Dorothy Rabinowitz recently penned a noteworthy article in the Wall Street Journal entitled "The Alien in the White House," described by American Thinker's Clarice Feldman as "exactly why Americans are uneasy about the president – he is alien to us, to our values, and, worse, is utterly out of tune to the threat we face."
Merriam-Webster defines the noun "alien" as: 1) a person of another family, race or nation; 2) a foreign-born resident who has not been naturalized and is still a subject or citizen of a foreign country; 3) extraterrestrial; and 4) exotic.
But lest readers interpret the piece as broaching definition 2, Ms. Rabinowitz quickly jumps on the birther-bashing bandwagon and states near the beginning of her essay:
He is the alien in the White House, a matter having nothing to do with delusions about his birthplace cherished by the demented fringe.
Even so, many in the liberal mainstream find Ms. Rabinowitz's characterization of Obama as an "alien" just as demented as she brands the birther "fringe." (It was only a matter of time before the media picked up on the "race" mentioned in definition 1). Apparently, though, in the minds of Rabinowitz and other prominent conservatives, contemplation on the ideological facet of Obama's alienness is commendable, while discussion of constitutional eligibility is only delusional.
Like Rabinowitz, America's founders recognized the need for strong allegiance of the president. The Constitution's framers took what today would be considered a politically incorrect stance to require citizenship from the moment of birth. As written, the eligibility clause of Article II focused on the objective requirements of age, length of residency and type of citizenship, completely omitting any guidelines relating to ideology or philosophy, instead relying on a diligent and unbiased press to vet and inform the public on these other aspects. Unfortunately for America, neither Congress nor the press took their roles seriously in the 2008 election.
The Constitution's "natural born" provision has been interpreted by many experts to mean birth in the U.S. to two U.S. citizen parents. Other so-called birthers focus only on the veracity of Obama's birth certificate, implying birth in the U.S. as the sole determining factor. Under either interpretation, clearly the framers did not subscribe to Obama's declaration that "being an American is not a matter of blood or birth, it's a matter of faith," and instead sought to ensure the kind of singular allegiance that naturally arises from place of birth and parentage. It is this same respect for family ties that leads many to agree that John McCain, though born in Panama, should be eligible, or perhaps to nod along with Justice Ginsburg in her opinion that her grandson, though born in Paris to American parents, should be considered a "natural born" citizen. As would Kenyans consider Obama a Kenyan citizen since he had a Kenyan citizen father. The legal terms "jus soli" (right of the soil), "jus sanguinis" (right of blood) and "partus sequitur patrem" (following the father) and not nebulous questions of "faith" are central to these ideas.
Is it conceivable, then, that the founders would have considered someone with dual citizenship (which the Obama campaign admitted he had until he was 23 years old) to have the kind of sole allegiance required for the presidency? Somehow this interpretation seems too intelligible and rational to be fringy or demented, especially considering recent discussion on whether the concept of "birthright citizenship" (the current practice of granting U.S. citizenship to all babies born in the U.S. to noncitizen parents, here legally but temporarily or even illegally) is constitutional and should be addressed as part of immigration reform.
Obama's father was an alien and never a U.S. citizen. Regardless of any "cherished delusions" about his son's place of birth, but rather in the context of the place that Americans call "home," we find Obama Jr. to be an alien who: was raised for several years in Indonesia, took a trip to Pakistan in 1981 after college, later returned to Bali for many months to complete an autobiography, traveled to Kenya at least four times (including appearances alongside his then-campaigning communist cousin Odinga), has a wife who has twice in public speeches called her husband Kenyan and Kenya his "home country," during his campaign after visiting "57 states" called himself a "citizen of the world" and bows to foreign leaders. The Secret Service, with its strict clearance requirements, would undoubtedly not even allow Obama to work for himself.
Most importantly, Obama, an alien in his background, associations, attitude and language, seems to be alien to the very idea that is America.
Whether respected conservatives consider Obama an alien of ideology, or the disrespected birthers consider Obama an alien in eligibility, they both recognize him correctly for what he is – an alien.
Perhaps conservative journalists like Rabinowitz or politicians like Tom Tancredo who recommend impeachment (while noting the difficulty in separating "political differences from the serious offenses"), should look for something more concrete, like adherence to constitutional law.
Eligibility under Article II is objectively provable. And this does not mean a narrow focus only on Obama's birth certificate, although it would require a thorough evaluation of the transparency (or lack thereof) of Obama in the release of his records and whether state election officials performed their fiduciary duties. Let's hope that the media, DNC, courts and the rest did not naively vet Obama's eligibility with no more than a digital image of a short-form certificate advertised on a campaign website, photos unofficially taken by two writers for a partisan website, a link to a blog of a microfilm newspaper birth announcement, labels as "smears" of any mention of the non-U.S. citizenship of his father and twitters.
This evaluation will also require a re-education and self-examination by our country of the larger concepts of citizenship by consent and birthright, dual and natural born citizenship. And it must be clearly understood that even though all U.S. citizens are entitled to equal protection under the Constitution, they do not all have the equal right to be president.
America needs conservative journalists who, rather than ridiculing those who define "alien" as something to do with the Webster definition of citizenship instead of ideology, are willing to move (if not next door at least to the neighborhood) and actually do some reporting. It's time to stop bashing the birthers. Citizens who challenge the constitutionality of any acts of this administration should stand proudly alongside those who question Obama's eligibility. America needs patriots to fight together to defend the Constitution before our alien in chief renders it worthless.
Cindy Simpson is a writer based in Louisville, Ky. Her work has also appeared at American Thinker and The Pearcey Report.