Joseph Farah has some serious spinning to do. Now that he’s spent the last few years claiming that President Obama, who was born in the United States to an American mother and is thus undeniably a natural born citizen, he wants to support Ted Cruz, who was born in Canada to an American mother, as president. So what does he do? Pretend that it’s liberals who are being hypocritical on this, so therefore it’s okay if he’s being hypocritical too. So he tries to show examples of liberals being hypocrites for saying Obama is eligible but Cruz is not:
Here are some of the headlines from what I call “the new birthers”:
- USA Today and Associated Press: “Sen. Ted Cruz still citizen of U.S. and Canada”
- The National Post: “Ted Cruz not the first to be stymied by America’s ‘natural born’ rules”
- CNN: “Can Ted Cruz run for president?”
Politifact, one of the staunchest, self-anointed defenders of Obama’s eligibility credentials, concludes the Canadian-born Cruz’s claims to natural born citizenship through his American-born citizen mother are in doubt.
Yes, of course, cite the headlines and not the articles. That CNN article? It concludes that Cruz is, in fact, a natural-born citizen and is eligible. The USA Today article doesn’t even suggest that he isn’t eligible, it’s just about the fact that he has duel citizenship and is trying to renounce his Canadian citizenship. The National Post is a Canadian publication, not an American one, and the article does not say that Cruz is not eligible. It only looks at the history of controversy over the meaning of the phrase “natural-born citizen.” And the PolitiFact article actually says that there is no reason to doubt that he is eligible but that, since there is no definitive court ruling, they can’t be “100 percent sure.”
So not a single one of the sources he claims are doubting Cruz’ eligibility actually doubt it. In fact, I don’t know of any liberal at all who thinks Cruz isn’t eligible. One could easily, and correctly, argue that if the birthers’ arguments about Obama are correct and he isn’t eligible then neither is Cruz. And that’s absolutely true. In fact, there’s a much stronger case to be made against Cruz than against Obama because Obama was born in the US while Cruz was not. But the reality is that both Obama and Cruz were and are eligible to be president.
Faced with this reality, Farah does what he always does — pretends it doesn’t exist, accuses his opponents of his own hypocrisy and then uses that as an excuse to keep going:
The last straw for me came in 2012 when, during primary election night analysis, I explained why Sen. Marco Rubio could not and would not be the vice presidential nominee of Mitt Romney – much to the astonishment of my colleagues on the panel at Fox. I simply said, “He’s not eligible.” That statement rendered me ineligible for future appearances – even though I was right.
So if anyone has the right and the duty to weigh in on Ted Cruz’s eligibility, it’s me – even though no one is asking.
My answer is, “I don’t care.”
I don’t care because the Constitution was not written and ratified to be applied to some and not others. If no one cared about Obama’s questionable eligibility, despite his shocking lack of transparency and thin paper trail, then they have no business questioning Ted Cruz – who has released his birth certificate, renounced his Canadian citizenship and upheld every provision of the Constitution to the best of his ability throughout his life.
For the record, I would have preferred if the issue of natural born citizenship were openly debated and discussed before Obama assumed office and began his all-out jihad on the Constitution. I would have preferred if my colleagues in the news media had taken seriously their responsibility to be watchdogs on government and hold all politicians accountable to the rule of law. I would have preferred if the motivations of those of us seeking the truth about Obama’s eligibility status and life story had never been impugned.
But now that’s all water under the bridge.
Our country is in shambles.
“The new birthers” got their way.
For better or worse, they set the standard of eligibility by precedent.
They can’t have it both ways – revising the standard up when they don’t like the candidate and down when they do.
Sorry Joe, the only one doing that here is you.