Now that Donald Trump has resurrected the issue of Obama’s eligibility, the debate is going to get hot again. I’d had plenty of thoughts about this business early on, but I hung fire. This time, I don’t want to be left behind, and so herewith my thoughts.
Here’s what bothers me.
1. Eligibility for the Presidency is set out in Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution.
2. The Congressional Research Service (CRS), in response to numerous inquiries from members of Congress, reported the following in November, 2010:
“Concerning the production or release of an original birth certificate, it should be noted that there is no federal law, regulation, rule, guideline, or requirement that a candidate for federal office produce his or her original birth certificate, or a certified copy of the record of live birth, to any official of the United States government; nor is there a requirement for federal candidates to publicly release such personal record or documentation. Furthermore, there is no specific federal agency or office that ‘vets’ candidates for federal office as to qualifications or eligibility prior to return.”
3. It is therefore incumbent upon any candidate and his/her/its party to produce all necessary evidence of eligibility.
From the very beginning of the Republic, all candidates had rushed, rushed to produce evidence of eligibility. All but one, that is; namely Barack Obama. Even now, he is spending thousands of dollars per day to keep his personal documents from surfacing. (Of note, the Democratic Party supports Obama to the hilt, possibly because that if it were ever proved that he isn’t eligible, the whole leadership of the party, not to mention much of the Democratic membership of Congress, would go to jail.)
Why this odd behavior? Good question.
Now, it may well be that he isn’t eligible for the job and, moreover, that he is in fact the Manchurian President that some people think he is. I myself have no proof one way or the other, though his behavior and the things that I see and read keep me wondering.
But let’s assume that Obama is constitutionally eligible. Then I have the following problems:
1. His refusal to prove his eligibility demonstrates contempt for the Constitution and for U.S. law. I suspect that he’d and/or his cronies had long ago found the loophole reported by CRS, and he’d slipped through it. Why? Because he could, and quite possibly because he thinks himself so far above everyone else that the Constitution and the laws do not apply to him. Also, the millions of dollars the Obama campaign had collected from anonymous, often foreign, sources is further demonstration of the man’s contempt for U.S. law. Of note, many people see Obama as a pathological narcissist, and this is certainly a narcissist’s perspective and behavior.
2. Obama’s refusal to prove his eligibility demonstrates contempt for us – all of us. Not Us the People, but Us the Peons. Ditto for continued refusal to deal with this important issue, which suggests to me that he’s rather enjoying this wholly unnecessary and divisive crisis. It’s a little like torture for the sake of torture.
The above two points tell me that, even if Obama’s Constitutional eligibility is ever proved, he would still remain ineligible – on moral grounds.
By the way, imagine that this is all a tactic and that, at the end of his term, Obama will blithely announce that he isn’t, in fact, eligible. The wind that would blow then would surely shake the United States to its roots.