Since none of us apparently have enough to do, let us try to analyze this “birther” controversy with an objective and dispassionate eye. At issue, for those who were born yesterday, is whether or not President Obama was born in Hawaii or not, upon which issue his eligibility for health care benefits . . . no, no, wrong issue. Upon which his eligibility to serve as the president of these states united depends. An underground “birther” movement has arisen, demanding that the state of Hawaii release the “long form” of Obama’s birth certificate. We know that this movement is now being taken seriously because Doonesbury has started to make fun of it.
Now the thing I want to contribute to this debate is something of a wild card. The tendency among the birthers is to assume that there is only one possible reason for refusing to release the certificate, and that is because it would reveal that Obama is not eligible to hold the office he currently holds. What I would like to suggest depends on the assumption that Obama was in fact born in Hawaii, and is therefore as eligible to serve as president as some WASP whose parents came over on the Mayflower, back when immigration standards were a lot lower.
Got that? Assume with me that Obama was born in Hawaii, and also take note of the fact that Obama could humiliate scores and scads of birthers by releasing the long form, and there they would be, running their collective finger around the inside of their collars, and going heh heh. Since that would be the result, much to be desired from Obama’s vantage, what is keeping that long form in the basement vault? Well, think about it. Birth certificates have other stuff on them.
What good would it do for Obama to settle the birther issue, only to have a newer, fresher controversy leap up in its place? If that certificate would have had the effect of shutting the birthers up, and only that effect, then it would have been done a long time ago. So what sorts of things might fall in this category — embarrassing enough to make the president want to keep it secret, even though that means he must continue to slog through the birther charges?
I can think of three possibilities — although I don’t have a copy of the Hawaii long form from that era with me just now. The first possibility is that of Obama’s birth name — this is the least likely, because he ran for president as Barak, not Barry, and won. It might be a problem if his birth name was Sven, but this is, in my considered judgment, unlikely. Another possibility is that of a surprise in the paternity department. If it turns out that his father was not his father, that could cause some political turbulence, and another set of issues for him. And then the last, with most potential for trouble, would be some identification of Obama as a Muslim when he was born. His subsequent conversion to Christianity wouldn’t keep that from becoming political issue — especially given his proclivity to say weird things about Islam.
At any rate, the birthers are tugging hard on the certificate issue. Obama is holding tenaciously onto the other end of it. But it might not have anything to do with where he was born.