Joseph Farah, Founder, Editor, and CEO of World Net Daily, recently took the plunge into full bore two citizen-parent Birtherism in all of its insane glory. In a recent appearance on Sean Hannity’s show, we find:
The panel thought Florida Senator Marco Rubio would be the appropriate choice. However, Joseph Farah of World Net Daily disagreed.
“Rubio’s not eligible,” Farah said.
“What do you mean?” host Sean Hannity asked.
“You’re going to lose 10% of the Republican vote because he is not a natural born citizen. We’ve been through this with Obama now for four years,” Farah explained.
“I don’t believe that. I don’t think that’s going to work,” Hannity said.
Then, Farah doubled-down on dumb over to the World Net Daily (WND), saying:
Obama is not eligible. And to not challenge him is, in effect, to dumb down a critically important constitutional requirement for being president of the United States – another nail in the coffin of the ingenious document carefully crafted to guide our nation through the future.
And, just as I suspected might happen back then, today the Republicans seem hellbent on nominating for vice president a delightful, engaging, inspiring candidate who is also not eligible.
Jeffrey Scott, and presumably Breitbart, is of the persuasion that one simply needs to be born in the U.S. under any circumstances, notwithstanding parentage issues, to be a “natural born citizen” and eligible to be president.
It is sad when someone of Joseph Farah’s status joins the two citizen-parent lemmings in their crazy Stampede Off The Cliff Of Sanity. Mr. Farah has no excuse. Farah worked for six years as executive news editor at the Los Angeles Herald Examiner and then became editor of the Sacremento Union. The man has a college education and has written 13 books, all of which evidences some acquaintance with the English language. He is smart enough that people ask him to be on their TV shows. He even has access to Jerome Corsi, PhD., who wrote Obama Nation in 2008 and throughout 304 pages never mentions the alleged two citizen parent disqualification.
It is my understanding that Farah began by questioning the birth certificate and then sort of morphed over to the two citizen-parent side of Birtherism. In his WND article he cites an article by Jeffrey Scott Shapiro, and states, in a mis-characterization:
Even the former Kerry legal eagle attacking me and WND for raising the eligibility issue in Rubio’s case now admits in his Breitbart piece that we had a good point about Obama’s eligibility. Welcome to the party, Mr. Scott. But you’re about four years too late with your epiphany.
Here is a link to Shapiro’s Internet Article:
What Shapiro actually admitted had nothing to do with the two citizen parent silliness:
The birther movement had some credibility in its scrutiny of President Barack Obama–not because his father was Kenyan born and because his mother voluntarily moved him to Indonesia, but because of his own actions refusing to release his long-form Hawaiian birth certificate. President Obama’s actions, not his ancestry, rightfully cast suspicion on his citizenship. When he finally released his long-form birth certificate last year, that suspicion dramatically diminished. To suggest that Miami-born Marco Rubio or any other person born within the United States with citizen or alien parents is not a natural born American citizen because their parents’ national origin governs their citizenship is foolish, for there is no constitutional provision, statutory law, or case law that has ever suggested that inference is true.
I am not being picky, but when an ex-editor gets the name of a writer wrong (incorrectly calling him Jeffrey Scott three times, instead of Jeffrey Scott Shapiro) and slides over the nature of the admission, Farah’s credibility is further strained.
Farah candidly states that:
Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe I misread the founders. Maybe my interpretation of the Constitution is too strict – too literal. I have little doubt the U.S. Supreme Court in 2012 would find I misconstrue history and the facts – in the unlikely event the justices even had the courage to hear such a case. But maybe – just maybe – we’re long overdue for a rational, open public debate on this issue, without the invective and the derision and the ad hominem attacks.
Now at this point, faithful readers of WND will probably need a moment to suppress their gag reflex. This is kind of absurd when you read Farah’s piece and find the following accusations, false assumptions, projections, smears, mis-characterizations, ad hominem attacks, parades of horribles, and a complete lack of any actual supporting legal analysis:
Obama is not eligible
the Republicans seem hellbent on nominating for vice president a delightful, engaging, inspiring candidate who is also not eligible.
maybe Breitbart, just a few years after leaving liberal-dom behind, still thinks of the Constitution as a “living document”
written, as it were, by the former legal adviser to John Kerry’s ill-fated campaign of 2004
a man who proudly proclaims in his bio that he studied under Gov. Michael Dukakis and interned for President Bill Clinton.
By Scott’s definition, every anchor baby – or the American-born offspring of illegal aliens – would also be a “natural born citizen” and eligible to be president or vice president.
[The Founders] wanted to avoid even the appearance of “divided loyalties” – something lawyers for John Kerry probably wouldn’t care much about.
I have little doubt the U.S. Supreme Court in 2012 would find I misconstrue history and the facts –
in the unlikely event the justices even had the courage to hear such a case.
For my trouble, I was blackballed, vilified, ridiculed and scoffed at by thoughtless people
Some wanted to defend the man in the White House at all costs
Some believed political expediency trumped the Constitution.
They were going to go after a corrupt president based apparently on only “winning issues.”
Even the former Kerry legal eagle attacking me and WND for raising the eligibility issue in Rubio’s case
Now this may seem pretty bad, but actually this is sort of tame for a WND piece. Contrast this with the Shapiro piece above and notice the difference. Shapiro discusses THE LAW. He doesn’t engage in name-calling and smears. He just states the law. Franky, Mr. Farah, if you have been black-balled it is not by thoughtless people. Oh no, the thoughtless people are the ones lapping up WND’s drivel on the eligibility issue.
Meantime, people who actually have thoughts, are busy reading Wong Kim Ark, Lynch v. Clarke, the Ankeny decision, and the subsequent legal decisions. You might have some exposure to these thoughtful people if WND was not sooo busy banning and scrubbing them from your website.
Note 1. Over The Edge: That idiom is defined:
Idioms & Phrases
over the edge
Insane, as in I think he’s gone over the edge. This expression alludes to the edge of sanity. [1920s]
Note 2. Lemmings: Wiki says:
Lemmings became the subject of a popular misconception that they commit mass suicide when they migrate. Actually, it is not a mass suicide but the result of their migratory behavior. Driven by strong biological urges, some species of lemmings may migrate in large groups when population density becomes too great. Lemmings can swim and may choose to cross a body of water in search of a new habitat. In such cases, many may drown if the body of water is so wide as to stretch their physical capability to the limit. This fact combined with the unexplained fluctuations in the population of Norwegian lemmings gave rise to the misconception.
The misconception of lemming “mass suicide” is long-standing and has been popularized by a number of factors. In 1955, Disney Studio illustrator Carl Barks drew an Uncle Scrooge adventure comic with the title “The Lemming with the Locket”. This comic, which was inspired by a 1954 American Mercury article, showed massive numbers of lemmings jumping over Norwegian cliffs.Even more influential was the 1958 Disney film White Wilderness, which won an Academy Award For Documentary Feature, in which staged footage was shown with lemmings jumping into certain death after faked scenes of mass migration.A Canadian Broadcasting Corporation documentary, Cruel Camera, found that the lemmings used for White Wilderness were flown from Hudson Bay to Calgary, Alberta, Canada, where they did not jump off the cliff, but were in fact launched off the cliff using a turntable.
Because of their association with this odd behavior, lemming suicide is a frequently used metaphor in reference to people who go along unquestioningly with popular opinion, with potentially dangerous or fatal consequences.