Main Menu

What’s this web site?

Dr. Conspiracy

Dr. Conspiracy

No one could spend much time here on obamaconspiracy.org and not get the sense that I don’t much believe the conspiracies I have reported here are true, but the purpose of the site is definitely not to defend Barack Obama. I voted for him, and I hope the guy does well, for the country’s sake, but I’m not his apologist.

My real job is related to vital statistics and electronic birth/death registration systems. It really bothers me all the really dumb stuff I was reading about Hawaiian birth certificates. For example, there are over 2,000 web pages that say that block 7c on a Hawaiian birth registration form is the “place of birth”, when anyone who looked at the form could see it’s the mother’s usual residence. Am I supposed to comment on, log into, or email 2,000 web sites for each of these stupid mistakes?

I was very lucky to get an excellent domain name and I developed this site to correct the misinformation I found. I am only targeting false information, or claims of fact that have no evidence for them. If I ever find a fact that supports an Obama conspiracy theory, I will highlight it here for completeness.

The rule I set for myself and for this web site is that evidence trumps opinion. As for “truth”, that depends on what you mean. Conspiracy theorists define “truth” as agreement with the theory. If that’s the definition, then I am not looking for “truth”. I prefer to talk about evidence and facts rather than “truth”.

Print Friendly

8 Responses to What’s this web site?

  1. avatar
    Hitandrun December 22, 2008 at 6:21 pm #

    admin et al,

    Greetings all!
    I’m a relative latecomer to this controversy, who’s looking for the unalloyed facts and reasoned speculation surrounding it, shorn of the usual gratutious motive-mongering. I beg your indulgence if my questions have already been addressed in detail.

    First, has Mr Obama anywhere for the record identified the name of the hospital or facility where he was born? What were his exact words and where are they recorded?

    Second, is the birth document under Hawaiian vault seal a long-form Certificate of Live Birth identifying that hospital or facility and is it duly signed by the attending physician or midwife?

    Third, does the ten-yr/five-yr residency rule (in effect in 1961) for the birth mother apply in Mr Obama’s case, or does the current five-yr/two-year rule apply retrocatively to Mr Obama’s situation?

    Fourth, what are the nature, contents, and present location of the ‘birth certificate’ Mr Obama mentions in his autobiography DREAMS FROM MY FATHER (p 26)?

    Finally, what does ‘natural-born’ mean and who is the ultimate arbiter of that meaning? Would Mr Obama still be natural-born, were he born outside of US jurisdiction?

    Thank you,
    Hit-and-run

  2. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy December 22, 2008 at 6:38 pm #

    Hi Hitandrun! Great questions, although not easy ones. I will give you the best answers that I can. I will carefully note what is only my opinion.

    Q. First, has Mr Obama anywhere for the record identified the name of the hospital or facility where he was born? What were his exact words and where are they recorded?

    A. To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Obama has never identified the name of the hospital. The Honolulu Advertiser newspaper says in several articles (Article 1, Article 2) that he was born at what is now Kapi-‘olani Medical Center for Women & Children. The hospital’s privacy policy prevents them from confirming or denying this (read hospital comments in Article 2).

    Q. Second, is the birth document under Hawaiian vault seal a long-form Certificate of Live Birth identifying that hospital or facility and is it duly signed by the attending physician or midwife?

    A. All birth records are confidential in Hawaii. Obama’s record is not sealed any more than all the others, according to the Director of the Hawaii Department of Health. Since no one has seen the long-form vault record, no one can say with authority what it looks like. A long form certificate for someone else image from 1963 (two years after Obama’s birth) identifies the hospital and the attending.


    Q. Third, does the ten-yr/five-yr residency rule (in effect in 1961) for the birth mother apply in Mr Obama’s case, or does the current five-yr/two-year rule apply retroactively to Mr Obama’s situation?

    A. I believe a court would have to make a decision on this. The earlier rule was in effect, as you note, but the current rule is said to apply retroactively. It doesn’t matter either way if Mr. Obama was born in Hawaii.

    Q. Fourth, what are the nature, contents, and present location of the birth certificate’ Mr Obama mentions in his autobiography DREAMS FROM MY FATHER (p 26)?

    A. Now that is an extremely interesting question. This is what Obama said in the book: I discovered this article [about his father from his student days], folded away among my birth certificate and old vaccination forms, when I was in high school. Since the article would have dated near the time of Obama’s birth, it is not unreasonable to think that the birth certificate is that old too. That leaves us with two reasonable paths:

    1. The birth certificate was obtained when Obama was around 6 years old in preparation for him getting a passport to travel to Indonesia with his mother. In that case, the certificate would almost certainly look like the 1963 sample pictured here.
    2. The document is a hospital birth certificate that hospitals give to new parents. Such documents are issued by the hospitals as souvenirs and have no legal value. If this were the case, then it explains why Barack Obama got a new birth certificate to put on his web site and never showed the valueless souvenir.

    Obama said that he viewed the certificate when he was in high school and that would be about 30 years ago. I have no information on where the certificate might be or if it still exists today.

    Q. Finally, what does natural-born’ mean and who is the ultimate arbiter of that meaning? Would Mr Obama still be natural-born, were he born outside of US jurisdiction?

    A. In my opinion, “natural born” citizen refers to a person who is a citizen at the time of his or her birth. It is also my opinion that my view is the consensus view among constitutional lawyers, and would be the view that prevailed should the matter ever be decided by a court. That said, there are some who would argue that “natural born” citizens must be born in one of the United States (not a territory or possession) and be born of TWO United States Citizens. The United States Senate unanimously declared John McCain a “natural born citizen” even though he was not born in one of the States.

    It is my opinion that should it become necessary to interpret the “natural born citizen” requirement, the Federal Courts are where that would happen, and most likely by the Supreme Court. If the Federal Courts decide not to review the meaning (and this is exactly what they are doing), then the way the government has understood it up until now (my view above) would remain in place.

    If Barack Obama had been born outside the boundaries of the United States then my view is that he would not be a natural born citizen because of the mother’s residency rule at the time.

  3. avatar
    Hitandrun December 23, 2008 at 6:59 pm #

    Thank you, admin, for so helpful and edifying a reply. I’ve been exploring your web site and am impressed by its high signal-to-noise ratio compared to other sites dealing with this issue.

    I believe the meager evidence available to us tips the balance for now toward a Hawaiian birthplace. Yet I find deeply disturbing (1) the failure of all vetting authorties, both local and Federal, to demand harder evidence of eligibility early on, such as a hospital-generated Certificate of Live Birth supported by hospital records; (2) the failure of all elected and appointed officials to call for the release of such records; and (3) the failure of mainstream ‘journalism’ to pressure the candidate for that release.

    I’ll ask you, admin, now to speculate:

    Why do you believe Mr Obama has not publicly identified his hospital of birth?

    Why do you believe Mr Obama has released neither the birth document under DOH vault seal nor any supporting hospital records?

    Would you recommend he be forthcoming rather than obstructionist on this fundamental issue of Constitutional eligibility?

    I’ll reserve for other threads additional questions such as whether his failure to state his former names on his Illinois ARDC form leaves him vulnerable to disbarment or even criminal indictment.

    Looking forward to engaging you and your fellow interlocutors in fruitful discussion.

    Holiday greetings!
    Hitandrun

  4. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy December 23, 2008 at 10:27 pm #

    Hitandrun,

    I am reading a remarkable article from the Boston University Law Review from 2005 that discusses the situation we are in now. I think you will find page 21 interesting, if not the entire article. I’m going to write a main article it on it soon. As to your questions of speculation:

    Why do you believe Mr Obama has not publicly identified his hospital of birth?

    He probably thinks it’s not important or see next answer.

    Why do you believe Mr Obama has released neither the birth document under DOH vault seal nor any supporting hospital records?

    If a blogger rants and raves, it is not news. When the President-elect does something it is news. I’m guessing he doesn’t want to divert public attention away from what he wants the public to focus on to unproductive areas.

    Would you recommend he be forthcoming rather than obstructionist on this fundamental issue of Constitutional eligibility?

    I would not offer any advice. He has smarter advisers than I. And frankly, I think the constitutional eligibility question has moved away from where Obama was born to claims that dual-citizenship made him not “natural born”.

  5. avatar
    Hitandrun December 24, 2008 at 1:15 pm #

    admin,
    You may have mislinked the Feb 2005 Duggin article. The correct link is:

    > http://www.acandidworld.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/12/83BUL53.pdf <

    Looking forward to your review.

    Hitandrun

  6. avatar
    admin December 24, 2008 at 2:13 pm #

    Hitandrun, Thanks. I left off a close quote in the hyperlink. Fixed now.

  7. avatar
    AXJ September 4, 2009 at 4:31 am #

    The truth is defined as approximation to reality, not to theory. Sorry I had to correct you there. My studies in Greek…

  8. avatar
    obot September 29, 2009 at 4:30 am #

    “I voted for him, and I hope the guy does well, for the country’s sake, but I’m not his apologist.”

    You’re a dumb OBOT.