atomic_fungus (atomic_fungus) wrote,

#1629: Interesting point.

I have not commented at all (since January) about the Obama birth certificate question.

Obama continues to stonewall; a lot of controversy is being ignored by the press simply because Nothing Must Obstruct The One--the same press which demanded (and got) proof of citizenship from McCain is utterly silent on the issue of Obama's birthplace.

What prompts me to discuss the issue now was the thought I just had while perusing this story about Obama's (alleged) birth hospital posting--and then de-posting--HTML code designed to look like a letter from the White House mentioning that Obama was born there.

What I thought of is this:

Let us say that the "birthers" are indeed correct, that Obama is not in fact eligible to be President. Let us further say that this fact is indeed allowed to come out and that the populace of the United States learns of it.

It means that every single piece of legislation signed into law by Obama is not law. It also means that every policy, every "Presidential finding", every Executive Order, everything Obama does as President is invalid.

It would, in fact, invalidate the 2008 election: as Obama was not eligible for the Presidency his candiacy would have been equally invalid, and the runner up in the electoral college would be...John McCain.

The riots would last for weeks.

So, you see, even if Obama is in fact not eligible to be President, we will never learn of it, and no action will ever be taken to prove--one way or another--his eligibility. The Democrats won't allow it; and the Republicans will probably let themselves be convinced to let it slide "for the good of the nation". "We have to avoid a Constitutional crisis!" The Democrats would argue, which would be exactly the opposite of what they'd be saying if the shoe were on the other foot. (Of course.)

The other problem is, would Obama go quietly? I would wager that he would not--witness please his reaction to the situation in Honduras, which is analogous--and in that case we'd have an extra-serious Constitutional crisis on our hands: an illegitimate President refusing to step aside.

In that case, Congress must step in...and guess what Congress would say? The vote would be divided along party lines and the Democrats would win.

Supreme Court? What's the proportion of constructionist vs. deconstructionist on the Court these days? Would the Court find that as a non-native Obama was disqualified? Or would the Court find him to be eligible, thus negating a whole bunch of jurisprudence (and making a hash out of citizenship law) but preventing riots and general disarray? Which would be more desirable?

If Obama's not a native-born citizen but the government lets him stay in the Presidency anyway...cue Civil War 2.0, because a bunch of people would not let that shit stand.

Either way, we're looking at riots, civil unrest, and a whole bunch of blood on the pavement.

That's why I've not bothered to comment on the issue for the past six months: regardless of what the truth is, we'll never learn it.

But it still nags at me: Obama could stop all this speculation--stop it stone cold dead--by releasing his long-form birth certificate. By doing so he'd take the wind right out of the sails of the "birthers" (except for the real lunatics who would probably claim the form was forged) and take a rallying point away from the hard right.

What is the downside to this? I see none, except that in his arrogance he probably sees it as a point of pride...if he is in fact native-born: "WTF, of course I'm native-born, you morons! And I don't have to prove it!"

There is only a downside to releasing the birth certificate if in fact it shows he's not native-born. And that's why the "birthers" persist.

* * *

As for forging a birth certificate, I have no doubt there are people in government who can do it. Most of them probably work for the CIA and the NSA; but the President can't go to the CIA and say, "Hey, guys, whip me up a good-looking birth certificate, state of Hawaii, from Kapi'olani Medical Center for Women and Children--find out what the place was called in 1962--and make it good. I need to prove I can be President."

Why not? Because of the paper trail: the CIA is a government agency and those guys don't wipe their asses without documenting it. Obama would have to find someone in the CIA's forgery department who was 100%--150%--loyal, someone who absolutely would not ever speak up and say that he in fact had made the document at the President's behest.

There's a difference between being removed from office and sent back to your hometown, and being thrown in federal prison for "high crimes and misdemeanors".

So, of course, the guy at the CIA--loyal or not--would have to be "retired". As in "six feet under". And the guys who "retired" him, even if they were just hired stooges, would probably have to meet with unfortunate demises, as well. And how many people would have to be involved with the conspiracy? Too many for the thing to remain secret for very long--probably not longer than Obama can stonewall and prevent the issue from coming to light. It's just not worth the effort.

The issue has not come up before; and all he needs to do is keep it from coming up for seven more years. Once the Democrats get their socialist agenda enacted it no longer matters if Obama is eligible or not; take away the entitlements and the people will scream bloody murder: even though they were enacted illegally they'll remain. (Much like Roe v. Wade, in fact.)

* * *

It's possible to get all wound up in conspiracy theories and skulduggery and Machiavellian plots, but it turns out that the simplest explanation is usually the best one. I would wager that Obama's reluctance to release his birth certificate is just arrogance; I would similarly wager that even if he is ineligible the Democrats simply didn't think about that issue before allowing him to get as far in the primaries as he did.

But I wouldn't bet the farm on any of this, because I know what the Democrat party is like.

  • #8751: I was right, they're not launching this year

    "I certainly wouldn't want to commit to any dates or timeframes" said "Mark Nappi, Boeing Starliner program manager and vice president". The second…

  • #8750: Target tanking? Tremendous!

    $13.8 billion loss of market capitalization since the whole "tuck-friendly swimwear" thing surfaced. Could not happen to a nicer company. * * *…

  • #8749: Still great

    Arrival was on UotsSuubs, so over the course of a few days I watched it while eating lunch. I still love it; you do not often see hard science…

  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.