Pages

Thursday, April 28, 2011

The Long Form Birth Certificate

It took long enough.  Some people are still hanging on to the belief that it is a fake.  If so, it was at least done by someone reasonably competent (unlike the Bush Air National Guard memos).  I suspect that Obama finally realized that keeping this controversy alive was not just making Republicans look stupid, but the increasingly mystified reactions from Democrats was eroding his numbers.

Now we can start worrying about the more serious problems of the Obama Presidency, such as his unwillingness to confront the spending disaster that is making Bush and the Republican Congresses seem positively financially responsible.

UPDATE: I notice that WorldNetDaily claims that twins born the day after Obama, and whose birth certificates were registered (and therefore numbered) three days after Obama, have a lower certificate number.  Now, that would be a most curious and worrisome problem.  But WorldNetDaily images of those birth certificates are so small that all you can see are the certificate numbers--not the dates.  I blew up the images, and yes, WorldNetDaily may be right about this, but you would think if you had confidence, you would supply high resolution pictures.

10 comments:

  1. I attribute that to a stack of certificates coming into the registrar's office, and then being stamped when there are enough to matter. First in, last out.

    On the other hand, while I don't doubt the authenticity of the base document, it's pretty clear that the White House photoshopped the pdf they have up (Adding the green background) because the version the AP has doesn't include that.

    It was a stupid move to try to make the image look more authentic which only served to make it look less so.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Besides, it's WorldNetDaily. At this point, if WND reported that the sky was blue, I'd open a window and check for myself.

    ReplyDelete
  3. There's a blogger who was born in HI who is asking a similar question.

    http://snarkybytes.com/2011/04/27/just-one-question/

    ReplyDelete
  4. I agree with Mauser. People keep forgetting that this was done in the day when 'data entry' meant banging on a Selectric to complete a pre-printed dead-tree form, not clicking boxes on a web screen on your desktop PC. The offical documents were probably filled out in the same order that the raw data forms were deposited on the clerk's desk without regard to actual temporal order of the events.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Clayton, I think you need to continue investigating this important issue, along with the opening of the 9/11 Mosque in less than 5 months. It should be about 60% complete by now to make the grand opening date on 9/11/11, correct?
    For the birth certificate, it couldn't be something as easy as what Mauser suggested, especially since the President was born on a Friday. Unless you believe that all government employees are super efficient and never take Monday off, and then work on their pile on Tuesday from the top down.
    And how about the "convenience" of identifying the birth doctor as someone who is dead? What are the odds that a doctor who delivered a 49 year old man would be dead?

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think Mauser has raised an important point here. It would be interesting to see if you have similar first-in, last-out situations in the same period with other birth certificates. I would not devote any great energy to this, because as things now stand, the evidence seems pretty strongly in support of this being a legitimate birth certificate. Someone is going to have to produce something a bit stronger than the layers that show up in Adobe Illustrator (which has a completely plausible explanation).

    What are the odds? Isn't there a legal requirement that doctors aren't allowed to die if they deliver a future President of the United States? Isn't that why doctors get into fighting matches in the hospital over who gets to deliver the baby whose mother has a halo over her head?

    ReplyDelete
  7. Ooh! Check out this "proof" that the birth certificate is a forgery!!1!1!
    (Especially the "quantum access time travel pre-identification secret" part.)

    ReplyDelete
  8. Wow! So the CIA informed Obama in 1962 that he was going to be President in 2009! Did he start crying? Or require a diaper change? There's a reason that a Democrat 9/11 Truther started this thing.

    However, one thing in the article is right: the White House has removed the long form birth certificate from its website. It is now 404. Why?

    ReplyDelete
  9. They changed "rss" to "rss_viewer" in the URL for some reason; I sure it was nefarious. It's right here.

    ReplyDelete
  10. You would think with all the money the CIA has spent getting that "quantum access time travel" thing working, they would have at least known beforehand what they were going to make the URL.

    ReplyDelete