Why We WON T See a Birth Certificate
Vol: 114 Issue: 8 Tuesday, March 8, 2011
What if somebody came up with undeniable proof that Barack Hussein Obama wasn’t legally eligible to be President? What do you think would happen? Do you really think it would make a difference?
If we are to take the Constitution at face value, then Obama isn’t eligible to be president no matter where he was actually born. A ‘natural born citizen’ is called for by the Constitution to prevent a dual citizen of divided allegiance from capturing the presidency.
Obama’s father was a subject of the British Commonwealth, making Obama a British subject at birth under both British and US law at the time — whether Obama wanted to be or not.
His mother was too young to convey natural-born status on her own, since she had not lived in the US continuously for six years after age sixteen – she was but eighteen when Obama was born.
So whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii is only relevant in the ‘gotcha’ sense – he isn’t eligible anyway. I can see why the left is undisturbed by Obama’s ineligibility.
But why is the Right seemingly so complacent? Why have they given up?
Bill O’Reilly has ‘pronounced’ Obama a legal citizen and labeled anyone who questions his citizenship a ‘far right loon.’ The same for Glenn Beck.
And everybody else in America who doesn’t want to share the O’Reilly Label.
The mainstream prefers the pejorative invented by Obama’s people. Modeled after the 9/11 conspiracists that believe the US faked the 9/11 attacks that call themselves “truthers” – those who question the obvious earned for themselves the label, “birthers.”
At least, the label “truthers” makes some sense – its adherents believe that they were lied to. I don’t think there is anybody on earth that denies Barack Hussein Obama was actually born – they only question where.
And not everybody asking questions about the birth certificate are questioning IF he was born in Hawaii. The majority of those labeled as ‘birthers’ have a different question.
That question is “WHY?”
Why the secrecy? Why the cadre of attorneys tasked with keeping Barack Obama’s history from being examined? It is easy enough to assume Obama was born in the US.
And there is plenty of circumstantial evidence to support a Hawaiian birth.
There are newspaper announcements, historical recollections, the solemn testimony of Hawaii’s former and present governors and the testimony of the Hawaiian keeper of registrar records who attested to having seen the actual copy.
Not to mention the posted copy of the Obama birth certificate. Some people say it is a forgery – mostly self-appointed experts. Others that say it is genuine are actual government officials.
Hawaii Governor Neil Abercrombie, (an Obama friend and crony) claimed that as soon as he was elected, he would trot down to the Hall of Records and demand Obama’s birth certificate and put this whole thing to rest.
Once elected, however, Abercrombie gave an interview in which he suggested that a long-form, hospital-generated birth certificate for Barack Obama may not exist within the vital records maintained by the Hawaii Department of Health.
One thing is certain.
Nobody has examined the actual document purported to be posted on the internet. It could be a forgery. Or it could be real. There is no way of knowing.
And that’s the plan. By design.
I believe that there are a number of good reasons why we will NOT see the birth certificate issue dealt with during the Obama presidency. Or even afterwards.
These same reasons explain why even guys like O’Reilly and Beck have joined the scoffers.
The first reason is logical. Obama ran against Hillary Clinton. If there was any provable dirt on Barack Obama, the Clintonistas would have found it. Personally, I find that among the most convincing reasons, which is why I listed it first.
The second reason is more sinister. I believe that the birth certificate posted online is a deliberate forgery, but not to hide the real one. The birth certificate conspiracy works for him.
The “birther” label is something of a psychological operation conducted against the people of the United States. It is used to smear the Republicans in general as “birthers,” conspiracy nuts who have given themselves over to right-wing conspiracy theory.
As a psyop, it has been so successful that any mention of this issue inspires in many a visible sense of revulsion. By refusing to release the vault copy Obama has created a carnival of conspiracy.
The effect is the same regardless of which possibility is true.
The longer Team Obama allows the issue to bubble under the surface, the more it divides the country. Ultimately, anybody who questions Obama’s eligibility looks a bit nuts and any challenge from the right on any issue can be funneled down the birther road.
Look at how well it worked! You tell me. Has the focus on the birth certificate taken our eye off the ball on questions pertaining to the source of his funding for Harvard and his Pakistan trip in 1981? Or not?
If Obama is not legally eligible, is it truly POSSIBLE to keep that a secret? This is where it all breaks down for me – I don’t think that it is.
But if he did, nobody in authority – on either side — is going to say so publicly now. Or ever.
I said at the outset that it is easy to see why the MSNBC’s and NYTimes of this world would want to keep Obama’s secrets for him. But what about Bill O’Reilly? Glenn Beck?
And what about the Republican majority? Don’t THEY have the power? Why not use it?
If Obama is not eligible then it means much more than simply removing him from office, which by itself would be enough to spark a real civil war. It would mean negating every action taken by the federal government since January 20, 2009.
You think the economy is in bad shape now? Imagine its condition if everything from January 2009 to the present was simply undone.
All the trillions of dollars earmarked, spent, borrowed or loaned by the Obama administration would have to be undone. Of course they can’t. The financial chaos would be unimaginable.
No laws signed by Obama would be enforceable, no budgets legal, no international agreements valid – at this point in time, it is not just conceivable, but probable, that America could not survive.
By way of analogy, imagine you are the eldest child of a large family of siblings in Victorian America. You suddenly discover that Father has had an affair. Mother does not know.
Remember, this is Victorian America. If Father leaves, the family is alone. Mother is on her own with all the kids. No court is going to order and enforce child support provisions.
As the eldest child, where is your responsibility? To your father? Your mother? To your siblings?
Do you confront Father? What do you say? “I’m telling Mother?”
Do you actually tell Mother, knowing that in either case, you risk breaking up your family and throwing your siblings into poverty?
Or do you simply hope that Mother doesn’t find out until after all your brothers and sisters are grown and out of harm’s way?
This is the reality facing the Republican leadership and the honest media. It is a brilliant trap and there is no escape from it. Nobody knows the truth – and that’s the way it has to be.
In any other likely scenario, it is hard to see how America could possibly survive. And THAT’s why I think Beck, O’Reilly and pretty much everybody else that has thought it through to the end has decided we’re better off not knowing.
Jack Nicholson was right. In this case, we really can’t handle the truth. It is utterly brilliant.
Dare I say, diabolically brilliant?