![doctorbulldogs-birth-certificate-02[1]](http://inlinethumb01.webshots.com/6912/2226148690103381328S600x600Q85.jpg)
Posted on 06/21/2008 2:03:50 PM PDT by pissant
Friday we started a series on Obama’s birth certificate. The most recent post, Obama’s BIG Birth Certificate PROBLEM, featured two supposed “Certificates of Live Birth” from Honolulu, Hawaii: one presented as evidence of Obama’s 1961 birth; and the other certifying the birth of Patricia Decosta.
Here again is the document proffered by the Obama Campaign as evidence of his birth:
And here is Ms. Decosta’s certification:
We received confirmation from the Hawaii State Department of Health (HSDH) that:
1. Certified copies of birth certificates are NEVER sent electronically. Copies can be requested by qualified individuals in person, by mail, or on line; and the Vital Records (VR) office will MAIL the Certification of Live Birth within 4 to 6 weeks.
2. Certifications of Live Birth will ALWAYS include an embossed seal.
3. The Vital Records office will NEVER black out the certification number.
Thanks to our sharp readers, I’ve come up with a pretty interesting list of observations and questions so far. So, let’s review.
Observations/Questions:
1. Both documents reference the same form, indicated in the lower left corner: “OHSM 1.1 (Rev. 11/01) LASER,” likely meaning that this form was revised in Nov. 2001 for use with laser printers, AND therefore that both of these certifications theoretically would have been produced by the VR office in Nov. 2001 or later.
2. In the lower left section, Decosta’s document says “Date Accepted By State Registrar” and Obama’s says “Date Filed By Registrar.” If they were both produced on the same form, why is the language different?
3. Decosta’s “Certificate No.” in the upper right region is shown; Obama’s is blacked out with a clean-edged block. When was this done, by whom, and why would a birth certificate number be a secret? Again, this is never done by the HSDH.
4. Decosta’s shows an embossed seal in the lower center region; Obama’s has no embossed seal. Again, HSDH says certifications never leave the office without one.
5. Decosta’s shows a stamp with signature in the lower left region; Obama’s does not. Again, standard procedure?
6. Obama’s “father’s race” is shown as “African,” which many readers find odd given that it’s not descriptive for race. What was the term used on birth certificates in Hawaii in 1961 for an African American?
7. Both documents appear to show in the lower center region a faint date, such as the kind produced by a standard ink-pad stamp purchased in any office supply store. I cannot make out the dates. Maybe this is supposed to be the date that the certification was approved, or mailed? When does Obama claim that he “received” this document?”
8. The font on Decosta’s is much bolder than that on Obama’s.
9. Decosta’s reveals fold marks, which you’d expect from a mailed document; Obama’s shows no signs of being handled at all, as if it was never printed (and if that’s the case, how was the certificate number blacked out?).
In addition, Polarik finds all kinds of problems in the microscopic details, as have other readers with expertise in the fields of printing, graphics, etc.
Other questions based on reader comments and Google searches:
1. Obama obviously cannot claim that this document is his original birth certificate, so why doesn’t he comment on the whereabouts of the original?
2. Wikipedia says that “Obama was born on August 4, 1961, at the Kapiolani Medical Center in Honolulu, Hawaii.” Are there records of his birth at that hospital? I have seen references that there are not, but have not researched further.
3. The HSDH provides for “late registration” of a birth, and some have suggested that Obama may have actually been born in Kenya and registered for birth in Hawaii later. Has anyone researched this?
And finally, a possibly related question is whether Obama registered for the Selective Service when he turned 18, as he was required to do by law. Did the SS registration require a birth certificate?
It would be in her best interests to have "The Right" discover it.
I have, in my possession, three versions of my Birth Certificate, all from the same source, The Cook County Clerk.
The oldest is a photo copy of the “Original Certificate of Birth” which is filled in, by hand. It lists not only my mother's and fathers names, but their address and occupation at the time of my birth. It also has the signature of the doctor that delivered me.
It also indicates how many children my mother had given birth to and how many still births, if any, prior to my birth.
There is much more detailed information on it.
During the 1980s I needed a copy of my Birth Certificate and I was sent a Certification of Birth, printed by a computer on a pre-printed form.
The third version, obtained in 1997 also is printed by computer on a pre-printed form.
The last two versions have the bare information, similar to Obama’s. The pre-printed forms have different designs on the safety paper and the borders are slightly different.
All three versions have raised seals and are signed by the County Clerk. All are valid legal documents even though they are different.
What we really need to see is Obama’s Original Certificate of Birth, which may not exist anymore.
I was told that the original Certificate of Birth was lost in the flood that occurred in Chicago downtown around 1990.
Jeff, have you seen this one? Lot's of good questions here.
And blacked out the cert no as well, I reckon. It was done on a computer.
Obama's doesn't.
btt
Why are you still wasting time on this horse s**t?
Obama is a natural-born US citizen, beyond doubt, and there are lots of other things you could be doing if you want to see him defeated.
The raised seals on my two latest versions are hard to identify. They are a part of the design of the printed border. You have to look on the back surface to see the embossing.
Remember a year or so ago, there was a too-smart by half child molester who uploaded a photo onto some site, of himself with some kid - on which he had altered his own face with some sort of whirling pattern, causing his identity to be hidden?
Except, it wasn’t really; the photo alteration was reversed — and he was busted!! (that was rather excellent, in a modern version of the dumb criminals story line)
Is there a way to reverse the obscure of the blacked-out number?
You can’t walk and chew gum at the same time?
FWIW, the "faint date" appears to be printed on the back side of the paper; reversing the image, it reads "JUN 6 2007" pretty clearly.
Can you try making a laser copy to see if the shadows of the embossing show?
Wow,That looks like Obama’s.
Whoa! Good idea.
Could you run a whole graphics program backwards to reduce the whole 'certificate' back to bytes of information if it was made that way in the first place?
(Sorry, I don't know how to be more tech.)
Interesting.
Just before he started to run?
Doctor Bulldog Bigjowels for President!!!
Why are you still wasting time on this horse s**t?
..................Even if he is a citizen, wouldn’t it be nice to know if this is fake, and if it is, why? If he is a blatant liar everyone needs to know that also. So, no, I don’t think this is a waste of time.
Also, since there is a cert. # that’s supposed to be on that document also means it is a controled document and would have been traceable. Why would someone not want this certificate to be traced back to the issuing agency?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.