"WHERE'S THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE? The Case that Barack Obama is not Eligible to be President."

  • Thread starter Thread starter a_priori
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
SwizzleStick said:
Okay, I think I am getting all the names straight.

Obama’s certificate indicates he was born at the Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital in 1961. I guess Kapiolani Maternity Home was called that in 1961?

Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital and Kapiolani Maternity Home merged in 1978 to become Kapiolani Medical Center for Women & Children.
Click to expand...
So what’s the problem? Maternity and Gynecological = hospital for delivery and care of women. There is no mention of children in the name on the birth certificate, so the scenario you give (if accurate) is totally plausible and in no way impugns the validity of the birth certificate.
 
seekerz said:
And your point is?
Click to expand...
His point is that the document reads Kapi‘olani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital and not Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital, Kapi‘olani Maternity Home, or Kapi‘olani Medical Center for Women & Children.

Legitimate question… I hope someone provides a logical answer.

Edit: Just realized Swizzle answered before I posted. 😛
 
SwizzleStick said:
Okay, I think I am getting all the names straight.

Obama’s certificate indicates he was born at the Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital in 1961. I guess Kapiolani Maternity Home was called that in 1961?

Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital and Kapiolani Maternity Home merged in 1978 to become Kapiolani Medical Center for Women & Children.
Click to expand...
Okay, this clarifies the hospital name issue.

“The website for the hospital states merely that the Kapiolani Maternity Home was founded in 1890 and merged in 1978 with another hospital. However, according to the 1962 “American Directory of Obstetricians & Gynecologists” (pages 105, 132, and 202), the Kapiolani Maternity Home was renamed the Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital. That name change is also cited in a book published three years before the President’s birth: “Social Service in Hawaii” by Margaret Mary Louise Catton (Pacific Book Publishers, 1959), In it the hospital’s name change from Kapiolani Maternity Home to Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital is cited on page 103. Two other books, “Social Process in Hawaii: Volume 32″ (University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1989) and “The Health of Native Hawaiians” by Eldon L. Wegner (University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1989), both state that in the hospital’s “charter was amended to change the organization’s name to Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital.” This name change took place prior to 1950, according to the “Hawaii Medical Journal,” Volume 10 (published 1950), which calls the hospital the Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital on pages 53, 129, and 453.”
 
Sonic said:
His point is that the document reads Kapi‘olani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital and not Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital, Kapi‘olani Maternity Home, or Kapi‘olani Medical Center for Women & Children.

Legitimate question… I hope someone provides a logical answer.

Edit: Just realized Swizzle answered before I posted. 😛
Click to expand...
I thought it was a legitimate question. That is why I searched until I found an answer. I need to also verify the answer I found in my post #694 with other sources, but it looks reasonable to me.
 
SwizzleStick said:
Okay, this clarifies the hospital name issue.

“The website for the hospital states merely that the Kapiolani Maternity Home was founded in 1890 and merged in 1978 with another hospital. However, according to the 1962 “American Directory of Obstetricians & Gynecologists” (pages 105, 132, and 202), the Kapiolani Maternity Home was renamed the Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital. That name change is also cited in a book published three years before the President’s birth: “Social Service in Hawaii” by Margaret Mary Louise Catton (Pacific Book Publishers, 1959), In it the hospital’s name change from Kapiolani Maternity Home to Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital is cited on page 103. Two other books, “Social Process in Hawaii: Volume 32″ (University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1989) and “The Health of Native Hawaiians” by Eldon L. Wegner (University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1989), both state that in the hospital’s “charter was amended to change the organization’s name to Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital.” This name change took place prior to 1950, according to the “Hawaii Medical Journal,” Volume 10 (published 1950), which calls the hospital the Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital on pages 53, 129, and 453.”
Click to expand...
And there’s the logical answer. 👍 👍 👍

Good work!
 
SwizzleStick said:
Okay, this clarifies the hospital name issue.

“The website for the hospital states merely that the Kapiolani Maternity Home was founded in 1890 and merged in 1978 with another hospital. However, according to the 1962 “American Directory of Obstetricians & Gynecologists” (pages 105, 132, and 202), the Kapiolani Maternity Home was renamed the Kapiolani Maternity & Gynecological Hospital. That name change is also cited in a book published three years before the President’s birth: “Social Service in Hawaii” by Margaret Mary Louise Catton (Pacific Book Publishers, 1959), In it the hospital’s name change from Kapiolani Maternity Home to Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital is cited on page 103. Two other books, “Social Process in Hawaii: Volume 32″ (University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1989) and “The Health of Native Hawaiians” by Eldon L. Wegner (University of Hawaii at Manoa, 1989), both state that in the hospital’s “charter was amended to change the organization’s name to Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital.” This name change took place prior to 1950, according to the “Hawaii Medical Journal,” Volume 10 (published 1950), which calls the hospital the Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital on pages 53, 129, and 453.”
Click to expand...
Thank you. Next…
 
SwizzleStick said:
I’ve been doing some reading and some of the sources are not great, but one claim caught my attention. Again, the source is not great, since that person quoted Wikipedia. Anybody have any clarification? Here is the quote (and oddly the source is in the middle of it rather than at the end, but I’ll excerpt it in blue below as I found it).
Click to expand...
The clarification can be found on the hospital’s website. This hospital (Kapi‘olani Medical Center for Women & Children) was originally two separate hospitals; Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital and Kapi‘olani Maternity Home. Obama’s long form birth certificate clearly states that the hospital he was born at was “Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital.” There is no controversy here. It was time to put this non-issue to rest the day it began. Enough already!
 
SwizzleStick said:
I thought it was a legitimate question. That is why I searched until I found an answer. I need to also verify the answer I found in my post #694 with other sources, but it looks reasonable to me.
Click to expand...
Sure it’s a legitimate question…the standards for being president go up faster than the price of gas!
 
SwizzleStick said:
I thought it was a legitimate question. That is why I searched until I found an answer. I need to also verify the answer I found in my post #694 with other sources, but it looks reasonable to me.
Click to expand...
So did I. I guess your not allowed to ask these questions. You had to look up the clarification yourself. None of your critics even bothered to post a source for clarification.

Please, let’s all help each other and be charitable instead of just posting “I told you so” over and over again.
 
EmperorNapoleon said:
The clarification can be found on the hospital’s website. This hospital (Kapi‘olani Medical Center for Women & Children) was originally two separate hospitals; Kauikeolani Children’s Hospital and Kapi‘olani Maternity Home. Obama’s long form birth certificate clearly states that the hospital he was born at was “Kapiolani Maternity and Gynecological Hospital.” There is no controversy here. It was time to put this non-issue to rest the day it began. Enough already!
Click to expand...
Yes, I know. Keep reading.
 
Sonic said:
So did I. I guess your not allowed to ask these questions. You had to look up the clarification yourself. None of your critics even bothered to post a source for clarification.

Please, let’s all help each other and be charitable instead of just posting “I told you so” over and over again.
Click to expand...
Seems so. But, I found the answers, so moving on. 🙂
 
Scott_Lafrance said:
Different topic for a different thread. I wouldn’t raise a buttcheek for Lincoln, let alone a glass. I am not a white supremist and I have no intention of going anywhere. Yes, he is my President, and I am going to work as hard as I can to make sure that he is no longer my President in 2 years.

You answered the question “What is Barack Obama?” You didn’t give me any indication that even you know WHO he is.
Click to expand...
Barack Obama is your president. That’s who he is. If you do not believe he is a legitimate president, then of course you can leave the country. BTW since your family is from Canada, you may not know that “what is …” is used in white racist groups to refer to African Americans and other non-whites. Because “who is …” means you are referring to a person, i.e., a white man or woman. Of course you wouldn’t know that.

Yes us Americans should toast Lincoln and the Union 150 years after the start of the Civil War. Good men and women died so good men and women could be free. Americans of African heritage can be whatever any other American of any heritage can be. Including President of the United States.

Hope that’s not a problem for you.
 
dusty_david said:
Barack Obama is your president. That’s who he is. If you do not believe he is a legitimate president, then of course you can leave the country. BTW since your family is from Canada, you may not know that “what is …” is used in white racist groups to refer to African Americans and other non-whites. Because “who is …” means you are referring to a person, i.e., a white man or woman. Of course you wouldn’t know that.

Yes us Americans should toast Lincoln and the Union 150 years after the start of the Civil War. Good men and women died so good men and women could be free. Americans of African heritage can be whatever any other American of any heritage can be. Including President of the United States.

Hope that’s not a problem for you.
Click to expand...
This is not the time or place for such conversation.

I could care less about your racist cousins in the south. Go find another forum to talk about your family in.
 
bbarrick8383 said:
This is not the time or place for such conversation.

I could care less about your racist cousins in the south. Go find another forum to talk about your family in.
Click to expand...
I agree. He should leave the thread for going off topic in response to an off-topic question repeatedly asked by the same poster (namely, “Who is Barack Obama?”). Makes complete sense when you consider that this thread is about the first ever public release of a “long form” birth certificate by a president of this nation…
 
seekerz said:
I agree. He should leave the thread for going off topic in response to an off-topic question repeatedly asked by the same poster (namely, “Who is Barack Obama?”). Makes complete sense when you consider that this thread is about the first ever public release of a “long form” birth certificate by a president of this nation…
Click to expand...
Who is Barack Obama sounds like satire relating to Atlas Shrugged.

Hardly worthy of such an ignorant response.
 
bbarrick8383 said:
The racism needs to be left out of the conversation.
Click to expand...
Why? Nothing else has been barred to my knowledge. As far as I can see there are no boundaries to what can be dragged into this conversation. I for one believe a white president would never have felt the need to stoop to the indignity that occurred this morning. Is that opinion out of the non-existent limits of discussion on this issue?
 
Thanks for your replies. I cannot, according to forums rules, paste links to racist websites. If you go to your favorite search engine, type in “Obama” “birth certificate” “racist” you might find the white power types are crawling out and squawking about how President Obama still is not a legitimate president.

"This is not the time or place for such conversation.
I could care less about your racist cousins in the south. Go find another forum to talk about your family in. "

Yuppers, it is. This is forum to post in. Because a lot of racists are posting everywhere on line now that the birth certificate is fake. The racists are posting because they don’t believe a man of African American heritage can be a legitimate president of the US.

"Why? Nothing else has been barred to my knowledge. As far as I can see there are no boundaries to what can be dragged into this conversation. I for one believe a white president would never have felt the need to stoop to the indignity that occurred this morning. Is that opinion out of the non-existent limits of discussion on this issue? "

Thank you. The people squealing about President Obama’s birth certificate are not talking about President Obama’s policies.

Rather, they are upset about who President Obama IS Again, not what President Obama has done. But what he “is”

Pretty much the definition of bigotry.

The Catholic Church has never degraded people on the basis of their skin color.

Therefore faithful Catholics will discuss President Obama’s policies. Discussing whether Obama can be legitimately elected President because he’s of African American heritage is racist. I’m sure all good Catholics and other Christians agreed. Glad to know we’re all moving on. Oh, here is some teachings from the Catholic Church. Thank goodness we all agree …

Racial prejudice, which denies the equal dignity of all the members of the human family and blasphemes the Creator, can only be eradicated by going to its roots, where it is formed: in the human heart. It is from the heart that just or unjust behavior is born,(63) according to whether persons are open to God’s will-in the natural order and in the Living Word-or whether they close themselves up in those egoisms dictated by fear or the instinct of domination. It is the way we look at others that must be purified. Harboring racist thoughts and entertaining racist attitudes is a sin against the specific message of Christ for whom one’s “neighbor” is not only a person from my tribe, my milieu, my religion or my nation: it is every person that I meet along the way.
It is not through external means-legislation or scientific proofs-that racial prejudice can be uprooted. It is indeed not enough that laws prohibit or punish all types of racial discrimination: these laws can easily be gotten around if the community for which they are intended does not fully accept them. To overcome discrimination, a community must interiorize the values that inspire just laws and live out, in day-to-day life, the conviction of the equal dignity of all. ewtn.com/library/curia/pcjpraci.htm
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top