Replies

In 2007 Rush didn’t want to take on the issue since it made him look like a right-wing kook. Unfortunately, he placed his own prestige above that of the country’s well being. I can understand it from that point of view. If Obama trumped him, his years of being the beacon of freedom for Conservatives would have been over. That being said, someone, anyone with a position of power, authority and access to media SHOULD have taken him on, but they were all too concerned with their egos, their positions, and their re-election, not to mention the ridicule they would have undergone at the hands of the complicit, deceitful communist lamestream drive-by media in this country.

“In 2007 Rush didn’t want to take on the issue since it made him look like a right-wing kook”

I don’t think it needed to be approached in such a way as to appear like a kook. To ask for verification of constitutional requirements in a sensible no-nonsense manner can be done in a perfectly non-kooky way. Ask for verification from all the candidates. When O fails to deliver, ask why. It is perfectly reasonable.

Good commentary, and I agree with you. I was disappointed in Rush, but I can understand where he was coming up. At least he never made fun of those asking questions. (Not that I heard, anyway.)

I've noticed lately he's been giving more and more attention to the issue. I think he is attempting to redeem himself in a "safe" manner. To that I say good...better late than never.

I'm posting this because I suspect there are many others who treated this issue the same way until recently.

At first, a few years ago, I was initially intrigued about the question of Obama's birth circumstances. Then, I heard about the COLB being made available and being ignorant of the natural born citizen definition, and didn't pay much attention to the matter for a while. I was much more concerned with trying to convince my friends/relatives of Obama's radical roots, etc. and to not fall for the "imaging" by the democrats and vote against this guy.

My stance was that Obama may or may not have been born in Hawaii, but there was little hope to prove it one way or the other. We just needed to vote him out in 2012.

Then, over time, I started paying more attention and educating myself on the intricacies of the issue and it didn't take too long to come to the definitive conclusion that Obama had never actually established his constitutional eligibility to run for President of the country.

At this moment in time, we don't have proof of where he was born and we don't have proof of who both of his parents were. Anyone who says otherwise should be asked to show their proof, which they will not be able to do.

That's it in a nutshell. We simply don't have proof. It is not unreasonable to demand proof of those two things before Obama is allowed to be put on the ballot to run for re-election in 2012.

Do I think this will be resolved prior to the 2012 election? I doubt it very seriously, although Trump's weighing in on the matter might help some folks see that the COLB is not sufficient and start looking at the issue a bit more. However, the odds are against this coming to a head in time, I believe. There are just too many interests who simply don't care to know the truth. There is about half the country who "can't handle the truth".