Monday, 27 December 2010

Obama and the birthers, viewed by the Guardian

Notwithstanding their vastly superior resources, the hacks at the Guardian don't seem to do much research. The question of whether Obama is eligible to be US President hinges on two issues. Firstly whether he was born in Hawaii, and secondly whether his stay in Indonesia where he went to school and his mother married a local man invalidated his nationality in some way.

On both issues, I don't know the truth, but one thing is certain: had Obama ever produced his birth certificate, he would have killed number one stone dead. But rather than this, he made do with a release of something called a 'certificate of live birth' which has no authority, insofar as it cannot be used as a substitute for a birth certificate.

Personally, I think Obama's hiding something, probably that he claimed money as a foreign student when he went to Chicago. Also his mother seems a little spooky, what with her interesting life, connections to various Foundations etc. What I also note is how this issue brings together an army of twisted Grauniad commenters to vie with each other in heaping abuse on America and (perhaps paradoxically) worshipping the ground Obama walks upon, and then in the middle of that, like a moment of sanity in an acid trip, comes this from J G Fox:

Those in the UK may not remember that John McCain’s place of birth was also an issue during the election ... a major one.

“McCain's birthplace prompts queries about whether that rules him out” New York Times, (December 8, 2008)

McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone in 1936 on a military base. But prior established US law is that children born overseas to those assigned to military bases are US citizens.

I’m a US Conservative, but I thought after Obama’s election, and before he was sworn in, that he should serve his term …. Even if it was “proved” that he was born elsewhere.

That would have torn the US violently apart.

If the exhaustive “vetting” process during the campaign could not establish this as a fact, then it should not be used to invalidate the election. His mother was an American and he was raised for most of his life in the US. And that, with lack of any firm pre-election evidence was enough for me.

And I would apply the same vetting time limit on all Presidential candidates of any party.

Having said that I believe Obama is a valid US President, I think his true place of birth still is uncertain. Showing a notification of birth is not the same as providing a birth certificate with all the details of family and physician and location.

I personally know the difference. I used a “notification of birth” from New York City for school and getting in the US military. That’s what they issued in the 1930’s and 1940’s.

When I wanted a US Passport when I was in my 30’s, I found that that was not enough!

“What do you mean!” I huffed and puffed. “I used this for x and y and z for thirty years”.

But I had to get it. I had to apply to NYC to get the “official birth certificate” with all the above details.

When Obama and his powerful friends are out of office for a number of years, we may be able to get all the information to resolve what has not yet been resolved.

But then I hope, it will be an historical question and not a political one.

The Grauniad pond-life pause for a moment, unsure how to respond... and then go back to their hate-fest.


Anonymous said...

Go Home Yank

Trooper Thompson said...

Err... not quite sure who that's aimed at.