Glenn Beck Versus the "Birthers": A Lesson for Both Sides

January 11, 2010

Glenn Beck spent considerable airtime on his January 4, 2010 radio program dismissing and ridiculing the "Birthers" and the idea that President Obama was born in Kenya.

Of course this raised immediate ire amongst those who question Obama's constitutional eligibility to serve in the office of President of the United States.

Before a war erupts on the Right between the Constitutional Eligibility Challengers and their deriders, both sides need to step back.

The eligibility issue is a distraction, and as Beck rightly points out – could serve to advance Obama's interests – at least at this point in time.

The focus needs to be on Obama's policies. ObamaCare is about to be rammed down our throats.  We must put all our energies into convincing our elected officials that nothing that comes out of Conference Committee can be acceptable and whatever emerges must be voted down.  Focusing on "Where's the Birth Certificate" right now will simply waste energy and resources that we need for the healthcare fight – and failing in that arena will permanently damage our Republic.  Priorities, people!

Besides, despite numerous lawsuits and millions of dollars spent on both sides, no legal authority seems willing to tackle the eligibility issue.  So many on the right dismiss it as a fringe issue that much education is necessary before a serious challenge to Obama's eligibility will have enough popular support as to force a real examination of the evidence.  The issue should be tabled until after the 2010 elections, when – hopefully – Obama's ability to dismantle our Constitutional Republic will be significantly diminished.  Currently, the Obama/Reid/Pelosi triumvirate possesses enough power to do far more damage to our Constitution than the question of whether Obama meets the Constitutional qualifications for the office he was elected to and has held for a year.

So please, challengers to Obama's eligibility… take a neutral corner for a while.  The bell for the round has rung.  There will be another opportunity to grapple, but right now is time for a breather, a sip of water, and some towel-fanning!

That said; those who dismiss the eligibility debate as unimportant, irrelevant, settled or "tinfoil hats" nuts really need to cool their jets and open their minds too.  While there are those who have made headlines and court cases postulating that Obama was born in Kenya and proclaiming the birth documents Obama has put forth are fraudulent, there are indeed others who reject that theory – yet still hold that there are other constitutional disqualifiers for Obama.  To call these people "Birthers" would be inaccurate, as they don't dispute Obama's Hawaiian origins –whether he was born there or not, is irrelevant to their ineligibility arguments!

It is a fact that the document Obama hangs his hat on, the "Certificate of Live Birth" is not a "Birth Certificate," and can be legally obtained for a child not born on U.S. soil.

It is also a fact that Obama was legally adopted by Lolo Soetoro and moved with him to Indonesia, where he was enrolled in school with documents showing him to be an Indonesian citizen.  Why is this important?  Because, at the time, there was no dual citizenship between the U.S. and Indonesia.

Then there is the Passport Question:  What passport did Obama use to travel to Pakistan?

He couldn't have travelled on a US passport, as Pakistan was a "no travel" destination for a U.S. Passport holder.  Was he using a British passport?  This would lend support to the Kenya birth theory.  And if he traveled on an Indonesian Passport, that would prove his Indonesian Citizenship, and by extension his forfeiture of any pre-existing U.S. citizenship.  The answer to the question of what passport he presented on entry into Pakistan is of paramount importance to the eligibility/citizenship debate – and the "Birth Certificate" is irrelevant to that answer!

Therefore, my admonition to the Right is this:

Put the eligibility question on the shelf until after election night, 2010.  It is a potentially disastrous distraction before then.

But don't forget the issue, and don't dismiss it.  Defense of the Constitution involves defending the entire constitution, including Article II and the eligibility requirements for the person who would hold the office of President of the United States.  There is indeed reason to question Obama's eligibility and he has invested millions in quashing the probes into the question.  Once the security and stability of the fundamental structure of the Republic can be assured (after the 2010 elections), the question must be raised and resolved!

Comments: 0
  1. Email address is REQUIRED, in case we need to contact you about your comment. However, we will not display or use your email address for any purpose other than to contact you about this comment.
  2. Nickname should be a short nickname that you choose to use. Please do NOT enter your full, real name. Nickname will be displayed along with your comment.
  3. Comments will not appear on our website until they have been reviewed by our Editorial Team. Inappropriate messages will be rejected by the Editorial Team. Free speech is important here at ConservativeTruth, however, the Editorial Team reserves the absolute right to determine what content appears on this website.
    • Comments that contain foul language, profanity or vulgarity will be rejected.
    • Comments that contain links will be rejected. (send email to the editor if you wish to let us know about another website)
    • Comments that advertise a product or service will be rejected.
    • Comments that contain email addresses will be rejected.
2500 characters max
Copyright ©2010 Doug Edelman