Friday, October 17, 2008

Obama not a natural born US citizen? Get real!

Have any of you heard this claim? Does anyone here know anything about it? I have checked Snopes.com, which addresses and refutes related rumors, but nothing in Snopes directly answers the specific allegations made in the video discussed below, even though Snopes mentions the Philadelphia lawyer involved.

My good friend, Edgar, a fellow-philosopher concerned with veritas, directed me to a website called "The Wide Awakes" that had the same material about Gov. Palin posted as I received recently in an independent email. I previously knew nothing about this website. It's obviously politically right-wing, and while I haven't had the time to explore it, I did watch one video it posted -- a video produced by Molotov Mitchell, representing Illuminati Pictures, which produced an earlier video I saw opposing Obama's pro-abortion position. (That anti-abortion video was one called to my attention by my good friend in North Carolina, Dr. Doug Miller, so this follow-up video on Sen. Obama aroused my curiosity.)

This subsequent video, entitled "The Obama October Surprise" (YouTube) featues a Philadelphia attorney, Philip J. Berg, former Deputy Attorney General of Pennsylvania, a life-long Democrat and former candidate for Governor of PA, standing in front of Independence Hall in Philadelphia, and talking about a federal law suit he is bringing against Sen. Barack Obama for failure to produce adequate records confirming that he is a natural born U.S. citizen, a Constitutional requirement for becoming President of the United States. In fact, Berg argues that even if Obama were a natural-born U.S. citizen, which he contests, he could only be at best a naturalized U.S. citizen after his purported adoption by his Indonesian step-father. In short, Berg insinuates a major cover-up. This is the first I've heard this allegation, but then I haven't spend much time digging into the personal details of Sen. Obama's past, primarily from lack of interest. One assumes that details such as these are ordinarily seen to well in advance of this stage of a political campaign.

I'm inclined to dismiss such allegations out-of-hand, especially during the heated tensions of an election year. I simply doubt their truth. There would seem to be too many improbabilities to make the case. On the other hand, even if it were true, I doubt whether it would be permitted to see the light of day at this stage. Imagine: if this were true, and if it surfaced as a national issue at this stage of the game, just days before the election, there would be rioting in the streets. There would be blood. They would call out the National Guard.

No comments: