Where's the birth certificate?

Obama Conspiracy Theories ^ | Feb. 27, 2009 | Dr. Conspiracy

[curiosity]

I’m not talking about Barack Obama’s “long form” from Hawaii. We all know that Hawaiian law prevents us mere mortals from putting our paws on that document. No, I’m asking where is his Kenyan birth certificate.

Unlike Hawaii, Kenyan law says that birth information is open to anyone!

Cap 149 Births and Deaths Registration:

26.(1) Any register, return or index in the custody of the Principal Registrar subject to the rules, shall be open to inspection on payment of the prescribed fee.(2) The Principal Registrar shall, on payment of the prescribed fee, furnish a certified copy of any entry in any register or in any return in his custody.

(3) The Principal Registrar shall, on payment of the prescribed fee, furnish a certificate in the prescribed form of the birth of any person compiled in the prescribed manner from the records and registers in his custody.

(4) A certified copy of any entry in any register or return sealed or stamped with the seal of the Principal Registrar shall be received as evidence of the dates and facts therein contained without any or other proof of such entry.

Oh, I forgot… Odinga, blah, blah, blah, top secret, blah, blah, blah. Nevermind.

[Terabitten]

Admittedly, no hard evidence, but it does fit the facts we know. It also makes more sense than Kenya. No way a *VERY* pregnant Ann Dunham flew to Kenya and then returned with a newborn, given how pregnant women and newborns were treated in 1961.

We know Ann Dunham was seen in Seattle just a couple weeks after Obama’s supposed birth, and was enrolled in UW at the same time. I don’t think she flew from Hawaii to Seattle. Nobody can account for Ann’s whereabouts in the six months prior to his birth.

I suspect that she decided to give birth in Vancouver for whatever reason, and when Grandma Dunham found out, she did what she had to do to get her grandson a US birth certificate.

There’s also some sites on the web pointing to a “Barak Hussein Mohamed Obama” being born in Vancouver on August 6, 1961.

It’s not hard evidence, I know, but it’s the only thing that explains both his reluctance to provide his birth certificate and the other odd circumstances around his birth (wonky birth announcements, mom traveling across the Pacific within days of his birth, etc).

[Tim Hans]

A poor attempt at comparing birthers to truther nut-jobs. DU not exciting enough for you?

[edge919]

The 1961 newspaper announcements undermine this theory. My guess is that neither the father nor the mother nor even a doctor signed the certificate.

[Uncle Chip]

I'm an economist who specializes in the financial markets.

Surely thou jest ---

[DJ MacWoW]

His bio screams “I’m a lefty!”.

[The Sons of Liberty]

I don't put much faith in the newspaper story - “facts” can be created and in this case I'd like more proof that it actually ran in ‘61, and wasn't manufactured in recent years to corroborate his “story”.

At any rate, I'll still refer to him as a b******.

[DJ MacWoW]

Bam’s wife said Ann Dunham, was “very young and very single” in July 2008 at the University of Missouri.

[edge919]

One of the newspapers printed the clip, presumably from it’s own newspaper morgue. I don’t see much evidence to really call these clippings into doubt, other than the fact that neither show the child’s name or place of birth. In essence, they do nothing more than confirm a date of birth and father’s name.

[Uncle Chip]

His bio screams “I’m a lefty!”.

After reading that home page, would you trust this "economist" to explain a financial report for you???

[DJ MacWoW]

I wouldn’t trust him to read the funnies.

[Uncle Chip]

LOL

[LucyT]

Proof that he was born in Kenya does not resolve the legal issues. He has admitted he was born in Kenya. There is a vast amount of collateral evidence where he was born-there isn't any doubt or room for doubt. There is no evidence of any nature that he was born in Hawaii.

The problem is that a correct legal proceeding is required to address the issue--so far, the resources have not been accumulated to initiate one.

. . . . Article, and comments; see David's #6, too. (No point in wasting time reading SP's tiresome, repetitious, erroneous comments.)

[Thanks, David.]

[LucyT]

Meant to ping you to #52, too. Check it out.

[curiosity]

Admittedly, no hard evidence, but it does fit the facts we know.

I don't see how it fits any facts at all.

It also makes more sense than Kenya. No way a *VERY* pregnant Ann Dunham flew to Kenya and then returned with a newborn, given how pregnant women and newborns were treated in 1961.

Well, by that standard, anything makes sense. You'd have to be either stupid or insane to believe that a seven-to-eight months pregnant American college coed would travel half way around the world, in 1961, just to give birth in third world conditions.

We know Ann Dunham was seen in Seattle just a couple weeks after Obama’s supposed birth, and was enrolled in UW at the same time.

She enrolled at the UW extension during the Fall quarter, which doesn't start until the end of September. So maybe she showed up at the end of August to get settled in before classes. Why does this make you suspect birth in Vancouver?

I don’t think she flew from Hawaii to Seattle.

Why not? She had lots of friends in Seattle. That's where she went to high school. If she wanted to get away from her parents and her hubby, Seattle seems like the most plausible place for her to go.

Nobody can account for Ann’s whereabouts in the six months prior to his birth.

So? She was pregnant and, like many women in her condition at the time, took it easy and stayed home. I'll bet lots of women who were pregnant 40 years ago can't account for their whereabouts during the last two trimesters of their pregnancy, other than to say that they spent a lot of time at home.

There’s also some sites on the web pointing to a “Barak Hussein Mohamed Obama” being born in Vancouver on August 6, 1961.

You've got to be kidding. That's your evidence? LOL.

But it’s the only thing that explains both his reluctance to provide his birth certificate and the other odd circumstances around his birth (wonky birth announcements, mom traveling across the Pacific within days of his birth, etc).

If you purge your mind of pre-conceived ideas, there's a prefectly reasonable explanation for all of those things.

Why did he not provide his long-form birth certificate? Simple. They're a hassle to get, as even the birther pissant will confirm.

In contrast, the COLB he posted is easy to get and it's just as good as a long-form for the purposes of proving location of birth.

Plus, by with-holding the long-from, he gets encourages the birther movement, which in turn ends up distracting his opposition.

So from his point of view, why should he bother with the long form?

As to his mom flying accross the Pacific, she didn't show up in Seattle days after his birth. At the earliest, it was within 3 weeks. Why did shy fly there? Probably because she had many friends there and she wanted to get away from her hubby. By all accounts they didn't have the happiest of marriages. Or maybe she wanted to get away from her parents. At any rate, she wouldn't be the first teen mom to try to get away from either her parents or the father of her child. Traveling from Hawaii to Seattle by plane with a newborn isn't that big of deal.

As to the birth announcements, I don't see what there is to explain. They're pretty standard if you look at the other ones in the paper. What is it about them that bothers you?

[wintertime]

You'd have to be either stupid or insane to believe that a seven-to-eight months pregnant American college coed would travel half way around the world, in 1961, just to give birth in third world conditions.

Any teen who at 17 would get pregnant out of wed lock is impulsive. It was even more impulsive in 1961.

Any white teen in 1960 who was pregnant with a black man was **especially** impulsive.

This is a person who married Muslim foreigners **TWICE**, and was willing to give birth (even as an adult) woman to her daughter in ( what was then less than a First World nation) Indonesia! She did this as an adult. Who knows what she was thinking as a pregnant kid.

Conclusion: Stanley Ann was one **weird** impulsive teen and not much better as an adult.She was completely capable of doing anything that would defy common sense.

I don't usually resort to arm chair psychology but since you are applying arm chair psychology, mine is just as valid as yours.

[edge919]

Well, by that standard, anything makes sense. You'd have to be either stupid or insane to believe that a seven-to-eight months pregnant American college coed would travel half way around the world, in 1961, just to give birth in third world conditions.

She had to travel with a newborn baby within days of giving birth in order to be seen in Washington state with a pink, new baby ... what's the diff?? Plus, Mombasa is a pretty big city that had been under British colonial rule ... its facilities may not have been so different from a Honolulu hospital or a Hawaiian midwife (since we have no evidence to support that Obama was born in hospital)

[curiosity]

She had to travel with a newborn baby within days of giving birth in order to be seen in Washington state with a pink, new baby ... what's the diff??

First of all, it would have been 3-4 weeks after the birth, at the earliest. Probably later, as Fall quarter does not start at UW until the last week of September.

Second of all, are you kidding? Let's compare the two journeies.

Hawaii to Seattle. Best case scenario: one six hour flight from modern airport to modern airport. Worst case scenario: she connects in San Franscico or LA, so we're talking about a 9 hour journey, modern airport to modern airport to modern airport.

Hawaii to Kenya: 2 day journey involving multiple primitive modes of transportation to a 3rd world country.

Oh yes. Same thing./sarcasm

[justiceseeker93]

I find it strange that anyone who is going to be president doesn't have to produce a long form birth certificate....Like you do on most normal jobs.

I would agree with you on a compulsory production of a long form birth certificate in order to run for POTUS, but the reason for having to produce such documentation has nothing to do with "most normal jobs." It's because of the requirements necessary to be President stated in the Constitution of the United States. If you are not a Natural Born Citizen, who is at least 35 years old, and who has lived in the US at least 14 years, you don't qualify and you can't hold the office. Simple as that!

As for school transcripts, they are not constitutionally necessary to be POTUS. Abraham Lincoln, for example, couldn't produce any.

[edge919]

First of all, it would have been 3-4 weeks after the birth, at the earliest. Probably later, as Fall quarter does not start at UW until the last week of September.

Her friend said late August ... at best 2-3 weeks after the birth. Plus, the friend had to show SAD how to change the little bastard's poopy diapers. How does SAD fly across the Pacific and not know how to do this??

[curiosity]

Her friend said late August ... at best 2-3 weeks after the birth.

So? A six hour flight between modern airports with a newborn isn't that bad.

Plus, the friend had to show SAD how to change the little bastard's poopy diapers. How does SAD fly across the Pacific and not know how to do this??

LOL. So that's what the birther argument rests on: dirty diapers.