The curious cult of so-called "birthers," those conspiracy theorists who believe President Obama wasn't born an American citizen, making him ineligible to serve in the White House, first struck me as a political joke.
I've stopped laughing. Too many political and media leaders are deliberately fanning the flames of ignorance and fear, and they should be ashamed.
-- Errol Louis
Yes, the fact -- as he notes -- only a tiny amount of people actually take this stuff seriously, the attention it gets alone is problematic. It is but a symptom of the promotion of ignorance. This includes the likes of Lou Dobbs, whose own network distances themselves form him. As is often the case, it takes Comedy Central to underline the stupidity. I'd add a few aren't as much concerned with the locale of his birth, but that his dad was Kenyan. This sort of misses the point of "natural born" citizenship, which is concerned with locale, not blood.
The racist aspect of all of this is highlighted by the fact that if anything, McCain was the one with a problem. He was born in Panama, and credible -- if minority view -- legal scholars have argued that (particularly given the congressional policy at the time of his birth) he was not "natural born." His parents were clearly both U.S. citizens, but the second theory is (pardon the pun) the minority one (since only "natural born," not "dual" or whatever, is the issue pursuant to Art. II, it also is the only one based on any credible theory, facts aside) -- all this talk of birth certificates underlines that. But, clearly, if we were talking about a person with a white father with Kenyan citizenship, things would be different.*
Meanwhile, the incident Professor Henry Louis Gates Jr. (as a newspaper might add, who is black) popped up during Obama's press conference. Let me upfront add that I'm as interested in watching these things now as I did before, to be honest. This is what (other) blogs are for right? OTOH, watching the Mets complete a loss of a series to that powerhouse of the NL, the Washington Nationals (this can be educational -- analyst Keith Hernandez "educated" Gary Cohen about the Reconstruction a couple days ago) is not too enjoyable these days, even if (see the back cover of today's NY Daily News) some of their execs come off as nuts of late. Some believe the team has a pulse.
[Update: If you click the link below, you will go to my Slate posts ... a check on other posts by the user will show various discussing the Gates incident. One addresses someone who thinks Obama was moronic for calling arresting a Harvard professor at his own home "stupid." Telling. We are upset when our leads spout platitudes, but when they are a bit blunt -- in the course of an extended discourse -- we are upset.
Also, not only does Obama know Gates (noting to being a bit "biased") but he has background in racial/policing issues to some degree, including in the legislature. No big "expert," but his answer had some basis in actual knowledge. Rachel Maddow noted that it was the last question -- this does cause problems, since it helps make it, not health care, the story. Still, he is a "fox" after all. So, even if he should have brushed it off, the opening it gave was hard to ignore.
The person also claimed Gates, carted off in handcuffs from his home, was not really "hurt." This too, even if the person referenced comes off as an ass, is a common theme when such "petty" wrongdoing occurs. What's the big deal? And, when something big happens or a community has a "straw that broke the camel's back" moment, these same people are shocked.]
Seriously, race continues to be an issue, as shown by a decision against New York City as to their fire department tests. Darn! Didn't Ricci end the issue of race in government jobs? No? Darn nuanced overblown rulings! As to Gates, this person connected it to Ricci and Sotomayor, too. A trifecta. von over at OW, perhaps because he moved from his usually ridiculed fiscal posts, had a good riff on how cops can be assholes either way. We sure a few years back how an officer asking for id became a federal case, even though the guy was white, the coverage suggesting a bit more care would have avoided an incident. Of course, reasonable recognition of societal realities are helpful, at least in the eyes of four to five justices:
The constant element in assessing Fourth Amendment reasonableness in the consent cases, then, is the great significance given to widely shared social expectations, which are naturally enough influenced by the law of property, but not controlled by its rules.
And, putting aside the simplicity promoted by the Sotomayor hearings (see here, also as to judicial law-making), things are a tad bit complex. As Bart D. Ehrman in Jesus, Interrupted noted when discussing the related issue of scriptural interpretation:
Of course when trying to understand these different points of views we need to engage in the work of interpretation. Contrary to what some people assume, texts don't speak for themselves. They must be interpreted. And this can never be done "objectively," as if we, the readers, were robots; texts are interpreted subjectively by humans.
Something about "empathy" there, probably. Anyway, if a bit repetitive to past works, I would recommend that book too.
---
* It is clear Obama was born in Hawaii. It is quite possible that the citizenship of one parent made that moot. But, though a now defunct 1790 statute suggested so (as long as the father at some point was a resident), the U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 7 - Consular Affairs notes:
It has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a natural born citizen within the meaning of Article II of the Constitution and, therefore, eligible for the Presidency.
Thus, those who cite the citizenship of his mother are not really that helpful. As to McCain, basically, since "natural born" is debatable, realistically, reasonable congressional policy and practice overall will decide the question. This includes not only those born in the U.S. (and its territories, military bases and so forth) but those by statute determined to be citizens at birth, including those with citizen parents born overseas. As the links overall suggest, judicial precedent from back to the 19th Century basically appears to agree.