WorldNetDaily reacts to the release of Barack Obama's long-form birth certificate with a story of its own and a quote from the site's editor, Joseph Farah.
The certificate of live birth is an absolutely vital foundation for determining constitutional eligibility of any president. We look forward to reviewing it like so many other Americans do at this late date. But it is important to remember there are still dozens of other questions concerning this question of eligibility that need to be resolved to assure what has become a very skeptical public concerning Barack Obama’s parentage, his adoption, his citizenship status throughout his life and why he continues to cultivate a culture of secrecy around his life.
Farah's referring to a whole host of rumors, most of which center on the years Obama spent in Indonesia with his adoptive father, Lolo Soetoro. A school record released in 2008 listed the young future president as a "Muslim" named "Barry Soetoro." Why didn't that get as much attention as birtherism? A couple of reasons. One, if birthers were proven right,* Obama would literally be disqualified as a presidential candidate. Two, the rumors about Obama's "Muslim faith" were burning pretty bright without any more attention being paid to this.
So why would conspiracy theorists return to those records? Because, if you are stupid, you can make yourself believe that Obama gave up his citizenship when he moved to Indonesia with his family. You can believe that the Indonesian school records, which don't have the force of law here, still somehow trump American birth and citizenship records. Hey, any port in a storm.
ThinkProgress points out that Joseph Farah has advised Trump about the "issues" at play here. I'm remembering the argument between Farah and Andrew Breitbart that I accidentally helped start at the 2010 National Tea Party Convention, after Farah used half of his speaking time to muse about birtherism .
I heard Breitbart criticizing Farah, and briefly talked to him about it before I noticed that WorldNetDaily’s Chelsea Schilling was already talking to him, holding up a voice recorder. I backed up to allow her to continue her interview, which consisted of questions on why Breitbart didn’t think Obama’s citizenship was a legitimate issue.
"It’s self-indulgent, it’s narcissistic, it’s a losing issue," Breitbart told Schilling. "It’s a losing situation. If you don’t have the frigging evidence — raising the question? You can do that to Republicans all day long. You have to disprove that you’re a racist! Forcing them to disprove something is a nightmare."
"Wouldn’t you say," asked Schilling, "in this case, that Farah is asking Obama to prove something rather than his disprove it?"
Breitbart rejected the premise. "When has a president ever been asked to prove his citizenship?"
Earlier today, Breitbart was very happy about the seeming end of birtherism -- or at least, the added damage to the conspiracy theorists' credibility.
"I'm ecstatic that the tea party made its focus on the economy and the constitution," said Breitbart, "and avoided making a slideshow part of its righteous cause."
*Don't worry, they aren't.