Unicorn in the (Rose) Garden

A liberal group, Left Action, is charging that the GOP's presumptive nominee, Mitt Romney, should be required to prove he is not a Unicorn. CNN, of course, has picked up the story. The liberal activists say they are just extending the logic of the "birthers" who question whether Obama was born in the U.S., and that they are satirizing the birthers.

It's not odd that CNN would pick up the story; CNN has moved so obviously left in its reporting style and leftward bias that many Americans are simply rejecting it as a credible news source. CNN's ratings for viewership made news as they reached a twenty-year low.

It's also not odd that a liberal group would try to tie the "birther" groups together with Romney's campaign. The media has done everything possible to avoid vetting Obama, and thanks to their hard work, virtually nobody really knows who Obama actually is or what he believes. And as part of the process of avoiding a vetting of Obama, the media and liberal groups have worked hard to marginalize and demonize those who do try to vet Obama.

The "birther" controversy arises out of claims that Obama may be ineligible to serve as President since he may not meet the citizenship requirements of the Constitution, and it is the perfect example of liberal's demonizing of those who question them.

By comparing the "birther" controversy to the fabricated "unicorn" controversy, Left Action and CNN suggest that the "birther" controversy is likewise without merit.

Despite that effort to mislead the electorate, the "birther" controversy does have merit. First, the "birther" controversy could have been stopped years ago by Obama simply releasing a certified long-form Birth Certificate (as Romney has already done); by choosing to refuse to release any records and dodging any vetting, Obama has subverted the electoral process into a guessing game of rhetoric, finger-pointing, and name-calling. Secondly, there are those whosuggest the copy of the Birth Certificate is a forgery; if Obama cared about truth, he and his campaign would go to some lengths to disprove that claim. Third, and not least, assuming the Birth Certificate is accurate, why did Obama, his supporters and the media claim he was born in Kenya for so many years?  

You see, Romney never claimed to be a Unicorn; that's just another liberal strawman to entertain and mislead the gullible- and by releasing his Birth Certificate (a fact CNN should know but chose or neglected to mention), he has already proven he is no unicorn. Obama and his cronies, however, have long claimed Obama was born in Kenya, themselves raising the spectre of ineligibility. The Hawaiian Birth Certificate, if true, indicts them of lying- maybe not all of them, but in that case Obama himself had to know "Kenyan-born" was a palpable lie. America is already watching the Senate campaign of Elizabeth "Cherokee" Warren deal with allegations that she lied to claim minority status as a native-American when in fact she had no proof and even the Indian tribe is denying her status.  With Obama, we see the same problem. The question is only whether he lying then, or is he lying now, and can America afford to have a proven liar as President?

Obama has changed his back story so often that even he seems to get confused. And we thought we had an actor in the White House when Reagan was President. With apologies to Thurber, perhaps Obama is as mythical as a Unicorn in the White House Rose Garden.