Daily Kos posts copy of Obama's birth certification

Hot Air ^ | 6/12/2008 | Allahpundit

[Oyarsa]

No word of how he got it-Team Barry isn't actually leaking to dKos, is it?-and naturally he misunderstands Jim Geraghty's point about Obama's place of birth, which would have been relevant not with respect to his "Americanness" but whether he was constitutionally qualified to run as a natural-born citizen. But here it is.

Update: Not that it matters for purposes of addressing Geraghty's concerns, but Flip notes that the posted document is a certification of birth, which is slightly different from a birth certificate.

[usmcobra]

It could very well be a photoshopped Auto of boat title.

[Aurorales]

Also, my 1968 Birth Certificate from Hawaii looks like it was typed on a typewriter. I am sure of it.

His document looks like it was printed.

[Fundamentally Fair]

This is not a "Buckhead Moment"

No matter how bad every one wants to be Buckhead.

[Political Junkie Too]

This needs to stop, it makes FR posters look like idiots, we need to stop beating this dead horse.

I'll tell you what I'd like to see.

If this is a fake posted at the Kos site, I'd like to see the MSM treat it with the same way they treated the photoshopped image that Freeper Registered posted showing John Kerry and Jane Fonda at the same speech. FR took a beating by the MSM over that one, and I'd like to see Kos get the same over this if it's fake.

-PJ

[aruanan]

Maybe "African" was regarded as an alternative to "Negro" which had negative connotations with many people.

In 1961 "Negro" was standard. It wasn't until the later 1960's that "black American" was used, as well as, first, "Afro-American", then, later, "African-American". Back then it was "colored" that had more negative connotations.

[RoseofTexas]

WHY does this come to mind every time I come across a POST DEFENDING Hussein Mohammad OsAMA!!

"Today’s Guardian reports that Barack Obama is setting up an entire unit to combat ‘virulent rumours’ about him on the internet.”

DON'T BE FOOLED!!

[antceecee]

I have requested and received certified BC’s on my husband, myself and my daughter - all were certified copies of the original document kept on microfilm.
This included information regarding mother and mother’s place of birth, father and father’s place of birth, babies birth weight, birth length, time of birth, attending physician...
This document does not appear real to me as it does not include information it should and does not bear an official seal.
Mr. Obama can dispel all of this by releasing a true certified copy of his BC - through his campaign staff - not through a third party.

[ncfool]

Why doesn’t somebody contact the Hawaii Republican party at their email address and ask what a legitimate Birth Certificate looked like in 1961.

They can also tell us or show us what the form looks like in when the copy posted on the KOS site looked like.

I’m at work so I can’t email or call right now.

Here is the contact information. The Gov of Hawaii is a Republican.

headquarters@gophawaii.com

Call us at
(808) 593-8180

http://www.gophawaii.com/index.html

[Gay State Conservative]

Is this the standard format of birth certificates in Hawaii in '61? I'm a family research buff so I have seen many birth,death and marriage certificates from many decades (1880's to today) and from many states and one thing even the very old ones feature is "place of birth" for both the father and mother.

Very strange,IMO.

[AmericaUnited]

Ok, I just confirmed (straight from the horse's mouth) that current issues certified copies of HI birth certificates have both a stamped signature AND a RAISED EMBOSSED SEAL on them.

BUT... they are on the BACK! I'm told that you should be able to see the embossed seal from the front, since it is fairly deep.

[Lurking in Kansas]

This needs to stop, it makes FR posters look like idiots, we need to stop beating this dead horse.

Thank you.

I deal with birth certificates in my job everyday. From all 50 states.

1) It is real.
2) It is proof of age / citizenship.
3. It can be used to get a US passport.
4. It is not a ‘birth certificate’, it is a state certified record of birth (i.e. proof that the state has the original on file or in their records.)
5. The actual proof of birth form can change from year to year. (note this form is the revised version of November 2001.)
6. As the versions change over the years, the state can and does give different information on the certified records. Now days most states just provide enough to show name, DOB, and parents names. This form is common of ‘newer’ records.

There is nothing here folks, don’t look stupid. What we need to see is the ‘original’ birth certificate.

[xkaydet65]

Don't doubt you. All I'm saying is that the haloed one's paper as posted on Kos looks very similar to the BC I picked up at the NYC Bd of Health. The old white on black fotocopy that I used for the Selectve Service and DMV hasn't been official in NYC for quite some time. And my copy does show the date it was printed

There are far more important avenues of attack that should be followed as a means of preventing the haloed one's acsesion to the White House, for anyone to be sidetracked chasing these rainbows.

[Ramius]

But if the racial categories don't make sense to us or the business of racial categorization is offensive to us, that doesn't in itself mean anything else is fake about it.

Yes, you made some good points. A clerk in 1961 might have put just about anything in there, and you're right that there's nothing inherently wrong with a modern-printed copy.

I'm not sure what this was supposed to prove anyway, on thinking about it. Is there really a credible argument that he was born somewhere other than Hawaii? I'm not sure it makes any difference anyway. If he was truly ineligible to run, it wouldn't just be coming out now.

I did have an amusing thought though: If only he'd been born about three years earlier, we could all argue that Hawaii wasn't a state yet! :-)

[Lurking in Kansas]

The Stock would have some watermarks on them two. Making it harder to duplicate.

Not necessarily, the stock varies by state. Some states are very security oriented, others not so. I’ve seem forms as cheap as this –not unusual.

[Anti-Bubba182]

Thanks.

[El Gato]

If the office that does the birth certificates prints "August 4" it's not going to be printing "JUN - 6" for "June 6".

Different printers. The front is a computer generated form, the back would be the date the copy was issued and not computer generated at all. Rather by a date/time machine. The front side was probably done by a laser printer. The back by a contact printer of some sort. Possibly something like this:

Notice the date stamp is red ink. It's well aligned, so probably not a hand stamp.

[usmcobra]

Can any one explain why there is more information on an Auto title then on Obama's alleged birth certificate?

As you will clearly note on this Official Document there is at least some attempt to prevent the said document from being forged in any way shape or form.

[Lurking in Kansas]

His document looks like it was printed.

This document was issued in 2007.

[Fox_Mulder77]

What we need to see is the ‘original’ birth certificate.

Bingo! It seems to me this thing was leaked to buy some time to get an 'original' birth certificate that is being amended as we speak. JMO. :-D

[Lynne]

If you can read backwards, you can see that this was stamped on ___ 6, 2007. I can’t quite read the month.