Actually, we have seen it. We have seen the long-form birth certificate, which is the photocopy of the original onto security paper with the modern seal attached. You do not believe that? Well, that is exactly what the Director of Health of Hawaii said.<quoted text>
Dypshyt, there is no hope for you. None at all. Poops, computers existed before '61. Now, the altering/creation of Obobblehead's documents most likely occurred in the mid 70s or 2001 when the system went digital. Mid 70s: In the mid 1970's in Hawaii, this changed to the clerk going to the file, typing SOME of the info onto a form, then stamping, sealing, and sending. I think even you can see the flaw in that method. In 2001 the system went digital. Computer generated documents are probably the easiest to alter. Especially, if you knew someone with connections, which Obobblehead's handlers obviously did. The original paper documents still exist, poops. Why haven't we seen it? Because there isn't one!
Now as to the nutty claim that Obama or his family got officials either in the mid-1970s or in 2001 to change his birth certificate records. Why would they do that? Did they think that he was going to run for president in 2008?
Moreover, Obama's birth in Hawaii is confirmed NOT ONLY BY THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE but also by the public Index Data file and by the birth notices that were sent to the Hawaii newspapers by the DOH of Hawaii in 1961. And, although birthers tend to say "anyone can place a birth notices in the newspapers," that reply is in fact not true, since in Hawaii in 1961 ONLY the DOH could send birth notices to the "Health Bureau Statistics" section of the newspapers, and it only did so for births IN Hawaii.
So Obama was born in Hawaii, and the notion that Obama's parents got the officials to change the records is stupid (did Mitt Romney's relatives get the officials in Michigan to change his records? Well, that is exactly as likely as Obama's relatives doing it).
Birthers have not even shown that Obama's mother had a passport in 1961 (and very very few 18-year-olds did in those days), and yet they would like the world to believe that there is a realistic chance that she had a passport, and traveled using it during the last two months of pregnancy (which would have been even more rare due to the rate of stillbirths at the time).
Birthers have not even shown the date on which Obama's mother's passport file was created (and if it was created after 1961, she did not have a passport in 1961). And, the date on which Obama's mother's passport file was created is unlikely to have been lost, evaporated, or scratched off of the file (and if it were, they could tell us if that had indeed happened). But birther sites have not even told us that date.
And they LIED by saying that Obama's Kenyan grandmother said that he was born in Kenya (She actually said repeatedly that he was born in HAWAII, but they just cut off the tape just before she was asked "Where was he born?")
Yet, the birther sites that have not shown that Obama's mother had a passport in 1961 and do not show the date on which Obama's mother's passport file was created AND lied about Obama’s Kenyan grandmother saying he was born in Kenya still want us to assume that she had a passport, and that she traveled to a foreign country despite the risk of stillbirth, and that the birther “experts” are telling the truth about their claim that the birth certificate is forged (although the birther sites simply do not show the numerous real experts who say that it was not forged).
AND they want us to believe that the officials of both parties in Hawaii are lying about his place of birth, and so is the Index Data and the birth notices in the Hawaii newspapers---which at the time could only have been sent to the papers by the DOH of Hawaii, which at the time only sent out those notices for births IN Hawaii. No wonder rational people do not believe them.