You have to say this about Tavis Smiley: the guy is one great harrumpher.
There he was this past Sunday on a CBS morning news show harrumphing about how the birthers showed a lack of civility when they repeatedly questioned whether President Obama is a native-born American.
Smiley harrumphed less than a week after Obama released the long form of his birth certificate. Ever since hes been president there has been a dedicated hard-core cadre of people who were convinced that Obama was born not in Hawaii but somewhere outside the United States.
Obama had no business being president the birthers protested because he wasnt born in the United States. Since he wasnt born here he wasnt a natural-born citizen which anyone who wants to be president of this country has to be. The birthers invoked Article II Section One of the U.S. Constitution which reads:
No person except a natural-born citizen or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution shall be eligible for the office of president.
Despite all his harrumphing Smiley was right about one thing: The birthers inspired one of the most addle-brained puddin-headed movements to come down the pike in quite some time.
These people ignored crucial pieces of evidence that pointed to Obama having in fact been born in Hawaii. At the time of Obamas birth in Honolulu 50 years ago this August the city had two newspapers. Both printed the announcement that Mr. and Mrs. Barack Obama were the parents of a son born in that city on Aug. 4.
Lets assume that the birthers were right that Obama hadnt been born in this country. Even if that were the case he still would have been a natural-born American citizen. Obamas mother was a natural-born American citizen.
She was married to Obamas father when he was born. There exists a law that says any child born abroad whose parents are married and has at least one parent whos an American citizen is also an American citizen.
As the saying goes you could look it up. The birthers never bothered because facts never bothered em.
Where Smiley stumbled in all his harrumphing was when he dredged up the shooting of Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords back in January. Like Pima County Ariz. Sheriff Clarence Mr. Civility Dupnik Smiley attempted to link the shooting to a lack of civil discourse.
The birthers Smiley harrumphed were guilty of such uncivil discourse with their claims about Obamas not being born in the United States.
Exactly how this was uncivil Smiley never made clear. It was inaccurate petty and disturbingly weird but none of those things falls squarely in the uncivil category.
What does fall into that category are the remarks New Black Panther Party leader Malik Zulu Shabazz made about Obama. Remember those?
An Uncle Tom Shabazz called Obama. A buck-dancing bamboozling Tom to be precise. The piece de resistance was Shabazz calling Obama the dreaded N-word which no Republican or conservative leader black or white has ever done.
Now if there were some kind of Richter scale that measured uncivil discourse which do you think would rank higher? The claims of the birthers that Obama was born outside the United States? Or those of Shabazz?
Shabazzs would win by anyones standards but we didnt see Smiley on a CBS news show early on a Sunday morning -- or anywhere else I might add -- harrumphing about the New Black Panther Party leaders uncivil despicable and disgusting comments about Obama.
I wonder when Smiley will harrumph about egregious double standards.
Columnist Gregory Kane is a Pulitzer-nominated news and opinion journalist who has covered people and politics from Baltimore to the Sudan.
You have to say this about Tavis Smiley: the guy is one great harrumpher.
There he was this past Sunday on a CBS morning news show harrumphing about how the birthers showed a lack of civility when they repeatedly questioned whether President Obama is a native-born American.
Smiley harrumphed less than a week after Obama released the long form of his birth certificate. Ever since hes been president there has been a dedicated hard-core cadre of people who were convinced that Obama was born not in Hawaii but somewhere outside the United States.
Obama had no business being president the birthers protested because he wasnt born in the United States. Since he wasnt born here he wasnt a natural-born citizen which anyone who wants to be president of this country has to be. The birthers invoked Article II Section One of the U.S. Constitution which reads:
No person except a natural-born citizen or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution shall be eligible for the office of president.
Despite all his harrumphing Smiley was right about one thing: The birthers inspired one of the most addle-brained puddin-headed movements to come down the pike in quite some time.
These people ignored crucial pieces of evidence that pointed to Obama having in fact been born in Hawaii. At the time of Obamas birth in Honolulu 50 years ago this August the city had two newspapers. Both printed the announcement that Mr. and Mrs. Barack Obama were the parents of a son born in that city on Aug. 4.
Lets assume that the birthers were right that Obama hadnt been born in this country. Even if that were the case he still would have been a natural-born American citizen. Obamas mother was a natural-born American citizen.
She was married to Obamas father when he was born. There exists a law that says any child born abroad whose parents are married and has at least one parent whos an American citizen is also an American citizen.
As the saying goes you could look it up. The birthers never bothered because facts never bothered em.
Where Smiley stumbled in all his harrumphing was when he dredged up the shooting of Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords back in January. Like Pima County Ariz. Sheriff Clarence Mr. Civility Dupnik Smiley attempted to link the shooting to a lack of civil discourse.
The birthers Smiley harrumphed were guilty of such uncivil discourse with their claims about Obamas not being born in the United States.
Exactly how this was uncivil Smiley never made clear. It was inaccurate petty and disturbingly weird but none of those things falls squarely in the uncivil category.
What does fall into that category are the remarks New Black Panther Party leader Malik Zulu Shabazz made about Obama. Remember those?
An Uncle Tom Shabazz called Obama. A buck-dancing bamboozling Tom to be precise. The piece de resistance was Shabazz calling Obama the dreaded N-word which no Republican or conservative leader black or white has ever done.
Now if there were some kind of Richter scale that measured uncivil discourse which do you think would rank higher? The claims of the birthers that Obama was born outside the United States? Or those of Shabazz?
Shabazzs would win by anyones standards but we didnt see Smiley on a CBS news show early on a Sunday morning -- or anywhere else I might add -- harrumphing about the New Black Panther Party leaders uncivil despicable and disgusting comments about Obama.
I wonder when Smiley will harrumph about egregious double standards.
Columnist Gregory Kane is a Pulitzer-nominated news and opinion journalist who has covered people and politics from Baltimore to the Sudan.
