[ClearCase_guy]

The real document above is attested as a "True and Correct Copy".
The president's document is attested as a "True Copy or Abstract of the Record on File".

Can we see the "True and Correct Copy" of what is on file for the President?

[LivingNet]

The Key is the wording at the bottom.
Nordyke one says "true and CORRECT copy".
Obama one says "true copy or ABSTRACT".

Abstract in Merriam/Webster dictionary says:
1c - insufficiently factual
2 - expressing a quality apart from the original
4 - having only intrinsic form with little or no attempt at pictorial representation or narrative content.

[Tatze]

The real document above is attested as a "True and Correct Copy". The president's document is attested as a "True Copy or Abstract of the Record on File". Can we see the "True and Correct Copy" of what is on file for the President?

I swear some people just don't think. In 1966, these records were not digitized. So when the Nordyke's requested a copy of their BC, thats what they got, a "True and Correct Copy" of the actual certificate on file.

2 years ago, the COLB that Obama released was the short form, which took the digitized data and printed it on a 2001 version of the form, hence it was an "Abstract" of the original document. Yesterday, he released a "True Copy" of the actual document on record.

The stamp was made to apply to either the CertificaTION of the type that was released 2 years ago, or the CertificaTE of the type that was released yesterday.

It really is not that difficult to understand. There are still valid questions about his eligibility based on the nationality of his father, but continued insistence that his BC's are forgeries is simply asinine!