New Obama Live Birth Cert Released, Questions Remain

The White House released a new “Certificate of Live Birth” today, but (surprise) it may not resolve for many the question of where Barack Hussein Obama was born.

What I find very interesting is that this new “Certificate of Live Birth” looks a lot like the one released during the campaign which placated no one because it looked so patently phony.

This is the one released during the campaign:

Obama Certificate of Live Birth released by the Obama campaign in 2008

This is the one released by the White House today:

Notice that it is on the same green-patterned paper as the bogus-looking certificate released three years ago.  This one does have signatures that seem to belong to his mother and the attending doctor, and the signatures are dated in August 1961.

But this new document looks quite different from this certificate of live birth for an unquestioned female in Hawaii in August of 1961.  My wife and I were born in separate states in the late 1960s and both our birth certificates have this same black background with white text. These black-background, white-text birth certificates often look as if they were written on a chalkboard and photographed.  Having served in the military alongside people from virtually every state in the union and having had opportunity to see many of my friends’ birth certificates, the kind with the black background are the only kind of birth certificate I had ever seen…until the green one the Obama campaign produced in 2008.

Birth certificate of female born in Hawaii in 1961. Included are hospital and attendant. This copyright-free public document was discussed in a newspaper article titled, "Hawaii officials confirm Obama’s original birth certificate still exists" in the Honolulu Advertiser on July 28, 2009. (Source: Wikimedia Commons)

A commenter at Free Republic has pointed out that if you download the pdf from the White House website, open it in Adobe Illustrator and release all clipping masks, you can see that the basic text of the certificate has been layered onto the green paper background.  Assuming this was not an incredibly sloppy Photoshop-type job, why it was necessary to put the text of the certificate on this green paper and provide a copy of that is anyone’s guess.  Also, the document released today says below the main portion “APR 25 2011 I certify this is a true copy or abstract of the record on file in the Hawaii State Department of Health” with the signature of Alvin T. Onaka.  Though this document provides more information than the one in 2008, we essentially only have the same kind of artificially reproduced facsimile (using the term loosely) we got in 2008.  Why haven’t they simply released the original birth certificate that everyone uses for various legal purposes in the United States?  Again, anyone’s guess.

Leftists who just want President Obama to be able to move forward with his goal of fundamentally transforming the United States into a Marxist enclave claim the only reason people are asking about his birth certificate is because they are racists, bigots, homophobes, torture kittens and are allergic to peanuts.  But though I personally don’t think there is much to be gained by continuing this debate more than two years into his presidency, there are valid reasons why people have doubts.

After all, we know that his mother was traveling overseas while pregnant with Barack near the date of his birth. We also know that his father is Kenyan.  We also know that Barack Obama spent many of his childhood years overseas. We also know that many of his attitudes and opinions are frankly more in harmony with foreign ideas than with American ideas.  When you consider all these things, it is quite natural for people to wonder if he really was born in the United States. Add three years of obfuscation and hiding his birth certificate, and the doubt factor rises even higher.

Back to the issue of the birth certificate though, I’m beginning to seriously doubt that this issue will ever be truly settled.  At this point, “birthers” are likely to be dubious of anything that might be released by Obama as faked, Photoshopped, etc.–and given the past history of obfuscation, their doubts have some validity.  On the other hand, Obama and his supporters may rightly doubt whether anything will satisfy the doubters, and so decide never to show us the real birth certificate.  In fact, they may just be getting a royal kick out of tweaking conservatives over the whole thing, while there are so many pressing issues facing our nation right now that cannot wait to be dealt with.

It would be nice, though, if we could have some reasonable assurance of (a) honest and (b) adult behavior that (c) puts the welfare of the country first from the Left on this and other issues, but a long track record of the opposite behavior makes that doubtful.

66 Responses to “New Obama Live Birth Cert Released, Questions Remain”

  1. I opened my college transcript PDF file received from my college in Illustrator and it seperated each word and line into separate layers.
    If a file is created in a program and “save as” a PDF, when the file is opened in Illustrator it will dissect it into layers. Try it yourself in Word, Excel… and save your document as a PDF file and you will see that Illustrator will separate it into layers.

  2. If the President would have truly wanted to put the issue to rest he would have had a camera crew film the Hawaiian authorities extricating the document from wherever it resides in the archives and documented the photocopying process and then showing the end result.
    What we got was some kind of document (obviously not a first generation copy of a 50 yr old document) being passed off as a ‘copy’ of the original.
    The White House is hopingthe issue will just go away. They think they can now quit taking questions about it because the ‘long form’ has been released. BTW, if this was indeed authentic, why all the resistance to releasing it in the first place.

  3. Bob

    I just saw this and wonder why my citizenship isn’t constitutionally relevant. If it isn’t and I am not a citizen then all my votes for President etc.,for my my entire voting life, are anti-constitutional !! That seems relevant constitutionally Gosh, you have hurt my feelings and marginalized me. 🙂

  4. No it wouldn’t have. The birthers would have called it a fake also.

  5. This is what I am saying. No matter what Obama says or produces you will not accept it. Someone suggested that Obama send a film crew to Hawaii and watch them actually produce the long form, but that wouldn’t be believed either. Birthers would claim it was altered or edited. The fact that Obama is different, speaks different,came from different backgrounds than they , and looks different , makes some just KNOW something isn’t legit.

  6. You are a blind jack***. I AM a graphic designer with over 14 years experience working with all kinds of graphics files and did the same thing in Adobe Illustrator. ALL of my friends in the local graphic design community, over 20 have chimed in back to me so far fully agree that this document is an absolute forgery.

    A blind jack*** who won’t look at the facts for himself makes you no better than an idiot who still denies that the holocaust happened.

  7. Not true. You would simply say the film was edited or the crew was in on this conpsiracy plan that Obama has manged to get away with for the last 50 years. . That is the problem. This is a kangaroo court. You keep demanding something be produced and no matter what it is, you just flippantly say it’s fake. Kangaroo court–Classic.

  8. I am so impressed with your rhetoric.

  9. The “Chalkboard” like appearance is due to the document has been photgraph and what you see is the negative which is placed on a role of microfilm or a sheet called microfiche. The only way to prove it is real or fake is to examine the original film in the possession of the Hawaii Department of Health. It would be extremely difficult to reproduce or fake the film negative image of the birth certificate. The film or fiche would show signs of deteoration of from being stored and pulled and handled over the past fifty years. The only other real question is the Instrument # 61-10641. These numbers are in numerical order and great pains are taken to insure this numbering system is in chronological order. Therefore I find it difficult to believe that the Nordyke’s certificates filed 3 days later has lower numbers 61-10637 and 61-10641. Even though the clerks were different there is a Ledger Book that has the numbers prefilled in and the clerk takes the next available number whom ever it is. The instrument numbers are assigned by the State Health Department not the hospital or what time you checked into the hospital I have researched in various courthouses in the United States for the past 20 years, filed documents myself and this is the first time I have seen the instrument numbers out of numerical order and chronological order. The Obama’s or the Nordyke’s birth certificate was incorrectly numbered. It is very hard to renumber those. The ledger should also be copied onto microfilm or microfiche. After speaking to a person I know that worked at a microfilming company, he informed me that generally after a period of time the original paper copies are destroyed. Microfilming was the old PDF style before the advent of computers. If every recorded document was stored that a state has on file the warehousing for this would be enormous and a great expense to the tax payer. The equipment used to microfilm or microfiche may still exist somewhere but it take quite an expedition of money and large group of people to pull it off.


  10. Oh, I’m quite familiar with the Dred Scott decision, the Lincoln-Douglas debates, et al. However, since I don’t re-read them on a regular basis, only the most commonly-reiterated themes stick out to easy memory.

    You seldom hear racist comments against black Americans framed in the language of “they can’t be a real American.” The most common racist theme throughout history involves their status as property, not as citizens. Post-Civil War racist themes usually involve a belief in inherent inferiority, e.g. blacks are not as evolved as whites, blacks are not as smart as whites, blacks are incapable of this or that, not “blacks cannot be a real American.

    Black Americans as a class have never had their citizenship legitimately challenged on the basis of their birthplace. When the Civil War ended–and slavery along with it–virtually all black Americans had been born here, making them as much a natural-born citizen as anyone of any skin color. Of course, this had to be spelled out to the Democrat sore losers in the South, but there was never any legitimate question of it.

    You will notice (if you’ve ever read the Constitution, that is) that the Constitution definitley makes an issue of citizenship and birthplace with regard to the presidency, and for good reason. Only an insane people would want to risk having a president with divided loyalties, with loyalties with another country that competed with his loyalty to America.

    Rational Americans quite naturally want a president who fully believes in and is committed to America values, not values and principles gleaned from foreign sources, especially when those values and principles are in conflict with American values and principles.

    Unfortunatley, the American people ended up doing that when the majority of voters elected Barack Obama. Whether he was born in the United States as required by the Constitution, we don’t know since he continues to play games. However, even if he was, it is clear that his loyalties are divided.

    It is clear from his books and his statements that he derived a great deal of his attitudes and opinions from his father–his anti-colonialist father. For more on that, read these two pieces:

    It is also clear from his Marxist ideas, leanings, opinions and most of all his Marxist policies since taking office that his values and principles are in direct contradiction with American values and principles, as well as the U.S. Constitution which specifically does not allow for the implementation of Marxist policies.

    In short, these are some of the key things which lead Americans to suspect and ultimately reject President Obama and his ideas. They are contrary to the American way, and threaten everything that makes America unique, successful and free.

  11. Curious…you say you “don’t hang around racists” and thus would “not know” what they say.

    Then you later state “You seldom hear racist comments against black Americans framed in the language of “they can’t be a real American.”

    What are we to make of the following characterization of Woodrow Wilson? :

    “Woodrow Wilson took advantage of his presidency to help correct many of what he considered to be the wrongs of the Reconstruction. Wilson believed white southerners to be the only real citizens and feared what might arise from a south “ruled by an ignorant and inferior race.”

    A racist, who believed that blacks were not “real” citizens.

    What you engage in, Mr.Ellis, is “Otherism”. For whatever reason, you do this in regard to Obama but not in regard to individuals such as Arnold Schwarzenegger or Henry Kissinger. ( that reason could well be political, as opposed to racial ).

    Are we to believe that Mr.Obama is seething with contempt for the nation that just made him President? It appears as if to you a “thoroughly American” individual is one who agrees with your own political philosophy.

    I have a difficult time taking you seriously as you so often stray off into emotion and melodrama. You perceive Obama as a threat. This is clear. But that is your perception, not “fact”, as you attempt to present it.

    Your goal is to “other” Obama, to characterize Obama and anyone not in line with your own political positions as “anti-American” or as an irrational American / not “thoroughly American”.

  12. Gee, I guess we’d consider Wilson to be a racist, don’t you think? However, as I said, I don’t hang around racists and I didn’t hang around Woodrow Wilson, either.

    What I engage in is analysis of current events, as well as the attitudes and policies of public officials. And unless something has happened that I’m unaware of, neither Henry Kissinger nor Arnold Schwarzenegger are president of the United States. Therefore, their attitudes and opinions aren’t nearly as important to the welfare of our republic as, say, the current president of the United States. And while I wouldn’t consider either Schwarzenegger or Kissinger to be completely in sync with American values, I think they both embrace more of the American way of life than we’ve seen from the Marxist Barack Obama.

    My “perception” of Barack Obama as a threat to the United States is based on fact, not an uninformed opinion. If you fail to understand why, or are unaware of the facts upon which I base this analysis, I suggest you do two things: (1) Brush up on American history and values, which you can do by reading the Declaration of Independence, the U.S. Constitution, the Federalist Papers, and any number of articles at this website using the search keywords “history”, “America”, or “founders” to name a few; (2) examine the attitudes, statements and policy initiatives of Barack Obama, going back to his youth and following through to his current presidency where you will see an affinity for Marxism and a disdain for the U.S. Constitution and the American way of life; you can research these by reading his books, as well as watching video of his statements and articles about his policies–many of which you can again find here on this website by using the appropriate search keywords.

    If you do so with an open mind, you will find beyond a shadow of a doubt that Barack Obama’s ideas and philosophies would fit in much better in a Marxist or socialist country than in the free constitutional republic of the United States.

  13. all of which leads up to the question:

    “Who the F is ‘Bob Ellis’ and why should anyone give weight to his personal opinion??”

  14. I would suggest treating his opinion the same way you’d treat anyone’s opinion: weigh what he says against what can be verified, evaluate the logic of his statements objectively, then determine the appropriate weight to give to his personal opinion in an unbiased fashion.

    That’s how intelligent people evaluate the statements of others, anyway.