Main Menu

Newspapers vary on Obama’s birthplace

I would think everyone here is familiar with the birth notices for Barack Obama from  Honolulu newspapers printed in 1961. Now, literally out of nowhere, come newspaper articles from bygone years saying Obama was born elsewhere.

The first is an article from the Sunday Standard of  Nairobi, Kenya, as recorded in an Internet archive from 2004. The headline is “Kenyan-born Obama all set for US Senate.” The article references an AP article, but research by commenters here show that the original AP article doesn’t mention “Kenyan-born”, indicating that this was an addition by the Nairobi newspaper itself. However, the newspaper doesn’t elaborate on their source of information.

The Honolulu Advertiser came up with yet a different story in January 2006. According to them, Obama was born, not in Hawaii, nor in Kenya, but in Indonesia! They said:

Both were born outside the country –” Obama in Indonesia, Duckworth in Thailand –” and graduated from high school in Honolulu –” Punahou and McKinley, respectively.

Still searching for direction the Honolulu Advertiser two years later reports that Obama was not born in the United States, but rather in the Kingdom of Hawai’i.

“Obama was born in the Hawaiian kingdom,” said Leon Siu, a Native Hawaiian and musician who brought up the issue in a column he wrote on a news Web site. “Not only was the overthrow of the Hawaiian kingdom illegal, it was admitted to be illegal by the United States.”

And if that weren’t enough! The All Africa Global Media (2008) in a report from Uganda puts Obama back in Kenya.

Ugandans have formed a group to mobilise support for Kenyan born-senator, Barack Obama for the US presidency.

And finally, to complete the cycle, the Kenyan Newspaper that started this off said last February:

A major sign of hope is embodied in Obama’s personal background as a product of at least three civilisations (American, African and Islam), with a wider multiculturalism in Indonesia, when he was a child, and in Hawaii, where he was born and spent much of his childhood.


Not to yield the last word, the Hawaii Advertiser tries that charmed third attempt to get it right in the article Obama Hawaii born, insists Isle officials, confirming:

In an attempt to quash persistent rumors that President Obama was not born in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961, Hawai‘i’s health director reiterated this afternoon that she has personally seen Obama’s birth certificate in the Health Department’s archives.

“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawai‘i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai‘i State Department of Health verifying Barrack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai‘i and is a natural-born American citizen.

So what does this all go to show? Newspapers aren’t always right, and the best source of information is primary evidence like a certified copy of a birth certificate, and the official statement of the Hawaii Department of Health.

79 Responses to Newspapers vary on Obama’s birthplace

  1. avatar
    John October 15, 2009 at 6:11 pm #

    Obama’s COLB is meaningless because we have no way of knowing how the information on the COLB is derived. Was it derived from a hospital birth? We don’t know. Without any coorborating evidence of a birth in Hawaii, the COLB is meaningless.

    Under ordinary circumstances a COLB would be sufficient proof of Obama’s birth in Hawaii.

    But, since a moutain of circumstancial evidence exists that he was born in Kenya and given the loose laws of 1961 that allowed foreign born children to register their births in Hawaii, more concrete coorborative information is needed.

    The birth announcements don’t provide the evidence because they are generated by the registeration of a birth in Hawaii which again could be for foreign born children in 1961 based a testimony of a relative.

    It is likely Obama’s vital record that Hawaii has been touting as proof Obama was born there is nothing more than a statement from the grandmother stating that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    What is really required in some sort of independent prove (Such as doctor’s signature) that proves Obama was actually born in Hawaii.

    If some sort independent verified information such as a signature from a doctor or midwife can be shown and it is verified, then I will confident as well as many other persons that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    To date, no evidence has appeared. Until then, Obama’s birth place will forever be in doubt and the fight will continue to get access to his records.

  2. avatar
    richCares October 15, 2009 at 6:23 pm #

    john, john, john so far you have been shown your comments as BS, stop it will you. all you do is prove your ignorance.

  3. avatar
    SFJeff October 15, 2009 at 6:33 pm #

    “Obama’s COLB is meaningless because we have no way of knowing how the information on the…..blah…blah…blah… Without any coorborating evidence of a birth in Hawaii, the COLB is meaningless.”

    I understand it is meaningless to you, but for all other purposes, it is a legally acceptable document.

    “Under ordinary circumstances a COLB would be sufficient proof of Obama’s birth in Hawaii.”

    Meaning- for a white man, without a Muslim name it would be sufficient but not this guy.

    “since a moutain of circumstancial evidence exists that he was born in Kenya”

    More like a mole hill. There isn’t any evidence, just rumors, second hand reports, forgeries- nothing that would be acceptable in any court.

    “What is really required in some sort of independent prove (Such as doctor’s signature) that proves Obama was actually born in Hawaii.”

    Except that this is not required by anyone but you. You are proposing creating a new requirement, which coincidentally will apply for the first time to our first Black President.

    The only actual evidence shows he was born in Hawaii- namely his COLB, Obama’s own words, the postings in the newspaper at the time, and the confirmation from the Hawaiian officials that he was born there.

    John- seriously- if you really, really think that President Obama was born in Kenya, go there and get some evidence that would be acceptable in a court of law. President Obama has no obligation to disprove what appears to most rational people as a delusional hope of racists and right wing kooks. It is your obligation to bring actual proof that you are correct if you want anyone else to take you seriously.

    He place of birth was not and is not an issue of doubt for the majority who voted for him and who still continue to support him.

  4. avatar
    Bob October 15, 2009 at 6:35 pm #

    Obama’s COLB is meaningless because we have no way of knowing how the information on the COLB is derived.

    Too bad that’s not the legal standard of proof. Why do you insist on more evidence than a court would?

    But, since a moutain of circumstancial evidence exists that he was born in Kenya

    Except there’s no competent evidence that he was born in Kenya.

    given the loose laws of 1961 that allowed foreign born children to register their births in Hawaii

    What law was in effect in 1961 that would have permitted a foreign birth to list the place of birth as Honolulu?

    The birth announcements don’t provide the evidence because they are generated by the registeration of a birth in Hawaii which again could be for foreign born children in 1961 based a testimony of a relative.

    There’s no evidence a relative gave any such testimony; just your speculation.

    If some sort independent verified information such as a signature from a doctor or midwife can be shown and it is verified, then I will confident as well as many other persons that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    Funny; birfers have a proven track record of screaming “FORGERY!!!” or moving onto different theories.

    To date, no evidence has appeared.

    Other than the COLB, the index data, the birth announcements, and Fukino’s statements, of course.

    Until then, Obama’s birth place will forever be in doubt and the fight will continue to get access to his records.

    If you are going to follow Taitz’s example, don’t forget to bring your checkbook!

  5. avatar
    Bob October 15, 2009 at 6:36 pm #

    And why should anyone believe you? You were caught touting a doctored AP article.

  6. avatar
    wendy October 15, 2009 at 6:47 pm #

    Here is what is different, regarding the news announcement in Hawaii..
    it is what genealogists call an ORIGINAL record, ie, one made at the time of the event. The copy is not internet based, but on microfilm which is housed in an archive.
    Meaning.. it isn’t alterable, where the currently surfacing “news reports” have been altered. Unbiased researchers already have indicated that the announcements indicate being based on reports FROM OFFICIAL sources, meaning vital statistics office. It BACKS UP the official document. Not a legal record in itself.. but absolutely credible. This comes from 30 yrs of researching family history, and knowing credible records from weak ones.
    “His grandma could have put it in”.
    She had no reason to. It includes an address. It goes contrary to rational thinking.
    I won’t bother with the garbage of how “foreign births could be registered in Hawaii”. That has already been addressed and dumped.
    Even without the backup..there is NO reason for Hawaiian officials to lie.
    Oh. Did John forget the school registration in Indonesia, where the stepfather entered Honolulu as birthplace?
    Sorry, John. Your arguments are meaningless.

  7. avatar
    John October 15, 2009 at 6:52 pm #

    OBama – How he got his birth announcement in the paper
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXQHNMlitpY

  8. avatar
    wendy October 15, 2009 at 6:53 pm #

    by the way, John…
    has it crossed your brain that while YOU or I have no authority to see the so called vault copy…
    That restriction does not and never has applied to LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT AUTHORITIES.
    Thus, your script conveniently pretends that the ENTIRE FEDERAL GOVT. is too stupid to have checked for themselves. I guess, according to the Bible according to Orly, no one in Washington has ever heard of this problem. “NO ONE HAS SEEN ANY PROOF” is total bovine excrement.

  9. avatar
    Montana October 15, 2009 at 6:57 pm #

    Wow, don’t you get it you are being punked. Remember other internet document that turned out to be FAKE, this is another one. You are getting punked.

  10. avatar
    richCares October 15, 2009 at 7:01 pm #

    no, john doesn’t know. His hate for Obama is to great so he is an easy mark for Birther make believe, click that paypal john, just contineue falling for the crap!

  11. avatar
    Expelliarmus October 15, 2009 at 7:04 pm #

    The reason that the contemporaneous 1961 birth announcements in Hawaii newspapers “of record” are significant are:

    1) They were published under section of the paper reserved for verbatim publication of public records. It was a longstanding practice for certain publications to be deemed to be sources “of record” and for public agencies to publish certain types of announcements in such papers — this would include birth announcements, death announcements, and various legal notices. This practice arises from pre-internet days, when publication in a newspaper of general circulation was the only feasible way to get notice out to the general public of various events.

    2) They are admissible under Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 803 (16) as an “ancient document” (“ancient” means the document is more than 20 years old):

    “(16) Statements in ancient documents. Statements in a document in existence twenty years or more the authenticity of which is established.”

    The idea is that while a newspaper article by itself has no particular presumption of validity, as time goes on it becomes more reliable than other sources. Its hard to find witnesses to events more than 20 years old, so the law has arbitrarily imposed that period as the cutoff time when a document will be deemed as having probative value.

  12. avatar
    Bob October 15, 2009 at 7:09 pm #

    More speculation not supported by any actual evidence.

  13. avatar
    James D October 15, 2009 at 7:13 pm #

    and in a related development, Dewey defeats Truman

  14. avatar
    wendy October 15, 2009 at 7:14 pm #

    yes, I realized that in some cases, the announcement WOULD be usable. That normally would go back to births occurring pre vital statistics, but those who were applying for social security in the 1930s or so. In order to apply for what is known as “delayed certificates”, the person had to submit some form of record, and news announcement would be one type.. census would be another, or affidavit from a relative.
    Never mind trying to explain that to John. He can’t grasp the simple rationale that Hawaii has authority, and has already validated the authenticity of the birthplace. That would hold up without anything else.

  15. avatar
    wendy October 15, 2009 at 7:17 pm #

    Nor will John accept that the Federal govt has no interest whatsoever in what he CHOOSES to believe. He can believe a comic book if he wants.
    The govt has both responsibility and authority to know the facts. Obama isn’t obligated to even post the SHORT form, much less any long form.

  16. avatar
    I see October 15, 2009 at 7:21 pm #

    I see, because a newspaper and an international press agency like AP said Obama was Kenyan born back in 2004 it doesn’t mean anything, right?

  17. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy October 15, 2009 at 7:23 pm #

    The AP didn’t say that, however. It was the local newspaper that added “Kenyan-born”. This is determined by comparing to other newspapers that carried the same AP story.

  18. avatar
    Bob October 15, 2009 at 7:29 pm #

    H/T to Rickey for figuring that one out.

  19. avatar
    wendy October 15, 2009 at 7:34 pm #

    No. When it is provable that the story was altered…
    it means nothing.
    Eric Holder didn’t have secret meeting with the judge.
    Grandma’s “statement” was edited to cut out the part where the family knew she made a mistake.

    What part of SCAM do you not grasp?

  20. avatar
    richCares October 15, 2009 at 7:34 pm #

    “doesn’t mean anything, right?”

    right, a phony add-on means nothing, try looking at the actual AP story idiot!

  21. avatar
    misha October 15, 2009 at 7:39 pm #

    Yeah, newspapers NEVER make mistakes. If it’s printed, it has to be true. NOT

  22. avatar
    richCares October 15, 2009 at 7:42 pm #

    for “i see” and “john” and other such gullible birthers here is link to the actual AP story, http://articles.latimes.com/2004/jun/27/news/adna-ryan27
    There is no mention of Kenya. Birthers are so easy to manipulate, they never check sources, just blindly accept, keep proving your ignorance john and let i see join you.

  23. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy October 15, 2009 at 8:06 pm #

    John: It is likely Obama’s vital record that Hawaii has been touting as proof Obama was born there is nothing more than a statement from the grandmother stating that Obama was born in Hawaii.

    And you’re going to take the word of a Kenyan step grandmother over the word of his real grandmother in Hawaii? I find that remarkable.

    [Of course the Kenyan grandmother, Sarah Obama, never claimed her grandson was born in Kenya. That’s just tape editing.]

  24. avatar
    John October 15, 2009 at 9:03 pm #

    It’s just not the Newpapers, you forgot to mention these sources:

    Olara Otunnu (Harvard Law, 1978) relating the remark of Kenyan historian Ali Mazrui on the oddity that a member of Kenya’s Luo tribe (Barack Obama, a Kenyan citizen and Luo tribe member from birth) may become president of the United States before a Luo tribe member becomes president of Kenya. “Town Hall Forum: An Examination of Race, Age, Gender & Religion in the 2008 Election,” Harvard Law School Reunions, Oct. 25, 2008, 9:15 a.m. (Austin Hall, 1st Floor, West), at 60:17 mark.

    PAKISTAN WORLD LEADER STATES OBAMA BORN IN KENYA?
    Mr Safdar Mehmood on list of World Leaders from Pakistan says Obama was born in Kenya. Who would know better than he? Since he knew OBAMA very well when Obama was in Pakistan. One forum thread Mr. Safdar Mehmood contributed to the forum was the lists of world leaders. On this list for the United States is: “President of USA (44th) Barrack Hussain Obama of Democratic Party* (Kenyan born) (Since 20th Jan 2009)”. Who would know Obama’s origins better than Pakistan? His mother lived and worked there. Obama was able to enter and spend 3 weeks there during a period of Martial Law. And, in order to work for the government of Pakistan, one’s general knowledge must now include the understanding that the United States is ruled by a Kenyan born, Constitutionally READ MORE

  25. avatar
    kimba October 15, 2009 at 9:12 pm #

    John, you’re a dumbass. Ann Dunham never lived or worked in Pakistan. She lived and worked in Indonesia. In 1981, Barack traveled to Pakistan after visiting his mother and sister in Indonesia. Such ignorant, misinformed statements make you look stupid even to birthers. Plese stop wasting this site’s bytes with your foolishness. And do a little frickin’ homework.

  26. avatar
    SluggoJD October 15, 2009 at 9:18 pm #

    Oops, I clicked the wrong finger! Sorry, someone uprate this please.

  27. avatar
    richCares October 15, 2009 at 9:24 pm #

    john, john, john each time you are debunked you come back with more stupidity,
    Stop insulultig yourself and maybe we won’t consider you a dumb ass.

  28. avatar
    racosta October 15, 2009 at 9:38 pm #

    john is way beyond being a dumbass. whenever caught with his foot in crap he steps in another pile, has to be very sad to be that dumb.

  29. avatar
    Kevin Bell October 15, 2009 at 11:48 pm #

    “Maybe we won’t consider you dumb ass” I don’t think that’s possible!

  30. avatar
    wendy October 16, 2009 at 12:26 am #

    Just goes to show… someone in Pakistan can be uneducated as to stories from the internet.

    He put his foot in mouth. Like this makes him an better authority than the state of Hawaii? And you fail to see how ridiculous that is?

    You are NOT QUOTING SOURCES. You are quoting RUMORS. I suggest you learn the difference.

  31. avatar
    Lupin October 16, 2009 at 2:52 am #

    I don’t think “dumbass” (while appropriate) encompasses the nature of the problem here.

    John is just as blinded by his prejudices and fears as the fanatics who flew into the Twin Towers.

    He is unreachable by truth, common sense, logic or any other tool used by civilized people.

    There is conceptually no difference between John and a hardcore Taliban: one believes Thor is stronger than the Hulk, the other the opposite, but they’re cut from exactly the same cloth.

    I don’t find John amusing; I’m actually a little bit afraid of John.

  32. avatar
    gwen October 16, 2009 at 5:29 am #

    The COLB (which incidentally looks just like my 1955 COLB showing I was born in Honolulu, TH) was good enough to get both Obama and I a passport listed us both as US citizens. If the level of proof was high enough to satisfy the govt (and passports are regarded as the most reliable form of identification–of course John has probably never had one issued to him), it would certainly be high enough to satisfy the requirement to hold the office as the POTUS.

  33. avatar
    jvn October 16, 2009 at 7:04 am #

    Isn’t it ironic that the same people who see the statement of the Director of the Hawaii DOH that the President was born in Hawaii as “meaningless and unverifiable” look at an unsourced newspaper article that itself is an altered AP story as “indisputable proof” that the President was born in Kenya?

  34. avatar
    aarrgghh October 16, 2009 at 7:23 am #

    ironic, no.

    moronic, oh most definitely.

  35. avatar
    Greg October 16, 2009 at 8:42 am #

    Who would know Obama’s origins better than Pakistan?

    Let’s see, his mother never lived in Pakistan and Obama visited for 3 weeks a month after a New York Times columnist wrote a travel item about how cool it was to go to Pakistan (martial law? not mentioned in the NY Times).

    Sure, I can’t possibly think of anyone who might know his origins better than Pakistan.

    I mean, Obama’s mother lived and worked in Hawaii for years. Obama himself lived in Hawaii from the age of 0-5 and 10-18. His vital records are contained in the Department of Health in Hawaii. He has lived in the United States for all but 5 years of his 48-year life. He ran a campaign for the US Senate against Alan Keyes, who was not shy in slinging mud against Obama. He ran a campaign for President against Hillary Clinton, one of the longest, most bitterly fought contests in history and against John McCain, who spent tens of millions in attempting to bring Obama down.

    Yep, let’s take the word of some guy from Pakistan, and some guy who graduated from Harvard Law 14 years before Obama. Who could possibly know of Obama’s origins better than these two?

  36. avatar
    DavidH October 16, 2009 at 9:27 am #

    I am going to assume here that the newspaper called “The Standard” in Narobi, Kenya is the same newspaper as “The Sunday Standard”. On February 25, 2009, The Standard published a story that included text claiming that Obama was born in Hawaii:
    “A major sign of hope is embodied in Obama’s personal background as a product of at least three civilisations (American, African and Islam), with a wider multiculturalism in Indonesia, when he was a child, and in Hawaii, where he was born and spent much of his childhood.”

    Here is the article:
    http://www.standardmedia.co.ke/InsidePage.php?id=1144007420&catid=15&a=1

  37. avatar
    Whatever4 October 16, 2009 at 9:46 am #

    The quote attributed to Olara Otunnu is incorrect. The link to the audio does say “(Barack Obama, a Kenyan citizen and Luo tribe member from birth)” http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=subject%3A%22Olara%20Otunnu%22

    but that’s not a quote from Otunnu. Otunnu knew where Obama was born, his point was that issues of ethnicity (tribe) matter more in Africa than race does in the US. The actual quote from the Audio is: “There is a prospect that the US will elect a president, a Luo president, before Kenya does.”

    He goes on to say (to the laughter of the crowd): If Obama had grown up in Kenya on [his] father’s side instead of the mother’s side, he may have had less of a chance of becoming president than [in] the US.

    I listened to the audio.

  38. avatar
    milspec October 16, 2009 at 10:29 am #

    As was mine even after 9/11

  39. avatar
    Black Lion October 16, 2009 at 11:13 am #

    Well Leo thinks that this article is gold. On his site he states that in this article President Obama admits that he is Kenyan. I can’t follow his logic, if he has any logic to follow…

    http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/10/16/president-obama-admitted-he-waskenyan-born/#comments

  40. avatar
    Bob October 16, 2009 at 11:23 am #

    Donofrio says Obama was “Kenyan-born” due to his CUKC status that was later converted to Kenyan citizenship.

    He then relies upon his misreading of “Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here… if he hath issue here… his child… If born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen…’” from Wong Kim Ark. (Do not tell Greg this; Greg will be very angry to learn Donofrio is repeating this argument.)

  41. avatar
    Black Lion October 16, 2009 at 11:30 am #

    Bob, after Greg eviserated Mario I guess he needs to do it to Leo. Leo needs to be take behind the woodshed for his gross misinterpretation of Wong. By reading Greg’s posts it is obvious that Greg has forgotton more about constitutional law and relevant legal cases than that clown Leo could ever imagine. However I doubt he will allow Greg to respond to him. Leo doesn’t like being shown up for the lack of legal ability he really has.

  42. avatar
    Bob October 16, 2009 at 11:39 am #

    Greg, on this site, has explained how Donofrio is twisting that quote. And Greg also has reported that when he attempted to correct Donofrio on his site, Donofrio refused to publish his comments.

  43. avatar
    Wild Bill October 16, 2009 at 12:16 pm #

    Further proof of usurping Democrats!

    I have seen a newspaper article proving conclusivly that Dewey defeated Truman in the 1948 presidential election, but Truman usurped power and stole the presidency!

  44. avatar
    nBc October 16, 2009 at 12:57 pm #

    ROTFL, very clever…

  45. avatar
    Rickey October 16, 2009 at 1:03 pm #

    Bob: Greg, on this site, has explained how Donofrio is twisting that quote.And Greg also has reported that when he attempted to correct Donofrio on his site, Donofrio refused to publish his comments.

    That’s par for the course on birther blogs. When Charles Lincoln took a quote from Chief Justice John Marshall out of context on The Post & Email Blog, I submitted an innocuous clarification putting it in proper context, and it didn’t make it past moderation. And I didn’t even mention that Lincoln is disbarred!

  46. avatar
    Mary Ortega October 16, 2009 at 1:05 pm #

    “Hawaii’s health director reiterated this afternoon that she has personally seen Obama’s birth certificate in the Health Department’s archives.”

    Where and when exactly did she say she personally saw his BC? When I read her statement, she said she had personally seen -BUT NOT VERIFIED – his vital records. I didn’t see where she said BC – maybe I’m mistakened.

    You try and make a case that Leo has latched on that newspaper article – but isn’t it the same way you have latched on to those newspaper birth announcements. No one can get a verification as to how or where the newspaper received birth information in 1961 in order to print the announcements.

    I think the fact that Fukino, Okubo, etc. in Hawaii are being very tricky with their words and in answering any UIPA requests, signals there are issues with his ‘vital records’ and whether they have EVER actually verified and recorded the information on his COLB that factcheck has posted. If it had been accepted and recorded, the COLB would not state “Date Received by Registrar”, it would say “Date Accepted by Registrar”.

    I think it is safe to say that NONE of us knows for certain anything about Obama. You hope he was born in Hawaii, but you don’t know – you can only speculate because there are too many unknowns surrounding his past.

    And for the record, I don’t think Leo is saying that the newspaper article is proof Obama was not born in Hawaii. I think, and I agree with him, the article is referring to his citizenship by way of his father, blood Kenyan, not soil Kenyan. Of course, that doesn’t fit your arguement, just as you claim Leo is twisting the words of Ark – he probably thinks you are twisting the words of Ark – do you think perhaps it is just that both sides have a different INTERPRETATION, rather than twisting?

  47. avatar
    KMM October 16, 2009 at 1:09 pm #

    It’s my understanding that Donofrio believes that BHO was actually born in HI. (He states this in one or more places within his blog.) The question here is rather whether the “natural born citizen” standard is met. A summary statement from the HI DOH does not go far enough to explain how this legal determination was established. This is the current line of investigation. (My understanding from following Donofrio’s blog.)

  48. avatar
    richCares October 16, 2009 at 1:19 pm #

    Tricky?
    nothing trickey about “I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen.”
    link to official release: http://hawaii.gov/health/about/pr/2009/09-063.pdf

  49. avatar
    kimba October 16, 2009 at 1:19 pm #

    Utter Nonsense. We know for certain Barack Obama was born in Honolulu on August 4, 1961. You simply choose not to believe the people who have the authority and access to the information who tell you it is so.

  50. avatar
    Jez October 16, 2009 at 1:20 pm #

    Finish the quote Mary. It’s very disingenuous of you to only put up the first half and leave the part where she says:

    “…verifying Barrack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai’i and is a natural-born American citizen.”

    So yes, she did verify it.

    And what do you think a vital record is? Vital records include Birth Certificates, Death Certificates, Marriage licenses, and a host of other files that the Department of Health in any other state would collect.

    As for what the Certification “should say” vs. what is does say: Who are you to make that determination? Maybe Hawai’i preferred “received” to “accepted”. Either way, the original vital record of the birth of Barack Obama was in the hands of the Hawai’i Department of Health and Registrar within 4 days of his birth.

  51. avatar
    kimba October 16, 2009 at 1:20 pm #

    Oh, sorry Rich, I thumbsdowned you by acidente! My apologies.

  52. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy October 16, 2009 at 1:24 pm #

    My read is that Donofrio is an opportunist, playing a chess game with the public and the government. He thought (and I think he was nuts to think this) that he could somehow win a battle against Hawaii and thereby put to rest the “born in Kenya” faction. He had no chance with Hawaii, and even if he prevailed, the birthers would just say the conspiracy goes deeper. Once shed of the “birthers”, Donofrio would appear the hero, and then begin his crank natural born citizen argument. What Donofrio fails to realize is that his role in American politics approaches zero, whatever he does.

  53. avatar
    SluggoJD October 16, 2009 at 2:00 pm #

    Mary, you do realize you’re a nutcase, right?

  54. avatar
    Greg October 16, 2009 at 2:42 pm #

    This was one of the particularly egregious misreadings of Wong that I have taken Leo to task for in the past. It’s a particularly obscene use of the ellipses to change the meaning of the paragraph he quotes.

    Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord Coke in Calvin’s Case, 7 Rep. 6a, “strong enough to make a natural subject, for if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject;” and his child, as said by Mr. Binney in his essay before quoted, “if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle.

    Far from saying that there are citizens and natural born citizens, Wong is saying that by being in the country, an Alien’s allegiance is strong enough to create a natural born citizen:

    “strong enough to make a natural subject, for if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject;”

    Remember, the decision spent something like 30 pages discussing how the terms natural born subject and citizen meant the same thing.

  55. avatar
    Rickey October 16, 2009 at 2:46 pm #

    Mary Ortega: No one can get a verification as to how or where the newspaper received birth information in 1961 in order to print the announcements.

    Wrong. Both newspapers have confirmed that the birth announcements came directly from the Hawaii Department of Health.

    If it had been accepted and recorded, the COLB would not state “Date Received by Registrar”, it would say “Date Accepted by Registrar”.

    Wrong again. The COLB doesn’t say “Date Accepted by Registrar.” It says “Date FILED by Registrar August 8, 1961.” You can see for yourself:

    http://www.factcheck.org/UploadedFiles/birth_certificate_2.jpg

    Whatever your opinions are, at least get your facts straight.

  56. avatar
    Greg October 16, 2009 at 2:59 pm #

    In his “article,” Leo makes the argument of incredulity:

    If Obama is eligible to be President then so are the sons of Osama Bin Laden, Kim Jong Il and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad if they impregnate an American woman who gives birth on US soil. The very notion is obscene.

    Here’s my answer to Leo on this point, which probably won’t “rock [his] world”:

    This is what George D. Collins argued in Wong Kim Ark. If we allow the children of Chinese immigrants to be citizens, then they’ll be eligible for the Presidency!

    Are Chinese children born in this country to share with the descendants of the patriots of the American Revolution the exalted qualification of being eligible to the Presidency of the nation, conferred by the Constitution in recognition of the importance and dignity of citizenship by birth? If so, then verily there has been a most degenerate departure from the patriotic ideals of our forefathers; and surely in that case American citizenship is not worth having.

    Brief on behalf of the Appellant, p. 34.

    I think the Appellee’s answer to Collins is appropriate for you as well, Leo:

    The fear suggested at page 34 of the brief of the amicus curiae that our next president might be a Chinaman is equally uncalled for. If a modern Confucius or a greater than Li Hung Chang should be born upon our soil, and the people of the United States should be of the opinion that he was the best person in this country for their president, it is not plain where, if he were elected, the disgrace would lie; but, if there were any, it woudl seem to fall, not on the Chinese race, but on the white citizens of the United States, who selected a Chinaman as the highest officer of their government.

    If it’s obscene that the child of Kim Jong Il could become president, the obscenity lies with the voters who would vote him in.

  57. avatar
    Bob October 16, 2009 at 3:14 pm #

    Thanks for reposting this.

    Doc, if you ever make a best-of section, or otherwise use stickies to denote the best posts, I would recommend this one.

  58. avatar
    misha October 16, 2009 at 3:19 pm #

    @Mary Ortega: I think you are on to something!! Here is an authentic Kenyan birth certificate.

  59. avatar
    Bob October 16, 2009 at 3:19 pm #

    A birfer once claimed there was a legal difference between “filed” and “accepted.” I asked for a citation for this legal difference.

    I was told those regulations are “secret.”

    “Uh-huh.”

  60. avatar
    Bob October 16, 2009 at 3:24 pm #

    He thought (and I think he was nuts to think this) that he could somehow win a battle against Hawaii and thereby put to rest the “born in Kenya” faction.

    He got the index data, which really ought to put to rest this argument.

    But instead he lingers, arguing “vital records” means Hawaii is hiding something, and Fukino’s use of the phase “natural-born citizen” means Hawaii has waived attorney-client privilege.

    He’s so off target he doesn’t even know his target is anymore.

  61. avatar
    ballantine October 16, 2009 at 3:52 pm #

    One of the silliest birther arguments. You think the fact that Coke is cited in the same sentence defining natural born subject would be a give-away or that Wong cites Kent for the proposition that citizen and subject are interchangeable terms would be a big hint. Binney’s paper argues that the English common law rules applied in america. The principle he is talking about is the rule of Calvin’s case than made the native born natural born subjects. Accordingly, it is pretty pathetic to try to read something into the fact that he didn’t use “natural born” when he was writing on who was a citizen rather than who was a natural born citizen.

    Wong stands for two important principles: first, it says that “natural born citizen” should be defined by the English common law and second, it holds that the 14th amendment codified the English common law. The court spends most of the rest of the opinion defining the English common law rules, rules that provided that one was either natural born or alien born, there was no third category. Binney and Coke were in agreement on such point.

  62. avatar
    SFJeff October 16, 2009 at 3:54 pm #

    “I think it is safe to say that NONE of us knows for certain anything about Obama.”

    If we used your standard, Bush should have been challenged as to his birth place also, as should have been Clinton, Bush, Reagan, etc. None of us know ‘anything’ for certain about any of our previous presidents, again according to your standard.

    However, something we do know for certain- President Obama was voted into office, the Electoral College cast their votes for him, Congress didn’t object to his election and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court administered his vow of office. These things we know for certain.

  63. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy October 16, 2009 at 3:54 pm #

    Not that I have any reason to think Donofrio would be influenced by a religious argument but:

    (Ezek 18:2-4 NRSV) What do you mean by repeating this proverb concerning the land of Israel, “The parents have eaten sour grapes, and the children’s teeth are set on edge”? {3} As I live, says the Lord GOD, this proverb shall no more be used by you in Israel. {4} Know that all lives are mine; the life of the parent as well as the life of the child is mine: it is only the person who sins that shall die.

    To judge a person based on who their parents were is simply wrong.

  64. avatar
    ballantine October 16, 2009 at 3:55 pm #

    Another argument would have been that under the common law children of foreign sovereigns would not have been deemed to be natural born as they would not have been deemed to owe allegiance to a country they were visiting. Silly argument anyway as it presumes the american people are stupid enough to elect an enemy as president.

  65. avatar
    Rickey October 16, 2009 at 4:44 pm #

    My birth certificate (New York) simply says “date filed.” I guess that in birther world the registrar first has to receive it, then file it, and finally accept it. Or do they accept it and then file it? It’s all so confusing.

  66. avatar
    wendy October 16, 2009 at 5:27 pm #

    I’ll offer another view. Donofrio might be arguing his thinking as to IF THE STANDARD IS MET. Personally, my argument is far more simple…WHO DEFINES if the standard is/is not met.
    Investigate away. For those that spend hour after hour, finding their supposed legal points, I’d say that they block out something. That is, they obviously DO NOT KNOW the law. Nor are they willing to deal with the idea, that “THEY” have no authority whatsoever.
    In fact, Hawaii has no obligation to them, at all. The law sets which records are open to the public. The statements made already, go beyond what is legally required.
    It all plays well to the mob.
    It means nothing. Obama would not be in office if not eligible; those with authority, have already made that determination, based on real facts.

  67. avatar
    Bob October 16, 2009 at 5:30 pm #

    As it was “explained” to me, it is filed then accepted.

    So Obama’s paperwork has been in limbo for 48 years now.

    That’s one helluva coffee break.

  68. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy October 16, 2009 at 7:07 pm #

    Hint: If it hadn’t been accepted, there would be no COLB from Hawaii.

  69. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy October 16, 2009 at 7:12 pm #

    It is filed first. The date filed is the important date when judging timeliness of compliance with the law and in determining whether it is a “delayed registration.” The Date accepted (or date registered) is a factor of the efficiency of the vital statistics office. The State Department’s Passport application page says:

    *A certified birth certificate has a registrar’s raised, embossed, impressed or multicolored seal, registrar’s signature, and the date the certificate was filed with the registrar’s office, which must be within 1 year of your birth. [Emphasis added]

    This is why a modern birth certificate will most likely state the date filed.

  70. avatar
    wendy October 16, 2009 at 7:17 pm #

    I think it is safe to say that YOU personally make the choice to disbelieve evidence that would be acceptable in any court of law, and which CLEARLY has met the standards of the entire Federal government.

    Personally, I know that I have NO REASON to sit around and dispute reality. You don’t either.. but that isn’t stopping any birther.

  71. avatar
    Runninbear October 18, 2009 at 8:54 am #

    Well they may be confused about Obama’s birth place but they aren’t confused when they say obama is a “DUAL CITIZEN OF INDONESIA” Fact.they have his school records and they clearly state that he is a citizen of Indonesia and thats how he was able to travel to countries where any other American would have been killed as soon as he showed his “American Passport,a passport that Obama “Never Had until he became a U.S.Senator????It shows he was a registered as a “MUSLIM” and to deny your faith is the worse cowardly act a human could do ,unless he has an agenda?and his agenda is Cloven /Piven theroy to bankrupt America to take over every aspect of our Lives,One word SOCIALISM?Why is it that this man who said I will be more transparent is any but?if everyone would force obama to provide his records you would see what he has been lieing about and you would see he does have an agenda and America your it?O M G O=Obama M= Must G= GO, Obama O=ONE B=Big A=azz M= Mistake A= America

  72. avatar
    kimba October 18, 2009 at 9:51 am #

    You have managed to pack into one paragraph just about every birther myth there is. Luckily you have come to Doc’s place where you will find dozens of articles with links addressing your concerns. You should consider reading Doc’s articles, which provide facts and links, not the unsubstantiatedly rumor, innuendo and speculation you have regurgitated.

  73. avatar
    M.L. Richardson October 21, 2009 at 11:51 pm #

    Spend time in Mombasa, Kenya. Learn that he was born in Provincial General Hospital in Mombasa — and, of course, the people there are quite proud of the fact.
    His mother mentioned his Kenya birth on an audio tape that is in the possession of the 17 parties suing in a California Middle District Federal Court, which has set a trial date for Jan. 26, 2010 to hear evidence.
    Obama has spent more than $1.4-million on attorneys operating in more than 12 American states trying to hush up efforts to make him produce a VERIFIABLE birth certificate. The one he produced in the summer of 2008 was examined by three forensic experts who declared it a fake. BIG MONEY and life-threatening situations arising here. Pray for the California Federal Judge !

  74. avatar
    Bob October 22, 2009 at 2:30 am #

    Learn that he was born in Provincial General Hospital in Mombasa

    Which fake birth certificate told you that?

    His mother mentioned his Kenya birth on an audio tape that is in the possession of the 17 parties suing in a California Middle District Federal Court

    Oh, come on. There’s this tape but no one has released it? Rumor and speculation.

    a trial date for Jan. 26, 2010

    Which will be vacated once the motion to dismiss is granted.

    Obama has spent more than $1.4-million

    But not all (not even most) on eligibility suits.

    hush up efforts to make him produce a VERIFIABLE birth certificate.

    He did; his COLB.

    The one he produced in the summer of 2008 was examined by three forensic experts who declared it a fake.

    Two of these “experts” were themselves fakes, and the third only took a cursory glance at it.

    Pray for the California Federal Judge!

    I do, and for the U.S. Marshals that guard these judges.

  75. avatar
    Expelliarmus October 22, 2009 at 3:09 am #

    I count 7 outright lies in ML Richardson’s post and 1 implied threat on the life of a federal judge.

  76. avatar
    nbc October 22, 2009 at 3:32 am #

    Wow how wrong can one be in two simple paragraphs.

    Hint, the COLB was not found to be a fake by any forensic expert.

  77. avatar
    Whatever4 October 22, 2009 at 3:42 am #

    Plus even the rumors are incorrectly reported. The tape isn’t of the mother, it’s the step-grandmother, and she doesn’t say he was born in Kenya.

    Thanks for playing our game!

  78. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy October 22, 2009 at 7:34 am #

    Actually the COLB is genuine. It was the forensic experts who were fake.

  79. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy October 22, 2009 at 7:44 am #

    M.L. Richardson: Spend time in Mombasa, Kenya.

    I may take you up on that.