Unless you’ve been living on the Moon, or you’re a liberal who chooses to stay in an echo chamber with nary a contrary fact or opinion, you’d know that the only birth document Obama had ever allegedly released to sympathetic leftwing websites is that now infamous Certificate of Live Birth (COLB).
That COLB is a secondary document that presumably was generated from Obama’s presumed primary document — his long-form birth certificate that, curiously, Hawaii’s anti-birther governor, Neil Abercrombie, admits he can’t find.
That is most curious because two years ago, on October 31 2008, Director of Hawaii’s Department of Health (DOH) Dr. Chiyome Fukino declared that she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, had personally verified that the health department holds Obama’s original birth certificate. More than that, Fukino claimed to have seen that elusive document with her own eyeballs!:
“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.”
More curious still is the fact that sometime after the midterm elections of November 2, 2010 delivered Obama-buddy Abercrombie as Hawaii’s new governor, blogger Citizen WElls discovered, on December 7, that Fukino was no longer DOH director! Was she fired?
The original long-form birth certificate — from which a COLB is generated — contains information that the COLB does not carry, such as the names of the attending physician and the hospital where the birth took place. Here’s what a Hawaii long-form birth certificate, not a COLB, looks like:
Obamabots insist that an online image of Obama’s alleged COLB posted on a website is sufficient to prove that he was born in Hawaii, as claimed. The problem is this:
Even if we accept that argument — which, of course, is questionable (just try obtaining a passport or a driver’s license with an online image of your ID!) — which online image of Obama’s COLB should we accept?
For the fact of the matter is that there are FOUR images of that COLB and — here’s the rub — they are not all the same.
To begin, let’s look at an authentic COLB of someone who’s not Obama so that we’ll know what a valid COLB of the State of Hawaii actually looks like:
Notice the certificate number in the upper right, and the embossed seal of the State of Hawaii in the lower center.
Below are FOUR online images of Obama’s alleged COLB.
Image #1 was posted on Daily Kos:
Image #2 was posted on Fight the Smears:
Image #3 was posted on FactCheck.org:
Image #4 was also posted on FactCheck.org:
Images #1 and 2 have a black bar, on the upper right of the COLB, instead of the certificate number. The certificate number in Images #3 and 4 is not blacked out. The number is 151 1961-010641.
Only Image #4 (Factcheck.org) has what appears to be an embossed seal of the State of Hawaii in the lower half of the certificate.
Neither Image #1 (Daily Kos), nor Image #2 (Fight the Smears), nor Image #3 (posted by the same Factcheck.org as Image #4) has the embossed seal.
If all four are Obama’s COLB, why are there these differences? How can any serious person be expected to accept an online image of a COLB as evidence of Obama’s American birth? If anyone tries to introduce these four online images — which are different from one another — as evidence in court, they’d be found at a minimum to be in contempt, or more likely be charged with outright fraud.
So next time some brainwashed mindnumbed Obamabot tells you that Obama really is constitutionally eligible because he’s produced his COLB, blah blah blah, just ask him/her:
Erh, which online image of Obama’s COLB do you mean? Is it Image #1? Or is it Image #2? Or is it Image #3? Or is it Image #4? Or is it none of those?
H/t ObamaReleaseYourRecords & beloved fellow FreeSpeech.