This is a cool Christmas gift: Abercrombie “has only been governor of Hawaii for less than three weeks, but he’s said in interviews this week that he’s already initiated a process to make policy changes that would allow Hawaii to release additional evidence that Obama was born in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961.”
I have read a bunch on this topic, and I can tell you exactly how this is going to play out.
We liberals will do two things. The exact two things I declare in other posts. Combined, they are our modus operandus.
First: Name-Calling; Second: Change-The-Topic.
Abercrombie may actually follow through with this effort. Not just say he will. This will be highly entertaining. We liberals believe we are so morally superior that we really do not need very much confirmation of some pet theory of ours in order to be convinced we are correct. Rank and file, this is us. It does not matter whether the topic is as obscure as the intricacies of state law regarding the types of birth documentation that were in action in Hawaii in 1961, or the advanced methods for discerning ambient teperature a thousand years ago from tree rings. We simply need a whisper of authentic “proof” and we are off and running, foaming at the mouth as usual and calling everyone “racist” as usual.
If Abercrombie follows through AT ALL, we wil begin to see the “change the topic:” it will be, I predict, not so confidently, that it may be: legalese to induce obfuscation. If the argument can get derailed to such things as who is able to ask what and when, the whole roiling mob will wander in that direction.
It will take an astute, wily long-term democrat who has woken up and realized we are taken over by communists to realize: hey, we have jumped FROM show the “birth certificate,” to who has [insert legalese here] probable cause, or compelling interest, or parens patriae, or whatever.
Our short attention spans will move to the next sordid topic, as China tightens the noose a bit tighter right in front of us, with our approval and support. And Obama will have yet again side-stepped the birth certificate issue, and both sides will be calling each other the same names as always.
Because, folks, here is the deal: you have been told that the birth certificate has been shown, and it was on Kos and everywhere else, but the truth is this: take notes – this will get complicated: In 1961 Hawaii, there were two kinds of “certificates” indicating that a baby was born in Hawaii. One would be produced in some circumstances, and the other produced in other circumstances. The one type is what we call a “birth certificate,” and the other kind is what we have for Obama. Two differnt things. Two different documents serving two different circumstances. That’s it.
In many of our states in the union, people can get a “driver’s license,” which also serves generally as a valid state-issued idenitifucation card, or a person can also get an “identification card.” The “identification card” can cetainly serve as an ID, as can the driver’s license.
But can you use the “identification card” as your license to drive? No. for that, you need the official state legal document that is both an ID and the document to demonstrate the privilege of being able to drive. Two documents. Similar, but not the same.
Now, if you are an irate, Kool-aid drinking liberal, maybe it is time you slow down for a bit- privately – I will tell no one – my blog is primitive because I really don’t know how to run this internet, with all of its tubes and everything – I cannot determine who you are from your visit to my blog, and I certainly have no way of figuring out what local liberal authorities should be informed that you are now “racist” because you are looking into this two-different-document issue. I won’t tell. Go look for yourself: follow this concept and see if it is true: In Hawaii in 1961, there were two certificates for a newborn; one is the “birth certificate” proper, and the other is the ONLY thing that has been shown, been verified, etc., regarding Obama. Go look it up. This info is everywhere – but you may have to look OUTSIDE of your ECHO CHAMBER. Yes, that echo chamber – the one you accuse all conservatives as living in.
I have never read or heard a conservative declare they will not read some news site because it has libeal info – but it is normal for me to hear liberals swearing they won’t watch – gasp – foxnews, or look at other conservative media.
How do you know what your opponent is up to? How do you know how to counter opposing arguments with undecideds? Hello Hello Hello Echo echo echo
OK – now you are on point: two types of documents for documenting a newborn. Obama has shown the wrong one. And has never shown the correct one.
Now: consider this: (with global warming erasing all snowy winters, this will not be easy): a baby is born in a remote, rural place during a snowstorm. A knowledgable but amateur midwife delivers. Everything goes just fine, as humanity has done for millenieux. But roads are blocked, offices are closed down, etc. The parents cannot manage to make a legal report of the birth for four entire days. Does this child get a birth certificate that declares which hospital, or which physician? No. There was no physician. There was no hospital. There was a snowstorm. [If you do not know what “snow” is, you can probably find archival video on Youtube. It was really cool, before AGW stole it all.]
So, what do you give the child? A similar certification. That is the type of document that has been shown for Obama as evidence of his eligibility to be Prez. That is the green piece of paper paraded around Daily Kos.
Now, go look at the top of the green official-looking form there at Daily Kos. It says “Certification of Live Birth.”
Now go dig deeper and you will learn that it is not a “Certificate of Live Birth.”
Look at this, for starters: Obama’s birth date is given as Aug 4, 1961, in Hawaii; these twins were born in Hawaii also, on Aug 5, 1961: one day later.
What does their form say? Does it say, “Certificate of Live Birth,” or “Certification of Live Birth”? Did Hawaiians just free-form it, and document whatever they wanted on any old form? And what certificate would be given for a baby born on a less-developed Hawaiian island, for example, to some low-income couple, for whom it took a couple days to get the birth filed? If they bothered at all to be speedy about it? Is there a rule about the type of birth certification to be given? Go find out yourself, if you care, and if you dare.
What will Neil Abercrombie find? he has just set himself out on this very same mission.