The left likes to call it the “birther” issue. The term birther is used as a derisive term by the left, much as truther is. Of course the difference is truthers beliefs are based on a paranoid ideology, where as the birther issue is based on facts.
I prefer to call it the eligibility issue, not the birther issue. Whether you agree or not, the people who are pushing the eligibility issue are on our side. It is certainly counter-productive to deride them like liberals do.
Recently a whole stream of Republicans have come out, at the prompting of the drive by media, to reassure us that Obama is a citizen and oh, yes, he is a Christian too.
Last Sunday, at the prodding of David Gregory on Meet the Press, or as Rush likes to call it, Meet the depressed, Boehner said, the State of Hawaii had said he was born there, that was good enough for him.
Karl Rove, not a friend of the Tea Party, pushed the RINO line that Obama is a citizen and Sarah Palin, at a meeting in Long Island, a few days ago, also denounced the eligibility issue. Palin ended her remarks on the subject by saying, “let’s stick with what really matters.”
This issue does matter.
There are three variations on the eligibility issue. Two are based on undisputed facts. The third is in dispute.
The most commonly reported of the eligibility challenges is the claim that Obama was actually born in Kenya, not Hawaii. I believe, based on the available evidence, that it is more likely than not, Obama was actually born in Hawaii. Obama has spent a lot of time and (other people’s) money, keeping his original birth certificate out of sight.
Jack Cashill is one of my favorite writers and he has a theory which I think makes sense, that Obama was in fact born in Hawaii, but there is something else on his birth certificate that would destroy the myth of Barack Obama. (See his website, Cashill.com). In the law, there is a presumption that if a party has exclusive access to a piece of evidence and will not release it, the evidence must be adverse to their position.
The second eligibility issue is the claim that because Barack Obama’s father was a Kenyan, a British subject at the time of Obama’s birth, he is not a natural born citizen.
The third is the argument that because Barack Obama was adopted as a child by an Indonesian and moved to Indonesia, he is not an American citizen. Under the law at that time, if an American child was adopted by a citizen of another country and moved to that country, he lost his citizenship. He could regain his citizenship by applying at an American Embassy when he was 18, but would then be treated as a naturalized citizen and thus ineligible to be President.
What is stunning about all of this is the mainstream Republican reaction to the eligibility issues.
The RINOs turn their noses up at the people who want the answers, which, incidentally is 60% of Republican voters. They turn their noses up at the Tea Party movement. Yet, they do not take a moment to consider why this is important.
If Barack Obama is proved to be ineligible to be President, everything he has done is wiped out. Obamacare is gone. The START treaty is gone. The liberal lunatics Obama has appointed to the Federal Judiciary, including the two he has put on the Supreme Court are gone.
Much of the damage Obama has done to this country can be undone. Unfortunately, the Country Club Republicans remain clueless. In their minds, the Democrats are simply the lower class versions of themselves. They do not understand that if the party of treason has its way, America will be forever changed and ultimately destroyed.
The Courts have so far brushed aside all of the eligibility claims. None have been addressed on the merits under the claim that Americans lack standing to challenge the issue. Recently, the Supreme Court has given some indication it may consider one of the issues. We can only hope.
What are the chances of success? Who knows?
Why do football teams run the flea flicker play? It does not work all of the time, but when it does, the results are spectacular. Why should conservatives all hope this works out? Because this wipes out almost everything the Obama regime has done. We get a do over.
You would think, even the RINOs who want to denigrate the eligibility issue could figure this one out.
Thank you for posting this, Diogenes. It gives us hope that our loved ones can function better even if they have Alzheimers.
Great report Diogenes. Coconut oil is beneficial.
Good one Wayne!
Galvanized: Romney, Ryan Draw Massive Crowd in NC
By William Bigelow
The announcement of Paul Ryan as Mitt Romney’s running mate is clearly galvanizing voters across the country; people are turning out in droves to see the new Republican ticket in person. Tweets from those attending the rallies today testify to the excitement.
And Congress is silent.
Destroys Heckler: Mr. President, Get Your Campaign out of the Gutter!
You can trust Obama to play fair. NOT
This story is not new, but the fact that it appeared in Investors Business Daily is new.
Transparency: A former classmate has added a tantalizing question to the mysteries surrounding Barack Obama's college years. Perhaps the GOP nominee, whose tax records are demanded, should call the president's bluff.
Not many students whose grades supposedly were good enough to get into Harvard Law School can say that 400 of their classmates taken randomly don't remember a single thing about him or his even being there. But Barack Obama, Columbia University class of '83, can.
Student Obama spent two years at Columbia after transferring there from Occidental College in Los Angeles. And for all the impression he made on his classmates, he might as well have been in the witness protection program.
The Wall Street Journal reported in 2008 that Fox News called that random group of 400 Columbia classmates and never found one who had ever met Obama.
Like most transfer students, Obama lived off-campus, a factoid defenders use to explain his apparent lack of human contact during his Columbia years. Obama himself does not speak much about his years at Columbia and Harvard Law, other than he attended both and was elected president of the Harvard Law Review.
Interestingly, Obama contributed not one signed word to the Harvard Law Review or any other legal publication. As Matthew Franck has pointed out in National Review Online, "A search of the HeinOnline database of law journals turns up exactly nothing credited to Obama in any law review anywhere at anytime." A curious factoid for an alleged scholar.
In October 2007, the New York Times ran a piece titled "Obama's Account of New York Years Often Differs From What Others Say," which would have won the Pulitzer Prize for understatements if there was one.
The article noted that Obama, when asked, "declined repeated requests to talk about his New York years, release his Columbia transcript or identify even a single fellow student, co-worker, roommate or friend from those years."
One of those fellow students is Wayne Allen Root, former Libertarian vice presidential nominee. He wonders, as we do, what's in Obama's Columbia file that warrants standards of secrecy higher than, say, the details of the Osama bin Laden raid or our efforts to derail Iran's nuclear program with a computer virus.
Root asks if Obama's grades were good enough to get into Columbia. We have a copy of Mitt Romney's high school report card, which was deemed by the Boston Globe important enough to reveal to the world, but President Obama's Columbia transcripts remain a mystery.
What is the essence of Communism?
Obama said it best,"The American auto industry has come roaring back and GM is number one again! So now I want to do the same thing with manufacturing jobs. Not just in the auto industry, but in every industry."
The cocaine imbued, Marxist, Muslim strikes again.