CNN investigation finds that, yes, Obama was in fact born in the U.S.

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Did we really need a CNN investigation to tell us what we already knew, what the facts told us, namely, that President Obama was in fact born in the U.S., more specifically in Hawaii on August 4, 1961?

No.

But we got one nonetheless and if nothing else it provides additional confirmation.

And what we can also confirm is that Birtherism is not just a delusional conspiracy theory but a blatant lie and complete disregard for the truth.

But will this finally silence the Birthers? Will it put an end to Donald Trump's self-aggrandizing ravings? No, of course not. The facts mean nothing to the Birthers, including Trump, who will no doubt continue to talk up his own secret investigation. Think Progress:

CNN researchers decided to save Trump the trouble and actually investigate. First, they spoke with Dr. Chiyome Fukino, former Hawaii Department of Health Director and a Republican, who took advantage of a state law allowing her to see President Obama's birth certificate stored in a vault. Fukino declared the certificate "absolutely authentic." She even put disputed Trump's suggestion that Obama is hiding that he's a Muslim to rest, pointing out that no birth certificate from that time mentions faith.

Aware of Trump's concern that no one remembers baby Obama, CNN went ahead and found them too. Not only did Hawaii Gov. Neil Abercrombie (D) reiterate his memory of celebrating the birth with Obama's mother, but so did Dunham's college adviser and another mother giving birth in the hospital when Obama was born. She remembered because "in those days, there were hardly any other black babies."

The repeated debunking of the birther conspiracy has convinced numerous Republicans that Trump offers nothing but a "joke" candidacy. Last night, Gov. Jan Brewer (R-AZ) told CNN's John King that this issue "is leading our country down a path of destruction." Americans agree, with 64 percent saying "they would definitely not vote for Trump in 2012" and half of all Americans believing he'd be a "poor" or "terrible" leader. This, however, seems to be another fact Trump will entirely ignore. 

Republicans embrace Birtherism at their peril -- and yet that is precisely what they're doing. Yes, there are some in the "establishment," including Brewer, who are worried about it, but Birtherism is rampant among the base, which explains why so many establishment figures, whatever their own views, are careful not to dismiss it (by insinuating that it might be true or by making it a matter of belief instead of fact) and which helps explain Trump's significant popularity even as a "joke" candidate.

Trump has other things going for him (e.g., broad name-recognition, ubiquitous media presence, myth as self-made Super CEO who possesses astounding business acumen, and lots of money, always popular with Republicans), but his current standing has a lot to do with the fact that he's tapping into the deep reservoir of grassroots Republican paranoia and fear. It's not an accident that he's embraced Birtherism. It's his key to Republican success, should he seek it, and he's not about to drop it just because a CNN investigation says he's crazy.

The facts haven't stopped Republicans before. They won't stop them now either.

Craziest Pundit of the Day: David Gergen

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Okay, let's start a Craziest Pundit of the Day series. (Given all the material, it was only a matter of time.) And let our inaugural winner be that smug, self-important advisor to so many presidents, David Gergen.

**********

A short while ago, R.K. Barry, one of our fine co-bloggers, e-mailed me this:

Do you fucking believe that David Gergen just said on CNN that Democrats bear responsibility for the violent tone of political debate in America because their "mal-governance led to a citizens' revolt"? And of course John King sat there and said nothing. They are both assholes.

Have a good night. 

That hardly helps me to have a good night. David Gergen, sort of like David Broder, likes to position himself as an above-the-fray independent, but most of his punditry serves the right, including the Republican Party, by lending it media-sanctioned legitimacy. (Because the media, and particularly CNN, spins the lie that Gergen is non-partisan, legitimately, and utterly sound in his punditry.) And John King, of course, is nauseatingly Republican-friendly. (Think back to the glee he expressed back in November.)

This is among the stupidest things Gergen has ever said. What he is essentially saying, if we really get down to it, is that Democrats don't have a right to govern, that their authority is somehow illegitimate, that they shouldn't have done anything even with the White House and solid majorities in both houses of Congress.

And what, exactly, did they do? Pass health-care reform, which is supported (either the Affordable Care Act or a more progressive package of reforms) by a majority of the American people -- a reform package that a Republican, Mitt Romney, passed in Massachusetts and that, for the most part, Republicans themselves were in favour of back in the '90s as an alternative to "Hillarycare"? Pass an economic stimulus package that, owing to Republican objections, was much smaller than it should have been (but that still pulled the economy back from the brink)? Pass DADT repeal, supported not just by a majority of Americans but by military brass and a majority of those in uniform? Pass New Start with enough votes to overcome a Republican filibuster? Pass bank and auto bailouts, which were actually quite centrist (and "Gergian") in their application? Etc., etc.

Oh, but all this somehow justifies a citizens' revolt of right-wing extremism? And somehow legitimizes acts of violence?

Democrats and those on the left generally certainly deserve some share of the blame for all the incendiary and violent political rhetoric that pollutes American political discourse -- Olbermann made that case himself -- but there's no way there's an even balance, or even anything close to it, between left and right.

And if you really think the Democrats are to blame, even indirectly, for what happened in Arizona on Saturday, you're a fucking idiot without a shred of credibility, no matter how much an enabling media establishment might prop you up.