?

Log in

AlbertJayNock

More Obama citizenship stuff

The Supreme Court decided today not to hear a suit bought by lawyer Leo Donofrio  challenging the eligibility of  Barack Obama (along with erstwhile candidates John McCain and Roger Calero) for the presidency on the grounds he is not a citizen.

I am OK with this ruling. Donofrio was willing to concede that Obama was born in Hawaii, but his father's Kenyan citizenship actually made Barack a subject of the British Crown. That's a really convoluted argument.

What got me interested in this whole citizenship thing was Obama's refusal to release his original birth certificate in the Berg lawsuit. I still would like to see that enforced. I am not interested, as such, in finding an argument against Obama's eligibilty to be President. If the circumstances of his birth are as Obama and his supporters say they were, I have no problems (beyond the fact that he was not my choice) with him being sworn in.

But I would like to see his birth certificate unsealed, or for him to allow permission for it be released to a court.  That is why this article at Salon makes me so angry. It claims that nothing will satisfy the skeptics of Obama's citizenship. The article claims:

Perhaps the most common argument of those questioning Obama's eligibility is that he should just release his full, original birth certificate, rather than the shorter certification, which is a copy. His failure to do so only proves there is reason to be suspicious, they say, and if the document was released, the issue would go away. But that's unlikely.

"Unlikely". But that's as much as the article can really say. Since the original birth certificate has not been released, nobody really knows. I know that I would shut up about it if Obama released his long form BC and he was indeed born in Hawaii. Salon magazine does not speak for me.

The article is also very heavy on ad-hominem arguments. They point out the Philip Berg is a 9/11 truther (so that's a problem now?) and that Robert Schultz is a  "notorious tax protester". Andy Martin, (admittedly the hardest to defend of the lot), was denied admission to the Illinois Bar because of psychiatric problems.
 
So what? There's a lot to criticize about all of these fellows, and certainly they should not be treated as authorities, but the facts and arguments they present should be considered independently of their characters. To invert a cliche, if Charles Manson tells me the sun rises in the east, I'll take him at  his word because of what I know about the sun.

It's perfectly reasonable to be suspicious when Obama expended money on legal fees, as well as time and energy,  to avoid turning over his birth certificate.  I would love for him to comply with discovery in the Berg lawsuit and show that he was really born in Hawaii. The ensuing taunts and gloating from my liberal friends would be music to my ears, because my suspicions would be allayed and this stupid issue would finally go away.



Comments