Replies

Yes, now the anti-Cruz leftists can take the birther baton from the anti-Obama birthers and continue with the race. The transition should be smooth because a lot of historical research has already been completed and neatly organized for this new crop of birthers.

One thing to understand is the MSM has telegraphed its intent to use this issue against Cruz. 12 stories in 2 days by the Washington Post is a clear sign they think they can cause a deep division, perhaps enough to prevent him from running, or winning if he runs. I don't believe this is an issue that can be allowed by conservatives to take one of our best candidates out. It's one (among many) of the battles we will have to help Cruz fight if he runs and if so, when he wins the nomination.

The power of the MSM/democrat complex is looming on this one, it's clear they mean to use it. The amount of people who are drawn in by this nonsense, many of whom I have some respect for in other areas is disturbing.

I understand your concern, but I think "birther mania" has little political effect. I doubt that Obama lost any votes as a result of birtherism. There are two somewhat overlapping birther groups: 1) the birthers who raise factual issues, and 2) the birthers who raise interpretive issues the Constitution's "natural born citizen" clause.

We have the "fact-oriented birthers" to thank for all of the factual questions regarding the location of Obama's birth, the identity of his real father, the identity of his real mother and the genuineness of any public records that relate to any of those issues. Remarkably, after five years of investigation, most of the "fact-oriented birthers" have gotten themselves so tangled up in doubts and suspicions that they will tell you that they now have "no idea" where Obama was born or the identity of either of his "real" parents. The shelf life of these birthers will expire at the end of Obama's term. It seems like a lot of time and money were wasted by those who got sucked into this black hole. These were the birthers that Obama didn't want to see go away and that may explain why he withheld some of his birth records for so long.

The second birther sub-group (those interested in the definition of the NBC clause) is more durable. I have a lot of respect for the work that many of them have done in uncovering a lot of interesting history. However, in the end, I think that they are trying to construct certain answers for questions that do not lend themselves to any certain or definite resolution. But, at least the questions they raise will have potential relevance to other candidates in the future.

Of the birthers I have known, I haven't known of one who I believe would have voted for Obama but for the birther issues. Every one of them that I have known is a person who I believe would have voted against Obama no matter where or to whom Obama was born.

The effect on a Cruz campaign should be similar. If he's lucky, there may emerge some anti-Cruz "fact-oriented birthers" on the left who claim that his real father was Fidel Castro or that he was actually born in Cuba or that he is really a space alien, etc., but I don't think anybody on the left could now make any money on such theories following the failure by the anti-Obama "fact-oriented birthers" to ever develop any coherent conclusions. That kind of stuff has been discredited for now.

I think anyone who votes against Cruz because of birther concerns will be someone who would never have voted for Cruz anyway.

Ted Cruz is one of a kind and I think he has a good chance of getting the nomination in 2016. And, if he gets the nomination, I think he has a good chance of being our next president.