Let's enjoy for a moment the squirming from the far right over Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas, his birth certificate, and Canada. But then let's let it go.
Cruz released the birth certificate Monday after the Dallas Morning News reported the day before that because the senator was born in Canada to an American mother, he was a dual citizen of the United States and Canada. While some have questioned whether Cruz was a natural born U.S. citizen and could run for president - as he seems very ready to do - experts told the News he was likely in the clear.
Cruz, a freshman senator and tea party darling, seemed surprised that he might be a Canadian citizen, and on Monday he took the curious step of publicly renouncing that citizenship. A cynical guess as to why: He knows that in a Republican primary for president, the far right voters he needs are the ones who might raise an eyebrow that he's not "fully" American.
Cruz also was annoyed Monday about the birth certificate questions, complaining that it must be "a slow news day." (We're still looking for similar complaints from Cruz when birther questions hounded Obama through both his presidential campaigns.) Meanwhile, those birthers and others on the far right are wondering why reporters aren't condemning the "new" birthers the same way they did the old ones?
Here's why: With Cruz, the questions surrounding his birth certificate are solely about whether his birthplace disqualifies him from being president. No one is questioning where he was born, or the legitimacy of that birth certificate. With Obama, birthers continue to fill reporters' inboxes with speculation that his birth certificate is a fraud and that he stole his Social Security number.
That said, the Cruz story should die a quick death. The courts haven't addressed the issue, but Constitutional scholars say that being born to a U.S. citizen is the same thing as being born in the United States. So, they say, Cruz is eligible to be our president - just as foreign born John McCain and George Romney were. That's good enough for us.
Peter St. Onge
Amazing how quickly Cruz released his Birth Certificate versus Obama.
ReplyDeleteMitt Romney was born in Michigan.
ReplyDeleteYou may have been referring to Mitt's father George Romney, born to US citizens living in a Mormon community in Mexico. The elder Romney was granted US citizenship upon birth.
Come on Peter let's compare apples to apples.
ReplyDeleteCruz released his official birth certificate and Obama never did. Even the White House has underscored that the certificate of live birth they released was not intended as an official document.
It's absolutely amazing that some still question Obama's birth certificate. Either he was born a US citizen or the Republican party leadership is filled with idiots.
ReplyDeleteJJW said...
ReplyDeleteIt's absolutely amazing that some still question Obama's birth certificate. Either he was born a US citizen or the Republican party leadership is filled with idiots.
This is the best explanation of the republicans and their leaders I have seen!!
Pete, Just looking at the most recent blog posts that show up on the O-pinion page I can't help but note that of the 9 posts every one of them involves criticism of Republicans in one way or another. Oh wait, the next five posts also criticize Republicans, making 15 straight in all. I realize that editorial page editors have no obligation to be balanced in any way, but aren't you going a bit overboard? I scrolled through a bit of the 2011 posts and found them covering a variety of topics, often, of course, critical of Republicans (we know which way the board slants) but some even critical of democrats. But there was no continual day after day bashing of one party or the other as we have seen over the past few months. Is there any hope that O-pinion will at some point once again become a little more "diverse" in the topics it covers?
ReplyDeleteOops--I know that 9 plus 5 is 14, not 15.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe real "birthers" are media outlets like the Observer who obsess on these trivialities rather than on investigative journalism.
ReplyDeleteI didn't vote for Obama and I'm not going to vote for Cruz, but the happenstance of their respective birthplaces didn't play any role in that decision.
One cannot choose one's birthplace nor can one choose one's parents (the media are already jumping through hoops to smear Rand Paul).
Let's judge Cruz and Obama on who they are now rather than where they were when they weighed 7 pounds apiece.
Are the Observer writers this ridiculous? Cruz isn't the President of the United States and he also released his official birth certificate. Heck, we still haven't seen a single college transcript, paper, etc...from Obama, much less a real birth certificate. I'm not saying he wasn't born here, but there has to be something on it that he knows would cause a major issue if it was released. Perhaps something related to being a Muslim? Who knows. All I know is Obama is a coward, socialist, liar, and complete garbage.
ReplyDeleteIt's a shame he has to give up his newly realized citizenship to Canada; I am sure he could have played onto that if he wasn't considering higher office. I myself have duel-citizenship with another country, but I am no less American than the next.
ReplyDeleteGarth,
ReplyDeleteOf course. Thanks...
Peter
I tell you why he isn't being harassed like Obama. He looks more like the "birthers" then Obama.
ReplyDeleteBoy, you clowns at the CO sure do know how to set yourselves up.. The first person to file a "birther lawsuit" against the fraud in The White House was Philip Berg and huge Hillary Clinton supporter. Meanwhile it took how many years for the fraud to release his fake birth certficate? You see Cruz has nothing to hide and released his right away as soon as the left wing echo chamber started this nonsense.. Meanwhile just keep ignoring what a collosal failure the clown is both here and abroad.. You see "watching birthers squirm" when noboady is or cares is more fun than than ignoring the obvious.
ReplyDelete"The far right voters he needs are the ones who might raise an eyebrow that he's not "fully" American? I guess like those other wacky "far right" Americans like Madison and Jefferson who insisted upon it? Instead of an American birth requirement wouldn't we have been much better off if they had insisted on a "possessing American ideals" requirement. But then Karl Marx hadn't even been born at the time.
ReplyDeleteIt has been Obama who was responsible for all the drama of the birth certificate. Like the IRS, NSA, Benghazi, etc. etc. we can never get a straight answer out of him nor anyone else in his "most transparent administration in history". Delay and deny has worked for him so far. And don't forget the "birthers" never made up as large a percentage of the GOP as the "truthers" who believe George Bush blew up the New Orleans levies during Katrina and masterminded 9/11 for his oil buddies have within the Dem party.
The Obamatrons have used this as one of their distraction from discussing issues for years. Naturally the Observer would resurrect it. Too bad he wasn't even the first president to have his birth credentials questioned. It is still unclear if Chester Arthur was born in the U.S. or Canada. At least Arthur had an excuse. They didn't issue official birth certificates back then.
kantstanzya, well put!!!! Then again, since when have Liberals cared about actual facts!?!
ReplyDeleteI WOULD NOT vote for a person NOT born here in the US...
ReplyDeleteIN MY EYES TED CRUZ is not an American.
SORRY...
Wingers need to let it go and move on. Where is this radical agenda that Obama is pushing as a result of his "unknown" roots? Sweet Jesus, you people are beyond dim. You're probably still screaming about Monica Lewinsky and Jane Fonda.
ReplyDeleteWhen will you get a conservative on the editorial board. That way you can just run down the hall and yell instead of posting your ramblings about how superior you liberals are here for us to read?
ReplyDeleteAnd you should do what Rick Thames does and just moderate anything out which does not help his story.
ReplyDeleteThat is one guy with a real ego he needs to protect.
The "birther" movement was started by the Hillary Clinton '08 campaign.
ReplyDeleteYou said it so well I want go repeat it for you, as there is so much truth in your statement: Are the Observer writers this ridiculous? Cruz isn't the President of the United States and he also released his official birth certificate. Heck, we still haven't seen a single college transcript, paper, etc...from Obama, much less a real birth certificate. I'm not saying he wasn't born here, but there has to be something on it that he knows would cause a major issue if it was released. Perhaps something related to being a Muslim? Who knows. All I know is Obama is a coward, socialist, liar, and complete garbage.
ReplyDeleteYou said it so well I want to repeat it for you, as there is so much truth in your statement: Are the Observer writers this ridiculous? Cruz isn't the President of the United States and he also released his official birth certificate. Heck, we still haven't seen a single college transcript, paper, etc...from Obama, much less a real birth certificate. I'm not saying he wasn't born here, but there has to be something on it that he knows would cause a major issue if it was released. Perhaps something related to being a Muslim? Who knows. All I know is Obama is a coward, socialist, liar, and complete garbage. "needed to correct a mis-typed word. I have a jammed finger with a stiff bandage on it and cannot type very well!
ReplyDeleteFACT CHECK. ORG.
ReplyDeleteFULL ANSWER
This is an example of mostly old baloney in a new casing. It mainly recycles years-old falsehoods and insinuations, most of which we covered long ago, in connection with an earlier viral email.
But with President Barack Obama’s reelection campaign heating up, this new graphic has appeared on countless anti-Obama websites and in viral emails like the one we’ve reprinted here. Very little that it contains is new, and the old falsehoods have not improved with age.
Nothing ‘Sealed’
The idea that any Obama record is “sealed” is a falsehood, to start. The word “sealed” when applied to documents ordinarily refers to records that would normally be public, but that a judge has ruled cannot be released without the court’s permission. Common examples of truly “sealed” documents include records of crimes committed as a juvenile or records of adoptions. None of the claims in this message refers to records actually “sealed” in that usual sense.
In some cases, the records this screed claims are “sealed” are actually public, and open for anyone to see. Other supposedly “sealed” records are normally private documents that Obama hasn’t released — and that other presidential candidates haven’t released either.
So as with earlier versions, this is little more than an attempt to raise suspicions by asking for records that aren’t ordinarily made public, without any evidence that those records contain anything derogatory. We’ll take the claims and questions in the order they appear.
• Claims #1, 2 and 4, college records. Obama’s college records are not “sealed” by a court order, as this graphic would have you believe. It would be illegal under federal law (the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act of 1974) for Occidental, Columbia or Harvard Law School to give any former student’s records to reporters or members of the public without that person’s specific, written permission. Obama hasn’t released them, but neither have other presidential candidates released their college records. George W. Bush’s grades at Yale eventually became public, but only because somebody leaked them to the New Yorker magazine. Bush himself refused to release them, according to a 1999 profile in the Washington Post.
• Claim #3, thesis paper. Obama did write a paper on nuclear disarmament for an honors course in American foreign policy during his senior year, but it wasn’t the sort of “thesis” that some colleges require for graduation and keep on file in their libraries, like those that Hillary Clinton and Michelle Obama released. During the 2008 campaign, reporters were told that Columbia had not retained a copy of Obama’s 1983 paper, and that Obama didn’t have a copy, either. NBC News contacted his former professor, Michael Baron, who said he looked for his copy but couldn’t find it, and thought he probably tossed it out eight years earlier in a move.
NBC quoted Baron as saying the paper likely would have disappointed Obama’s critics. “The course was not a polemical course, it was a course in decision making and how decisions got made,” Baron told NBC. “None of the papers in the class were controversial.”
• Claim #5, Selective Service registration. Obama’s Selective Service registration is public. A copy has been posted publicly, and the Selective Service confirmed that Obama registered for the draft on Sept. 4, 1980, and was given registration number 61-1125539-1.
Worth noting is that nobody in the U.S. has been drafted for military service since 1972, the year Obama turned 11. Obama, like other young men turning age 18 since then, was required to register on a standby basis, in case Congress ever resumes an active military draft. Failure to register is technically a crime, and disqualifies a man for federal student aid or from holding certain federal jobs.
Wow the conspiracy nuts are out in force here. Don't bother trying to reason with them, no amount of proof will overcome their Obama prejudices.
ReplyDeleteI love birthers say it's Obama's fault that there is a birth certificate scandal. Just because he ignored inappropriate demands from lunatics then he's hiding something. That defines circular argument, which is all birthers do. Over and over.
ReplyDeleteI am glad Ed understands that all this mess is only due to the obama prejudices, that is the only thing that would make sense, since Ed apparently does does not see how poorly obama has handled everything.
ReplyDeleteFunny how it works that way with this president.