It does not. The information may have been created by an affidavit submitted by Madelyn Dunham in 1961. (The Father's birth date is wrong, and so is his race. Obviously he wasn't there providing correct information. )
If Obama was adopted in 1964 by Lolo Soetoro, then his Hawaiian birth certificate would have been replaced. If legal Guardianship was acquired by the Dunhams in 1971, the Soetoro Adoption may have been annulled, or they may have gotten the judge to issue a new birth certificate saying the same thing the original did. Probably the machinery of government regards it as a simpler methodology to create a new document rather than jumping through the hoops of unsealing an older one and sealing the second one. Maybe his third birth certificate said "Dunham" but he kept using the name "Obama" and they let him. Maybe he got that legally changed back to "Obama" after he reached the age of maturity, or perhaps when he started running for President.
I don't know. All I do know is that in this cat and mouse game of lawyer poker, you can't reliably accept anything unless it cannot possibly be interpreted in any other manner.
Obama is an atypical case, and I should not be surprised to find all sorts of weirdity regarding his legal status.
‘Weirdity’
Best word ever!
Btw, go easy on the obot; Watergate was his high water mark.
Think about it.
Though the FAR more plausible scenario is that the information came from Kapiolani, since Kapiolani and Dr. Sinclair end up on the B.C. I've mentioned this several times now. But that "Hawaii would issue a B.C. on anyone's say-so" bit persists.
If Madelyn Dunham claimed it was a home birth, then no hospital information would have been in the record. If she came in and claimed BHO II was born at Kapiolani (but one surmises he wasn't), Hawaii would likely just await the information direct from the hospital to issue the B.C.
And if Hawaii D.O.H. is in on the "Great Conspiracy," why not just create a B.C. showing a home birth so as to avoid the possibility of Kapiolani later saying "What? we have no record he was born here!" (a non-record is not HIPAA protected).
The "Madelyn could have done it" speculation will forever remain Birther lore. But it doesn't withstand scrutiny.
All I do know is that in this cat and mouse game of lawyer poker, you can't reliably accept anything unless it cannot possibly be interpreted in any other manner.
If this had arisen in 1988, the controversy would have died upon Hawaii issuing the COLB. (Janice Okubo is right; it should have ended at that point). But for the Internet, with its slew of amateurs-turned-self-proclaimed-experts, the whole bit of "this photograph looks suspicious, I see odd-looking fonts, I'm not seeing a raised seal, blah, blah, blah" wouldn't have happened. It would have been reported that Hawaii had issued a B.C., and that would have been it.
(The Father's birth date is wrong, and so is his race. Obviously he wasn't there providing correct information. )
A lot of Dads were absent from the hospital at birth-time in the 60's, even among the ones still involved with the mother beyond the moments of conception. Nothing new under the sun here.
If Obama was adopted in 1964 by Lolo Soetoro, then his Hawaiian birth certificate would have been replaced.
Right. Meaning the original BHO-as-father certificate would have been pulled out of the books and locked away. But that just means the WH image reflects THE original (which is what Hawaii keeps saying).
If legal Guardianship was acquired by the Dunhams in 1971, the Soetoro Adoption may have been annulled, or they may have gotten the judge to issue a new birth certificate saying the same thing the original did.
Occam's Razor. You're multiplying entities beyond necessity. How about instead of a Lolo adoption (proof for which is lacking) and then a subsequent annulment of that adoption with a new 'original' certificate (which is complete speculation based on an earlier speculation), followed by even more speculation about what may have happened in later years, we posit that there was simply ONE birth certificate with BHO as father -- and that's why Hawaii states what's shown on the WH image matches what they have on file as the original record?
Much simpler.