Few movements have generated as tenacious a group of followers as that of the Birthers. Despite the fact that neither the Clinton nor the McCain staff were able to find issue with the eligibility of Barack Obama, Birthers somehow believe that these two determined contenders for the presidency simply overlooked this issue, only realizing a few years later that had they just uncovered this one stone, candidate Obama would have been ruled ineligible.
(Why is this picture considered racist? BECAUSE IT IS!!!!)
The evidence of derangement has been on full display since the election of our first Black president. Initially, it was put forth that Obama was indeed born in Kenya, his father's birthplace. So ludicrous is this notion owing to the following:
1. Obama's mother was in a failing marriage to a man who already had a wife in Kenya.
2. Why would a pregnant 18-year-old opt to give birth in an impoverished part of the world instead of the more salubrious hospitals of Hawai'i?
3. Where would the decidedly middle-class Dunhams have raised the airfare for their pregnant daughter to give birth halfway around the world?
4. Where are the passport records, visas, vaccinations, airline tickets, departure stamps, re-entry stamps, Kenyan birth certificates, photos, testimonials of the doctors and several family members regarding Stanley Ann Dunham's departure for Kenya and her subsequent delivery in that land?
5. Why would the Hawaiian authorities have posted a birth notice for Barack Obama in Honolulu in August of 1961 had he been born in Kenya?
The mindset that overlooks such obvious obstacles to a Kenyan birth is far from rational. Those who have abandoned the belief that Obama was born in Kenya are now focused on how Obama, the American-born president, is not a "natural-born" citizen and is still ineligible. This is because, according to birther logic, Obama had one parent who was a non citizen, thus he is not a natural-born citizen and cannot be the president.
(So what? It's probably a different Barack Hussein Obama!)
How slothful are the legal scholars of this nation that they would overlook this until the collective wisdom of the birthers forced us to take a long, critical examination of our president's status? According to birthers, one must be born to two parents who are citizens of the United States in order to be a natural-born citizen. What is curious is how the birthers were visibly absent back in 1988 when Michael Dukakis, the child of Greek immigrants who had not been naturalized, ran for president. No eligibility issues were raised. Did the birthers demand an investigation into the citizenship status of George McGovern's Canadian mother when McGovern ran in 1972? Of course not. The term "natural-born citizen" is as nebulous as the 14-year residency requirement required for presidential candidates. This stipulation does not state whether or not the 14 years must be consecutive, for example.
Those who see a lack of precision in the verbiage itself refer to the "fact" that Obama is a dual citizen, born of a British subject, thus ineligible for higher office owing to his "dual allegiances." With this mentality, no Jew could ever be president of the United States, for Israel considers anyone with Jewish parents or grandparents to be an Israeli by birth; the same holds true for those born anywhere in the world and who have Irish or Italian parents and/or grandparents: both Irish and Italian law stipulate that anyone with an Irish or an Italian grandparent is a citizen of Ireland or Italy.
The U.S has no jurisdiction over what other sovereign nations consider to be the requirements for their own citizenship. If Raul Castro were to declare that every person born in Florida is a citizen of Cuba, this obviously should have no effect on U.S. law, just as British law over former colonies should have no impact on U.S. nationality law.
The birther movement is a spectacle in itself, one that shows the average citizen just how determined irrational individuals can be given enough time and publicity. An exercise in futility, they nonetheless carry on with their plight, neglecting how desperately we need to band together to concentrate on real issues that have an impact on our citizenry
The evidence of derangement has been on full display since the election of our first Black president. Initially, it was put forth that Obama was indeed born in Kenya, his father's birthplace. So ludicrous is this notion owing to the following:
1. Obama's mother was in a failing marriage to a man who already had a wife in Kenya.
2. Why would a pregnant 18-year-old opt to give birth in an impoverished part of the world instead of the more salubrious hospitals of Hawai'i?
3. Where would the decidedly middle-class Dunhams have raised the airfare for their pregnant daughter to give birth halfway around the world?
4. Where are the passport records, visas, vaccinations, airline tickets, departure stamps, re-entry stamps, Kenyan birth certificates, photos, testimonials of the doctors and several family members regarding Stanley Ann Dunham's departure for Kenya and her subsequent delivery in that land?
5. Why would the Hawaiian authorities have posted a birth notice for Barack Obama in Honolulu in August of 1961 had he been born in Kenya?
The mindset that overlooks such obvious obstacles to a Kenyan birth is far from rational. Those who have abandoned the belief that Obama was born in Kenya are now focused on how Obama, the American-born president, is not a "natural-born" citizen and is still ineligible. This is because, according to birther logic, Obama had one parent who was a non citizen, thus he is not a natural-born citizen and cannot be the president.
How slothful are the legal scholars of this nation that they would overlook this until the collective wisdom of the birthers forced us to take a long, critical examination of our president's status? According to birthers, one must be born to two parents who are citizens of the United States in order to be a natural-born citizen. What is curious is how the birthers were visibly absent back in 1988 when Michael Dukakis, the child of Greek immigrants who had not been naturalized, ran for president. No eligibility issues were raised. Did the birthers demand an investigation into the citizenship status of George McGovern's Canadian mother when McGovern ran in 1972? Of course not. The term "natural-born citizen" is as nebulous as the 14-year residency requirement required for presidential candidates. This stipulation does not state whether or not the 14 years must be consecutive, for example.
Those who see a lack of precision in the verbiage itself refer to the "fact" that Obama is a dual citizen, born of a British subject, thus ineligible for higher office owing to his "dual allegiances." With this mentality, no Jew could ever be president of the United States, for Israel considers anyone with Jewish parents or grandparents to be an Israeli by birth; the same holds true for those born anywhere in the world and who have Irish or Italian parents and/or grandparents: both Irish and Italian law stipulate that anyone with an Irish or an Italian grandparent is a citizen of Ireland or Italy.
The U.S has no jurisdiction over what other sovereign nations consider to be the requirements for their own citizenship. If Raul Castro were to declare that every person born in Florida is a citizen of Cuba, this obviously should have no effect on U.S. law, just as British law over former colonies should have no impact on U.S. nationality law.
The birther movement is a spectacle in itself, one that shows the average citizen just how determined irrational individuals can be given enough time and publicity. An exercise in futility, they nonetheless carry on with their plight, neglecting how desperately we need to band together to concentrate on real issues that have an impact on our citizenry
No comments:
Post a Comment