Here is an additional Univ. of Washington record,
http://www.theobamafile.com/_images/AnnaUWashington.jpg
This is the first piece of information which I have seen that claims these were correspondence courses. I have previously seen written articles which refuted this possibility. Apparently they were mistaken. So okay, you have rendered indeterminate that piece of evidence. It doesn't prove Stanley Ann was in Hawaii, because she could have easily corresponded from Blaine Washington as well. We still have the other piece of evidence.
As to Susan Blake’s testimony:
“Susan Blake, another high-school classmate, said that during a brief visit in 1961, Dunham was excited about her husband’s plans to return to Kenya.”
We now know that Barack Obama never had any intentions of playing house with Stanley Ann. Either Stanley lied to Susan Blake to save face, or Susan lied about what Stanley said to save face for Obama.
A “brief visit” doesn’t suggest that she moved there in August, 1961.
It certainly does suggest that she moved there. How is the Broke Stanley Ann paying for flights to and from Hawaii? I can see her mother footing the bill once, and for cause, (To get an embarrassing pregnancy out of the way * and put the child up for adoption as indicated in Barack Obama's INS file.) but to pay for what amounts to pleasure jaunts? I don't think so. Stanley flew there to stay for awhile.
And this:
“Blake recalls that Dunham, who was calling herself Ann Obama at the time, visited her at her house in Mercer Island during the last week of August, 1961.”
There you go.
“She left Honolulu just as soon she had clearance from her doctor to travel with her new baby.”
Others have pointed out that no airline would have allowed an infant to fly in 1961 because the pressure change could rupture a baby's ear drums. I am given to understand that it was the normal and usual practice to ban infants on all flights.
Here is the thing that I consider silly. These friends of Dunham are being asked questions about an event that occurred 47 years previously.
What would have been so remakable that they would have remembered inimate exact details of a 47 year old event?
That's easy. Having your vacation to Santa Cruz cut short because fires (Austrian Gulch Fire, 1961) are ravaging the countryside. From The Obama file:
4. Susan had gone on vacation to Santa Cruz in summer of '61, had returned mid August because she remembered the fires around Santa Cruz at that time which caused her to return home. Soon after she was back, her mother told her that Stanley was coming to visit. Stanley had the newborn Barack Obama, roughly 3 weeks old. To Susan's best recollection it was sometime around Aug. 25th to Aug 30th.
Unless you can refute it, that piece of information pretty much establishes that Stanley Ann was in the vicinity of Seattle during the later half of August.
---------------------------------------------------------
* For proof that the pregnancy was Embarrassing to Madelyn Dunham, I direct your attention to these quotes from Madelyn Dunham's coworker.
Berry said she didn't realize Obama was Dunham's grandson until early this year while watching TV.
The norm is that a grandmother crows about her first grandchild, and often puts pictures on her desk. That no one in her workplace knew she had a grandson can only be explained by intent. She was ashamed, as would be expected of a White Girl from Kansas in 1961.
``She was pretty conservative from my point of view so back then it would have been surprising'' to know she had a black grandson, Berry said. ``I would have thought: `I wonder what she thinks about that?'''
I’m not disagreeing with you (Obama sr. only married her to make an honest woman of her and grandparents were not happy about things). I’m just trying to separate provable facts from things that may or may not be possible.
That time period is cloudy for her whereabouts. She appears to have dropped from site between January and August 1961. She took no classes at U of H in the spring of 1961 (which could be explained by her being pregnant and out of sight or having been sent to Washington). She doesn’t show up until late August/early September in Seattle. Even that seems mysterious as Blake says late August and Box says early September and both say they never saw her again after that visit. And both say that she never mentioned going to U of W. Both were under the impression that she was going somewhere to visit her husband. But how much of that is the fog of 47 year old memories?
Here is my problem with the Canada/Seattle birth - Why the Hawaii BC or birth announcements?
Assume that the birth occurred in White Rock, Canada, if they were so anxious to get a US citzens BC, mom and 1-day old baby could drive across the border and report a home birth to Washington officials. I haven’t checked the archived Washington revised codes but here is what the current one says,
RCW 70.58.080 Birth certificates — filing — establishing paternity — surname of child.
[skip]
(6) If there is no attending physician or midwife, the father or mother of the child, householder or owner of the premises, manager or superintendent of the public or private institution in which the birth occurred, shall notify the local registrar, within ten days after the birth, of the fact of the birth, and the local registrar shall secure the necessary information and signature to make a proper certificate of birth.
[skip]
(8) When no alleged father is named on a birth certificate of a child born to an unwed mother the mother may give any surname she so desires to her child but shall designate in space provided for father’s name on the birth certificate “None Named”.
[2002 c 302 § 708; 1997 c 58 § 937; 1989 c 55 § 2; 1961 ex.s. c 5 § 8; 1951 c 106 § 6; 1907 c 83 § 12; RRS § 6029.]
Why have the grandparents go to the Hawaii DOH and register the birth? There is no advantage to having a Hawaiian BC or having a Washington BC.