Like a lot of other circumstances I find myself disagreeing with both sides of the arguments going on right now. First you have die-hard birthers who are hell bent to prove that Obama is not eligible to be president. Then you have the rest of conservatives who hold birthers with such contempt.


So it truly does beg the question. What happens if it is proven without any reasonable doubt that Barack Obama was born in Kenya or by other means ineligible for office? I have a hard time even picturing it. Every signature would be a fraud. Joe Biden may’ve signed the legislation, but Biden did not run for president. It would make the election itself fraudulent. What about all the pieces of legislation that were vetoed? Do they come back into question? After all they were vetoed on false pretenses.


I contend that proving this without reasonable doubt would cause a constitutional crisis that could actually require a constitutional convention to determine what to do next. Once that is called all bets are off. I do not trust the current establishment in either party to re-draw the constitution or to leave it alone once they are given that power. So in short, in some ways its potentially better if Barack Obama was never proven to be ineligible even if it could potentially reverse everything he has done.


I also contend that the poisonous vitriol towards birthers (who are over-generalized because the term birther refers only to his place of birth and there is an entire different argument about his father being a british national making him ineligible for presidential service) is causing a lack of trust even in other conservatives. A skeptic often believes that those who attack their skepticism as conspiracy theories and unfounded racist or whatever other label are thus continuing and covering up that which they are attacked for. Nothing will stoke the fires of a movement like being called crazy, racist, or conspiracists. I know if someone did that to me I’d be louder in my dissent on the subject. So those that wish that birthers would go away are doing themselves and the other side of the conversation a disservice by attacking. If you have a point of view that thinks that it is unfounded, educate the person on why it is unfounded or why it may not be beneficial to go down that road don’t attack them.


Ever noticed how slow moderate democrats are to chastise or call out their liberal members? There is a reason for that they know that there is an anti-status quo argument out there and they use that to get their ends done. At least thats how it happened pre-Obama where they seem to be fully embracing the fringe left of their party. Call people out on racism, but do it in a way that actually has a chance to make a difference. Alert people to the dangers of the argument, but do it in a way that doesn’t make them louder. Don’t continuously stoke the flames and continue the distraction and perceptively negative consequences from the narrative erupting again by ridiculing them. To do that just makes everything worse.