I haven’t written anything on the blog in a while, so it’s probably time. This comes from Facebook comments (what doesn’t these days). Social networking is fun! I’ve paraphrased and added emphasis below because, hey, this is my blog, after all. So, let’s visit that Obama birth certificate issue One More Time…
As far as the “birthers” go, common sense says if there wasn’t anything to hide, then nobody would be hiding anything, right?
There is a fundamental principle of inquiry – that is assuming one cares about the truth – that assertions should be based on evidence. The absence of evidence does not constitute evidence. So far as the courts and I can tell, nobody is hiding anything. To accept assertions on insufficient evidence risks making oneself a tool for evil hands.
By the way: The argument presented is a common fallacy. The argument in the general form goes something like: If you haven’t done anything wrong, then you have nothing to hide. I assume everyone reading this can understand why this argument is not valid. It always bugs me when I hear people say it, especially in this country where we have an enshrined right to privacy arising from the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
But isn’t it a duty to show the evidence if a person is running for President?
Yes, it is. And this was done to the satisfaction of the U.S. courts more than once.
And that is enough to satify a you? Big difference between this and McCain, and you know it.
Yes, there is a big difference.
McCain was born in the Panama Canal Zone, a tenuous and temporary extension of the US and not a state of the union. If elected, McCain would have been the first US President to have been born outside the states. This was a serious legal matter that ultimately ended in a (nonbinding) Senate resolution and required real legal investigation by a bipartisan legal review. This is because “natural born” is not defined in the Constitution. While McCain would be very, very likely to prevail in a legal challenge, it is not assured. In short, the courts have not ruled on this matter.
Obama was born in Hawaii, our 50th state, and a state of the union. He has provided documentation of his birth adequate for all legal purposes. In addition, his original birth certificate has been examined by the director of the Hawaii State Department of Health who attested to its authenticity under oath. The Republican governor of the state, Linda Lingle, has also attested to Obama’s status. The US courts have ruled on this matter.
So, yes, there is a big difference. Obama’s status as a naturalized citizen is well established. McCain’s is not.