Department.

> Got anything to prove that assertion?

Lots of proof of the assertation I -actually- made, yes.

>When you actually have the answer to that question, post it. In

When you actually have _proof_ that the previously published documents
do not meet the legal requirements of the State Department -- as distinct
from your *faulty* interpretations of the requirements -- post it.
Until that time, **YOU** are are wasting our time and bandwidth.

[Dean]

On Tue, 3 Jan 2012 20:36:58 -0800 (PST), The American Enquirer
<tom...@inbox.com> wrote:

>On Jan 3, 9:37 am, Hank <ninebal...@aol.com> wrote:

>> On Jan 3, 10:32 am, Lone Haranguer <linus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > So the information I posted is bogus?  Where is Obama's certified
>> > birth certificate?  Why wouldn't he use that instead of a
>> > certificate of live birth.....which
>> > is NOT the same thing as a certified copy of a birth
>> > certificate?  When my youngest son got his security clearance
>> > working for Lockheed-Martin, a certificate
>> > of live birth issued by our consulate in Spain was not
>> > acceptable, they wanted the actual birth certificate, even though
>> > it was issued by the Spanish government and the entire document
>> > is in Spanish.  It DOES, however, have his birth footprint, which
>> > gives it more credibility.  The Spanish government required the
>> > military
>> > hospital to furnish that information because as far as they were
>> > concerned, he was a citizen of Spain.  He was born the same year
>> > as Obama claims.
>>
>> > I haven't seen any documents which prove that the doofus in the
>> > White House was born where he says he was.  Tell me how YOU know,
>> > without a shadow of doubt, that the certificate of life birth can
>> > be conclusively linked to El Doofus?  You can't.
>> > LZ
>>

>> If I were you, I would go kick his ass out of the White House right
>> now! You don't have to put up with an illegal in our country. Turn him
>> in!
>>
>> You are so funny it makes my sides hurt.
>>
>> Hank  <~~~~ thinks LZ needs some downers :-)- Hide quoted text -
>
>
>NO, WHAT HE NEEDS IS A FUNCTIONING BRAIN AND SOME COMMON SENSE.

Can any of you socialists forward your views w/o making ad hominem
attacks. Are your positions soooo weak that you dare not argue in
favor of any facit of them?

Oh, and do you always have to yell? That alone weakens your position.

--

(Some mornings, it's just not worth
chewing through the leather straps...)

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<9mj8nj...@mid.individual.net>,

So what?

>>>
>>> Obama's Hawaii short-version certificate _HAS_ all the required elements,
>>> and thus qualifies as a 'certified birth certificate' under the rules of
>>> the U.S. State Department.
>> As usual, you buried the central question under mountains of
>> bullshit. Your wordy answer has ZERO bearing on what kind of
>> documentation
>> Obama used to get his FIRST passport. Current rules do not
>> address that question. You need to do more research and reload
>> your bullshit cannon.
> Linus is so full of it, that not only are his eyes brown, but the roots
> of his hair are turning that color..

Eyes are still blue and my faded red hair are closer to blond
than anything else.

He claims that Obama has not produced a 'certified birth certificate',
as required by the State Department.

Wrong. I said we've never seen a copy of Obama's "certified birth certificate".

He is provably incorrect on that
point.

You haven't proved what document was used when Obama acquired his
first passport. You do understand the concept of "proof" right?
Even if the State Dept accepts a live report of birth that
doesn't miraculously turn it into a certified birth certificate.

>
> By U.S. State Department rules, the widely-published Obama short form
> Hawaii birth certificate qualifies as as "certified birth certificate'.

Qualifying doesn't make it a certified birth certificate.
Currently the document may be acceptable but was it the document
Obama used to get his first passport?
Answer the question or just admit you don't know the answer.

>
> Which expressly answers the question he asked, quote "Where is Obama's
> Certified birth certificate?"

I asked what kind of documentation got Obama his first passport?
See the subject line for further clarification.

>
> The cited rules have changed by *ONE* word in the last 30+ years.

Prove it.

> That
> change was made April 1, 2011. it changed "the name of the parent(s)"
> to "the FULL name of the parent(s)".
>
> Anything which satisfies today's requirements satisfies the
> requirements that have been in place since since before Obama turned
> 21.

Prove it. With what documents did Obama (AKA Barry Sotero)
travel to and from Indonesia where he attended school registered
as a citizen of
Indonesia?

>
> All I have claimed is that the Hawaii birth certificate would have been
> SUFFICIENT,

Could have been, maybe....but what kind of documentation got
Obama his first passport?

>
> If Linus wants to find out what was _actually_ used, he can ask the
> White House, or file a FOIA act lawsuit.

If you can't answer the question, why are you in this thread?
LZ

[Dean]

Presuming that it isn't phony (forged). And there are indications
that it is.

Personally, I don't know and I don't care.

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<9mj8s4...@mid.individual.net>,

> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Robert Bonomi wrote:
>>> In article<rlf6g7tjm097rhu3n...@4ax.com>,
>>> Dean<roa...@k7no.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 03 Jan 2012 04:25:51 -0600, bon...@host122.r-bonomi.com
>>>> (Robert Bonomi) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article<9mfgni...@mid.individual.net>,
>>>>> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> It's a free country (so far) and I'm allowed to wonder..... From
>>>>>> reading the requirements above, it appears that
>>>>>> Obama's certificate of live birth does not meet the requirements
>>>>>> for a passport.
>>>>> You're wrong. The State Dept. has a PUBLISHED checklist of criteria
>>>>> for an 'acceptable' U.S. birth certificate. and the Hawaii-issued
>>>>> short-form certificate that has been widely published meets *every*one*
>>>>> of those listed criteria.
>>>>>
>>>> The "short form" was NOT accepted in Arizona in 2004. I applied with
>>>> mine and it was rejected out of hand.
>>> Did _your_ 'short form' certificate meet the State Department published
>>> requirements? Some short form certificates do, some do NOT. See '22 CFR
>>> 50.42(a)', and<http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/first/first_830.html>
>>>
>>>
>> In order to address my original question,
> I don't give a shit about your "original question"

And I don't give a shit about your alternate answer. You can't
answer the question I asked and as usual you
have gone off on a tangent, cooked up your version of the
question and then buried us in mountains of bullshit.

What document did Barry Sotero use to obtain his first
passport? Remember he was registered at his school as a citizen
of Indonesia.
Did he travel under the name Barry Sotero with a passport
identifying him as Barack Obama? Or did he just live in
Indonesia with false documents?
LZ

[Lone Haranguer]

Hank wrote:
The bottom line is that his wanting to prove O was/wasn't a
citizen, is history.

Hank <~~~~ knows when the ship has sailed

The question was: What kind of documentation got Obama his first
passport? If you can't answer the question, just say so.

You and Robert keep reading into the question something that
isn't there and pile up mountains of bullshit in doing so.

Do you KNOW what passport Barry Sotero was using when he traveled
from Hawaii to Indonesia and back? Remember he was enrolled in a
school as a
citizen of Indonesia. So what credentials did he show when he
registered in that school? Phony documents because non citizens
may not have been allowed
to attend a government school? We know he wasn't registered as
Barack Obama. Did he have more than one passport? Is there
anyone left alive that
knows the answer?
LZ

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<9mj957...@mid.individual.net>,

> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> You admit the rules have been changed recently, therefore you
>> have failed to address my question.
> You're blowing bullshit. The definition of a 'certified birth certificate'
> has *NOT* changed.

In your mind. A certified birth certificate is just that, NOT
what the State Department will accept as a substitute.

The question is: Does anybody KNOW what kind of documentation
got Obama his first passport? Did he travel from Hawaii to
Indonesia as Barry
Sotero or Barack Obama? We know he registered in a government
school as a resident of Indonesia under the name Barry Sotero.
So did he use a phony ID?
Under what name did he return to Hawaii? Ignoring the
citizenship question, you have to admit that Obama's past history
is pretty unusual and poses a lot of unanswered questions.
LZ

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<9mj9gd...@mid.individual.net>,
> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Robert Bonomi wrote:l.net>,

>> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Just reading the paper and stumbled on this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>> http://traveltips.usatoday.com/can-stop-one-getting-passport-21216.html?UTM_SOURCE=obrain
>>>>>> "One of the key requirements for applying for a passport in the
>>>>>> United States is that the applicant provide proof of U.S.
>>>>>> citizenship. Primary proof includes a previously issued U.S.
>>>>>> passport that has not been damaged; a certified copy of a birth
>>>>>> certificate issued by the city, county or state; a consular
>>>>>> report of birth abroad or certification of birth; a
>>>>>> naturalization certificate; or a certificate of citizenship.
>>>>>> Secondary proof includes a combination of early public records
>>>>>> (such as a baptismal certificate, census record, early school
>>>>>> record, family Bible record, doctor's record of post-natal care),
>>>>>> which must be accompanied by a state-issued Letter of No Record."
>>>>>> *****************
>>>>>> Just wondering..........
>>>>>> LZ
>>>>>>
>>>>> The previously published short-form Hawii birth certificate would have
>>>>> been sufficient 'primary proof'.

>> A certified birth certificate is a certified birth
>> certificate.....not what the State Department considers to be the
>> equivalent.
>> Have you seen a copy of Obama's certified birth certificate? As
>> I've mentioned above, I have yet to see that document.
>>> See 22 CFR 50.42(a) for the complete requirements for what is an
>>> acceptable birth certificate for passport purposes.
>>>

But you haven't seen a certified copy of Obama's birth
certificate either.....and you don't know what he used to obtain
his first
passport. What was he using while living in Indonesia as Barry
Sotero and attending school registered as a citizen of Indonesia?

Save the diversionary bullshit. We already know you don't have a
clue.
LZ

[Americans Love Liberals]

On Jan 3, 11:11 am, LOONATIC LOONIS, RORT'S RESIDENT GASBAG FUCKHEAD,
wrote:

<trying to worm out of the fact he's made a fool of himself and a bald-
faced liar> snipped.

[Americans Love Liberals]

On Jan 3, 11:44 AM, GASBAG CENTRAL wrote:

<More ignorant spew from the mindless lying gasbag> snipped.

[nothermark]

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 10:39:12 -0600, bon...@host122.r-bonomi.com

Thank you for the clarification. It is one of those nuances I was not
aware of. ;-)

[eloisekoch]

And the State Department evidently accepts forgeries.

[eloisekoch]

On 1/3/2012 10:37 AM, Hank wrote:

> On Jan 3, 10:32 am, Lone Haranguer<linus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> So the information I posted is bogus? Where is Obama's certified
>> birth certificate? Why wouldn't he use that instead of a
>> certificate of live birth.....which
>> is NOT the same thing as a certified copy of a birth
>> certificate? When my youngest son got his security clearance
>> working for Lockheed-Martin, a certificate
>> of live birth issued by our consulate in Spain was not
>> acceptable, they wanted the actual birth certificate, even though
>> it was issued by the Spanish government and the entire document
>> is in Spanish. It DOES, however, have his birth footprint, which
>> gives it more credibility. The Spanish government required the
>> military
>> hospital to furnish that information because as far as they were
>> concerned, he was a citizen of Spain. He was born the same year
>> as Obama claims.
>>
>> I haven't seen any documents which prove that the doofus in the
>> White House was born where he says he was. Tell me how YOU know,
>> without a shadow of doubt, that the certificate of life birth can
>> be conclusively linked to El Doofus? You can't.
>> LZ
>

> If I were you, I would go kick his ass out of the White House right
> now! You don't have to put up with an illegal in our country. Turn him
> in!
>
> You are so funny it makes my sides hurt.
>
> Hank<~~~~ thinks LZ needs some downers :-)

If you believe the melon head was born in the United States you'll
believe anything. Wanna buy a bridge?

[eloisekoch]

On 1/3/2012 9:36 PM, The American Enquirer wrote:

>> Hank<~~~~ thinks LZ needs some downers :-)- Hide quoted text -

>
>
> NO, WHAT HE NEEDS IS A FUNCTIONING BRAIN AND SOME COMMON SENSE.

Believing the lies of the Kenyan village idiot is evidence of retarded
brain development of being of his ilk.

[Lone Haranguer]

The bureaucrats won't take a chance on being called racists.
LZ

[Dean]

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:51:59 -0700, Lone Haranguer

Remember, his COLB was printed on a form that was issued long after
his birth date by ~40-50 years.

[Hank]

On Jan 5, 2:09 pm, Dean <roa...@k7no.com> wrote:

>
> Remember, his COLB was printed on a form that was issued long after
> his birth date by ~40-50 years.
>

What I find interesting is the fact that only the reps on this forum
are still believing he doesn't have COLB. I know you all are much
smarter than the Reps in office now, but wouldn't you believe that at
least one of them would see to it that O was thrown out of office
because of this MAJOR mistake? ROFLMAO

Hank

[Hunter Hampton]

On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 12:45:34 -0800 (PST), Hank <nineb...@aol.com>
wrote:

>What I find interesting is the fact that only the reps on this forum
>are still believing he doesn't have COLB. I know you all are much
>smarter than the Reps in office now, but wouldn't you believe that at
>least one of them would see to it that O was thrown out of office
>because of this MAJOR mistake? ROFLMAO

I swear, this is the worst case of beating a dead horse that I've ever
seen on RORT.

Hunter

[LonVanOstran]

I think your Maytag is a little under-inflated with that call Mr. Osborn.

Lon

[Lone Haranguer]

Was Dan Rather involved?
LZ

[Lone Haranguer]

With the way our current DOJ is operating under Holder, Obama
could commit murder in broad daylight in front of witnesses and
Holder
would find an excuse not to investigate or prosecute.

He probably has a copy of Janet Reno's handbook on how to manage
cover-ups.

*"Despite numerous official assurances that Vincent Foster really
did commit suicide, more and more Americans, over 70%
<http://whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/FOSTER_COVERUP/ZOGBY.html>
at the last count, no longer believe the official story. TV
specials, most notably the one put out by A&E's "Inside
Investigations" with Bill Kurtis, have failed to answer the
lingering questions, indeed have engaged in deliberate fraud to
try to dismiss the evidence that points to a cover-up.*"

Interesting, eh?
LZ

[Lone Haranguer]

We specialize in dead horses. You have to feed live ones and
that's not cheap.
LZ

[Hunter Hampton]

On Thu, 05 Jan 2012 17:53:00 -0700, Lone Haranguer
<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:

>We specialize in dead horses. You have to feed live ones and
>that's not cheap.
>LZ

Tell me about it <g>

Hunter

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <datbg7pcar8b7r4u0...@4ax.com>,

Linus is a proven liar. he stated (verbatim quote):

"..from

reading the requirements above, it appears that
Obama's certificate of live birth does not meet the requirements
for a passport."

I challenged _that_ specific claim, and provided _exact_ language of the
OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT requirements from official government sources -- as
opposed to the writings of a hack reporter on a low quality newspaper
that Linus used as his 'authority'; It is left as an exercise for the
reader as to which source is more likely to be full of bullshit regarding
official government requirements..

>
>>What document did Barry Sotero use to obtain his first
>>passport? Remember he was registered at his school as a citizen
>>of Indonesia.

So what? I take it you've never heard of dual citizenship.

>>Did he travel under the name Barry Sotero with a passport
>>identifying him as Barack Obama? Or did he just live in
>>Indonesia with false documents?

Did he _have_ to have a passport in his own name, *then*? Or could he
travel on the strength of his parent's passport?

>Remember, his COLB was printed on a form that was issued long after
>his birth date by ~40-50 years.

Again, 'so what?' The birth certificate _I_ used to get my passport,
was also on a form that was first used roughly 45 years after my birth.
But the State Department of Vital Statistics 'certified' that the
information on that form was a 'true copy" of the facts on file.

There is also absolutely *nothing* on that document -- fingerprints,
footprints, etc. -- that could be used to 'prove' that _I_ am the
person that that document references.

That document was 'sufficient' for getting a passport with no problems.

[Hank]

On Jan 5, 3:54 pm, Hunter Hampton <airstreamingy...@geemail.com>
wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 12:45:34 -0800 (PST), Hank <ninebal...@aol.com>

> wrote:
>
> >What I find interesting is the fact that only the reps on this forum
> >are still believing he doesn't have COLB. I know you all are much
> >smarter than the Reps in office now, but wouldn't you believe that at
> >least one of them would see to it that O was thrown out of office
> >because of this MAJOR mistake? ROFLMAO
>
> I swear, this is the worst case of beating a dead horse that I've ever
> seen on RORT.
>
> Hunter

Yeah, I should apologize for keeping these RORT reps all worked up,
but damnit, it is fun to see them get all worked up when they can't do
anything about it. :-)

Hank <~~~~ still being amused

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<datbg7pcar8b7r4u0...@4ax.com>,

> Linus is a proven liar. he stated (verbatim quote):''

Deal with my conclusions from the article I posted rather than
one you researched.
Using the information I posted to draw a conclusion does not make
me a liar.

Instead it makes you a rabid Obama supporter who starts frothing
at the mouth when anyone asks
questions about El Magnifico.

"..from
reading the requirements above, it appears that
Obama's certificate of live birth does not meet the requirements
for a passport."

I challenged _that_ specific claim, and provided _exact_ language of the
OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT requirements from official government sources -- as
opposed to the writings of a hack reporter on a low quality newspaper

I didn't claim it came from an official source but quoted the
newspaper article on travel.

."from
reading the requirements above"

> that Linus used as his 'authority';

You're so anxious to prove your superior knowledge that you used
a different source and instead of claiming the article was
not current, you jumped on my conclusion.

>>> What document did Barry Sotero use to obtain his first
>>> passport? Remember he was registered at his school as a citizen
>>> of Indonesia.
> So what? I take it you've never heard of dual citizenship.

So he has Indonesian citizenship in addition to U.S.
citizenship? Can you prove that?

I think you must be mentally ill-equipped since I've mentioned
that my son born in Spain had it automatically. My daughter born in
Munich had the option of having German citizenship in addition to
her American citizenship

>>> Did he travel under the name Barry Sotero with a passport
>>> identifying him as Barack Obama? Or did he just live in
>>> Indonesia with false documents?
> Did he _have_ to have a passport in his own name, *then*? Or could he
> travel on the strength of his parent's passport?

When we left Spain, our son who was born there was on my wife's
passport since he was less than a year old. When we shipped for
Germany 2 1/2 years later, he had to have his own passport.

So my ACTUAL experience would tell me Barry Sotero would have his
own passport when he went back to live in Hawaii.

>> Remember, his COLB was printed on a form that was issued long after
>> his birth date by ~40-50 years.
> Again, 'so what?' The birth certificate _I_ used to get my passport,
> was also on a form that was first used roughly 45 years after my birth.
> But the State Department of Vital Statistics 'certified' that the
> information on that form was a 'true copy" of the facts on file.

So some low-level clerk made that decision.

There is also absolutely *nothing* on that document --
fingerprints, footprints, etc. -- that could be used to 'prove'
that _I_ am the person that that document references. That
document was 'sufficient' for getting a passport with no problems.

According to your statement above, someone in the "State
Department of Vital Statistics" VERIFIED that the form was a
"true copy" before approving it.

Now MY "Certified Birth Certificate" is a photograph of the one
prepared and submitted by the doctor who attended my birth. So
is my wife's. The imprinted seal
of the county auditor is the verification that they are valid
copies from their files.

Apparently neither you or Obama can obtain one of these, yet I
have had to furnish one when I enlisted, when I got married and
again when I applied for
my AF housing allowance. The U of MN required one when I
registered there and the U of MN hospital got a copy from the
state....which is why my 2 children born there have the same
spelling as my birth certificate whereas the two born in military
hospitals have only one "n" at the end of their names.

Obviously my experiences have been far different than yours...but
no one ever had a question about MY birth certificate.
LZ

[Lone Haranguer]

The ones "worked up" in this thread appear to be folks like
Robert who froth at the mouth when anything with a negative
connotation is attributed to El Doofus. I'm just tickling his
feet with a feather.
LZ

[Hank]

On Jan 6, 10:28 am, Lone Haranguer <linus...@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Obviously my experiences have been far different than yours...but
> no one ever had a question about MY birth certificate.
> LZ

Ok, Where is Romneys COLB, or all the candidates for that matter? Can
you provide them?

Face the fact that you are suffering from OCD over this great
president that we are sooooooooo lucky to have.

Hank <~~~~ still flogging for amusement ;-)

[Lone Haranguer]

Hank wrote:
> On Jan 6, 10:28 am, Lone Haranguer<linus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Obviously my experiences have been far different than yours...but
>> no one ever had a question about MY birth certificate.
>> LZ
> Ok, Where is Romneys COLB, or all the candidates for that matter? Can
> you provide them?

Not instantly but I bet they can produce copies of their actual
birth certificate, whereas Obama apparently can't.
>
> Face the fact that you are suffering from OCD over this greatpresident that we are sooooooooo lucky to have.

I'd rather have typhus.....at least it can be eradicated.

Hank <~~~~ still flogging for amusement ;-)

I think you've been flogging little willy too much.
LZ

[Hank]

You Reps are now arguing over who won the Iowa caucus.

To correct you....... it is called Big Willy and I when I flog him, I
think of you. roflmao

Hank

[LonVanOstran]

Hank wrote:
> Ok, Where is Romneys COLB, or all the candidates for that matter? Can
> you provide them?

Do you really believe any candidate other than Obama would spend
millions trying to avoid producing a birth certificate?

If you believe that, then you must be richard's twin brother.

Lon

[Lone Haranguer]

Hank wrote:
> On Jan 6, 11:15 am, Lone Haranguer<linus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hank wrote:
>>> On Jan 6, 10:28 am, Lone Haranguer<linus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Obviously my experiences have been far different than yours...but
>>>> no one ever had a question about MY birth certificate.
>>>> LZ
>>> Ok, Where is Romneys COLB, or all the candidates for that matter? Can
>>> you provide them?
>> Not instantly but I bet they can produce copies of their actual
>> birth certificate, whereas Obama apparently can't.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Face the fact that you are suffering from OCD over this greatpresident that we are sooooooooo lucky to have.
>> I'd rather have typhus.....at least it can be eradicated.
>>
>> Hank<~~~~ still flogging for amusement ;-)
>>
>> I think you've been flogging little willy too much.
>> LZ
> You Reps are now arguing over who won the Iowa caucus.

So?

>
> To correct you....... it is called Big Willy

By you only. Others have referred to it as a baby carrot.

> and I when I flog him, I
> think of you. roflmao

Your fantasies need a major upgrade.
LZ
>
> Hank
>

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9moi9b...@mid.individual.net>,

{{reinstating the verbatim quote that Linus dishonestly elided}}
"... it appears that Obama's certificate of live birth does not

meet the requirements for a passport."
>

>Deal with my conclusions from the article I posted rather than
>one you researched. Using the information I posted to draw a
>conclusion does not make me a liar.

Linus lies, again.

I did _not_ say that Linus was lying about the conclusion Linus drew, I
merely said Linus was "wrong" about _that_.

I *AM* calling Linus a liar -- for claiming that i went off on a tangent,
and "cooked up" things that were not in his original posting.

Linus, *YOU* are the one 'cooking up' distractions, and attempting to
bury the facts with your bullshit.

>Instead it makes you a rabid Obama supporter

snort. <snicker> *GUFFAW*

_Me_ an Obama supporter??

You *are* a raving lunatic to believe that.

Try to find _ANYTHING_, *ever*, where I have said *one*word* in support
of _ANY_ program, policy, or political agenda, proposed or endorsed by
Obama.

In point of fact, I actively volunteered in the campaigns of two other
candidates.

What I do, is 'call out' those who employ 'big lie' techniques -- repeating
provably 'false to fact' assertations, with the apparent belief that
if they say a thing often enough, it will come to accepted as true.

I do -not- expect to convince the 'big lie' perpetrator of the error of
his ways. Just to keep the 'true facts' available for those who stumble
across the 'big lie' attempt in the future, so -they- can make their own
*INFORMED* decisions as to what the 'truth' really is.

> "..from reading the requirements above, it appears that
> Obama's certificate of live birth does not meet the requirements
> for a passport."
>
>I challenged _that_ specific claim, and provided _exact_ language of the
>OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT requirements from official government sources -- as
>opposed to the writings of a hack reporter on a low quality newspaper
>
>I didn't claim it came from an official source but quoted the
>newspaper article on travel.

Admitting that you are apparently too ignorant, or too lazy, to bother to
check whether or not that hearsay reporting by a questionable-quality
source is accurate.

> "from
> reading the requirements above"
>
>> that Linus used as his 'authority';
>
>You're so anxious to prove your superior knowledge that you used
>a different source and instead of claiming the article was
>not current, you jumped on my conclusion.

Of course, your 'conclusion' is not supported by either the facts
in the article, or by the rules in effect for the prior 30+ years.

I merely proved that _your_ interpretation of what that questionable
'authority' says, as well as what the official rules say, is erroneous.

The article _is_ mostly accurate in what it says relevant to the birth
certificate requirements for a passport. *YOUR* "interpretation",
however -- that Obama's short-version certificate does not meet those
requirements -- is demonstrably INCORRECT. You insist on your own
interpretation of what a 'certified birth certificate' is, CONTRARY to
the way the U.S. State Department defines that term -- for passport
application purposes.

While the widely-published Obama Hawaii short version certificate clearly
does not meet _your_ definition of a 'certified birth certificate',
it *DOES* meet all the requirements of the U.S. State Department for the
State Department's use of that document as a 'certified birth certificate'.

>>>> What document did Barry Sotero use to obtain his first
>>>> passport? Remember he was registered at his school as a citizen
>>>> of Indonesia.
>> So what? I take it you've never heard of dual citizenship.

>So he has Indonesian citizenship in addition to U.S.
>citizenship? Can you prove that?

It's _your_ claim that he was a citizen of Indonesia. The burden of
proof lies with you. Where is the proof that the school verified
the citizenship of _any_ student, as distinct from accepting at face
value what a parent/guardian -- who may or MAY NOT have been telling
the truth -- said?

>I think you must be mentally ill-equipped since I've mentioned
>that my son born in Spain had it automatically.

Sorry, your words are simply _not_ memorable enough to be worth
remembering.

But, then, _YOU_ are demonstrably mentally ill-equipped, given your
repeated failures to to recognize hard facts, complete with official
cites, when they are shoved in your face. Thus your 'thoughts' about
mental deficiencies of others carry absolutely no weigh with any
'reasonable person'.

Here's a simple challenge;
Using the official U.S. State Department requirements, as published
in 22 CFR 50.42(a), or on the U.S. State Department Web-site, at:
<http://travel.state.gov/passport/get/first/first_830.html>
Please identify *WHICH* specific requirement(s) that the widely-
published Hawaii 'short version' birth certificate fails to meet.
If you want to claim it is not 'certified', please identify which
of the requirements of _that_ term, AS DEFINED on the travel.state.gov
that it fails to meet.

You can use either the current, "more restrictive" version of those
rules (as shown on either of the authoritative references mentioned
above), or you can change ".. the full name of the parent(s) ..." to
'... the name of the parent(s) ...', (simply eliding the word 'full'),
and have the version of the requirements that have been in effect
for the prior 30+ years. Your choice.

Before responding you may wish to review the high-quality, high-resolution
images at:
<http://factcheck.org/2008/08/born-in-the-usa/>
A site run by the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of
Pennsylvania, with no connections to any political party or political
agenda.

You have repeatedly asserted your belief that that document is not valid
for passport purposes. Here's your chance to back up your bluster, by
identifying *which* document requirements it fails to meet.

I'm willing to bet that you will either ignore this or respond with
bafflegab and bullshit about how it's not part of your question; that
you will -not- provide any specifics, -nor- admit that you cannot do so.
Of course, your failure to do so, for whatever reason _will_ 'speak for
itself', regardless of how much bullshit you attempt to bury that failure
in.

>>>> Did he travel under the name Barry Sotero with a passport
>>>> identifying him as Barack Obama? Or did he just live in
>>>> Indonesia with false documents?
>> Did he _have_ to have a passport in his own name, *then*? Or could he
>> travel on the strength of his parent's passport?

>When we left Spain, our son who was born there was on my wife's
>passport since he was less than a year old. When we shipped for
>Germany 2 1/2 years later, he had to have his own passport.
>So my ACTUAL experience would tell me Barry Sotero would have his
>own passport when he went back to live in Hawaii.

Which is relevant, how, to the rules for someone who may have been
traveling under a passport of different nationality? It is the
_issuing_ country that determines the rules on such matters.

What do you know about _Indonesia's_ rules, at that time, for passports?

>>> Remember, his COLB was printed on a form that was issued long after
>>> his birth date by ~40-50 years.
>> Again, 'so what?' The birth certificate _I_ used to get my passport,
>> was also on a form that was first used roughly 45 years after my birth.
>> But the State Department of Vital Statistics 'certified' that the
>> information on that form was a 'true copy" of the facts on file.
>
>So some low-level clerk made that decision.

FALSE TO FACT. You have mis-parsed what I wrote.
Rephrase for clarity; The Department of vital statistics of the issuing
State 'certified' that the information on that form was a 'true copy' of
the facts on file with the State.

> There is also absolutely *nothing* on that document --
>fingerprints, footprints, etc. -- that could be used to 'prove'
>that _I_ am the person that that document references. That
>document was 'sufficient' for getting a passport with no problems.
>
>According to your statement above, someone in the "State
>Department of Vital Statistics" VERIFIED that the form was a
>"true copy" before approving it.

FALSE TO FACT. Rephrasing for clarity: The "Department of Vital State"
of the issuing State, certified the document was a 'true copy' of the
facts on file WITH said State Government offices. The issuing State
had no idea of what use the document was to be put,

>Now MY "Certified Birth Certificate" is a photograph of the one
>prepared and submitted by the doctor who attended my birth. So
>is my wife's. The imprinted seal of the county auditor is the
>verification that they are valid >copies from their files.

What -your- certificate is and what the U.S. State Department requires
are very different things. Review the actual State Department requirements.

>Apparently neither you or Obama can obtain one of these,

You're blowing bullshit again.

My _long_form_ birth certificate is a laser-printed copy of a digital
image of a (poor quality) microfilmed copy of a typewritten document
filled out by a member of the Hospital's staff who was -not- present
at the birth. That staff member is the only person who's signature
shows on the document. *EVERYTHING* on the document is 'technically'
'hearsay', since it is 3rd party reportage, by someone who was *NOT*
present. However, as the form states, all the information was taken
from an interview with the mother, said interview having taken place
a few days after the actual birth.

> yet I
>have had to furnish one when I enlisted, when I got married and
>again when I applied for >my AF housing allowance. The U of MN
>required one when I >registered there and the U of MN hospital
>got a copy from the >state....which is why my 2 children born
>there have the same >spelling as my birth certificate whereas the
>two born in military >hospitals have only one "n" at the end of
>their names.

You're just blowing bullshit, and trying to change the subject
away from what the _minimum_ U.S. State Department requirements
for a birth certificate _used_for_a_passport_application_ are.

>Obviously my experiences have been far different than yours...but
>no one ever had a question about MY birth certificate.

"BFD" applies. No one has ever had a question about mine either.

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mol14...@mid.individual.net>,

Lone Haranguer <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Hank wrote:
>> On Jan 6, 10:28 am, Lone Haranguer<linus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Obviously my experiences have been far different than yours...but
>>> no one ever had a question about MY birth certificate.
>>> LZ
>> Ok, Where is Romneys COLB, or all the candidates for that matter? Can
>> you provide them?
>
>Not instantly but I bet they can produce copies of their actual
>birth certificate, whereas Obama apparently can't.

Linus demonstrates, yet again, that he 'doesn't know what he doesn't know.'

The _true_facts_ contradict his "apparently can't" conclusion.

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9moihl...@mid.individual.net>,

Lone Haranguer <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The ones "worked up" in this thread appear to be folks like
>Robert who froth at the mouth when anything with a negative
>connotation is attributed to El Doofus. I'm just tickling his
>feet with a feather.

The only thing on the subject that Robert responds to is those who
engage in the 'big lie'. Robert simply provides the provable facts,
_with_ authoritative sources, that shows the falsehood of the 'big
lie' claim.

[LonVanOstran]

Hardly. Robert bloviates so much bullshit that no rational person with
anything resembling a life would bother to read past the first 2 or 3
sleep inducing paragraphs.

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article <9moi9b...@mid.individual.net>, Lone Haranguer
> <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 15:51:59 -0700, Lone Haranguer
> >>> <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>>>>>> In article<9mfgni...@mid.individual.net>, Lone
> >>>>>>>>> Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> It's a free country (so far) and I'm allowed to
> >>>>>>>>>> wonder..... From reading the requirements above,
> >>>>>>>>>> it appears that Obama's certificate of live birth
> >>>>>>>>>> does not meet the requirements for a passport.
> >>>>>>>>> You're wrong. The State Dept. has a PUBLISHED
> >>>>>>>>> checklist of criteria for an 'acceptable' U.S.
> >>>>>>>>> birth certificate.

Which is NOT the article *I* was basing my conclusion on.

http://traveltips.usatoday.com/can-stop-one-getting-passport-21216.ht...

"One of the key requirements for applying for a passport in the
United States is that the applicant provide proof of U.S.
citizenship. Primary proof includes a previously issued U.S.
passport that has not been damaged; a certified copy of a birth
certificate issued by the city, county or state; a consular
report of birth abroad or certification of birth; a
naturalization certificate; or a certificate of citizenship.
Secondary proof includes a combination of early public records
(such as a baptismal certificate, census record, early school
record, family Bible record, doctor's record of post-natal care),
which must be accompanied by a state-issued Letter of No Record."
*****************

The ARTICLE states exactly WHEN a certificate of live birth is
acceptable and the SOURCE of who is expected to furnish such a
document in lieu of a
certified birth certificate.

" a consular report of birth abroad or certification of birth"

> >>>>>> In order to address my original question,

> >>>>> I challenged _that_ specific claim, and provided _exact_
> >>>>> language of the OFFICIAL GOVERNMENT requirements from
> >>>>> official government sources --

Which is not the source from which I drew my conclusion.

Your diversion is simply because you CAN'T answer the question I
posed so you find it necessary to drag in red herrings in an
effort to avoid admitting that you simply don't know the answer.
A typical liberal at work.
LZ

[Lone Haranguer]

If you can furnish a TRUE copy of Obama's ACTUAL birth
certificate...the one signed by the doctor who delivered him and
which contains an actual
footprint...please do so. Stop trying to confuse his certificate
of live birth with an actual certified birth certificate. It may
be "acceptable" but it is NOT an actual birth certificate.

Apparently you choose to lie or fail to admit you can't tell the
difference. When are you going to answer the question in the
subject line?
LZ
>
>
>

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert can't answer the question in the subject line and doesn't
know the difference between a certificate of live birth and
an ACTUAL certified birth certificate. We have yet to see
Obama's actual birth certificate complete with the signature of
the doctor who delivered him and Obama's footprint. Does one
exist? Robert specializes in red herrings and strawmen when he's
stumped for the answer.
LZ

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mr7ta...@mid.individual.net>,

Lone Haranguer <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Robert Bonomi wrote:
>> In article<9mol14...@mid.individual.net>,
>> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hank wrote:
>>>> On Jan 6, 10:28 am, Lone Haranguer<linus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Obviously my experiences have been far different than yours...but
>>>>> no one ever had a question about MY birth certificate.
>>>>> LZ
>>>> Ok, Where is Romneys COLB, or all the candidates for that matter? Can
>>>> you provide them?
>>> Not instantly but I bet they can produce copies of their actual
>>> birth certificate, whereas Obama apparently can't.
>> Linus demonstrates, yet again, that he 'doesn't know what he doesn't know.'
>>
>> The _true_facts_ contradict his "apparently can't" conclusion.
>
>If you can furnish a TRUE copy of Obama's ACTUAL birth
>certificate...the one signed by the doctor who delivered him and
>which contains an actual footprint...please do so.

First you provide any verifiable reference that a footprint is a required
part of a Hawaii long-form birth certificate in 1961. I bet you can't.

It is standard trick of the intellectually dishonest to demand the
'impossible' -- a thing that does not exist. So first you must prove
that what you demand _actually_ exists for Hawaii certificates.


Note: Obama's long-form certificate is signed by his mother (on 8-7-61);
by the attending M.D on '8-8-61'; and a date-stamp shows that it was
'accepted' by the "registrar general's" office on that same date (the
stamp reads 'Aug -8 1961') The M.D. has a typical doctor's scrawl,
making the last name hard to decipher -- it appears to read "David A
Smila{something}".

>Stop trying to confuse his certificate
>of live birth with an actual certified birth certificate. It may
>be "acceptable" but it is NOT an actual birth certificate.

I am not trying to 'confuse' anything. I claim only that it _is_
sufficient, as "certified birth certificate" by the U.S. State Department
definition of that term, for a passport application.

YOU have repeatedly, _falsely_, claimed that that short version
certificate is "not acceptable" for a passport. That is the only
thing you've said on the matter that I have disputed. The fact
remains that BY U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT RULES, the short version
certificate _DOES_ QUALIFY as a 'certified birth certificate', contrary
to what you insist the words mean.

You have never been able to identify any specific deficiency in that
document, when judged by the OFFICIAL U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT STANDARDS
for a 'certified birth certificate'.

Apparently you have chosen to lie, or fail to admit that you can't
find any such deficiency.

>Apparently you choose to lie or fail to admit you can't tell the
>difference.

You are the one who chose to lie -- when you claimed the Hawaii short
version certificate does not meet the requirements for a passport.

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mr7fg...@mid.individual.net>,

You lie, as usual. Neither the article, nor the underlying Federal
regulations *ever* use the language "certificate of live birth".
That claim is, pure and simple, a figment of your imagination.

Furthermore, since Obama's short-version birth certificate meets
all the legal requirements -- AS the U.S. State Department defines
the term -- for a 'certified birth certificate', any 'alternate'
forms of identification are irrelevant.

You are so blind that you even quote the language that proves you
are a liar. The requirements for a 'certified copy of a birth
certificate', are EXPLICITLY defined by the U.S. State Department,
and the Hawaii short-version certificate meets *all* the legal
requirements for such a document.

You continue to insist that *your* interpretation of what a
'certified birth certificate' means trumps that of the U.S. State
Department, for purposes of a passport application.

You are wrong about that.

If you want to claim that The Hawaii document does not meet the
_U.S._State_Department_ requirements for a 'certified birth certificate',
as opposed to what you 'think' the term means, you will have to identify
_WHICH_REQUIREMENT_ for such a document that the State Department has
laid out, that said document fails to meet.

Since you cannot do so, you will provide more bullshit, bafflegab, and
further attempts to change the subject.

[Technobarbarian]

"Robert Bonomi" <bon...@host122.r-bonomi.com> wrote in message
news:lPydnZRpjOSzZ5XS...@posted.nuvoxcommunications...

> In article <9mr7ta...@mid.individual.net>,
> Lone Haranguer <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>Stop trying to confuse his certificate
>>of live birth with an actual certified birth certificate. It may
>>be "acceptable" but it is NOT an actual birth certificate.
>
> I am not trying to 'confuse' anything. I claim only that it _is_
> sufficient, as "certified birth certificate" by the U.S. State Department
> definition of that term, for a passport application.
>
> YOU have repeatedly, _falsely_, claimed that that short version
> certificate is "not acceptable" for a passport. That is the only
> thing you've said on the matter that I have disputed. The fact
> remains that BY U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT RULES, the short version
> certificate _DOES_ QUALIFY as a 'certified birth certificate', contrary
> to what you insist the words mean.
>
> You have never been able to identify any specific deficiency in that
> document, when judged by the OFFICIAL U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT STANDARDS
> for a 'certified birth certificate'.

Some of the original confusion here seems to be due to the fact that
some hospitals have issued certificates of live birth that are merely
souvenirs with no legal standing, while Hawaii calls their official birth
certificates a certificate of live birth on the document. This subject has
been so beaten to death here that the people who cannot understand the
difference at this point can't understand because they refuse to understand
just about anything that runs counter to their preconceived notions.

TB

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<9mr7ta...@mid.individual.net>,

> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Robert Bonomi wrote:
>>> In article<9mol14...@mid.individual.net>,
>>> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hank wrote:
>>>>> On Jan 6, 10:28 am, Lone Haranguer<linus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Obviously my experiences have been far different than yours...but
>>>>>> no one ever had a question about MY birth certificate.
>>>>>> LZ
>>>>> Ok, Where is Romneys COLB, or all the candidates for that matter? Can
>>>>> you provide them?
>>>> Not instantly but I bet they can produce copies of their actual
>>>> birth certificate, whereas Obama apparently can't.
>>> Linus demonstrates, yet again, that he 'doesn't know what he doesn't know.'
>>>

>>> If you can furnish a TRUE copy of Obama's ACTUAL birth
>>> certificate...the one signed by the doctor who delivered him and
>>> which contains an actual footprint...please do so.
> First you provide any verifiable reference that a footprint is a required
> part of a Hawaii long-form birth certificate in 1961. I bet you can't.

Why not? My son was born in an Air Force hospital in Spain yet
his birth certificate has his footprint and he was born 2 months
before El Doofus.

When are you going to answer the question? Anybody know what
kind of documentation got Obama his first passport? All your
blathering is your best attempt
to avoid answering that question. All this drivel about an
"acceptable" document is NOT an answer, it's speculation on your
part but fails to answer the question.

Can YOU prove he wasn't traveling as Barry Sotero, the name he
was using at the time of his international travel and also the
name he used to register as an Indonesian citizen in an
Indonesian school?

If so, hop to it and give up with the smokescreen.
LZ

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9mr84h...@mid.individual.net>,

Lone Haranguer <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Robert Bonomi wrote:
>> In article<9moihl...@mid.individual.net>,
>> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> The ones "worked up" in this thread appear to be folks like
>>> Robert who froth at the mouth when anything with a negative
>>> connotation is attributed to El Doofus. I'm just tickling his
>>> feet with a feather.
>> The only thing on the subject that Robert responds to is those who
>> engage in the 'big lie'. Robert simply provides the provable facts,
>> _with_ authoritative sources, that shows the falsehood of the 'big
>> lie' claim.
>>
>Robert can't answer the question in the subject line and doesn't
>know the difference between a certificate of live birth and

>an ACTUAL certified birth certificate. `

Linus lies. Robert addressed the question in the subject line.

Linus obviously doesn't know, doesn't comprehend, or doesn't care,
how the U.S. State Department _defines a 'certified birth certificate'.

> We have yet to see
>an ACTUAL certified birth certificate.

Linus is blind, ignorant, or intentionally lying.

A copy of Obama's long-form certificate is readily available on-line
for those who bother to look for it.

> We have yet to see
>Obama's actual birth certificate complete with the signature of
>the doctor who delivered him and Obama's footprint. Does one
>exist?

Does *any* Hawaii birth certificate of that vintage have footprints on
it, or is Linus demanding something that simply does not exist?"

I will note that _every_ long-form birth certificate I have seen of that
vintage, from more than a dozen states, did *NOT* include footprints.
This is not to say that -some- certificate =may= have them, but it is
demonstrably _NOT_ a universal requirement.

> Robert specializes in red herrings and strawmen when he's
>stumped for the answer.

Linus specializes in bullshit and 'asking the impossible', when he
doesn't have anything constructive to say.

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9msegk...@mid.individual.net>,

Lone Haranguer <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Robert Bonomi wrote:
>> In article<9mr7ta...@mid.individual.net>,
>> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> If you can furnish a TRUE copy of Obama's ACTUAL birth
>>>> certificate...the one signed by the doctor who delivered him and
>>>> which contains an actual footprint...please do so.
>> First you provide any verifiable reference that a footprint is a required
>> part of a Hawaii long-form birth certificate in 1961. I bet you can't.
>
>Why not? My son was born in an Air Force hospital in Spain yet
>his birth certificate has his footprint and he was born 2 months
>before El Doofus.

More bullshit, bafflegab, and changing the subject.

And your experience in Spain is relevant to requirements set by the
State of Hawaii for birth certificates issued there.

Or maybe you are so ignorant that you don't know that each state sets the
requirements for birth certifies in that state?

>When are you going to answer the question? Anybody know what
>kind of documentation got Obama his first passport? All your
>blathering is your best attempt to avoid answering that question.

You are a liar. In the first response I provided an exact answer
to your question, as asked. I identified the only people who _do_
know, authoritatively, and suggested that you contact *them* for an
answer.

>All this drivel about an "acceptable" document is NOT an answer,

*YOU* introduced the 'drivel' -- by claiming the document was not
acceptable. Thank you for admitting that it *was* drivel. <grin>

>it's speculation on your part but fails to answer the question.

FALSE TO FACT.

a) It is not speculation; it is legal FACT.
b) It addresses the 'claim of fact' YOU made that the widely published
Hawaii short-form certificate 'does not meet the requirements' for
a passport.
c) I _did_ address your 'question' -- identifying the parties who _do_
know, authoritatively, and recommending you contact them.

>Can YOU prove he wasn't traveling as Barry Sotero, the name he
>was using at the time of his international travel and also the
>name he used to register as an Indonesian citizen in an
>Indonesian school?

Note: Linus offers more bullshit, bafflegab, and "changing the subject".

In the spirit of _that_ question:
Can YOU _prove_ that you have stopped beating your wife?

On point, can you prove that he *was* using that name on his international
travel?

If so, hop to it, and give up on the 'drivel', bullshit, and bafflegab.

By the way, the use of an 'assumed name' is _not_ illegal, *unless* it
is being used to defraud. Was he attempting to defraud the school, or
anyone else, for that matter? If so, who? And how was the fraudulent
scheme perpetrated?

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<9mr7fg...@mid.individual.net>,

> Neither the article, nor the underlying Federal
> regulations *ever* use the language "certificate of live birth".

> " a consular report of birth abroad or certification of birth" OK, the word "live" is missing.....not that it changes
anything since a certificate of dead birth wouldn't apply.

" certified copy of a birth certificate issued by the city,

county or state" is the primary choice.....which means Obama
didn't have one that met that

description.

Now just answer the question: Anybody KNOW what kind of documentation got Obama his first passport". Notice I did NOT
ask for speculation on what kind of documentation was used. His early international travels were as Barry Sotero....as far as
we know. Did he have a passport under that name?
LZ

>

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<9mr84h...@mid.individual.net>,

> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Robert Bonomi wrote:
>>> In article<9moihl...@mid.individual.net>,
>>> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> The ones "worked up" in this thread appear to be folks like
>>>> Robert who froth at the mouth when anything with a negative
>>>> connotation is attributed to El Doofus. I'm just tickling his
>>>> feet with a feather.
>>> The only thing on the subject that Robert responds to is those who
>>> engage in the 'big lie'. Robert simply provides the provable facts,
>>> _with_ authoritative sources, that shows the falsehood of the 'big
>>> lie' claim.
>>>
>> Robert can't answer the question in the subject line and doesn't
>> know the difference between a certificate of live birth and
>> an ACTUAL certified birth certificate. `
> Linus lies. Robert addressed the question in the subject line.
>

Not true. Robert doesn't KNOW anything. He speculates on the
documentation used for Obama's first passport....something any
fool can do.

Then he writes 10,000 words trying to cover up the fact that he
didn't know the answer.

We DO know that Obama went by the name Barry Sotero during the
years he lived in Indonesia and was enrolled as an Indonesian
citizen in an Indonesian school.
Was Obama adopted by his stepfather that he was using the Sotero
name? If so, did he travel back to Hawaii using that name? We
don't know....Robert doesn't
know either but is convinced he does.
LZ

[Hunter Hampton]

On Sat, 07 Jan 2012 20:51:50 -0600, bon...@host122.r-bonomi.com
(Robert Bonomi) wrote:

>I will note that _every_ long-form birth certificate I have seen of that
>vintage, from more than a dozen states, did *NOT* include footprints.
>This is not to say that -some- certificate =may= have them, but it is
>demonstrably _NOT_ a universal requirement.

My daughter was born in 1964, and there's no footprint on her birth
certificate.

Hunter

[Lone Haranguer]

Robert Bonomi wrote:
> In article<9msegk...@mid.individual.net>,

> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Robert Bonomi wrote:
>>> In article<9mr7ta...@mid.individual.net>,
>>> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> If you can furnish a TRUE copy of Obama's ACTUAL birth
>>>>> certificate...the one signed by the doctor who delivered him and
>>>>> which contains an actual footprint...please do so.
>>> First you provide any verifiable reference that a footprint is a required
>>> part of a Hawaii long-form birth certificate in 1961. I bet you can't.
>> Why not? My son was born in an Air Force hospital in Spain yet
>> his birth certificate has his footprint and he was born 2 months
>> before El Doofus.
>

> And your experience in Spain is relevant to requirements set by the
> State of Hawaii for birth certificates issued there.

You said you had never seen a birth certificate with a footprint
for someone born in 1961.....or words to that effect.

>> When are you going to answer the question? Anybody know what
>> kind of documentation got Obama his first passport? All your
>> blathering is your best attempt to avoid answering that question.

>> All this drivel about an "acceptable" document is NOT an answer,
> *YOU* introduced the 'drivel' -- by claiming the document was not
> acceptable.

According to the article I used to reach that conclusion, a
certified birth certificate was first choice and certificates of
birth were expected
from consular officials.....which would mean that your
"acceptable" document would be submitted by a consular
official....and consuls work in foreign countries.

>> it's speculation on your part but fails to answer the question.

> I _did_ address your 'question' -- identifying the parties who _do_
> know, authoritatively, and recommending you contact them.

As you know, Obama has squadrons of lawyers blocking access to
that information.

>
>> Can YOU prove he wasn't traveling as Barry Sotero, the name he
>> was using at the time of his international travel and also the
>> name he used to register as an Indonesian citizen in an
>> Indonesian school?

>> On point, can you prove that he *was* using that name on his international
>> travel?

He was using it in Indonesia. Was he adopted by his stepfather?
Or just using a fake name to get enrolled in school?

Do YOU know what name he was traveling under? If so, prove it.

>> By the way, the use of an 'assumed name' is _not_ illegal, *unless* it
>> is being used to defraud. Was he attempting to defraud the school, or
>> anyone else, for that matter?

We don't KNOW but using the name Sotero (who was a citizen of
Indonesia) and registering as a citizen may well have hidden the
fact that he was
a foreigner and couldn't attend that school......at least for
free. It may well have been fraud. Maybe you should look into
it? Obama could be the first president to
commit fraud before the age of 10.
LZ

[Lone Haranguer]

What backwater was she born in?
LZ

[Hunter Hampton]

On Sat, 07 Jan 2012 20:56:22 -0700, Lone Haranguer
<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:

>What backwater was she born in?
>LZ

Tennessee.

Hunter

[Lone Haranguer]

There ya go. I was sure you would say NYC.
LZ

[Hunter Hampton]

On Sat, 07 Jan 2012 21:55:29 -0700, Lone Haranguer
<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hunter
>
>There ya go. I was sure you would say NYC.
>LZ

nope, I was born in NYC.

hunter

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9msfr9...@mid.individual.net>,

BFD applies. That language is inoperable, since there _is_ a document
in existence that meets _all_ the U.S. State Department requirements
to be called a 'certified birth certificate'.

If you claim otherwise, please identify precisely _which_ State Department
requirement that it does _not_ meet. i.e. what required information is
missing, or which of the factors that make a document a 'certified'
certificate PER U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT definition, is absent.

No bafflegab, bullshit,or other handwaving, about *your* definitions of
'COLB' vs a 'birth certificate', just apply the STATE DEPARTMENT'S
definition, and show where the document fails to meet _that_ definition.
If you can, that is.

>" certified copy of a birth certificate issued by the city,
>county or state" is the primary choice.....which means Obama
>didn't have one that met that description.

So you falsely claim. And are apparently incapable of backing that
claim by identifying any deficiency in the Hawaii short version
certificate that fails to meet the U.S. State Department requirements
for the State Department's definition of a 'certified birth certificate'.

You might find it worthwhile to read:
<http://hawaii.gov/health/vital-records/Policy_Memo_5_15_2001.PDF>

Where official notice is given that the *ONLY* form of _certified_
copies of vital records that Hawaii will produce are the 'computer-
generated 'abstracts'. Including the information that that change is
being made to comply with statutory requirements _against_ disclosure
of some information contained in those records.

Just answer the question: Which of the enumerated requirements for a
'certified birth certificate' AS PRESCRIBED BY THE U.S. STATE DEPARTMENT
does the Hawaii short version certificate fail to comply with? to be
precise, which of the components that the State Department requires for a
document to be considered 'certified' is absent? Or, if not that, which
of the required elements for a valid 'birth certificate' is absent?

To make your answering simple, here are the State Department criteria
for a 'certified' birth certificate:
"*A certified birth certificate has a registrar's raised, embossed,
impressed or multicolored seal, registrar's signature, and the date
the certificate was filed with the registrar's office, which must
be within 1 year of your birth."

Do YOU claim that:
1) It lacks the registrar's 'raised, embossed, impressed, or multi-
colored seal?
Fact: it has an impressed seal of the Registrar's office.
2) It lacks the registrar's signature?
Fact: it has such a signature
3) It was not filed within the 1 year deadline?
Fact: the date of filing with the registrar's office was on the
4th day day after the birth. Birth 7:24 PM 8/4/1961, filed with
the registrar's office on 8/8/1961.

Hmmm, the facts don't seem to favor any of those possibilities. Therefore
it does meet the requirements for a 'certified' copy.

Thus you must be claiming that the document itself is deficient -- because
it omits some piece of 'required' information. Those requirements are:

"The birth certificate must show the full name of the applicant, the
applicant's place and date of birth, the full name of the parent(s),
and must be signed by the official custodian of birth records, bear
the seal of the issuing office, and show a filing date within one
year of the date of birth."

The last three requirements are those which satisfy the 'certified' copy
requirement, already disposed of?

Therefore, do YOU claim that the short-version document is deficient
because:
4) It lacks the full name of the applicant?
Fact; it contains the full name of the applicant.
5) It lacks the applicant's place and date of birth?
Fact: it contains the place and date of birth
6) It lacks the full name of the parent(s)?
Fact: it contains the full names of both parents
7) It lacks the Signature of the official custodian of records?
Fact: it contains the signature of of the official custodian of
records.

Or are you (8) claiming it is 'not valid for a passport application'
for some _other_ reason, despite meeting ALL the legal requirements
of the U.S. State Department regarding a certified birth certificate
used for a passport application.

>Now just answer the question: Anybody KNOW what kind of
>documentation got Obama his first passport".

That question has already been asked AND ANSWERED. Yes, there are
people who do know. But the only people who _do_ know -- other than
the applicant -- would be committing a felony by disclosing that
information.

You're not deliberately suborning the commission of a felony, are you?
I'm sure you recognize that doing -that- is a felony in and of itself.

[Robert Bonomi]

In article <9msgrk...@mid.individual.net>,

Lone Haranguer <linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Robert Bonomi wrote:
>> In article<9mr84h...@mid.individual.net>,
>> Lone Haranguer<linu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Robert can't answer the question in the subject line and doesn't
>>> know the difference between a certificate of live birth and
>>> an ACTUAL certified birth certificate.
>> Linus lies. Robert addressed the question in the subject line.
>>
>Not true. Robert doesn't KNOW anything. He speculates on the
>documentation used for Obama's first passport....something any
>fool can do.

Linus lies. Robert _KNOWS_ who has the answer to Linus's question.
Robert provided that information in the initial response.

Linus is also 'full of it', regarding the difference between a
'certificate of live birth' an a 'certified birth certificate'.

An official Hawaii long-form birth certificate carries the title
'Certificate of Live Birth".

>
>We DO know that Obama went by the name Barry Sotero during the
>years he lived in Indonesia and was enrolled as an Indonesian
>citizen in an Indonesian school.
>Was Obama adopted by his stepfather that he was using the Sotero
>name? If so, did he travel back to Hawaii using that name? We
>don't know....Robert doesn't know either but is convinced he does.

Linus lies. Robert has *never* claimed he knows anything about those
matters. And Linus cannot produce one word where I _have_ so claimed.
I have raised questions about Linus's claims the _he_ cannot (or will
not) answer. And, where Linus has claimed a thing _must_ be a particular
way, I have raised other possibilities. I do not claim that they *are*
true -- I _don't_ know -- but the mere _existence_ of the alternative
requires that it be 'proven _not_ to be the case' before the claim that
something else 'must be true' has any validity. Linus is apparently
unable to disprove those possibilities, and is reduced to the next-to-
last-refuge of those with no case -- attacking the messenger.