First, the country’s most listened-to talk radio show host Rush Limbaugh brought up the eligibility question. Then, Salon.com columnist and feminist Camille Paglia broached the issue. More recently, She Who Would Be President ™ faced the question head-on. And now talk radio show host and Fox News commentator Sean Hannity similarly dove in, backing WorldNetDaily’s right to question Mr. Obama’s bona fides (h/t WND):
WASHINGTON – Sean Hannity today defended Sarah Palin’s recent comments about Barack Obama’s constitutional eligibility for the presidency and WND’s pursuit of the story.
He said the question about his original, long-form birth certificate has still not been answered.
“What was so wrong in saying that, ‘Can we see your birth certificate?’ … We were told early on that, in fact, somebody else had looked at it and confirmed that it was legitimate. So, I mean, what was wrong with people saying, ‘Wait a minute. You know what? In light of the fact of where your, your father came from, et cetera, uh, let’s just make sure that this is a legitimate birth certificate’? … It was not asked by the mainstream media. It was asked by places like WorldNetDaily, who, I think, were just doing due diligence considering it’s a constitutional mandate. … I think a lot of people were just afraid to ask the question.”
CitizenWells presents the actual conversation via YouTube:
The Post & Email has further commentary here.
I think that, while such questioning — or at least the “allowance” for such questioning — on the part of high-profile political commentators has been a long time in coming, I do believe that Mr. Hannity is exactly right when he says that there is a lot of fear in questioning Mr. Obama. Since no original documentation has ever been produced concerning this man’s background, the fear of the unknown is greatly enhanced, especially by those who fully support the President. Not only this, but since a situation of questioning a President’s legitimacy has never formally occurred in the history of the republic, nobody really knows how the results of an official determination would transpire.
And like Mr. Limbaugh, I appreciate the fact that — at least in the sound bite — Mr. Hannity seems perfectly comfortable in facing the issue squarely, especially in light of a caller who clearly could not care less about fully enforcing the Constitution, no matter who’s in office. Further, it would appear that Mr. Hannity has not bought into the allegations that somehow the FactCheck.org blog is qualified to either declare by inference that Mr. Obama is qualified for office or that they are the arbiters of determining exactly what information and how much of it is required to substantiate those qualifications (or potential lack thereof).
In related news, opposition commenter “Sue” mentioned that The Advocate and Democrat reported that the Monroe County, Tennessee grand jury rejected LTCDR Fitzpatrick’s plea to indict Mr. Obama of treason:
Despite a brief media frenzy, indictments sought against President Obama, a grand jury foreman and an assistant district attorney were not returned by the Monroe County grand jury.
Walt Fitzpatrick has been seeking to indict President Barack Obama on treason charges, but the grand jury failed to grant his request. Grand jury proceedings are kept secret until indictments are handed down, and when the December session for Monroe County was released, neither the president’s name nor Gary Pettway or Jim Stutts was on the list.
See the following links regarding the eligibility saga:
- The background:
- The questions:
- The State Department and Sen. Patrick Leahy’s (D-VT) Natural Born Citizen Resolution (April 10, 2008)
Photo courtesy ThePostEmail