From a research 2000 poll commissioned by DKos:
Wow. Just for the record, that's more than half of respondants in the South who are uncertain or disbelieving that Obama was born in the US.
The crosstabs aren't too much better; of republicans nationally, 58% are uncertain or disbelieving, with 28% firmly in the birther ranks, and 30% unsure.
(Weirdly, 4% of Democrats think Obama was not born in the US, proving that there is always 1-5% of people willing to say any damn thing to a pollster. This reminds me of the 1% in one "Is Obama a Muslim" poll who thought the was Jewish.)
Josh Marshall at TPM points out, just for the record, that it wouldn't matter one whit if Obama had been born in Kenya, since there is zero disagreement that the children of US citizens born overseas are also US citizens. This is about a) people having difficulty accepting that a black man was elected president, and b) conservatives having difficulty accepting that they were voted out of office.
Kevin Drum at Mother Jones adds:
Wow. Just for the record, that's more than half of respondants in the South who are uncertain or disbelieving that Obama was born in the US.
The crosstabs aren't too much better; of republicans nationally, 58% are uncertain or disbelieving, with 28% firmly in the birther ranks, and 30% unsure.
(Weirdly, 4% of Democrats think Obama was not born in the US, proving that there is always 1-5% of people willing to say any damn thing to a pollster. This reminds me of the 1% in one "Is Obama a Muslim" poll who thought the was Jewish.)
Josh Marshall at TPM points out, just for the record, that it wouldn't matter one whit if Obama had been born in Kenya, since there is zero disagreement that the children of US citizens born overseas are also US citizens. This is about a) people having difficulty accepting that a black man was elected president, and b) conservatives having difficulty accepting that they were voted out of office.
Kevin Drum at Mother Jones adds:
We've obviously spun back into a version of the full-bore Clinton derangement mode that swept the nation in the early 90s. [...] Which makes you wonder: what would it be like if Hillary Clinton had been elected? I think we've suspected this all along, but now we know the answer with scientific precision: it would have been exactly the same. It was never Clinton Derangement Syndrome in the first place. It was Conservative Derangement Syndrome.
That pretty much sums it up.
7 comments:
Josh Marshall at TPM points out, just for the record, that it wouldn't matter one whit if Obama had been born in Kenya, since there is zero disagreement that the children of US citizens born overseas are also US citizens.
He's wrong. I just re-read all of the various laws and legal opinions on the matter and it's a Constitutional requirement not that a person must be a US Citizen but must be a "natural born citizen". It is subsequently not clear through legal precedent that "natural born citizen" must mean "a citizen at birth". I think the weight of precedence and because we shouldn't be insane about it would mean that functionally it is correct to think that foreign born of US parents conveys a status of "natural born citizen" but it is not so cut and dried as he makes it out to be. The very fact that the phrase "natural born citizen" appears in the same document as "citizen" makes it clear there was a distinction the framers were trying to draw. I think the current consensus is that the idea was to leave it to the States. If that's the case, than Hawaii weighing in (twice) should put the argument firmly to rest. Oh, and being sane and awake should put it to rest as well.
Funny, you endorsed the exact opposite opinion last year.
Anyhoo, lack-of-binding-precedent aside, the interesting constitutional argument would still strongly favor Our Dear Leader. The intent of the restriction of "natural born" citizenship was clearly intended to prevent a coup d'etat by a foreigner with a citizenship of convenience. Regardless of birthplace, this would obviously not apply to someone who lived their entire life in the US and who is considered a citizen from birth onwards.
Other than the fact that it hasn't actually been ruled on by SCOTUS, is there a plausible argument that a child born abroad of a US citizen is not, in fact, natural born, as intended by the framers? I have not read one, and you do not suggest one.
Leaving it to the states, is, by the way, a nonsensical answer to the question of whether someone born overseas is a natural born citizen. You reference the fact that Hawaii certified his birth there, and you are right that this fact should end the debate in a sane world, which we do not inhabit. But the hypothetical Obama born to an American mother in Kenya must have his status resolved federally.
Funny, you endorsed the exact opposite opinion last year.
I just re-read that thread. I pointed to a FactCheck.org site that pointed out that being born in Panama of US parents probably means you qualify as a "natural born citizen."
This time around I found sites which led me to say: "I think the weight of precedence and because we shouldn't be insane about it would mean that functionally it is correct to think that foreign born of US parents conveys a status of "natural born citizen" but it is not so cut and dried"
I hardly think that is the "exact opposite".
Leaving it to the states, is, by the way, a nonsensical answer to the question of whether someone born overseas is a natural born citizen.
Why? The idea was that originally the Federal Government would accept as citizenship of a state whatever the state said it accepted. Why is that nonsensical? You might have a difference opinion on how a federalized group of states would best run itself in terms of citizenship, but your opinion doesn't define sensicalness.
A "natural born" citizen is one who is a citizen from birth, howsoever that occurs (born within US borders or to US citizens or whatever). This is to distinguish from "naturalized" citizens such as Arnold Schwarzenneger who have applied and waited and eventually become sworn in as citizens. The end.
Matt,
You wrote, "He's wrong." ... "It's not so cut and dried." So, do you have a theory about how a foreign-born child of US citizens would not be considered a natural born citizen? Because it really does seem cut and dried.
Not much of one other than that I think it's not cut & dried from a legal perspective, and that I think it would be insane to argue against McCain's validity as a candidate.
Umm... thinking our legal system is not cut&dried while also thinking that the ambiguity allows for an insane position is not contradictory.
And I didn't argue exactly opposite positions.
Post a Comment