The Republican Second Coming

February 25, 2010

The Republican Second Coming

By Cal Thomas

Tribune Media Services

I wrote on this area today, buy nobody can say it better than Cal, J.C.

I have alluded to this exact concept below.  Nobody can articulate the position as well as Cal, Random thoughts on the coming parade, J.C.

When Republicans regain a majority in the House and Senate — either this fall, as seems increasingly likely, or in the election following — they must learn from their previous mistakes when they last held power. In addition to focusing on overturning whatever health insurance “reform” proposal this Congress eventually passes (by a veto override, or a lawsuit challenging the measure’s constitutionality), a Republican congressional majority must help large numbers of the public unlearn the factual errors they have been taught to accept.

From “climate change,” to the notion that government is a guarantor through “entitlement” programs of a minimal outcome in life, to the forgotten idea given to us by the Founders that Liberty is the most precious gift there is, the country needs a history lesson based on truth, experience and provable facts.

A new breed of fiscal conservatives ready to restore honor to the office of the

President, restore our place in the world, and kick progressive ass at the polls

One of the things I admire about Glenn Beck’s program on Fox is his chalkboard. Agree with him, or not, Beck’s appeal is largely due to his teaching role. Everyone has had the experience of sitting in a classroom while a teacher writes things on the board, things considered important enough to learn. So much of what passes for facts today are like what another generation called “old wives’ tales.” They were assumed by many to be true, though few sought information that would have disproved them. Worse, few asked questions that would have unraveled the falsehoods.

Republicans need to do at least two other things. They should present at hearings and through TV and radio commercials individuals who will confront the political equivalent of old wives’ tales. Huge numbers of us believe government is essential to a better life. Instinctively and from stories handed down from grandparents who endured wars and economic downturns, we know that the strength of America is not in its government, but in its people. That’s why the Preamble to the Constitution begins, “We the people.” Power comes from the bottom up, not the top down as in totalitarian societies. The formerly poor should be encouraged to tell their stories about overcoming. America loves stories. More of ours should be told to inspire others. Complete Story

House ethics panel legalizes bribery

Ethics panel clears 7 on earmarks

By Paul Kane and Carol D. Leonnig

Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, February 27, 2010

This story reads like something from The Onion.  I didn’t believe it and couldn’t source it. I received a tip on the story from my friend Terry.  In changing the search criteria to Ethics panel, or Ethics bribes, a new source was found.  I was amazed at the arrogance of the members of the “Ethics Committee,” forever an oxymoron, who essentially legalized bribery and let every one go free.  I know somebody quite well, who was thrown in the D.C. lock up for calling out to Chuck Schumer during an evening when the Senate was in session, “hey, it’s not your money”  Well it wasn’t then, and it isn’t now. I guess they still don’t see it that way.   Oh yes, of course it was me, I’ve been following these recalcitrant miscreants for over twenty years.  Random thoughts while remembering that life looks better on the other side of the bars and wondering why many in congress are not behind them, J.C.

P.S. I received a standing ovation from the members of the senate on the right, the entire gallery above started shouting “it’s not your money, it’s not your money”.

When I returned home, I wrote my Congressman, Chris Cox and apologized but told him it was the first patriotic thing I felt I had ever accomplished. I wasn’t a patriot in the Army in the sixties.  He was well aware of the commotion I started, sent me the page from the Federal Register and circled, at such and such time, a person was removed from the gallery “for disturbing the working of congress” for 7 minutes. Do you have any idea how much money I saved us during that short period?  Also riding in a squad car, handcuffed to a big circular bolt in the back of the car with it’s sirens blaring for no apparent reason was a blast.  Try it the next time you visit Washington D.C.

The House ethics committee ruled Friday that seven lawmakers who steered hundreds of millions of dollars in largely no-bid contracts to clients of a lobbying firm had not violated any rules or laws by also collecting large campaign donations from those contractors.

• PMA Report (pdf)

In a 305-page report, the ethics committee declared that lawmakers are free to raise campaign money from the very companies they are benefiting so long as the deciding factors in granting those “earmarks” are “criteria independent” of the contributions. The report served as a blunt rejection of ethics watchdogs and a different group of congressional investigators, who have contended that in some instances the connection between donations and earmarks was so close that it had to be inappropriate.

“Simply because a member sponsors an earmark for an entity that also happens to be a campaign contributor does not, on these two facts alone, support a claim that a member’s actions are being influenced by campaign contributions,” the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct said in a unanimous statement.

Ethics watchdogs issued sharp denunciations, citing portions of the report that showed that the private companies thought their donations helped them win earmarks. The lawmakers — Reps. Norm Dicks (D-Wash.), Marcy Kaptur (D-Ohio), James P. Moran Jr. (D-Va.), Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), Peter J. Visclosky (D-Ind.) and C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.) — claimed vindication.

“They found no cause. They basically said we were completely exonerated,” Moran, whose former top aide once worked at the lobbying firm under investigation, said in an interview explaining his office’s earmark process. “We screened everything. It didn’t make a difference how well we knew someone.”

The late John P. Murtha (D-Pa.), who until his death earlier this month chaired the defense appropriations subcommittee, was also cleared. The other six lawmakers served on Murtha’s panel. In fiscal 2008 alone, the seven lawmakers sponsored $112 million worth of earmarks for clients of the PMA Group while accepting more than $350,000 in contributions from the firm’s lobbyists and its clients, according to Taxpayers for Common Sense, a watchdog group. Complete Story:

By Paul Kane and Carol D. Leonnig

Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, February 27, 2010

Don’t forget your donation to a favorite Green Advocacy Group!

Remnants of the communist party, filled with progressives, demonstrate their love for capitalism!

In Memory of Rachael Carson, Her Book the Silent Spring is

Largely Responsible for Banning DDT, Resulting in 15 billion

cases of Malaria Word Wide and 101 thousand deaths & counting

n April 1972, after seven months of testimony, EPA Administrative Law Judge Edmund Sweeney stated that “DDT is not a carcinogenic hazard to man. … The uses of DDT under the regulations involved here do not have a deleterious effect on freshwater fish, estuarine organisms, wild birds, or other wildlife. … The evidence in this proceeding supports the conclusion that there is a present need for the essential uses of DDT.”*

Two months later, EPA head [and Environmental Defense Fund member/fundraiser] William Ruckelshaus – who had never attended a single day’s session in the seven months of EPA hearings, and who admittedly had not even read the transcript of the hearings – overturned Judge Sweeney’s decision. Ruckelshaus declared that DDT was a “potential human carcinogen” and banned it for virtually all uses.**

Since Ruckelshaus arbitrarily and capriciously banned DDT, an estimated cases of malaria have caused immense suffering and poverty in the developing world.***

Of these largely avoidable cases, people died.****see counting above****

That exceeds one needless premature death every 12 seconds for more than three decades.

Bringing new meaning to ‘thou protests to much’

From additional references below:

*** Based on the median WHO estimate 300 million to 500 million (hmmm, not too good at estimating?) cases globally each year, clock start date set July 1, 1972
**** Based on an estimated 2.7 million malarial deaths per year – “The Intolerable Burden of Malaria: A New Look at the Numbers,” – supplement to The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. The supplement was published by the Multilateral Initiative on Malaria (MIM) with support from MIM partners, including NIH, The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, GlaxoSmithKline, the Rockefeller Foundation, The United Kingdom Medical Research Council, The United Nations Foundation, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), The Wellcome Trust, and the World Health Organization.

According to the World Health Organisation, 9 out of 10 of these, some victims of fluorescent-green excess, were likely pregnant women, or children under the age of five. Unborn through five-year-old body counts such as this are certainly difficult to reconcile with the repetitive green rallying cry of “For The Children.” In fact, infanticide on this scale appears without parallel in human history.*****

How is it that Gaia can be painted an Earthmother nurture-figure whilst demanding an annual sacrifice of roughly two million, four hundred and thirty thousand infants, pending mothers and their untallied unborn? This is not ecology. This is not conservation. This is genocide.

Let’s be unequivocal, spraying DDT inside dwellings presents no discernable human or environmental hazard. “Resistance” is not an issue since this mostly takes the form of avoidance and keeping mosquitoes away from human prey is the intended object anyway. DDT presents no patent issues to upset anti-globalists/anti-capitalists and, at pennies a pound, DDT is affordable and cost-effective health care for developing nations.

In short, anti-malarial use of DDT allows more healthy populations to work, generate wealth and climb out of the poverty/subsistence hole in which “caring greens” apparently wish to keep them trapped. DDT bans are not pro-environment – they’re anti-human. Worse, they attack impoverished, developing societies least able to protect themselves.

Since you have been on this page more people have been afflicted by malaria and died of this devastating morbidity, 90% of whom were pregnant women and young children.

---

* Sweeney EM. EPA Hearing Examiner’s recommendations and findings concerning DDT hearings. 25 April 1972 (40 CFR 164.32)
** Ackerly RL. DDT: a re-evaluation, part II. Chemical Times and Trends. October 1981:55
*** Based on the median WHO estimate 300 million to 500 million cases globally each year, clock start date set July 1, 1972
**** Based on an estimated 2.7 million malarial deaths per year – “The Intolerable Burden of Malaria: A New Look at the Numbers,” – supplement to The American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. The supplement was published by the Multilateral Initiative on Malaria (MIM) with support from MIM partners, including NIH, The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, GlaxoSmithKline, the Rockefeller Foundation, The United Kingdom Medical Research Council, The United Nations Foundation, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), The Wellcome Trust, and the World Health Organization.
***** Note that some of these cases would have occurred irrespective of DDT use. Note also that, while enormously influential, the US ban did not immediately terminate global DDT use and that developing world malaria mortality increased over time rather than instantly leaping to the estimated value of 2,700,000 deaths per year. However, certain in the knowledge that even one human sacrificed on the altar of green misanthropy is infinitely too many, I let stand the linear extrapolation of numbers from an instant start on the 1^st of the month following this murderous ban. — Ed.

---

“Malaria map paints stark picture” – “Study suggests the disease may afflict twice as many people as thought.” (Nature)

“Malaria: The long road to a healthy Africa” – “The Nature Outlook Malaria zeroes in on the major issues in the war on malaria, with a particular focus on Africa. It analyses the current state of affairs, the major scientific and other obstacles in treatment and control, and the promising areas where substantial progress might be made. Until February 2005 the supplement will be freely available online.” (Nature)

Suggested additional resources: DDT FAQ;
Facts Versus Fears (Third Edition) – A Review of the Greatest Unfounded Health Scares of Recent Times;
Eco-Imperialism – Green Power. Black Death
The Worst Thing Nixon Ever Did

Obama The Book!

The liberals are asking us to give Obama more time

We agree and think 25 to life would be appropriate.

America needs Obamacare like Nancy Pelosi needs a Halloween mask.

Q: Have you heard about McDonald’s new Obama Value Meal?
A: Order anything you like and the guy behind you has to pay for it.

Q: What does Barack Obama call lunch with a convicted felon?
A: A fund raiser.

Q: What’s the difference between Obama’s cabinet and a penitentiary?
A: One is filled with tax evaders, blackmailers and threats to society.
The other is for housing prisoners.

If Nancy Pelosi and Obama were on a boat in the middle of the ocean and It started to sink, who would be saved? …. America!

Q: What’s the difference between Obama and his dog, Bo?
A: Bo has papers.

---

It’s Time For Contract With America II

February 28, 2010

Jim Campbell

Perhaps, many of us have forgotten how Newt Gingrich’s Contract With America profoundly changed the political landscape of our country. Following Hillary’s health care debacle, Newt engineered an overwhelming majority in the House of Represents using common sense principles. With  a democratically controlled congress still in place, and  Bill Clinton as president, the contract brought fiscal sanity back to the American political scene.  Of course it took a politically astute, President Clinton, a complete weasel, who’s only objective was to win a second term, to sign off on the vast majority of the bills placed before him.  Remember, Clinton ran on the promise of not raising taxes. Once elected he put in place the largest tax hike at the time in American history.

One law from The Contract  stands out in my mind as possibly the most important, Ending Welfare As We Know It.  To the consternation among those on the hand ringing left this could not possibly happen.  It did, saved the tax payers money, and provided a path toward the dignity assured with financial independence rather than being a ward of the nanny state for millions of America’s poor.  For a complete list of the accomplishments of the contract click here.

I had the opportunity several weeks ago to attend Newt’s meeting where he outlined a new set of principles and guidelines are being  developed by his group American Solutions. You may vote on the ten most important to you. This will be a Contract FROM American. Currently a collection of 22 policy proposals developed and chosen by the American people, voting is now open to you and every other American, so that you can decide upon a final 10-point Contract to be unveiled on April 15, 2010 – the next round of nationwide Tea Parties. Vote Here:

DEMAND A BALANCED BUDGET

Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require a balanced budget with a two-thirds majority needed for any tax hike. (Proposed by: Erik Carter, San Diego, CA)

STOP THE TAX HIKES

Permanently repeal all tax hikes, including those to the income, capital gains, and death taxes, currently scheduled to begin in 2011.

COMMIT TO REAL GOVERNMENT TRANSPARENCY

Every bill, in its final form, will be made public seven days before any vote can be taken and all government expenditures authorized by any bill will be easily accessible on the Internet before the money is spent. (Proposed by: Steve Kulik, Gonzales, Texas; and Steve Hollis, San Francisco, CA)

PROTECT THE CONSTITUTION

Require each bill to identify the specific provision of the Constitution that gives Congress the power to do what the bill does. (Proposed by: Brooke Storrs, Midland, MI)

PASS MARKET-BASED HEALTHCARE & HEALTH INSURANCE REFORM

Make health care and insurance more affordable by enabling a competitive, open, and transparent free-market health care and health insurance system that isn’t restricted by state boundaries.

ENACT FUNDAMENTAL TAX REFORM

Adopt a fair and simple single-rate tax system by scrapping the internal revenue code and replacing it with one that is no longer than 4,543 words—the length of the original Constitution.

END RUNAWAY GOVERNMENT SPENDING

Impose a statutory cap limiting the annual growth in total federal spending to the sum of inflation rate plus the percentage of population growth (Proposed by: Mark Meckler, Sacramento, CA).

LET US SAVE

Allow young Americans the choice of opting out of Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes, creating both real financial security in retirement through the freedom to own your personal retirement savings, and reducing the long-term unfunded liabilities of the federal government

PROTECT INTERNET FREEDOM

No regulation or tax on the Internet. (Proposed by: Andrew Ian Dodge, Harpswell, ME)

GIVE PARENTS MORE CHOICES IN THE EDUCATION OF THEIR CHILDREN

Improve American education by reforming the broken federal role through eliminating ineffective and wasteful programs, giving parents more choices from pre-school to high school, and improving the affordability of higher education.

PASS AN “ALL OF THE ABOVE” ENERGY POLICY

Authorize the exploration of proven energy reserves to reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources from unstable countries and reduce regulatory barriers to all other forms of energy creation, lowering prices and creating competition.

PROTECT FREEDOM OF THE PRESS

Prohibit the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) from using funds to reinstate the Fairness Doctrine in any form, including requiring “localism” or “diversity” quotas. (Proposed by: Lori Roman, Annapolis, MD)

RESTORE FISCAL RESPONSIBILITY & CONSTITUTIONALLY LIMITED GOVT

Create a Blue Ribbon taskforce that engages in a complete audit of federal agencies and programs, assessing their Constitutionality, and identifying duplication, waste, ineffectiveness, and agencies and programs better left for the states. (Proposed by: Benjamin Tessler, Washington, DC; and Douglas Mainwaring, Potomac, MD)

PROTECT PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS

Block state and local governments that receive federal grants from exercising eminent domain over private property for the primary purpose of economic development or enhancement of tax revenues. (Proposed by: R.M. House, Woodstock, GA)

REJECT CAP & TRADE

Stop costly new regulations that would increase unemployment, raise consumer prices, and weaken the nation’s global competitiveness with virtually no impact on global temperatures. (Proposed by: Jan Heinricks, Spring, T

STOP THE PORK

Place a moratorium on all earmarks until the process is fully transparent, including requiring a 2/3 majority to pass any earmark.

AUDIT THE FED

Begin an audit of the Federal Reserve System. (Proposed by: Judy Pierorazio, Parkville, MD)

NO MORE BAILOUTS

The federal government should not bail out private companies and should immediately begin divesting itself of its stake in the private companies it owns from recent bailouts. (Proposed by: Mike Ware, Mountain View, CA)

STOP CAREER POLITICIANS & CURB LOBBYIST POWER

Begin the Constitutional amendment process to require Congressional term limits. (Proposed by: Marylou Petriccione, Raleigh, NC)

SUNSET REGULATIONS & ENACT FUNDAMENTAL REGULATORY REFORM

Sunset all regulations in order to eliminate those that are wasteful, unconstitutional, and ineffective, and place strict limits on the ability of agencies to create regulations. (Proposed by: Jim Armstrong, Morgantown, WV)

Become a member of American Solutions:

Pelosi to Dems: Back health bill even if it hurts

Sunday, February 28, 2010

Washington Times

By Charles Babington ASSOCIATED PRESS

Upside vs Downside:  Upside, should the bill be passed through reconciliation, it could very well mean the end of progressive/socialist politicians in our lifetime.  Since it doesn’t go into effect until 2013 it can be reversed (think Newt’s Contract With America and subsequent laws reversed) by a new fiscally conservative majority and president.  The bill as a whole is unconstitutional, specifically, forcing people to purchase a service they may not want. Many states have already used the Tenth Amendment to nullify this bill and others should they go through (think Cap and Trade and Gun Bans)

Downside, not much, a law can be put in place and soon be replaced just as we are going to replace the representatives that failed to represent the wishes of We the People.  Don’t worry, be happy:-) Random thoughts will taking some serious time to think about comedians in Washington elected to represent us, while they only entertain us, J.C.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi urged her colleagues to back a major overhaul of U.S. health care even if it threatens their political careers, a call to arms that underscores the issue’s massive role in this election year.

Lawmakers sometimes must enact policies that, even if unpopular at the moment, will help the public, Mrs. Pelosi, California Democrat, said in an interview broadcast Sunday the ABC News program “This Week.”

“We’re not here just to self-perpetuate our service in Congress,” she said. “We’re here to do the job for the American people.”

It took courage for Congress to pass Social Security and Medicare, which eventually became highly popular, she said, “and many of the same forces that were at work decades ago are at work again against this bill.”

It’s unclear whether Mrs. Pelosi’s remarks will embolden or chill dozens of moderate House Democrats who face withering criticisms of the health care proposal in visits with constituents and in national polls. Republican lawmakers unanimously oppose the health care proposals, and many GOP strategists believe voters will turn against Democrats in the November elections.

What’s Not To Like?

Mrs. Pelosi, from San Francisco, is more liberal than scores of her Democratic colleagues, but she generally walks a careful line between urging them to back left-of-center policies and giving them a green light to buck party leaders to improve their re-election hopes.

Her comments to ABC, in the interview released Sunday, seemed to acknowledge the widely held view that Democrats will lose House seats this fall — maybe a lot. They now control the chamber 255 to 178, with two vacancies. Mrs. Pelosi stopped well short of suggesting Democrats could lose their majority, but she called on members of her party to make a bold move on health care with no prospects of GOP help.

“Time is up,” she said. “We really have to go forth.”

Her comments somewhat echoed those of President Obama, who said at the end of Thursday’s bipartisan health care summit that Congress should act on the issue and let voters render their verdicts. “That’s what elections are for,” he said.

The White House said Mr. Obama, perhaps on Wednesday, will announce a “way forward” on health care. He, Mrs. Pelosi and Senate Democratic leaders have left little doubt that they hope to pass a Democratic-crafted bill under “budget reconciliation” rules that would bar Republican filibusters in the Senate. It’s unclear whether Mrs. Pelosi can muster the needed votes in the House. Complete Story

Wow, I’m on a first name basis with Nancy Pelosi

MOMENTUM: Democratic definition: Going down hill quickly, going backwards even faster.

Dear Jim –

There are now only a few hours remaining before tomorrow night’s critical FEC deadline and strategists at the DCCC tell me that we are just $22,828 short of our goal. Dear Nancy, apparently you have never bothered to take my name off you friends list. What’s it going to take?  Let me make it as clear as possible.  If Hillary Clinton were to become President, and could fit six secret service agents on her broom, I would not give you a nickel.  You are a progressive/socialist that does not understand our country. We do not want your agenda and we do not want you in Washington any longer. I’m contributing along with many Californians to John Dennis.  We are on to you and it’s time for you to go.

As the first deadline since President Obama’s historic bipartisan health insurance reform summit this week, the world is watching our resolve for winning this fight on behalf of America’s families.

Do you actually believe you persuaded anybody with this contrived dog and pony show to believe that your progressive agenda had anything to offer? Republicans completely decimated you and your minions with facts and figures.

Apparently your side figured you could get by with nice letters from their states making impassioned pleas.  Sadly for you, the Democrats came unprepared, were not knowledgeable about the bill and made fools out of themselves showing they were not willing to compromise. Agreement had been reached on seven areas by both parties. Those areas of agreement  could have been put in effect with executive orders quicker than Obama hid all his records.

Of particular interest was Paul Ryan taking the president to the wood shed and letting him know that his proposal was nothing but smoke and mirrors. The president claiming his bill would cut the deficit, Ryan using CBO numbers showing it would actually add to it by two trillion dollars over ten years.  If your version is so important and you care about the uninsured so deeply. Obama has been repeatedly said that your health care proposal was to be the corner-stone of the recovery. Why wait until 2014 to implement the plan? Oh here’s an answer – you can’t because you have to raise taxes in the dark behind closed doors from 2011 to give you a start on your “revenue neutral hose job”.

Unread Faxes and Letters from the Real World

In closing , since you are my new best friend Nancy, my all time favorite moment of the summit was during your summation in which you proclaimed government funding was not in the bill for abortion. So certain were you, it was said twice.  I guess reading must have been a post-graduate course you slept through. Read your bill Nancy.  Tax payer funded abortions are in it.   Use the nuclear option, the republicans are daring you.  Think you had trouble getting the votes from your democratic colleagues with the previous bills, watch them tell you to take a hike this time around.

If you have treated this letter as the rest that I’ve sent you, please remember to hold your breath when breathing compressed air underwater for the check to appear in the mail.  Say good night Nancy, your services will no longer be required November 2, 2010.

Please contribute $5, $10 or more before Midnight Sunday to show the world that Democrats have the momentum and determination to achieve health insurance reform.

The insurance industry left to its own devices has behaved shamefully, and we must act on behalf of the American people. We have lived on their playing field all this time. It’s time for the insurance companies to exist on the playing field of the American people.  Ah Nancy, you are a little bit disingenuous here.  Insurance companies operate on a 2.5% net profit structure as an industry.

With your grassroots Mine are astro turf support in the next 24 hours, that is precisely what will happen.

Please contribute $5, &10 or more before Midnight Sunday to show the world that Democrats have the momentum and determination to achieve health insurance reform.

At long last, history is within our reach. With just $22,828 remaining to meet our goal, please act in the next 24 hours to put us over the top.

Thank you,

Nancy Pelosi
Speaker of the House

Hawaii: Okubo responds to public outcry for investigation: releases records on Hawaii birth index

RELEASES REDACTED PRINT-OUTS OF HAWAII BIRTH INDEX, WHICH IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS PROVE ONLY ONE THING

The big question remains, will any court in the US agree to view this along with other requests or shall we just be resolved that our justice system is as completely corrupt as the current administration? Random thoughts while observing continued obstruction of justice, J.C.

by John Charlton

Post and Mail

February 26, 2010

tips to Socialismisnottheanswer

(Feb. 26, 2010) — In response to the public outcry over my last report regarding Okubo’s apparently false response to my request for index data from the Hawaii Birth Index, Miss Janice Okubo has directed staff at the Hawaii Department of Health to release a pdf file containing what appears to be scans of a computer printout containing redacted pages from the Hawaii Birth Index for those sections, which would contain the surnames Payne, Dunham, Soetoro and Obama.

My initial UIPA request of January 22, 2010, sought the index data for all children on the Hawaii Birth Index whose parents’ surnames were either Obama, Payne, Soetoro or Dunham.  The Certificate of Hawaii Birth was issued from 1911 to 1972 for those who wished to have a document proving that they were born in Hawaii.  It was a way to apply for a document for those who were born a year before the request was made and who did not have a standard birth certificate, presumably because they were born at home, not in a hospital.  I had made my UIPA request to determine if Obama was born before Hawaii became a state, but a name on this Index does not exclusively prove that.  If you read the link on “Certificate of Hawaii Birth” you can see that it was granted to those who provided what the Department of Health considered sufficient proof of a a birth in Hawaii.  Thus it provided a vehicle to claim a Hawaii birth without actually being born in Hawaii, if only one succeeded in convincing the Department that you were.

In response to the evasive denials of my original UIPA request and the outright claim I had written what I did not write, Miss Janice Okubo admitted to me last week that microfiches of the Hawaii Birth Index did exist and that they did not contain the said surnames.  Following my disclosure of that to several friends, I was given a copy of a Treasury Department Document from 1949 showing that at least one individual with the surname Dunham was born in Hawaii during the period in which the Hawaii Birth Index was used.

As a consequence, I wrote Miss Okubo and asked for copies of the microfiche to prove the veracity of her claim and offered to pay for them.  I also suggested to readers of The Post & Email that they contact Mrs. Lingle, the governor of the State of Hawaii, asking for an outside review of the matter.

Today’s release of a pdf file appears to be the Department of Health’s way of responding to this public outcry, even though the documents do not prove anything, since they are not prima facie evidence of anything, other than that

1) the Department does not understand how to respond to a UIPA request:  I asked for microfiche copies, not pdfs of computer printouts,

2) does not understand how to respond to the Press:  obstructed my UIPA request for three weeks, made false claim, and never responded to my email to Miss Okubo asking her to look into this matter,

3) and does not understand how to respond properly to a public call for investigation with solidly confirmatory documents:  if the Department thinks these images are corroborating evidence, I would hate to think what kind of evidence they accept to issue a Certificate of Hawaii Birth!  If this is the standard of evidence in 2010, what was it in 1961?

Indeed, an impartial observer to this present affair, considering this manner of response of the Department to my UIPA request, now has even more evidence to regard the claim of Obama being born in Hawaii (based on having a Hawaii Birth Certificate) as even more dubious, as that Department evidently does not understand or use any professional sense of the term “prima facie evidence.”  This can only mean that any Certificate of Live Birth that they might issue is worthless as evidence without a concomitant disclosure of all supporting documentation filed to obtain it — which has been the contention of this e-Newspaper from the beginning.

Please note that it is not an unimportant fact that the images released do show that the Birth Index data does contain the names of the parents.  In her correspondence with me, Okubo denied that I could ask for the Birth Index information for children based on the surnames of the parents.  So if these images are evidentiary in any manner, they are evidentiary of Okubo’s obstruction of my initial UIPA request, since I never asked for the parents’ names, only the names of the children.  She has the names of the parents right there; why did she refuse to do a search on that basis?

Finally, it should be emphasized that this UIPA request is not in itself very important, but the manner in which the Department of Health has responded to it is what is important.  If the actual microfiche shows no such surnames, then Miss Okubo will be vindicated, and I will apologize, as all I am interested in is the truth.  Miss Okubo, we, the press or the public cannot know what that is unless you cooperate with the UIPA in a timely, courteous, exact, and coherent manner.  When you fail to do this, you only undermine the reputation of your own department, even if on account of such failures, we might at times doubt or believe you when we ought to do the opposite.

Below are electronic images of the PDF file, in a format which makes their viewing accessible to the readers of this electronic paper.  I have only reduced them and converted them to jpg.

A Redacted Computer print-out, allegedly of the Hawaii Birth Index for surnames beginning with “Du”

——————-

A Redacted Computer print-out, allegedly of the Hawaii Birth Index for surnames beginning with “Ob”

——————-

A Redacted Computer print-out, allegedly of the Hawaii Birth Index for surnames beginning with “Pa”

——————-

A Redacted Computer print-out, allegedly of the Hawaii Birth Index for surnames beginning with “So”