The article addresses that point. It argues that the short form establishes his place of birth and thus the long form is not needed to establish eligibility:
As for the theory that Obama's original birth certificate might show he was foreign-born, [Hawaii Department of Health spokeswoman Janice] Okubo said the "Certification of Live Birth" would say so. Obama's does not. Again, it says he was born in Honolulu.
The article goes on to quote a reporter who looked up the two newspaper birth announcements and established that they would have come from the Health Department and were not placed by a family member:
Take a second and think about that. In order to phony those notices up, it would have required the complicity of the state Health Department and two independent newspapers — on the off chance this unnamed child might want to one day be president of the United States.
Of course, there are lot more details in the long form. You can view an example of a 1962 Hawaii BC here. So, it's possible Obama's long form contains something embarrassing (that we don't already know). But not disqualifying.
As for why he doesn't release it, I think he's just toying with the birthers. Unless their contentions gain traction with the public at large, he'll continue to do that.
And as for the million+ the birthers claim he's spent keeping it secret, I'm sure the total is far less. His total legal service expenditures were just under $1.2m, or about one sixth of one percent of his campaign's total cost. The portion of those expenses to respond to birther actions is probably one sixth of one percent of the one sixth of one percent. It's not as if the courts have required him to do much in the way of a response.
And as for the million+ the birthers claim he's spent keeping it secret, I'm sure the total is far less. "
It is an indisputable fact that Hawaii, in the early '60s would issue birth certificates to infants who's parent(s) were Hawaiian residents and either gave birth to a child out of the country, or adopted a child out of country, so long as they applied for the bc within a specific period of time (less than a year or six months, I believe). This has never been acknowledged by any traditional media outlet I've seen. Knowing it's true, I am curious as to why the fact is never spoken about.
Secondly, irrespective of how much Obama has spent, the fact that he's spent anything beyond the $25 to get a facsimile of his vault-copy birth certificate is troubling. Additionally, many of the legal professionals that have worked on this issue on Obama's behalf, have done so pro bono, as they have admitted. I'm not surprised Obama's actual costs are only in the six figures, still a staggering amount of money.
Third, he's not "toying" with birthers, as you've described, his actions and inactions have created the "birther" movement. He should have released these records, as most candidates do, during the primaries, well before there was any kind of "birther" movement.
Lastly, I'm also puzzled, and I am disappointed that the traditional media isn't, that Obama hasn't released any of his other relevant historical documents like: college transcripts, financial aid forms, college applications and the like. From my point of view, he's being far to secretive about mundane, even trivial historical records to not be hiding something.
I won't bury my curiosity, even if the media has decided to bury theirs.
That would be true, IF. (1) Place of birth is sufficient for "natural born", and (2) The CoLB was not a fogery.
