Archive for the ‘BILL BLOG’ Category
This Week’s Column: Born in a Manger in Honolulu
Friday, July 31st, 2009
7/30/09
By Bill Press
Tribune Media Services
In September 2002, astronaut Buzz Aldrin was walking out of a Beverly Hills hotel when Bart Sibrel, a leader of the nutty gang who believe the Apollo mission was actually faked in a Hollywood studio, confronted him.
“You’re the one who said you walked on the moon when you never did,” shouted Sibrel. When Aldrin politely asked him to step aside, Sibrel called him a “thief, liar, and coward,” whereupon the then-72-year-old Aldrin punched Sibrel in the face.
Good for Aldrin. But, compared to Barack Obama, he got off easy. At least Sibrel didn’t question the circumstances of Aldrin’s birth.
There may be a few “moonies” left, but for the most part “Birthers” have replaced them. Yes, they actually call themselves that: “Birthers.” That name alone proves they’re crazy.
According to the Birthers, Barack Obama is not the legitimate president of the United States because there’s no proof that he was born in the United States. Of course, neither was John McCain, but why compound one conspiracy with another?
Now, you might expect to encounter Birthers in the mountain hollows of West Virginia, but you actually don’t have to go that far. They can be found among some of the biggest names in radio, television, and the U.S. Capitol. Rush Limbaugh insists that Obama has “yet to prove that he’s a citizen.” CNN’s Lou Dobbs nightly asserts that the “question of Obama’s place of birth hasn’t been dealt with.” Ten Republican members of Congress have sponsored legislation requiring all future candidates for president to produce a valid birth certificate. And former Republican Majority Whip Roy Blunt, now running for U.S. Senate, told reporters: “What I don’t know is why the President can’t produce a birth certificate. I don’t know anybody else that can’t produce one. And I think that’s a legitimate question.”
The Obama birth conspiracy is even the subject of a new documentary produced by Joseph Farah, publisher of the conservative Website WorldNetDaily which, proving that it is “fair and balanced,” also publishes my weekly column.
Whoa! The president of the United States is not even an American citizen? That’s a pretty serious charge. What evidence have the Birthers produced to back up that inflammatory charge? None. Zip. Nada. Instead, they toss out a series of unsubstantiated claims: that Obama was born in Hawaii, which was not yet a state; that he was actually born in Kenya; that he refuses to release a copy of his birth certificate; that his mother was only 18 when he was born, and therefore didn’t qualify to give birth to an American citizen. See what I mean? They’re crazy, certifiable, crackers. And each of their claims has been soundly repudiated.
The fact that his father was Kenyan means nothing. Obama’s mother was an American citizen, therefore he became one automatically. But — here’s where the Birthers have no ground to stand on — even if she were not an American, it wouldn’t make any difference. According to the Civil Rights Act of 1866, “all persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power … are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States.” (Today, that includes children of undocumented immigrants). And Obama was born in Honolulu on Aug. 4, 1961, two years after Hawaii had become a state.
What’s the proof of that? Over a year ago, the Hawaii State Department of Health, which handles electronic records only, posted a copy of Obama’s birth certificate online. Recently, in response to continued skepticism, Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino took the additional, unusual step of checking the actual files and reported having “seen the original vital records … verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born citizen.” Not only that, the Honolulu Advertiser and Honolulu Star-Bulletin both printed birth announcements of a son born on Aug. 4 to Mr. and Mrs. Barack H. Obama of 6085 Kalanianaole Highway, Honolulu.
That should settle the matter once and for all. Except, of course, for the Birthers, who only believe what they want to believe. Despite substantial physical evidence, they steadfastly refuse to believe Barack Obama was born in a Honolulu hospital. Yet these are the same people who, with zero physical evidence, readily believe Jesus was born in a manger in Bethlehem. Too bad there aren’t any “wise men” among the Birthers.
Posted in BILL BLOG, Uncategorized | No Comments »
A “Wise Latina” for the Court
Thursday, July 16th, 2009
Tribune Media Services
Ugly, white, Southern male Republicans on parade. That’s what we saw in the Senate Judiciary Committee: ugly, white, Southern male Republicans on parade, trying to derail Sonia Sotomayor from becoming the next justice of the Supreme Court.
Their attacks on Sotomayor were personal, racist, and sexist. One thing for sure: no white male nominee would ever be treated with the same level of disrespect.
Sotomayor has an impressive, 17-year record on the bench, as trial judge and appellate judge. She brings to the hearings more judicial experience than any Supreme Court nominee in the last 100 years. On top of all that, she has an inspiring life experience: a heartwarming, only-in-America story.
But we didn’t hear about any of that from Republican senators. They ignored her record. Except for the New Haven firefighters decision, they asked no questions about the 3,000 cases she has ruled on, either alone or together with other judges.
Instead, they pounded over and over again on her so-called “wise Latina” statement — one sentence! — made in a speech at UC Berkeley eight years ago. And, despite her outstanding record to the contrary, they accused her of being a “reverse racist” and incapable of deciding cases fairly and impartially because President Obama, not Judge Sotomayor, once said he was looking for someone with “empathy” on the court.
What was most notable about Sotomayor’s confirmation hearing is that she was not the only one on trial. So was the Republican Party. She passed with flying colors. They failed miserably. One by one, every white Southern Republican proved that the Republican Party hasn’t changed much since the days of Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms. Tom Coburn, Lindsey Graham and Jeff Sessions have just replaced them.
Apparently, Sotomayor was the first Hispanic Oklahoma’s Tom Coburn had encountered since watching “I Love Lucy” as a kid. Echoing Lucille Ball’s husband Ricky Ricardo, Coburn told the judge she had “lots of ‘splainin’ to do” about the Second Amendment.
After citing quotes from several attorneys who argued cases before her that Sotomayor was a “bully” on the bench, South Carolina’s Lindsey Graham asked her: “Do you have a temperament problem?” Which was code for: “Are you really a b—-?”
Graham didn’t cite the many attorneys who praised her judicial temperament. And, of course, he’d never have put the same question to Antonin Scalia, who’s famous for asking tough questions. For a man, challenging attorneys is a virtue; for a woman, it’s a “temperament problem.”
But the most outrageous of the Republicans, by far, was ranking Judiciary Republican Jeff Sessions. In the New Haven firefighters case, Sessions castigated Sotomayor for not voting the same way as fellow panelist, Judge Jose Cabranes: “Had you voted with Judge Cabranes, himself of Puerto Rican ancestry, had you voted with him, you could have changed that case.” In other words, Sessions wanted to know: “What’s going on? Aren’t all you brown-skinned people supposed to vote the same way?”
Sessions also attacked Sotomayor for serving as board member of the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund, perhaps unaware that Judge Cabranes, also “of Puerto Rican ancestry,” had served on the same board.
You must admit; questions about Sotomayor’s alleged racial bias were especially ironic coming from Jeff Sessions. Does he think our memory is so short? This is the same man who, in 1986, was denied a seat on the federal bench, and rightfully so, by the then-Republican-controlled Judiciary Committee because he was “grossly insensitive” on racial issues.
As assistant U.S. attorney and attorney general for Alabama, Sessions had prosecuted three civil rights workers for voter fraud based on only 14 questionable ballots out of 1.7 million cast. He blasted the NAACP as “un-American” and “Communist-inspired,” and dismissed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 as a “piece of intrusive legislation.” During his confirmation hearings, a black former assistant U.S. attorney testified that Sessions once told him he used to think members of the KKK were OK until he learned that some of them were “pot smokers.” And Sessions warned his assistant to “be careful what you say to white folks.”
And this direct descendant of Bull O’Connor dares question the racial impartiality of Sonia Sotomayor? He’s lucky lightning didn’t strike him dead on the spot.
Bottom line: Sotomayor will be confirmed as the next Supreme Court justice. Republican senators did not hurt her. But they hurt themselves — badly!
Posted in BILL BLOG | No Comments »
