Hardly. Your ability to know the difference between an original and a certified copy, and which one of those you have, speaks directly to your expectation for Obama and Gov. Abercrombie. You've said that Abercrombie should be able to obtain Obama's paper original, with Obama's consent, because you have your original. You've further claimed that Obama should possess his original and should have supplied that upon request. Your claim to possess your original is the basis for your expectation in both those claims. Hence it is key to your argument, which was already on shaky ground to begin with.
While
you might have been able to prove
you possess
your original birth certificate, that does not trump the policy of the states I'm aware of, which retain the original in their vital records repositories and issue copies, and have done so since the turn of the last century. Hence it is of dubious value anyway in setting up an expectation for someone born in Hawaii. But if you cannot even prove you have your own paper original, then your claim (weak as it was to begin with) simply fails.
I don't know if it's a copy or an original.
Then that is fatal to your claim.
In those days, there may have been more than one original created.
That's quite an imaginative hedge, but speculation doesn't save your claim.
If Obama had what I had, he could have simply produced it which he did not do.
Special pleading. Neither Obama nor anyone else is obligated to possess or furnish "what you have," but only what the states are bound by the Constitution to accept from each other. It doesn't matter whether the copy is elegantly calligraphed, typed manually into a form, photocopied, or laser-printed from the state's database in Cheltenham Extra Heavy on copy paper, so long as it bears the issuing agency's seal. In fact, the more you change your story, the more I'm inclined to believe that
no one has "what you have" -- including you. "What you have" seems to change depending on the needs of the argument
du jour.
Obama in fact furnished
two certified copies of his birth certificate, one the Standard Form issued by Hawaii and which was equivalent to that deemed authoritative enough for his opponents, and a facsimile copy of the long form. I'm not sure what it will take for you to realize that your made-up rules don't apply.
And you, who admit you cannot even tell the difference between an original and a copy, have the audacity to personally declare them invalid and to personally discredit all those professional election officers and professional journalists who examined the copies in person and were satisfied. Your ignorance and uncertainty, while creatively hedged, is not a sufficient basis for the world to declare that Obama's certificates (expressly plural) are invalid.
