Words, Just Words

(Click image itself to enlarge, and then come back to this post)
Dilbert.com
(Original image at: http://dilbert.com/strips/comic/2006-07-16/)

And then remember this:

But I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I’m going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the American people. Thank you.

During the grand jury testimony Clinton was guarded, and argued:
It depends on what the meaning of the word is is“.

Denial and subsequent admission:

News of the scandal first broke on January 17, 1998, on the Drudge Report website, which reported that Newsweek editors were sitting on a story by investigative reporter Michael Isikoff exposing the affair. The story broke in the mainstream press on January 21 in The Washington Post.  The story swirled for several days and, despite swift denials from Clinton, the clamor for answers from the White House grew louder. On January 26, President Clinton, standing with his wife, spoke at a White House press conference, and issued a forceful denial, which contained what would later become one of the best-known sound bites of his presidency:

Now, I have to go back to work on my State of the Union speech. And I worked on it until pretty late last night. But I want to say one thing to the American people. I want you to listen to me. I’m going to say this again: I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky. I never told anybody to lie, not a single time; never. These allegations are false. And I need to go back to work for the American people. Thank you.

Pundits debated whether or not Clinton would address the allegations in his State of the Union Address. Ultimately, he chose not to mention them. Hillary Clinton publicly stood by her husband throughout the scandal. On January 27, in an appearance on NBC’s Today she famously said, “The great story here for anybody willing to find it, write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president.”

For the next several months and through the summer, the media debated whether or not an affair had occurred and whether or not Clinton had lied or obstructed justice, but nothing could be definitively established beyond the taped recordings because Lewinsky was unwilling to discuss the affair or testify about it. On July 28, 1998, a substantial delay after the public break of the scandal, Lewinsky received transactional immunity in exchange for grand jury testimony concerning her relationship with Clinton. She also turned over a semen-stained blue dress (which Linda Tripp had encouraged her to save without dry cleaning) to the Starr investigators, thereby providing a smoking gun based on DNA evidence that could prove the relationship despite Clinton’s official denials.

Clinton admitted in taped grand jury testimony on August 17, 1998, that he had had an “improper physical relationship” with Lewinsky. That evening he gave a nationally televised statement admitting his relationship with Lewinsky which was “not appropriate”.

There are some present-day similarities…

1) A press that is willing to “cover” for a Democratic President (as opposed to a press that was willing to promote “fake, but accurate” documents in an attempt to harm a Republican President and influence the 2004 Presidential election).

2) Ridicule of anyone who questions the President. Before it was “this vast right-wing conspiracy” that wanted the truth about Bill Clinton. Now it’s “birthers” who want the truth about Barack Hussein Obama. Except this time, no one can claim “birthers” are a “right-wing conspiracy”… there are many, many Democrats who are calling for Obama to release a certified copy of his original birth certificate.

3) Statements from government officials that must be carefully parsed to get to the truth. Just like Wally in the Dilbert strip above, they may not be lying, but they are also not telling “the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth”.

Here is the actual text of the two official statements from Dr. Fukino:

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
News Release
LINDA LINGLE
GOVERNOR
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CHIYOME LEINAALA FUKINO M.D.
DIRECTOR
Phone: (808) 586-4410
Fax: (808) 586-4444
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release: October 31, 2008 08-93
STATEMENT BY DR. CHIYOME FUKINO
“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record.
“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.
“No state official, including Governor Linda Lingle, has ever instructed that this vital record be handled in a manner different from any other vital record in the possession of the State of Hawai‘i.”
###
For more information, contact:
Janice Okubo
Communications Office
Phone: (808) 586-4442

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
News Release
LINDA LINGLE
GOVERNOR
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
CHIYOME LEINAALA FUKINO M.D.
DIRECTOR
Phone: (808) 586-4410
Fax: (808) 586-4444
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
For Immediate Release: July 27, 2009 09-063
STATEMENT BY HEALTH DIRECTOR CHIYOME FUKINO, M.D.
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital
records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama
was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement
or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
###

I already parsed the October 31, 2008 statement here.

What “We the People” want to see are the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying:

1) Barack Hussein Obama was born at the Kapi’olani Medical Center in Hawai‘i and

2) is a natural-born American citizen.

Neither Obama nor any Hawaiian official has provided any documentary proof that Obama was born at Kapi’olani Medical Center in Hawai‘i. If Obama was truly born there, then there will be an original birth certificate with the doctor’s signature.

Note that while the State of Hawaii allowed Certifications of Live Birth to be issued upon the sworn statement of a relative (for example one of Barack’s two Dunham grandparents), such a statement would only have been necessary if Obama had been born outside of a Hawaiian hospital.

If the “original vital record” of Obama’s birth is only the sworn statement of a relative, and not a hospital birth certificate, then the “Obama nativity story” is exposed as a fraud.

And even if a hospital birth certificate is eventually produced, showing Obama was born at Kapi’olani Medical Center to Stanley Ann Dunham Obama and Barack Hussein Obama, Sr., there is another question.

If the “Obama nativity story” is proven true with original documents, it will verify that he was born to a father who was never a U.S. Citizen. Obama’s campaign already admitted that his birth status was “governed by” British law, and he was born a British subject.

What makes the Director of the Hawai‛i State Department of Health qualified to say that such a son, born to a foreign father who passed foreign citizenship on to his son at birth, is “a natural-born American citizen”?

The United States Supreme Court, in rulings after the passage of the 14th Amendment, made it clear that there are doubts about such a person being a “natural-born citizen” of the United States.

What makes Dr. Fukino qualified to overrule the doubts of the U.S. Supreme Court and declare expressly that “Barack Hussein Obama … is a natural-born American citizen”?

Even if Dr. Fukino was a Constitutional Lawyer (which she’s not), she does not have the Constitutional authority to overrule the doubts of the United States Supreme Court.

Advertisements
This entry was posted in Presidential Eligibility. Bookmark the permalink.

3 Responses to Words, Just Words

  1. Obama’s campaign already admitted that his birth status was “governed by” British law, and he was born a British subject.

    If this is true, then there is no need to see the birth certificate. If Obama was born a British subject, then he is, by definition, NOT a natural-born citizen.

    RWR
    http://www.rightwingrocker.com

  2. Math says:

    It is true. And Congress, the Supreme Court and everyone that matters knew about it. And he still got nominated, elected and sworn in. Go figure. Maybe a natural born citizen is not what you think it is? The Constitution is extremely vague on the subject and never defines the phrase. Maybe they just meant someone born in the US? Everyone seems to think so.

  3. As to Dr. Fukino’s first News Release….

    So, now we have our answer. We know whether or not “Date Filed by Registrar” matters. It matters. A lot. Because Dr. Fukino said that the “original birth certificate” was in the “Registrar’s” custody. It was still in the procedural stage. And because someone other than the Hawaii State Registrar was custodian of Obama’s original birth certificate on October 31, 2008, we know that Obama did not have a valid original birth certificate and he possibly had an application for a ‘Late Birth Certificate’ on file that was pending acceptance by the State Registrar….

    And if it was not in the State Registrar’s custody and under his authority, then his “original birth certificate” was not evidence to “date and place of birth and parentage.”

    As to Dr. Fukino’s second News Release….

    Which came first, the chicken or the egg?

    There were just under 5 hours between the chicken (H.Res.593)
    and the egg (Dr. Fukino’s second News Release).

    On July 27, 2009, the vote on House Resolution 593 came at 6:55pm EDT (12:55pm HST).

    And on that same day, Dr. Fukino’s second News Release was first made public in a PDF attachment in an email sent to MissTickly at 11:45pm EDT (5:45pm HST).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s