To the Editor,

More than one political pundit has weighed in on the controversy surrounding Barack Obama’s eligibility to be President as being nothing more than a desperate theory of the conspiratorial lunatic-fringe. I emphatically disagree. The birthplace lawsuit was initiated by prominent Democratic Attorney Philip J. Berg in the early days of the Democratic primary. A State Court dismissed the case in the eleventh hour only because it rejected Mr. Berg’s standing. The US Supreme Court will be revisiting the case and I wonder (just call me a right-wing lunatic!) if that will be before or after Mr. Obama packs it.

We still have a Constitution that clearly enumerates the powers and limitations of government. It states that only a natural-born citizen can be President. It requires this for good reason - addressing the importance of natural loyalties that your heart can only give to your place of birth.

What good is having a Constitution if the first time one of its provisions is challenged, we disregard it? Especially with respect to a President elect who has vowed to transform our nation by challenging other Constitutional provisions including our government’s enumerated powers. If we give up on the first provision without a fight, the second will fall much easier.

We should be vigilant now more than ever and for more than one reason. Consider the probability of a scenario where a person, such as a Governor, has records under their control that prove Mr. Obama is not a natural born citizen. Imagine the power that person can wield. What if the information were shared with some partisan organization, shadow government or group of political adversaries in Washington? One might even imagine the courts using their control over access to that information to sway a President.

Mr. Obama should be insistent upon clearing up this allegation for his own sake. The persistent doubt could hamper his transformational agenda (hmmm – maybe I should shut up).

 DRC