Some say that the published newspaper announcements of Obama's birth establish that he was born in Hawaii. Others go so far as to state that anyone who questions the announcements is part of a conspiracy to discredit the child who would become the President of the United States. That's a distraction and it's nonsense. That theory is as meaningful as saying that the child would become a NHL hockey player or a garbage truck driver.

 

    If I was a teenage hippy who had casual sex with a married foreigner that resulted in pregnancy, my parents and I would also want to establish U.S. residency through what has now come to be known as an anchor baby. What better and easier way to attempt to establish anchor status than to publish birth announcements?

 

    Some say that the announcents came from information released by the birth hospital but that's not necessarily true. The announcenent(s), published 9 days after the birth, could have been dropped off, phoned in (from anywhere) or mailed (also from anywhere).

 

     The announcements contain names, address and birth place. It is established that the parents never lived together and that neither ever lived at the published address. If 2/3 of the announcements are lies, why would anyone believe that the remaining 1/3 (the birth location) might be true?