With the notable exception of Michael Shrimpton who has not really been a mainstay of the birther movement, birthers have been remarkably consistent in their agreement on President Obama’s day of birth, August 4, 1961. No matter where in the world they think the President was born, that date has always been the date, even though it causes problems for their alternate histories. Even the Lucas Smith fake Kenyan birth certificate has that date.
Now, however, Jack Cashill raises the issue and suggests that Obama could younger by 5 years! The article, “Obama Turned 53—Or Did He?” at WorldNetDaily and his own web site, Cashill.com, is the usual collection of petty smears and catty insults. Here’s an example:
If there ever were a romance between Dunham and Barack Senior, it likely started at closing time and ended when Senior sobered up.
In reality Cashill is not really suggesting Obama is impossibly younger than it says on his birth certificate, but actually criticizing a remark Obama made in a speech in Selma in 2007 where he talks about events in Selma making his own birth possible. The discussion of the date of birth, coincident with Obama’s birth day, is nothing more than a way to make a largely-discredited smear topical again. The alleged anachronism was analyzed at Snopes.com 6 years ago, and interested readers can follow the link and evaluate their argument.
Other than creating a new opportunity for nastiness, what the heck does it matter? An Obama 5 yrs younger is still well qualified in terms of age. Conclusion: being nasty is an end unto itself. Again.
Once again THE ONION is eerily prophetic:
http://www.theonion.com/articles/obama-turns-50-despite-republican-opposition,21061/
I believe Charles Kerchner is questionable on whether August 4, 1961 is really Obama’s birthday. Kerchner believes Obama was born earlier (probably in Kenya) and that August 4, 1961 is merely the date that was REGISTERED (not a birth date) with State of Hawaii to state that Obama was born in Hawaii when he really wasn’t to give him the benefits of US citizenship.
I guess they hope that if they can get people to believe that Obama is younger than he says he is, it’ll mean he was born before Hawaii was a state, thus nulling his status as a “natural born citizen”. *facepalm* Dr. Forrester and TV’s Frank hatched better schemes!
Do you have a citation? Obama’s birth was registered on August 8, according to all official sources.
Vice President Curtis was born in an incorporated US Territory that later became a state. So Obama being born before Hawaii statehood shouldn’t be an issue.
Upon what do you base your beliefs?
Hint: all the evidence, every shred, contradicts your beliefs. So why do you believe what you believe?
I know why you believe what you do; I’m wondering if you’re capable of that sort of introspection.
That’s when the birth certificate was registered with state of Hawaii. But Obama’s actual birth date was registered on August 04, 1961. I guess that was date they used to report to Hawaii on the day he was actually born.
Dr C:
“Vice President Curtis was born in an incorporated US Territory that later became a state. So Obama being born before Hawaii statehood shouldn’t be an issue.”
Eligibility wasn’t an issue for Barry M. Goldwater who was born in the Arizona Territory. (As noted in the Senate Congressional record in 2008 regarding Senate Resolution 511.)
Registered by whom on August 4?
Yes, the doctor who delivered the President and the hospital where he was delivered attested that his birth was on August 4, 1961, at Kapi’olani Hospital. Said birth was registered with the state if Hawai’i on August 8, 1961. Do you have any evidence to the contrary?
Hint: speculation is not evidence.
There. That’s better.
I assume John means the birthdate was registered as 8/4/61, and this registration occurred on 8/8/61.
You know, birfers and grammar, ne’er the two shall meet. Eternally twain.
Your welcome, John.
That would require Obama being older, but, whatever, crazy isn’t supposed to make sense, all the crazier if they believe his being younger could somehow make him older than Hawaii’s statehood!
If you look at the Certificate of Live Birth, Barack Obama’s mother signed it on August 7, 1961 and the attending physician at Kapi’olani Hospital, David A Sinclair, M.D. signed it on August 8, 1961 along with Local Registrar Verna K.L. Lee who also signed the birth certificate on August 8, 1961.
If he wasn’t a citizen at birth, why wouldn’t his mother have him go through the naturalization process? The only benefit that a natural-born citizen has that a naturalized citizen doesn’t is being eligible to be President.
Given the long odds against any one person in this country being elected President, especially a black person born at a time when blacks couldn’t vote in some states, why would anyone be thinking about this when their kid is born?
Ah yes Birthers out of options are now going to question the birthdate. Nancy Ruth Owens started this nonsense claiming August 5th was the date he was really born. Kerchner isn’t really good with dates especially when he accused FDR of having the army shoot pensioners for asking for their bonus money during Herbert Hoover’s administration.
There is no reason he should have/would have had to go through the naturalization process, 1) he was born in the US so automatically a citizen, and 2) even if he hadn’t been born in the US his mother was a citizen so he would be as well. All irrelevant since his birth certificate shows him being born at Honolulu in Hawaii.
Well, yes, of course. I was just trying to point out to John that there was no real motive to do what he claims the President’s parents did.
Your #1 (the only one that matters) is right, but your # 2 isn’t. A child born outside the US and its outlying possessions (or the Panama Canal Zone) to Ann Dunham Obama on August 4, 1961, could only become a US citizen by naturalization.
Mike Volin (of Where’s Obama’s Birth Certificate) is very fond of Obama’s “Selma” speech. He regularly plays it on his show as proof that Obama lied about his birth.
The problem is that the clip doesn’t say what Volin thinks it says. Even other birthers like Volin tell him his interpretation is off only for him to repeatedly play it to try to get them to think his way.
John:
I’m more troubled by the fact that last year Pres. Obama said he was 52. Now he says he’s 53.
Which one is it?
It should be “You’re welcome” 😀
Anyway, My birthday is the 5th of the month, and my birth was registered on the 24th according to my BC. Obviously I am a fake Manchurian candidate.
That’s awesome. Birther bigot’s paradox! 😀
As if that would stop birthers who already have thrown Chester Arthur under the bus. The would throw every single President, VP and candidate in history under the bus if it meant keeping a theory alive that would make the black guy ineligible.