Skip to Content
Eric Black Ink

Obama's long-form birth certificate

By Eric Black | 04/27/11

The White House has posted the long-form version of Pres. Obama's Hawaii birth certificate.

A post on the White House blog explains and provides a link.

The post, by White House Communications Director Dan Pfeiffer, ends:

"At a time of great consequence for this country – when we should be debating how we win the future, reduce our deficit, deal with high gas prices, and bring stability to the Middle East, Washington, DC, was once again distracted by a fake issue.  The President’s hope is that with this step, we can move on to debating the bigger issues that matter to the American people and the future of the country."

Updates: Upon learning of the release, Donald Trump declared -- from New Hampshire, no less --  that he was "very proud" of himself.

Pres. Obama made a five-minute appearance before the press corps, in which he tried to appear amused ("bemused" was the word he used) and to reiterate that he -- and the rest of us -- have better things on which to spend our time. There's a video of it here.

Related Tags:

Comments (11)

Submitted by Paul Brandon on April 27, 2011 - 9:35am.

Deniers will still deny -- it's all a conspiracle.

Submitted by Cecil North on April 27, 2011 - 11:28am.

Not surprising. Donald's also proud of making effective use of the bankruptcy laws.

Submitted by Lance Groth on April 27, 2011 - 12:05pm.

I tend to think this was a mistake on Obama's part. It makes The Donald look strong and the president weak. As Paul noted, it won't change anything with the birthers and others who simply hate the president and will oppose him no matter what. Some will claim the birth cert is a forgery. Others will say, "OK, maybe he's an American, but he's still a Muslim!" The White House should not pander to these people. The time to do this, if at all, was during the campaign, not as president.

Submitted by scott cantor on April 27, 2011 - 12:28pm.

It's obviously a forgery, which affirms yet again that Obama is a foreign agent. For instance, it's printed on green patterned paper, while everyone knows that Hawaii uses plain yellow for official certified records. Further, notice how the signature Ann Dunham Obama doesn't match the typed name of Ann Dunham Stanley--a common rookie mistake. Also observe that the purported signatures didn't take place until 3 or 4 days after the claimed birth--which would be plenty of time to fly him in from Kenya or Indonesia (notwithstanding the established fact that Obama was actually born in China 14 years earlier). And does anyone seriously believe that the registrar recorded it on the same business day as the attendant signed it? August 8 is the Feast of Cyriacus, so it's impossible anyone was even working. Lastly, how can one account for the fact that the certification print uses the exact same typewriter and font as the supposed original copy? You can't, nor can you explain how they used a 1971 model IBM Selectric II in 1961. Frankly, I expected better from the Trilateral Commission, the Anti-Masonic Order of Freemasonry, and their other co-conspirators.

Submitted by Brian Simon on April 27, 2011 - 2:38pm.

"Pres. Obama made a five-minute appearance before the press corps, in which he tried to appear amused ("bemused" was the word he used) and to reiterate that he -- and the rest of us -- have better things on which to spend our time."

For those who missed it, there is an article in last Sunday's New York Times Magazine about a forthcoming biography of Stanley Ann Dunham - the president's mother. An excerpt describes how in Indonesia, one learns to not respond to people who are teasing or ridiculing; and that young Barry Obama picked up this skill there.

Submitted by Gregory Lang on April 27, 2011 - 4:20pm.

There is still a potential "loophole" here. The law at the time said that an unmarried woman under 25 had to reside continually in the US for five years before the birth for the child to be considered "natural born". Obama's mother thought she was married but the father was still married in Kenya.

The US had a twelve mile territorial and economic limit until around 1980 when we went to a 200 mile economic limit (both the US and Russia had "spy" fishing boats off each other's coasts until satellites replaced them).

We would need to get dreadfully technical here but some Hawaiian islands are more than 24 miles apart so inter-island travel would technically mean being in international waters.

I don't expect Obama to be removed for this reason but it could be a minor thorn in a claim of lack of vetting of Obama. Actual removal of Obama for a reason like this would make him a "living martyr". This would be the Republican's worst 2012 election campaign nightmare.

Submitted by Rachel Kahler on April 27, 2011 - 5:23pm.

@ Brian: Young Barry MUST have picked up that skill in Indonesia. Americans are not that well behaved.

Submitted by Gregory Lang on April 28, 2011 - 5:10am.

There is still a potential "loophole" here. The law at the time said that an unmarried woman under 25 had to reside continually in the US for five years before the birth for the child to be considered "natural born". Obama's mother thought she was married but the father was still married in Kenya.

The US had a twelve mile territorial and economic limit until around 1980 when we went to a 200 mile economic limit (both the US and Russia had "spy" fishing boats off each other's coasts until satellites replaced them).

I don't see Obama being removed from office because of this but it may be brought up during the reelection campaign. (absence of proper legal vetting).

For Republicans the worst thing that could happen would be for Obama to be removed from office because of this type of technicality. It would make him a "living martyr".

Submitted by Eric Paul Jacobsen on April 28, 2011 - 5:22am.

I don't call it "pandering" when President Obama takes a moment to tell liars they are lying. I call it telling the truth. Even when the truth is glaringly obvious to most of us, the truth needs to be told, and repeated as often necessary.

The professional liars, particularly those with big advertising budgets, understand full well that merely by repeating their lies, they are winning over millions of gullible people. Why don't we understand this about the truth?

I do not share Lance Groth's concern that President Obama may be calling more attention to the birthers than they deserve. The birthers already have more attention than they deserve, thanks to their colossal advertising budget - Rupert Murdoch's advertising budget. The professional liars at Fox News are happy to give birthers far more of a hearing than they deserve, every day of the week, under the pretense of expressing skepticism about their claims. Even if the rest of us did our best to ignore the birthers, we can't undo the work of their message machine. The message is out there, and because it is out there, and because it is an outrageous lie, we sometimes must respond to it, with facts and evidence. We have no other choice.

Submitted by Rachel Kahler on April 28, 2011 - 1:09pm.

@Gregory--The argument that Obama's parents were not technically married at the time makes it more likely that he's a citizen, as out-of-wedlock marriages then, as now, require only that the mother be an American citizen and be in the US continuously for only 1 year prior to the birth. Interestingly, no one ever questioned John McCain's birthplace of the Panama Canal Zone (then under control of the US, but not within the US). And George Romney, who ran in the GOP primaries in 1968, was born in Mexico (a location never under control of the US) to American parents and still, not a peep.

There is certainly an element of racism to the whole thing. There is no proof possible for the birther movement that will satisfy them, I am sure, because the movement is not rational on the same level that racism is not rational. It provides the barest excuse for those that cling to their irrationalities, but it doesn't change the fact that it is still racism, or at least as rational as racism.

Submitted by Bernice Vetsch on April 28, 2011 - 3:25pm.

The law I read (U.S. Code Title 8, Chapter 12, Subchaper III, Part 1, 1401, at the webside www.law.cornell/uscode/8/1401.html) now says that the parent (not spouse) who is a U.S. citizen must have resided in "the U.S. or its outlying territories for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of whcih were after attaining the age of fourteen years...."

The president's mother did not leave the U.S. until after graduating from high school and earning her degree at the U. of Hawaii. She then worked for USAid and several NGOs in various countries.

If the law at the time referred to residency requirement for "an unmarried woman," she still met them, since she lived continuously in the U.S. for at least 20-22 years.