[spectre]

"It’s difficult to prove a negative. It would be much easier to prove where Obama WAS born, and I believe there is overwhelming evidence to establish this."

It's not really difficult to prove a negative regarding where Obama was born.

A LIST of people born in Hawaii at and around the same time Obama should be available. Public records.

IF Obama is NOT on the List of Hawaiian Births, then he wasn't born there. See?

[fireman15]

By a strange coincidence that list I believe you are referring to is no longer available according to the Hawaiian Department of Health. Butterdezillion has dealt with this issue in great detail.

[fwdude]

I said it was more difficult to prove where he wasn't born, not impossible. Kind of like proving that the suspected burglar was not at his own home at the time of the crime. Researching and rounding up witnesses in Hawaii to attest to the facts surrounding the incident of Obama's alleged birth would be a gargantuan task, and would be vulnerable to all types of dis-allowance on cross examination.

It's much easier and more efficient to put a burglar at a crime scene through evidence: fingerprints, DNA, photos, property left, etc. It would be much easier to produce ONE verifiable, unimpeachable document saying that Ø WAS born in a specific location.