[null and void]

Wouldn't help me all that much either. Besides the fact that I'm surely no expert, we'd be comparing a known good paper document to a web posted .jpg in an attempt to prove the validity of the posting.

To paraphrase what opendna said, this is roughly the equivalent of trying to determine if a particular bank note is valid by looking at a .jpg of it posted on a web site.

With glaring differences between the Decosta BC and the BHO BC we could be sure that one is a fake. Since your known good document is much closer to the BHO BC than the Decosta BC, I must conclude that the Decosta document is fake. In the absence of examining the paper BHO document, I can't conclude that the BHO BC is valid, but the case for it is much stronger than I thought when I got up this morning

At this point, I'm content to accept the BHO BC as genuine, pending further information.

This doesn't mean I think he's qualified to be President! It just means I think he probably meets the minimum Constitutional requirements for the job.

[KJC1]

It does matter. Obama’s copy looks EXACTLY like mine.

I’m wondering how “Dolores” got a copy that looks so different, and why it was so easily swallowed and assumed to be the correct one when no one has bothered vetting “Dolores”. Maybe the printer was malfunctioning that day, that’s plausible. But what I DO know is that the “Dolores” copy claims to be the same version (Rev. 11/01) of Obama’s document (and mine) yet looks quite different.

My offer stands with Jim Robinson.

[Political Junkie Too]

The DeCosta certificate was not the only embossed certificate posted to these threads. Another Freeper posted another certificate in this thread. Her link to the image is here.

-PJ

[Fred Nerks]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/2033434/posts?page=46#46

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2035307/posts?page=53