You may have seen in the news today that President Obama has released the so-called long form of his birth certificate. In a five minute speech, he noted that during a week where he and Congress each presented their budgets, including recommendations for difficult choices of how to manage the finances of this country, the dominant news stories for the same time period were about questions regarding his birthplace.
I agree whole heartedly with the President when he called this issue "silliness." After Obama spoke, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus said, "The President ought to spend his time getting serious about repairing our economy." Now wait just a minute!! The Republican party and affiliates have been the ones all along who keep pushing the issue of the President's birthplace. They have been calling on him for more than two years now to produce the long form birth certificate. Now that he does it, they accuse him of playing politics and not engaging more serious issues? I have a decent imagination, but I think I would be hard pressed to divine a more perfect illustration of the pot calling the kettle black.
Over the years, officials from both political parties have confirmed, even in sworn affidavits, that the President is eligible to hold his office. For those who refuse to believe all of that evidence, I doubt the publication of the long form will change your opinion; after all, you are already well practiced in ignoring reason and fact. Yes, I'm speaking to you, Mr. Trump.
I'm not saying that Mr. Obama has a halo and should be heralded as a perfect president. I think there are some serious bases upon which legitimate and substantive criticism can appropriately be mounted. The question of his birthplace does not rank among those items and should be abandoned in pursuit of more relevant and productive debate.
Follow Up: After work, I read this piece of "news" where Joseph Farah, CEO of the World Net Daily, refuses to back down on the so-called birther issue, even in light of the President producing the long form birth certificate. Now, he argues, the issue should switch to his citizenship. I argue, with the backing of the Constitution, that his citizenship is irrelevant in terms of his eligibility to be president as long as he was born on US soil.
The 14th Amendment's first line reads: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside." Therefore, the President is a citizen of the United States.
Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution contains this restriction on persons eligible to be president: "No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States." Plain reading of this language reveals three criteria: (1) natural born citizen, (2) at least age 35 and (3) lived at least 14 years in the US. Please note that it does not say ANYTHING about having citizenship in another country.
If you are unwilling to accept the Constitution as the highest law in the land, then no amount of logic and reason can help you. But if you accept the Constitution and are willing to abide by its law, then you have no choice but to acknowledge President Obama's Constitutional eligibility to be President. Given the abundant evidence, any conclusion to the contrary requires setting aside of reason and logic.
I hope the GOP doesn't kill itself over this issue. Further pursuit of it will only result in embarrassment of the pursuers.
No comments:
Post a Comment