Via WorldNetDaily and TheHill.com comes the following video from today’s National Prayer Breakfast during which President Obama remarked that he doesn’t think that his citizenship should be questioned:
…Now, I am the first to confess I am not always right. Michelle will testify to that. But surely you can question my policies without questioning my faith, or, for that matter, my citizenship.
Challenging each other’s ideas can renew our democracy. But when we challenge each other’s motives, it becomes harder to see what we hold in common. We forget that we share at some deep level the same dreams – even when we don’t share the same plans on how to fulfill them.
Once again, a particularly prescient comment — from “RED NECK INN MA” — is on TheHill’s posting:
Personally I am no birther … but I am curious as to why Obama continues to beat on this issue .. is it a politcal ploy by his handlers to continue to use this as a divisive issue?To try and embarrass a certain segment of the popualtion? And if not, why doesn’t he just provide the certificate and end all the specualtion for the conspirators once and for all ? Obama has certainly been a little less than forthcoming on his grades, his Harvard review publications and many other accomplishments he has accomplished .. it makes one wonder what his true intentions are .. and if he is indeed the self described post partisan, post racial, post everything he claims .. seems to me he would disperse this rumor once and for all and lets move on …
Yeah, well, the Democrats actually refuse to give up on the issue; in fact, as HotAir.com has already pointed out, the party wants to make it a political issue for 2010. Not only this, but as Prof. Jacobson notes, calling those of us who challenge this Administration crazy (in one form or another, to include the “birther” pejorative) will likely only inflame the electorate, potentially costing the Democrats even more seats at the end of the year.
Advertise on this site
Now, dare I say that anyone’s smearing the President — he is, after all, smearing himself just fine (no, wait — the teleprompter made him do this latest gaffe!) — the smears against those of us who actually do question this President continue, unfortunately, over at PeachPundit.
Rep. Nathan Deal’s request for information regarding the President’s birth certificate (here’s my latest on that story) has drawn the ire of commenter Loren Collins (I nevertheless congratulate him on the cross-post on Georgia’s biggest blog).
So, what’s the beef? Well, shouldn’t Rep. Deal have to show his birth certificate as a GOP gubernatorial candidate for Georgia Governor? Here’s the same cross-posting snippet (Loren’s link):
I have never seen any proof that Nathan Deal is a U.S. citizen. Unlike President Obama, he has never released any records of his birth. The documentation that is publicly available leaves many things to be desired. Extensive online research turns up only an alleged birthdate and birthplace of Millen, Georgia. Who were his parents? What was the hospital? Who was the delivering doctor? These are questions that need answers.
You see, there are unsourced internet rumors that Nathan Deal was not born in Georgia at all. That instead, his mother gave birth to him while his parents were in Canada, dodging the WWII draft. They then returned to Georgia and registered his birth here. Moreover, there is further rumor that Nathan is actually the son of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. I’m not saying these rumors are true, but when can we expect Deal to produce the documents that would put them to rest? What is he hiding?
And unfortunately, a birth certificate alone cannot settle this matter, even after it’s been forensically examined. Deal has been a U.S. Congressman since 1993, and was previously a Georgia State Senator beginning in 1981. Both offices have citizenship requirements, yet in his nearly three decades in elected office, Nathan Deal has never publicly produced a shred of evidence to support his presumed U.S. birth and citizenship. Three decades of evasion. Even his Congressional website says nothing about his birth, opting instead for the conveniently ambiguous statement that he “was raised in Sandersville, Georgia.” His gubernatorial campaign website avoids the subject of his youth entirely.
And are you aware his first name is not actually “Nathan”? It’s John. John Nathan Deal. Did he ever legally change his name? Could his surname still be Rosenberg? We simply don’t know.
In the interests of full disclosure, I have spoken with Mr. Collins on the phone as he interviewed me for a book that he is writing regarding the eligibility movement. As a part of a follow-up email, he asked me about Rep. Deal and eligibility:
As you know, Nathan Deal has asked Obama to publicly produce a birth certificate. Since Deal is running for governor, and the Georgia governor is required to be a US citizen, do you think Deal should publicly produce his own birth certificate? Should it be
authenticated in the same fashion you’d like to see Obama’s authenticated?
…to which I responded accordingly:
Regarding an answer to your follow-up question:
According to the GeorgiaEncyclopdia.org site, the following candidate qualification requirements must be met in order to be seated as a Governor for Georgia:
– Must be 30 years old “upon assumption of office;”
– Must have been a US citizen (no qualifiers there) for 15 years prior to election;
– Must have been a resident (no qualifiers there) of Georgia for 6 years prior to election
Consistent with my call that federal candidates for the office of the presidency and vice-presidency should be required to show their bona fides, I think it would be similarly helpful if candidates for Governor would submit documentation that substantiates the above qualifications as a part of their request to be put on the ballot.
In the instance that a given candidate’s background is suspect by, say, the Secretary of State’s office, that would be grounds for either further research or disqualification.
Honestly, I don’t see what the problem is in asking for any candidate’s bona fides, especially if some of us have reason to believe that said candidate’s credentials are in doubt. This would be akin to someone having a problem with getting a mortgage because the mortgage broker is asking for documentation of income, thereby putting lower-income individuals at a disadvantage in the process — wait: that “someone” is the federal government making the complaint!
As far as what the President thinks about those of us questioning his background is concerned, I’ll simply say what I’ve been saying in some comments here lately:
Cry me a river, big guy.
You’re a public servant in the highest elected office in the land. You don’t have any rights as President — only specifically-delineated power and authority. Therefore, it’s not up to you to decide who gets to question you and about what. You’re not obligated to answer any questions (unless the Constitution otherwise calls for it), and we’re not obligated to listen to your defiant, ego-laden attitude about questions you don’t like.
See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:
- The background:
- The questions:
- The State Department and Sen. Patrick Leahy’s (D-VT) Natural Born Citizen Resolution (April 10, 2008)
Photo courtesy VOANews.com