In Wake Of D.C. Shooting, Whither GOP Reps Pushing “Birther” Bill?
A side question raised by the D.C. shooting: Will GOP members of Congress who have pushed so-called “birther” legislation in Congress drop this crusade, now that it’s emerging that the suspected shooter may have been a “birther,” too?
TPM has unearthed a writing of James von Brunn that seems to show that he’s a “birther,” one of those hearty souls who’s questioning the legitimacy of Obama’s election because he isn’t a natural born American citizen.
The point is not that the “birther” talk is directly to blame for violence like this. But it seems fair to ask whether this kind of stuff, and related fringe wackitude, is playing some kind of role in helping egg it on at a moment when Obama’s agenda is coming into focus.
So what of the GOP Congressmen who are pushing along the “birther” movement? GOP Reps Bill Posey of Floriday and Bob Goodlatte of Virginia have sponsored a bill that would require presidential candidates to furnish a copy of the candidate’s birth certificate. These are members of the United States Congress. Do they keep this up, or do they drop this wacked crusade?
Spokespeople for both Republicans didn’t immediately return a request for comment, but it’s worth asking and staying on top of right now.
The homepage of this blog is here. RSS feed here. Twitter feed here. Email me here.
Stay on it Greg! It is about time these people get called to the carpet.
What was I saying about Rush? Hour 1 today – a whole hour on Obama not having a birth certificate.
*sigh*
Amen Greg- they should be held to account. After all the **** being said that past few days (Voight, the ******* Rep who told China not to believe us, Cantor on “importing terrorists”, etc) I’m also for each and every one being asked if they believe the President is trying to destroy the US then let them justify their delusions.
Yes, do keep on them, Greg – we’ve seen you get results before.
“The point is not that the “birther” talk is directly to blame for violence like this. But it seems fair to ask whether this kind of stuff, and related fringe wackitude, is playing some kind of role in helping egg it on at a moment when Obama’s agenda is coming into focus.”
It’s awfully cumulative, if nothing else. It’s awfully neat and tidy how it all came together today, too – Rush spends and hour on this, a Birther shoots up the Holocaust Museum, the GOP is pushing this legislation -
It might behoove someone in authority somewhere to look at this and connect the dots and see just where this wackerie is going.
Haven’t we been begging for this since Sarah Palin showed up and started her hate campaign?
You miss nothing Greg.. Great question!
How many “lone wolf” incidents like this have to happen before somebody decides we have a genuine domestic terrorism problem?
*sigh* again -
Greg, I was wrong about your and others’ attention to Palin. She does bear watching.
I’m sorry I snarked.
no prob, Tena, I need more of that.
and thx leAnn, Paddy and Trinity. we’ll see if they ever respond…
It is far more likely that Rev Wright comments about the Jews keeping him from seeing Obama was the cause.
Methinks the birthers need an assignment to write this 1000 times.
The US Secret Service is the ultimate source of intelligence in the US.
The US Secret Service has to protect a black POTUS with their lives.
The US Secret Service is not controlled by terrorists, Muslims or Jews.
The US Secret Service knows Barack Hussein Obama is an American citizen.
Now, could we all just get along?
I think the answer is still NO.
>>The point is not that the “birther” talk is directly to blame for violence like this. But it seems fair to ask whether this kind of stuff…
If it’s not related (and it’s not), then to inquire further is a waste of time. Nope, all this trying to claim that people on TV or the radio expressing their opinion is somehow influencing people to kill is unworthy of consideration. This is not yelling fire in a crowded movie theatre. It’s still OK for US citizens to say abortion is murder. It’s still OK for US citizens to say they vehemetly disagree with BHO, or to call him a socialist, or to say he’s not really a citizen. If someone wants to believe the US is a corporate oligarchy and the TV networks bow down to the GOP, they are free to do so. If someone wants to believe the world is being controlled by the Jews and that 9/11 was an inside job, as is the case with James von Brunn, they can certainly do so. Hopefully we all recognize these things. It crosses the line when something like what happened does, in fact, happen.
If you want to use an immediate example, what if someone were to read “So what of the GOP Congressmen who are pushing along the “birther” movement?,” take that as a call to arms, and go out and kill a member of the “birther” movement based upon reading what you wrote. Are you responsible for them having done so? I would say No. But who’s to say someone might not read what you wrote and take it to mean that violence should take place over it? There’s a lot of nuts out there on every side of the aisle and in-between who are going to read into things what they want to read. We can’t abridge speech just because someone might have heard something and acted inappropriately or we might as well toss in the Constitutional towel now, say we had a fairly good 230+ year run, and call it a day.
Did bin Laden activate his GOP sleeper cell?
Too bad he’s the president now, so his certificate is a moot point. He has the best forgers in the world at his disposal, so even if he didn’t have a BC, he could make one.
“If you want to use an immediate example, what if someone were to read “So what of the GOP Congressmen who are pushing along the “birther” movement?,” take that as a call to arms, and go out and kill a member of the “birther” movement based upon reading what you wrote. Are you responsible for them having done so? I would say No” -posted by elad
in this instance you’d be correct. Now if Greg, like the on air personalities we have been discussing, had said “someone should do something about those senators, they are waging war on your way of life” you’d be wrong tho. It does make a difference, your strawman defence nonwithstanding.
>>Now if Greg, like the on air personalities we have been discussing, had said “someone should do something about those senators, they are waging war on your way of life” you’d be wrong tho. It does make a difference, your strawman defence nonwithstanding.
Negative. Saying “someone should do something about those senators, they are waging war on your way of life” is not a statement that is a direct call to violence anymore than saying ““someone should do something about those birthers, they are waging war on your way of life.”
I think Jimmi is proof of his own point. This article really did bring out the nutjobs.
It seems it IS possible to be born in one place, yet be documented being born in another. Can someone explain how a person born in China winds up holding a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth?
Background:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Yat-sen
Sun Yat-sen (12 November 1866 or 24 November 1870 – 12 March 1925)
Sun Yat-sen was born on 12 November 1866 to a peasant family in the village of Cuiheng, Xiangshan county, Guangzhou prefecture, Guangdong province (26 km or 16 miles north of Macau). The latter claim is likely to be correct, as the Certificate of Hawaiian Birth was issued based on Sun’s typewritten testimony, rather than on any documentation from witnesses….
After receiving a few years of local school, at age thirteen, Sun went to live with his elder brother, Sun Mei, in Honolulu. Sun Mei, who was fifteen years Sun Yat-sen’s senior, had emigrated to Hawaii as a laborer and had become a prosperous merchant.
The certificate:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/9830547/Sun-Yatsen-Certification-of-Live-Birth-in-Hawaii
A portion of the certificate reads: “……And it appears from his affidavit and the evidence submitted by witnesses that he was born in the Hawaiian Islands on the 24th day of November A.D. 1870…”
Even if Obama wasn’t born here, he is a citizen because his mother was a natural born citizen. Remember McCain wasn’t born here either. He was born in Panama. He became a citizen when the law was changed and it became retroactive for a period of years, which included McCain.
740 8
251 7
559 4
499 7
528 5
536 8
168 3
654 7
Who is a birther is not the issue. A birther bill is not the issue. The issue rather, is the U.S. Constitution. The U.S. Constitution is the issue. The first paragraph of the United States Supreme Court’s website makes the following promise to the American People – “As the final arbiter of the law, the Court is charged with ensuring the American people the promise of equal justice under law and, thereby, also functions as guardian and interpreter of the Constitution.” To date, the United States Supreme Court has failed to do anything in furtherance of the search for the truth about Obama’s natural born citizen status. Furthermore, not one single solitary person or agency in the Executive, Legislative, or the rest of the Judicial branch of government has done anything other than accept Obama’s posted Certification of Live Birth as conclusive evidence of his alleged birthplace.
Mr. Obama claims that he was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961. As his only evidence that he meets the Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution’s requirement that a President be a natural born citizen, he produced a document called a “Certification of Live Birth,” which he posted on his website under the title: “Barack Obama’s Official Birth Certificate.”
At first blush, it is case closed. A closer examination of the facts, however, reveals that Mr. Obama failed to point out on his website that his posted “Official Birth Certificate,” as he called it, is actually a 2007 computer-generated, laser-printed summary document of his 1961 vital record(s) on file with the Hawaii State Department of Health. What we do not know, however, is what 1961 vital record the Certification of Live Birth is summarizing.
In 1961 there were at least six different procedures available to obtain a vital record (birth certificate) that the Certification of Live Birth could be summarizing. Five of the six procedures lacked adequate indicia of reliability and trustworthiness because they were fraught with the potential for fraud. That said, an “official” state-issued document that summarizes a document that lacks an adequate indicia of reliability and trustworthiness is not worth the paper it is printed on. Scans of the original Hawaii Revised Laws from that era can be found at http://birther.com .
Why does all of this matter? This nation can not risk having a President who may harbor divided loyalties because the President of the United States is one of the three branches of government. He is the Executive branch. The nation speaks to all people through one voice, the President’s. The President can make treaties, grant pardons, sign and veto legislation, appoint a Cabinet, as well as Supreme Court Justices. In addition to these duties, the President knows the nation’s most important and secure secrets, and as the Commander in Chief of the military, has the military’s nuclear launch codes at the ready, and who can arguably, either take steps to weaken the nation, or even destroy it. In the words of Vice President Dick Cheney, “The president of the United States now for 50 years is followed at all times, 24 hours a day, by a military aide carrying a football that contains the nuclear codes that he would use and be authorized to use in the event of a nuclear attack on the United States. He could launch the kind of devastating attack the world has never seen. He doesn’t have to check with anybody. He doesn’t have to call the Congress. He doesn’t have to check with the courts. He has that authority because of the nature of the world we live in.”
I’ll close this post with a quote: “All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.”