After more than two years of controversy, President Obama dropped a political bombshell with the surprise release of his long-form birth certificate.
For most, the issue is settled - Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii on Aug 4,1961.
For others, the conspiracy lives on.
In an online poll at The Wall Street Journal, nearly 28 percent of more than 10,000 voters say the release of the document does not settle the issue at all.
A post at the website Gotham Resistance, for example, states:
I’m sure that in the days and weeks to come the BC will be reviewed by document experts and others. Is it really that hard for the POTUS and his people to come up with a facsimile of a Hawaiian birth certificate? I just wonder why it took them this long. I also wonder why it wasn’t done in a more dramatic fashion as many in the Conservative anti-birther movement warned us. Like during the middle of a presidential debate!
Another website says the document presented by Obama was clumsily altered, and any user with Adobe Illustrator can easily see the edits that were made:
This document has been altered and whoever did it wasn't even very clever in doing so.
I downloaded the PDF from the White House Web site - the "official copy" right from the "Horse's Mouth."
The author states that several things were altered, including the mother's occupation, the "Accepted date" and the document number.
The cuts were left in the clipboard illustrating the clumsiness of the edit, according to the post.
A post at godlikeproductions.com provides links to images of two birth certificates - one is the document produced by President Obama, and the other is a Hawaiian birth certificate from 1962. According to the post, there are marked differences in the certificates.
1. Obama's certificate does seem to be missing the seal. I did the research on this issue and it seems when you scan, the seal does not always show up especially if its a hologram type seal.
2. The pattern on both certificates are different. I've looked closely and Obama's certificate has a different background that was printed out when it was requested. The patterns are not static. The certificate is old, but the pattern is new.
Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit posts information he says was provided by a computer graphics expert who has written 17 books on the subject. According to that post, the document is clearly faked. Hoft also provides the image of a Hawaiian birth certificate for comparison. He writes:
Lastly, look at the attached 1961 sample image found on the Internet of a legitimate 1961 Hawaii Birth Certificate (which someone posted to show what a real certificate would look like from that year in Hawaii)… look at the marks on this Internet version and you can see this was the template for Obama’s BC handiwork. The handwriting is exactly the same between posted Internet image and Obama’s fake version — the placement of boxes and marks are in the exact same position, dates are where the modified clipping masks occur to adjust dates to fit for Obama, but the handwriting of dates match (except for the clipping mask changes). Even the Cert. number is only off by the last two digits (which…you guessed it… happens to be a clipping mask layer).
Many point to the race listed for the President's father, noting that "African" is not a 'race' and the term does not fit 1960's vernacular. According to Gotham Resistance:
I did notice that Obama’s supposed birth certificate still has the father’s race listed as “African” as it was on the COLB that was released during his campaign. Like many in the blogosphere, I have serious doubts that this term was ever used to describe a person’s race. Once again, African is not a race! That would be the equivalent of stating that my race was European. I’m sure that it wouldn’t be too difficult finding another person born in Hawaii to a black farther around the same time of Obama’s birth and compare the father’s race box to Obama’s. Either Obama’s forgery team is handicapped by political correctness of the brain, or the Hawaiian Department of Health was run by morons at the time of Obama’s supposed birth.
An Associated Press article states:
Thus, an apparently unprecedented moment in American politics: An elected president, after more than 800 days in office, still defending his legitimacy to serve and prodding people to drop "this thing that just keeps on going."
For some, however, the controversy will - like the Energizer bunny - keep going on, and on, and on.
-----------------------------------------------------------
If you like this article, you can follow Joe on Twitter @jnewby1956, visit his Facebook page, or click the Subscribe button to receive email updates when a new article is published.
Comments