“Those announcements are generated when any one of 4 types of Hawaiian vital birth records are generated. They mean nothing as anyone can get a Hawaiian vital birth record.”
So you acknowledge that the newspaper announcement shows that Obama *DID* get a state of Hawaii birth records, right?
And he got it between Aug 4, 1961 and Aug 13, 1961 and it shows him born on Aug 4, 1961, right?
Clearing the Smoke on Obama’s Eligibility: An Intelligence Investigator’s June 10 Report
I asked the Dept of Health what they currently ask for (in 2008) to back up a parent’s claim that a child was born in Hawaii. I was told that all they required was a proof of residence in Hawaii (e.g. a driver’s license [We know from interviews with her friends on Mercer Island in Washington State that Ann Dunham had acquired a driver’s license by the summer of 1961 at the age of 17] or telephone bill) and pre-natal (statement or report that a woman was pregnant) and post-natal (statement or report that a new-born baby has been examined) certification by a physician. On further enquiry, the employee that I spoke to informed me that the pre-natal and post-natal certifications had probably not been in force in the ‘60s. Even if they had been, there is and was no requirement for a physician or midwife to witness, state or report that the baby was born in Hawaii.
Now enough of this. If you want to be fooled by the Liar in Chief, that's YOUR choice. But stop trying to deter others. You are NOT going to change anyone's opinion.
He has Hawaiian paperwork. That does not mean he was born on the island.