Buster

Will Release Of Obama's Purported Birth Certificate Give Rise To New "Certer" Movement?

This morning’s White House release of President Barack Obama’s long form birth certificate will, of course, do little to derail the “birther” movement, which will now analyze the document with the kind of verve previously directed toward those Texas Air National Guard memos faxed to CBS from that Kinko’s in Abilene.

So here’s a few nutty points about the birth certificate sure to be seized upon by the nonbelievers:

• If the original document was in a bound volume (as reflected by the curvature of the left hand side of the certificate), how can the green patterned background of the document's safety paper be so seamless?

• Why, if Obama was born on August 4, 1961, was the “Date Accepted by Local Reg.” four days later on August 8, 1961?

• What is the significance of the smudges in the box containing the name of the reported attendant?

• David A. Sinclair, the M.D. who purportedly signed the document, died nearly eight years ago at age 81. So he is conveniently unavailable to answer questions about Obama’s reported birth.

• In the “This Birth” box there are two mysterious Xs above “Twin” and “Triplet.” Is there a sibling or two unaccounted for?

• What is the significance of the mysterious numbers, seen vertically, on the document’s right side?

• Finally, the “Signature of Local Registrar” in box 21 may be a desperate attempt at establishing the document’s Hawaiian authenticity. Note to forgers: It is spelled “Ukulele.”

Comments (1500)

All of this "controversy" is laughable. A couple of comments regarding the "questions" surrounding the authenticity of this document. P.M. - as was suggested by another poster, the form may have been pre-printed with "M." to speed completion of the form by manual typewriter much in the same way checks are/were often printed "19___" or "20__". Non-issue. Sotero vs Obama - the guy's father was named Obama and his mother didn't marry Sotero until later so why would his last name be listed as Sotero on the birth certificate? Signatures - they aren't even close! Compare the capital A and D, the lowercase a - non-issue. Certificate number - may be a simple issue of typing the forms based on taking the information from the top of the stack of an in-basket where the most recent might be on top of the stack which would/could lead to numbering not corresponding with birth times. Non-issue. Dates - my wife and I took 3 days to name our daughter (who was 4 weeks early) so there are several dates on her certificate. The registrar may not have been working the day he was born, may have been on vacation, or may only sign the things once a week. Again, not an issue. Security paper - look at the date on the bottom of the document - April 25, 2011. The document reproduced is a photocopy of the original on security paper that was certified on April 25, 2011. They don't hand out the original folks, they make copies and certifiy that it's a true and accurate copy of the original (look at what the registrar testifies to above his signature). When I requested copies of my childrens' birth certificates from another state, that's exactly what I got - photocopies of originals on new security paper. Nevermind that I have another copy for each child on different security paper that was produced earlier and signed by a different registrar. Another non-issue. This whole consipiracy theory is much ado about nothing.
And for anyone who things Obozo is a great guy to release this NOW??? Col Lakin is ROTTING in a military JAIL CELL when Obozo could have spared him that sentence A YEAR AGO!!!! This is ALL too fishy....
I'm a little confused on why African would be considered a race. . .then or now. Using that logic, my race should actually be Swedish?
Yes,,,,, you're swedish,,,,, and anyone from the US is United Statesean,,,,,,,,, AH HAHAHA!!! Incredible.....
Rable Rable Rable...
People this national insanity must stop! Hasn't anybody affiliated with politics read the Constitution of the United States of America? What is wrong with the people of this country? Where a person is born does not qualify that person to be a presidential candidate! Read the U.S. Constitution! People! You are being played for fools! And if you can't read the U.S. Constitution and move beyond this stupid birth certificate fraud....you deserve to be treated like a fool! America's Founding Fathers made it clear in the Constitution....there are two classes of citizenship. The citizen for those who want to be a member of the House or Senate. And the NATURAL BORN CITIZEN reserved specifically for those who want to be president! If you are just a "citizen" you cannot become a president! Only NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S can be a president! This thing about the stupid and irrelevant birth certificate is a hoax! It's a fraud! it's a deliberate diversion, a decoy! A NATIONAL DISCOURSE ABOUT THE U.S. CONSTITUTION AND IT'S NATURAL BORN CITIZEN CLAUSE IS TABOO! And people who have not read the U.S. Constitution and instead are relying on the lying words of political pundits and corrupt politicians are being betrayed at a Constitutional level because they are being lied too by the very same people who swear oath to serve and protect the U.S. Constitution. READ THE U.S. CONSTITUTION PLEASE! FOCUS ON ARTICLES 1 AND 2! YOU WILL SEE YOU ARE BEING LIED TOO!
I think you need a new aluminum foil deflector beanie...the signals seem to be getting through again...
Someone call a waaabulance.
And for anyone who things Obozo is a great guy to release this NOW??? Col Lakin is ROTTING in a military JAIL CELL when Obozo could have spared him that sentence A YEAR AGO!!!! This is ALL too fishy....
"Obama does not meet the natural born citizen clause of the Constitution i.e. born in the United States, of parents who were both U.S. citizens at the time of the candidate’s birth." Why are so many people in the media so stupid?