You’re thinking Obama just turned the big five-oh, assuming his known birth date is correct? That would make his Hawaiian, birth-related vital records authentic, Hawaiian and absolutely damning, since he would have been born in a territory and not a state, as was Barry Goldwater, who experienced controversy as a candidate for the very same thing.
Add to that, that Hawaii was British, prior to US control, combined with British citizenship at birth.
Bzzzt ... ineligible.
I’ve noticed, on other UKC (United Kingdom and Colonies) birth documents, from Rhodesia, that racial categorization by continent is the norm, ie European for white.
I’m assuming this ties in somewhere, a British colonial categorization of race.
Hawaii was annexed by the US in 1893 and became a territory on that date. Also, on that date, all persons born in the new territory automatically became citizens of the USA. I was born in 1938 and have always been a citizen.
In 1959, Hawaii was granted statehood. Obama was born in 1961.
Regardless whether he was born in Hawaii or not (I have doubts) is, I believe, irrelevant since his father was a British subject at the time and his mother was a minor. This alone would make Obama inelligible. I don’t see how he can get around that . . .tnx