Not So Fast, Mr.
Obama: Trust But Verify
By Carol A. Taber
TownHall.com
Yesterday, President Obama released a long
form birth certificate. In doing so, he
lectured Americans about what was truly
important in America. "We do
not have time for this kind of silliness,"
he intoned. "We've got better stuff to do.
I've got better stuff to do. We've
got big problems to solve, and I'm confident
we can solve them, but we're going to have
to focus on them, not on this." He then
promptly boarded Air Force One to solve one
of those vital problems -- by flying to
Chicago for another appearance on Oprah's
show.
Let's focus now on one very simple question:
why did he
fight not
to release the long form birth certificate?
Why did it take the moving of mountains (or
at least poll numbers) to get Obama to
release a long form birth certificate after
literally years of stonewalling? Although
there is incriminating evidence on the
long form birth certificate
-- in that the numbers are still out of
sequence with the
Nordyke twins' numbers
-- we already knew that from Obama's
Certification of Live Birth (COLB). In
fact, were it not for the certificate
numbers and the date accepted by the
Registrar General on the Nordyke twins'
birth certificates, and the certificate
number and the date filed by the registrar
on Obama's COLB, this indication of forgery
would never have been detected.
So why did he fight not to release it? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that Obama wasn't hiding anything that is on the present long form birth certificate. The evidence indicates that what he is hiding is that his long form birth certificate may not be genuine.
Two years ago, the mainstream media published online a Certification of Live Birth for Mr. Obama and told us it was a birth certificate, which the White House at the time did not correct. More recently, in an article written by Michael Isikoff, National Investigative Correspondent for NBC News, a spokesman for the Hawaii attorney general's office, Joshua Wisch, was interviewed. The article stated:
"It's a Department of Health record and it can't be released to anybody," he [Wisch] said. Nor do state laws have any provision that authorizes such records to be photocopied, Wisch said. If Obama wanted to personally visit the state health department, he would be permitted to inspect his birth record, Wisch said.
Despite Hawaii's own statute stating otherwise, this was the reporting. Some investigative work!
Mr. Obama sent Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, a
decorated combat-experienced Army flight
surgeon, to jail because Obama refused to
release his birth certificate. That
document couldn't have been produced 6
months ago to prevent Lt. Col. Lakin's being
manacled and shipped to Fort Leavenworth
prison to rot in a cell? What possible
explanation and what sort of
character does Obama have, especially
as Commander-in-Chief, for sending a soldier
to jail, ruining his career, over the very
same document the soldier had to produce for
his military deployment orders?
And then there is the case of Mrs. Eleanor
Nordyke. A few weeks back, American Thinker
published my article,
Trump Needs to Shift to Second Gear on Birth
Certificate Challenge.
In it, I explained that the certificate
number on Obama's "Certification of Live
Birth" is out of sequence to the certificate
numbers on the long form birth certificates
of the Nordyke twins, also born in Hawaii.
We know by both the Nordyke and Obama long
forms that an incremental stamp was used for
the certificate numbers, yet Obama's
certificate number is higher than
the twins' when it should have been
lower.
Mrs. Nordyke, copying an attorney,
wrote to say that the reason why Obama's
certificate number was higher than her
twins' was because Ann Dunham, Obama's
mother, entered the hospital after
Mrs. Nordyke and the time of a pregnant
woman's entrance to the hospital is what
determined the birth registration number.
In what can in my mind only be described as
a "lawyered-up" email, Nordyke went on to
say "The 'sequence' refers to time of birth
certificate registration -- not to the
actual time of delivery," cleverly confusing
the two ideas of a birth certificate
registration and the mother's
registration at the hospital. It is clever
because of this fact: the birth certificate
numbers were not assigned at the hospital;
rather, they were assigned at the Hawaii
Department of Health (HDOH) at the Main
office in Honolulu when the birth
certificates were accepted and filed there.
That is the only place it was done,
so Nordyke's statement is entirely
misleading since no birth certificate
numbers were given when the mother entered
the hospital. Nor were they assigned when
the baby was born.
I wrote back to her and said among other
things:
Your letter has engendered a few questions. Previous statements of yours indicate that you did not see Ann Dunham in Kapiolani Hospital during the time when you were there to deliver your twins in August 1961.... Also, since the hospital records are closed to the public and Mr. Obama is not talking about or unsealing his records, how do you now know or believe that Ann Dunham arrived shortly after you did, or if she ever did, and how do you know when she delivered her child? [...]
Without proof (someone to attest by name to Ann Dunham entering the hospital or an admissions record or a record of birth time), information which neither the hospital, the state, nor Mr. Obama will provide, and because of your conflicting statements, I'd need to know more about how or why this information in your email is now valid or meaningful.
Why would Mrs. Nordyke say this? In my
opinion, the Obama supporters are very
concerned about the central message in my
article -- that whatever he releases as a
birth certificate simply must be
forensically tested. An honest man does not
fear a forensics evaluation of his birth
certificate.
President Reagan was right when he
said, "Trust, but verify."
At the very least, a forensics expert should
examine the hospital admission records for
Stanley Ann Dunham, as well as the paper and
ink formulation on the original long form
birth certificate.
Do these requests seem unreasonable? Not at all as one considers that, when enemies of George W. Bush began to question his Texas Air National Guard service, they demanded copies of his service records. He then released them, and they continued to question him, demanding hard copies.
Oh! -- and now that President Obama has
released a long form birth certificate, will
he ask the Democrats to drop their
opposition to state laws requiring forensic
testing of such documents? I would hope
that Mr. Obama now would wholeheartedly
endorse efforts of state legislators
introducing eligibility bills, to include
provisions for forensics testing of any
documents where authenticity might be in
question.
An honest man has nothing to fear from a
forensics test: like DNA evidence, it helps
to convict the guilty and protect the
innocent.