Originally Posted by mirse
As I understand your statement above: You are saying that Obama has his original birth certificate, but he ordered another one around June 2007---which was only about 4 months AFTER he announced for President in Feb. 11, 2007---as a backup in case the first one was lost.
No. Nor am I defending the man either. I was merely making the point that the fact that he obtained the certificate is not usupicious ,in and of itself, as there is a perfectly plausible explanation.
I also don't find it overly suspicious that it is stamped June 6 2007 either, quite frankly. We already know that there is no actual proof of eligibility for office required when one applies to run in the primaries. Do we know at which point that proof of eligibility IS required? Really, the fact that the certificate is stamped June 6, 2007 may merely signify that he obtained it in advance of actually needing it. It's also not unreasonable to assume that, like millions of other people, he prefered to submit that particular document instead of taking any chances with his original birth certificate.
In other words Mirse, there is already so much which is suspicious about the certificate posted on his site.....so much suspicious about Obama himself, in fact.....that, IMO anyway, it's really not worth getting hung up on a date stamped on a document which can have an alternate explanation when there is so much else which doesn't seem to have one.
1. My obvious question is this: If Obama indeed has TWO or more birth certificates, including the one he talks about in one his books, then why doesn't he simply display the one he talks about in his book, which is older and probably more reliable than the one dated "Jun 6, 2007"?
Oh, I absolutely agree with you there Mirse. WHY the refusal to display the original certificate?
It's my understanding that people have come forward with very detailed birth certificates issued by the same hospital(s) he is supposed to have been born at, and sent to them by the DVS, as recently as 1997, raising questions as to why he has produced this certification of live birth instead of the detailed birth certificate.
I don't know the answer to that. All I can say is that, at one time, I also had a copy of my birth certificate, obtained from the DVS in NJ, which had been issued by the hospital where I was born and was also very detailed as to whom my parents were, what they did for a living, etc. A few years ago when I had to obtain replacement, all I got from the NJ DVS was a certification of live birth. Further, I have 4 children, and all they have ever been issued is certifications of live births. The only one who has a detailed Birth Certificate is my husband, but, when he requested a copy from AZ DVS to send to the SSA 4 years ago, he was also only issued a certification of live birth and not his actual Birth Certificate.
Now, I did ask a friend, who works for the State of AZ, about this once and she said it was her understanding that, at some point, states stopped issuing the more detailed birth certificates because of identity theft issues. It does make sense, especially if you are a victim and need to prove who you are, to keep information only you would know...such as parents' names, occupations, etc.....out of the hands of identity thieves.
So really, the Certification of Live Birth does not necessarily raise any suspicion either. But, the fact that Obama flatly refuses to bring forward the actual birth certificate he claims to have, which one can assume is the very detailed version issued by the hospital, DOES raise suspicion. And a lot of it with very good reason.....people with nothing to hide, hide nothing.
2. For instance, if Obama displayed BOTH of his Hawaii birth certificates side-by-side---the one he has had for a long time and the more recent one stamped "Jun 6,2007" on the back at his smears site---then it would go a long way in stopping the swirling web debate that the "Jun 6, 2007" birth certifcate now on display at Obama's smears site is a fake.
