Obama’s Birth Certificate: Which One Is It?

(H/T Codeezra on Twitter for posting the link)

(Author’s note: The real question is why has Barack Obama paid over a million dollars to Perkins Coie, the dem go-to law firm, to keep all of his records sealed?)

I will continue to hammer the fact that all of Barack Obama’s records are sealed and that the fire is there; not so much with the birth certificate but this report is very interesting and shows the legalise about foreign nationals obtained Hawaii BCs at the time of Obama’s birth. Make sure to go over and read the whole article. Try not to get bogged down in the legal terminology.  I have highlighted the important lines.

From Western Center For Journalism:

Clearing the Smoke on Obama’s Eligibility: An Intelligence Investigator’s June 10 Report

Editors Note: In December ‘08 a retired CIA officer commissioned an investigator to look into the Barack Obama birth certificate and eligibility issue.  On July 21, 2009 westernjournalism.com obtained a copy of the investigator’s report. Here is an unedited version of the report.

June 10, 2009 Report, updated July 18, 2009

The Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii

I think that I now understand the legal background to the question of where Obama was born.

Let’s begin with the statement that Dr. Chiyome Fukino, the Director of the Hawaii Department of Health released on October 31, 2008.  The television and print media used this statement as a reason to prevent and treat with contempt any investigation into whether Barack Obama was not born in Hawaii.  But the language of the statement was so carefully hedged and guarded that it should have had the opposite effect.

“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record.  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.”

It is understandable that after such an apparently definitive statement most news outlets, whether conservative or liberal, would accept this as sufficient grounds to relegate the controversy to the status of a fringe phenomenon.  Unless they happened to take the trouble to look into the “state policies and procedures” as laid down by the relevant statutes.  If they had done so, they would have seen that Dr. Fukino’s press release was carefully hedged and “lawyered” and practically worthless.  But the media in general should not be faulted.  The statement seems to roll out with such bureaucratic certainty and final authority.  I believed it to be significant until a Honolulu attorney mailed me the relevant statutes.  I was so surprised that I laughed out loud.

Here is a summary of Hawaii’s “state policies and procedures” in 1961.

In the State of Hawaii, back in 1961, there were four different ways to get an “original birth certificate” on record.  They varied greatly in their reliability as evidence.  For convenience, I’ll call them BC1, BC2, BC3, and BC4.

BC1. If the birth was attended by a physician or mid wife, the attending medical professional was required to certify to the Department of Health the facts of the birth date, location, parents’ identities and other information. (See Section 57-8 & 9 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).

Actual long form Birth Certificate similar to one Obama refuses to release
Actual long form Certificate of Live Birth similar to one Obama refuses to release

BC2. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then all that was required was that one of the parents send in a birth certificate to be filed.  The birth certificate could be filed by mail.  There appears to have been no requirement for the parent to actually physically appear before “the local registrar of the district.”  It would have been very easy for a relative to forge an absent parent’s signature to a form and mail it in.  In addition, if a claim was made that “neither parent of the newborn child whose birth is unattended as above provided is able to prepare a birth certificate, the local registrar shall secure the necessary information from any person having knowledge of the birth and prepare and file the certificate.” (Section 57-8&9)   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.

BC3. In 1961, if a person was born in Hawaii but not attended by a physician or midwife, then, up to the first birthday of the child, a “Delayed Certificate” could be filed, which required that “a summary statement of the evidence submitted in support of the acceptance for delayed filing or the alteration [of a file] shall be endorsed on the certificates”, which “evidence shall be kept in a special permanent file.” The statute provided that “the probative value of a ‘delayed’ or ‘altered’ certificate shall be determined by the judicial or administrative body or official before whom the certificate is offered as evidence.” (See Section 57- 9, 18, 19 & 20 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961).”

[In other words, this form of vault birth certificate, the Delayed Certificate, required no more than a statement before a government bureaucrat by one of the parents or (the law does not seem to me clear on this) one of Barack Obama’s grandparents.  If the latter is true, Ann Dunham did not have to be present for this statement or even in the country.]

BC4. If a child is born in Hawaii, for whom no physician or mid wife filed a certificate of live birth, and for whom no Delayed Certificate was filed before the first birthday, then a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth could be issued upon testimony of an adult (including the subject person [i.e. the birth child as an adult]) if the Office of the Lieutenant Governor was satisfied that a person was born in Hawaii, provided that the person had attained the age of one year. (See Section 57-40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act in the 1955 Revised Laws of Hawaii which was in effect in 1961.)  In 1955 the “secretary of the Territory” was in charge of this procedure.  In 1960 it was transferred to the Office of the Lieutenant Governor (“the lieutenant governor, or his secretary, or such other person as he may designate or appoint from his office” §338-41 [in 1961]).

Certification of Live Birth, released by Obama
Certification of Live Birth, released by Obama

In 1982, the vital records law was amended to create a fifth kind of “original birth certificate”.  Under Act 182 H.B. NO. 3016-82, “Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that the proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.” In this way “state policies and procedures” accommodate even “children born out of State” (this is the actual language of Act 182) with an “original birth certificate on record.” So it is even possible that the birth certificate referred to by Dr Fukino is of the kind specified in Act 182.  This possibility cannot be dismissed because such a certificate certainly satisfies Dr Fukino’s statement that “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.”  If this is the case, Dr Fukino would have perpetrated so unusually disgusting a deception that I find it practically incredible (and I greatly doubt that anyone could be that shameless).   On the other hand, if the original birth certificate is of types 2, 3, or 4, Dr Fukino’s statement would be only somewhat less deceptive and verbally tricky. I only bring up this possibility to show how cleverly hedged and “lawyered” and basically worthless Dr Fukino’s statement is.

Sections 57-8, 9, 18, 19, 20 & 40 of the Territorial Public Health Statistics Act explain why Barack Obama has refused to release the original vault birth certificate.  If the original certificate were the standard BC1 type of birth certificate, he would have allowed its release and brought the controversy to a quick end.   But if the original certificate is of the other kinds, then Obama would have a very good reason not to release the vault birth certificate.  For if he did, then the tape recording of Obama’s Kenyan grandmother asserting that she was present at his birth in Kenya becomes far more important.  As does the Kenyan ambassador’s assertion that Barack Obama was born in Kenya, as well as the sealing of all government and hospital records relevant to Obama by the Kenyan government.  And the fact that though there are many witnesses to Ann Dunham’s presence on Oahu from Sept 1960 to Feb 1961, there are no witnesses to her being on Oahu from March 1961 to August 1962 when she returned from Seattle and the University of Washington. No Hawaiian physicians, nurses, or midwives have come forward with any recollection of Barack Obama’s birth.

The fact that Obama refuses to release the vault birth certificate that would instantly clear up this matter almost certainly indicates that the vault birth certificate is probably a BC2 or possibly a BC3.

It is almost certainly a BC 3 or even a BC 4  if the “Certification of Live Birth” posted on the Daily Kos blog and the fightthesmears.com website by the Obama campaign is a forgery.  Ron Polarik has made what several experts claim to be a cogent case that it is a forgery.  There have been a couple of attempts to refute his argument and Polarik has replied to the most extensive of them.  I do not claim expertise in this area, but I think it would be best for journalists and politicians to familiarize themselves with the arguments on both sides before they casually dismiss Polarik’s position without taking the trouble to understand it.

Now, I want to see all the rest of his records and I want to know why he has paid Perkins Coie over $1 Million to keep all of his records sealed.

By Logistics Monster


  • I think it is more of discredit anyone who wants any information – including all the sealed records – because his birth cert is “official”.

    But then again – wouldn’t it be “arrested” instead of impeached?

  • Practical Madman -

    This is the way it is:

    1) EVERY president before this one was a open book. We knew Bush and Regan were ‘C’ students. Obama’s history, past, records of any type are “off limits” only raising questions of what he has to hide. We know NOTHING about this clown, by design. Anyone with so much to hide CAN NOT AND SHOULD NOT BE TRUSTED!

    2) Obama has spent 20 years in the church or a radical racist bigot that taught his congregation that America should fall and was an unjust nation. He even says that this ass clown was his spiritual mentor.

    3) Obama was mentored as a child by one of the biggest communists of all times, Frank Marshal Davis, by his own admission. His mom worked for and belonged to a communist organization. He was born, bread, and teethed on communism.

    4) Obama was friends and served on the board of the Anninburg Foundation with an admitted criminal radical, Bill Ayres, who admittedly blew up a police station among other things and should be behind bars, not teaching college.

    5) Obama has done a 180 degree opposite of EVERY campaign promise he made. “No lobbyists”= appoint them everywhere

    6) Obama has spent more money in 6 months that ALL of the other presidents added together.

    7) Obama has apologized to the entire world for American “transgressions”, and told them we are no longer a Christian nation or a sovereign nation.

    8) The media is owned, lock-stock-and barrel, by the money changers, and the fact that Obama can do no wrong in their eyes and that they will defend him with more lies to cover up his lies, make America a dying nation with no direction but down.

    Bottom line, this guy is and will continue to be the boil on the butt of this country till we can rid ourselves of him. Anyone that voted for him that still admits it, and defends this communist usurper, can board the next flight out of here, because you do not apparently have enough intelligence to take a breath to stay alive, nor enough understanding of what this country is and stands for to live here, and you have no appreciation of the sacrifices other generations have made to defend freedom and to share it with the rest of the world. You dishonor them by being so dumb and gullible!!!

  • This is from a comment on this topic on Hot Air it is interesting.

    Check this out…
    Obama’s (finally published) birth certificate serial number is 151 1961 – 010641, he was born on 8-4-1961, and the certificate was filed by the Registrar on 8-8-1961 ( http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html )

    Today, the Honolulu advertiser publishes a story, and at the bottom includes a set of long-form BC’s from a woman who had twins at Kapiolani on 8-5-1961 who went to school with Obama.


    These twins were born the day AFTER Obama AT KAPIOLANI. And their certificate numbers are LOWER than his (10637 and 10638). They were born 8-5-1961, the certificates were signed by mom 8-7-1961, signed by the MD 8-11-1961, and signed by the Registrar 8-11-1961.

    THIS MEANS HE DEFINITELY WAS NOT BORN AT KAPIOLANI, because his BC number (born on Aug 4th and filed with Registrar Aug 8th) should have a lower number than the twins (Born Aug 5th at Kapiolani and filed with Registrar Aug 11- 1960.
    I don’t know about that, clerical workers not necessarily inputting in order, also more than one working at inputting, it could be a number of reasons, these BC were out of sync. But there is a gif for what the twin’s BC look like thought Diamond Tiger might like an example of what Obama’s actual BC should look like.

    • Thanks Jockey – and those examples would be the actual long form certificate that everybody is looking for. He doesn’t have it or it shows something he wants to hide – therefore – no long form BC….just the fake COLB.

  • smrstrauss -

    Re: “I have stated before the easiest way to put this thing to bed is to let Republicans and Democrats look at the original record, let them state Yes he is a U.S. citizen and be done with it.”

    The way to do that is to get Hawaii to change the rules to allow anyone to look into Obama’s file and see and copy his original birth certificate. It is not Obama who is doing this. It is Hawaii. Obama asked for a copy of his birth certificate, and Hawaii sent him the certification of live birth. That is what it sends to everyone. http://www.starbulletin.com/features/20090606_kokua_line.html

    Speaking as a supporter of Obama, I would be delighted if Hawaii did this because I know that the original birth certificate says that he was born in Hawaii, and I doubt that there is anything suspicious in it such as birth outside of wedlock or Obama Senior not being the real father. So, I’d be delighted if Hawaii changed the rules to let us look at the birth certificate.

    What to do? Petition the governor of Hawaii to change the rules to make the birth records of a president public documents that anyone can see and copy.

  • Regarding the last comment. This is why the country is in a mess. Do you want us to believe that Obama who just passed the biggest stimulas package, forced the bail out of car companies, travles all over the world, sends men to battle and die and can get Gates and the cambridge cop to drink a beer together can not get Hawaii to send over his Birth Cert.
    He was there not to long ago to visit his grandmother!

  • smrstrauss -

    Re: “can not get Hawaii to send over his Birth Cert.”

    If those are the rules in Hawaii, and they are. If Obama asked for something special, then Hawaii could very well turn him down. Hawaii has the right NOT to obey the president in even such a small matter as this.

    However, it can change its rules to allow us to see the original birth certificate and/or send one to Obama. It can change its rules if we petition Hawaii to change the rules to allow copies original birth certificates to be sent out, or at the very least to allow anyone to look into the birth files of a US president.

    Who could change those rules? Not Obama. Only Hawaii can change the rules. So, we should petition the governor of Hawii, Linda Lingle, to change the rules.

    Clearly the fault in this matter is all caused by Hawaii not sending out the original birth certificate. Obama cannot show it unless he has it, and Hawaii won’t send it. Blame Hawaii and ask them to change the rules.

    However, the original birth certificate will show that Obama was born in Hawaii.

  • I think people have an incorrect understanding of the meaning of natural born citizen. This is one of the best explanations I have seen on the topic of natural born citizen.


    Until I read this, I was under the impression that the term meant you had to be born on U.S. soil and that was the only requirement. But, after reading the original intent behind why the Founders made the distinction, it is clear that the intent was for both parents of the person to be U.S. citizens to maintain a purer line of loyalty to the country… particularly as Commander in Chief of the military.

    Everyone keeps focusing on Obama’s Hawaiian birth certificate and whether he is a citizen or not… that is not necessarily the issue. He may well be a citizen. The issue is whether he is a natural born citizen. There is a difference.

    Assuming that Barack Obama, Sr. is indeed his father, the fact that his father was not an American citizen (natural born or naturalized) at the time of his birth, but Kenyan… means that he is not a natural born citizen. Both parents have to be American citizens at the time of birth.

    If however, someone else is his father (like Frank Marshall Davis… who was an American citizen at the time of his birth), then he may be a natural born citizen.

    But, based on the documentation Obama has provided to date, that documentation is basically saying he is NOT a natural born citizen.

  • John Nance Garner (FDR vice-president) was not born in the United States. (Texas was not a state at the time since it seceded and was not yet readmitted.) As for national candidates, George Brinton McClellan, Jr. was born in Germany. James Hamilton Lewis and Josephus Daniels were born in secessionist Virginia. William Gibbs McAdoo, Jr. and William D. Upshaw were born in secessionist Georgia. David Franklin Houston was born in secessionist North Carolina. William Henry Davis Murray was born in secessionist Texas.

    The sloppy “research” of those who label the president as a Kenyan overlooks the fact that President Obama’s father was a British subject (which many presidential parents were). at the time of his son’s birth. Of the first 16 presidents, only 5 were born the U.S. In addition, most of them had a parent who was not born in the United States, not even considering territories.

  • Wow, MP. That’s some research you did! I guess we should just all pack it up and go have a glass of Kool Aid now. Thanks for setting us straight. Just tell the boss your work here is done at the Monster.

    But in case you’re curious, the Constitution doesn’t prevent anyone from running for President, just from serving if they don’t meet the qualifications. Plus the restrictions are for national office, not mayor of NY City. And damned if my history teacher didn’t forget to tell me about President McAdoo!

    Not to mention (but I’m gonna) that the regulars here are quite versed in the whole concept that Obama Sr. was a British national at the time of Barry’s birth. You say it like that makes a difference, but neglect to notice that the Founders were specifically trying to prevent those loyal to the British crown from usurping the new Republic.

    Besides – don’t you think we have enough against him to impeach him anyway? We do.

  • MP – if you would bother to read the Constitution (Article II, Section 1):

    “No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.”

    The phrase “or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution” was in there to allow the people at the time (Founders) to be grandfathered in, so we could have Presidents. After that generation died off, that phrase no longer applied, but only the first phrase… “a natural born citizen.”

    As GG stated, the Constitution doesn’t prohibit someone from running for office and as for your secession arguments… the United States (the North, if you will) never recognized the Southern States as being in a seceded state from a U.S. Constitutional point of view and were never treated differently from a citizenship point of view after the Civil War. So, your argument is totally without logic.

    The real question in all of this remains whether Obama is a NATURAL born citizen… not NATIVE born citizen nor just citizen…. but NATURAL born… meaning having been born on U.S. soil or territory under complete control of the U.S. and having BOTH parents being U.S. citizens (natural, native or naturalized) at time of birth. According to that criteria and what documentation/information Obama has provided to date, he does not meet that criteria. His father (Barack Obama, Sr.) was Kenyan.

    At this point, in my mind, the only relevance a long-form birth certificate would have would be in case it showed: a) Barack Obama, Jr. was not born in Hawaii, or b) Barack Obama, Sr. was not his father. In either case, he is NOT who he purports to be.

  • smrstrauss -

    Re: “The phrase “or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution” was in there to allow the people at the time (Founders) to be grandfathered in, so we could have Presidents.”

    Not true. Those who were born in US colonies before the Revolution were considered citizens of the colonies and citizens when the colonies became states. The grandfather clause was inserted to allow someone who was NOT born in a US colony to become president, Alexander Hamiliton, who was born on the British island of Nevis, which was not a US colony but was a separate British colony.

    The term Natural Born was used in the colonies before the revolution to indicate someone who was born in the colony regardless of the number of her or his parents who were already citizens. It was not used by anyone other than Vattel to indicate two citizen parents.

    John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and John Jay used the term Natural Born Citizen as a synonym for Natural Born Subject in the draft of the peace treaty with Britain. A Natural Born Subject, was merely someone who was born in the British realm, regardless of the number of parents who were already subjects.

  • smrstrauss -

    Re: “NATURAL born… meaning having been born on U.S. soil or territory under complete control of the U.S. and having BOTH parents being U.S. citizens (natural, native or naturalized) at time of birth.”

    Who said this other than Vattel? Natural Born referred to the laws in the colonies before the Revolution, in which anyone born in a colony was considered Natural Born regardless of the number of her or his parents who were citizens of the colony or subjects of Britain. If the writers of the Constitution were using Natural Born in a different way than was the law at the time, they would have told us.

  • Richard B -

    “Diamond Tiger says:
    August 1, 2009 at 6:35 am
    okay MP – what’s your point?”

    Diamond Tiger. What’s your point – seriously?! Why is it you guys on this site can’t engage in a real discussion with people who don’t agree with you?

    “having BOTH parents being U.S. citizens (natural, native or naturalized) at time of birth.” That is just not true. You guys claim to know the Constitution? If McCain would have been elected would you have had your panties in a twist because he was born in Panama?

Comments are closed.

Related Posts

Bad Behavior has blocked 1768 access attempts in the last 7 days.

No widgets found. Go to Widget page and add the widget in Offcanvas Sidebar Widget Area.