NY Post Goes to Phase Three on Obama Citizenship Story
Mohandas Ghandi "First they ignore you, second they ridicule you, third they fight you, fourth you win".
Most of the establishment media (including the faux-conservative media set up to pretend to represent conservatives like FOX) is still vigorously and energetically ignoring the growing controversy over Barack Obama's citizenship status. Obama could end at least half of the controversy by releasing his actual long-form birth certificate in any one of the 17 court cases around the country where plaintiffs have motioned for him to do this, but so far Obama has kept the evidence locked up tight. Why? All evidence about his trip to Pakistan in 1981 with an Indonesian passport has been locked down tight. Why?
If Obama is not a natural born citizen of the United States, then he is constitutionally ineligible for the office of President.
The story has been bubbling on the internet for months, and gaining momentum under the corporate media radar. It now appear that some outlets are moving from ignoring the story to steps two and three of Ghandi's proverb. They are attempting to end serious discussion of issues of law with ridicule and misinformation.
NY Post reporter Kevin J. Kelley wrote a piece entitled "Obama haters in last-ditch effort to derail his presidency ". Come now. If Obama is found to be ineligible the electors will likely make Joe Biden President- a man whose policies appear to be similar. I can state categorically that I do not hate Barack Obama. This issue is not about hate. Rather, this is about something that post-modern thinkers can't seem to understand.
The rule of law for the long-term good is an obstacle to adult children who think that all that matters is what they feel that they want now. So they may want to set up an idol in violation of the rules, scoffing at laws which say it should not be placed there. When what they want changes, they will also scoff at the rules which prevent them from tearing down the idol that they first set up in violation of the rules. Reality, and the rules and order that go with it, makes post-modern thinkers angry. It is up to classical thinkers to keep such people from destroying civilization with their foolishness.
When I was 22 years old, long ago, I took an oath. The oath was to defend the Constitution of the United States. I have only made two other such public oaths in my life. One to God and the other to my spouse. To the best of my ability, I have kept my oaths. I mean to keep them still. If you have read this space regularly you know that I have said that I would vote to impeach G.W. Bush based on the evidence I have right now. I declared his actions in violation of the Constitution on many occasions. Now I say that were I a judge or elector in this case I would insist that Barack Obama show that he is a natural born citizen of this country before he is allowed to take office.
Neither position is about hate, its about upholding the Constitution which has protected our liberties and sustained our country for so long. The rule of law has to be bigger than any man, be they named Bush or Obama, or else our liberties and freedoms rest on the whim of a man.
By the grace of God, I mean to keep my oaths till my last breath. If enough men are true and do the same then our liberties can be sustained. If not, the flower of freedom in this nation will die, and that oath I took will be of no account. That is why I do what I do. Small men in one party called it hate when I stood for the rule of law against the actions of President Bush, and small men like Kevin Kelley call it hate when I stand for the rule of law in this case.
Kelley's article is full of untruths and over the top distortions. For instance, he writes concerning the demands to see Obama's birth certificate, "the Obama campaign weeks ago posted on the internet a copy of his birth certificate. It affirms that he was born in the state of Hawaii."
Wrong. What Obama actually had posted was a digital image of a "Certificate of Live Birth". This document can be given to non-citizens born outside the state of Hawaii as long as it is filed within a year of their birth. It does not list the doctor or the hospital Obama was born in. A COLB under the rules for Hawaii simply does not establish that a person was born in Hawaii. It seems that Obama's mother filed the certificate, which is normally filed by hospital personnel. All of this does not even take into account the evidence that the COLB Obama is showing to carefully selected friends in the media is a forgery. What could resolve this is a court of law getting a good look at the original long-form birth certificate on file in Hawaii. That is not an unreasonable thing to ask of someone before making them President of your country. Why won't Obama do it?
Kelley further writes, "His hardest-core detractors have questioned the authenticity of the document, however, and are continuing to contend, with no credible evidence, that he may have been born in Kenya."
There are statements from several Kenyan relatives, including his grandmother, that he was born in Kenya. His grandmother says that she was present at his birth and that his mother tried to fly back to the states just before he was born, but the airlines in those days would not let a woman so close to giving birth board an international flight. After he was born, she hopped on the first plane for Hawaii, according to Obama's grandmother. Since the controversy broke, the Kenyan government has cut off access to Obama's relatives. They have also announced that they have "sealed all records" in their registry of births related to Barack H. Obama. An astute observer might note that there should be no such records if Obama was indeed born in Hawaii.
In addition to all this, there is ample evidence that Obama became an Indonesian citizen when he lived there as a small child, and kept his citizenship into adulthood. There is no record of his ever reclaiming his U.S. citizenship. This is a separate question however, from the one raised in the article.
Kelley spends the rest of the article speaking of the electoral college, including where he claims it is an "artifact of slavery". He is again flat wrong. The 3/5ths of a slave for determining a state's share of congressmen (and therefore electors) was an artifact of slavery, but the electoral system is a result (not an artifact) of the historical fact that the federal government of the United States was a creation of the individual sovereign states. That is why our President is elected in a series of state elections rather than one national election. The use of electors is a result of our status as a representative republic rather than a direct democracy.
If this controversy were not gaining ground, they would just keep ignoring it. Their efforts to do that are eroding. Expect to see them fight us hard on it, unless Obama simply presents the evidence that he is a Natural Born Citizen.