Barack Obama claims to have a real birth certificate.
At least he had one in 1995 when he authored his first book, probably with the collaborative assistance of domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, "Dreams From My Father."
On page 26 of that otherwise forgettable piece of literary history, he or his ghostwriter tells the reader: "I discovered this article, folded away among my birth certificate and old vaccination forms, when I was in high school."
Now why is it significant that Obama had a real birth certificate – presumably the kind we're all familiar with that discloses the name of the hospital in which the birth took place, the names of the parents, notes and signatures of attending physicians, etc.?
It's significant because it presumably exists – unless, of course, this is simply a fictional literary device dreamed up out of whole cloth by Ayers or some other ghostwriter. I suppose that is possible.
TRENDING: Has Google created an AI Frankenstein?
Where's the proof Barack Obama was born in the U.S. or that he fulfills the "natural-born citizen" clause in the Constitution? If you still want to see it, join more than 380,000 others and sign up now!
So why doesn't Barack Obama want to show the world what it says? Why the resistance? What could be on that record that would threaten national security or sully the reputation of a man already residing in the White House?
If Barack Obama had this elusive document in 1995 – 14 years ago – it is safe to assume he hasn't lost it. He may have even retrieved it from his grandmother's house when she died during the latter stages of the presidential campaign.
The document he describes is folded up with other important letters and papers. It doesn't sound like the "certification of live birth" he released to select news organization and posted on his campaign website in a bid to "prove" he was a "natural born citizen."
The question is, however, why wouldn't Obama release the more detailed document – one that might actually put to rest questions about whether he was actually born in Hawaii? Why wouldn't he release a document that would reflect the actual contemporaneous details of his birth as recorded by witnesses on the scene? Why would he insist, after all this time, in releasing only the heavily sanitized "certification of live birth" that proves nothing – not even a Hawaiian birth?
Instead, Obama has tirelessly fought numerous lawsuits aimed at release of that document by spending nearly $1 million, stonewalling the clamoring of millions of Americans, thumbing his nose at the Constitution and putting the lie to claims of an "open" and "transparent" administration.
What does that birth certificate say?
Aren't you more curious than ever?
If we can't trust Barack Obama to reveal his birth certificate to the American people, can we really trust him with national security?
Is it possible that something on that birth certificate is so embarrassing to Obama that he could actually be subject to blackmail as a result?
These are some of the questions raised by this issue – and I can't get them out of my head. I don't understand why everyone isn't as curious as I am.
Barack Obama could shut me up and shut Rush Limbaugh up and embarrass the "birthers" from coast to coast by simply and quietly releasing that birth certificate that was such an important discovery for him 14 years ago when he wrote his first book.
Don't insult our intelligence, Barack Obama, by suggesting the sketchy "certification of live birth" does anything to prove you are a natural born citizen.
On the contrary, it suggests just the opposite. It claims his father was a Kenyan foreign national and his mother was an 18-year-old American whose own immature citizenship would not confer natural born citizenship upon her son. It also suggests, as I wrote yesterday, that he was in fact a Kenyan citizen at birth and a subject of Great Britain at birth – hardly what the founders had in mind for presidential eligibility when they ratified the Constitution.