Barack Obama and His Birth Certificate: Evidence Enough?

According to CNN’s “American Morning” this morning, the US Supreme Cout today will decide whether or not to hear a case. What’s so signifcant about that? The case is being brought on by a small sect of the Republican party and is challenging if President-Elect Barrack is really an American citizen. <sigh>

The issue is not a question if he was born in The United States or not – the Obama camp long ago turned over his birth certificate – it was even shown on CNN. He was clearly born in Hawaii on August 8th, 1961. So no questions there. The issue at hand is the fact that the GOP is taking advantage of a small bit of haze in the Constitution. This founding document states that in order to be President one must be a “natural born citizen.” The only issue is that it does not define to a specific state what a “natural born citizen” is. 

Here’s where Obama comes into play: even though his mother was American and he was born on United States soil, his father was Kenyan. At the time, Kenya was a mandate of Britain. This makes his father a British citizen. Under British law, any son (born anywhere) to a British citizen is automatically granted British citizenship at birth until the age of 24; at that age, the individual has the option to renewal his citizenship or permantly lose it. So, while Barrack Obama was clearly born a US Citizen, he was also clearly born a British Citizen. According to the lawsuit, those born with the birthright (if you will) of dual citizenship are most deffinitly should be excluded from the term “natural born citizen” since they are actually “natural born dual citizens.” Not lying. 

The GOP fails to mention, however, that President-Elect Obama voluntarily chose to resign his British citizenship at 24 and retain only his American citizenship. 

Now, I really am curious what the main goal of those bringing the lawsuit is. Did the Democrats file a huge lawsuit in 2000 when GOP canidate George W. Bush became president – when he was clearly not the actual winner? No. Barrack was very clearly the winner against Senator John McCain this year – it couldn’t have been any clearer even if Obama was running against a blind pack mule. So what is the end goal, exactly?

I doubt it is to have Vice President-Elect Biden take up the main seat – he’s a Democrat. 

I doubt it is to have a second run-off election (please God, no) because the other obvious contender to Senator McCain (assuming Obama was disqualified) would be Senator Clinton – and you know she would wipe the floor with the man (that would be quite ammusing to see, under different circumstances of course). 

There is no way in hell that a disqualification of Obama would result in an automatic promotion of John McCain to the Oval Office – he was the clear loser. Besides – he wasn’t even born in the States; he was born on a military base in the Panama Canal Zone. Classified as U.S. soil or not – that seems like a much bigger argument than the one about Obama if the GOP really wants to take to task the issue of birthing conditions).  

Some “patriotic” Americans may ignorantly stand-by the claim that he’s not a real American citizen (when the facts show otherwise, very obviously), but when you think about it, there is no clearer motivation than race. What other motivation is there at this point? If you were to look at me and say, “It’s not a matter of race – we just want to make sure the person in office is a real American citizen!”

Well, he is. Check out this story on PolitiFact about it, complete with a picture of the certificate itself. 

Point is, you have the evidence in front of you. If at that point you can’t accept that he’s an American, then I will hotly fill you full of my own invented falacies – I will aruge with you that Walt Disney World is located in Sandusky, Ohio; I will convince you that the World Trade Center is still standing; I will convince you that James Earl Jones is a white Southern Baptist preacher man. No matter how much evidence you try to throw at me, I will convince you otherwise – I will find something to argue against. Trust me, I’m a writer, I can do it. My dispaly of ignorance on these issues will be as great as yours. 

While I have written a good deal on this blog in the last month about our President-Elect, the point of today’s post really isn’t about me defending him and his policies. It’s merely about combating ignorance. Those who know me are aware of the fact that I can’t stand stupid people. Hey, if you’re misinformed or simply mistaken or unaware, that’s cool – let’s talk; I hope somone would do the same for me. But being misinformed is not the same as being ignorant and close-minded; those are the sorts of people who can try to craft what they think is a witty and compelling argument based off of pure emotions and their personal absorbtion and subsequent personification and ownership of outright lies. Throw a little itchin’ for a good-ole-fashion lynchin’ in there too, while you’re at it. Whitey. 

I will conclude with an actual conversation I had a few days ago with an individual at a local coffee shop: 

Them: “They call it The White House for a reason!”

Me: “You do know that slaves actually built The White House, right?”

Them: “Well that should be the only thing their kind has to do with it!”