WorldNetDaily has reported that last week, El Rushbo finally started asking questions about Mr. Obama's birth certificate.

Originally, Limbaugh said, the speculation about why Obama has not released his long-form birth certificate was that he wanted to "toy" with "birthers," to illustrate that they are a bunch of "loony tune, kook right-wingers."

In the meantime, he said, numerous lawsuits challenging Obama's eligibility have been thrown out, leading to the conclusion that "he was born in Hawaii, it isn't any big deal."

But now, in the wake of Abercrombie's apparent admissions, Obama supporters, he said, still cannot produce the proof.

"This is stunning to me," Limbaugh said. "(They) still can't prove it."

Of course, the birth certificate may or may not exist.

My question is why this man is occupying the White House with so many people's blessings despite it being established and admitted fact by all involved that his father was not a US citizen, thus disqualifying him as a "natural born citizen". I suppose we need the birth certificate for that, or do we?

Rush summed it up himself pretty well:

For liberals, he said, the issue is no big deal, "It's merely a presidential, constitutional requirement."

The Constitution, as far as liberals are concerned, he said, is an "impediment to them."

There is one thing I do have to say on this, though.

Whether you think of Rush as "The Truth Detector" or just another member of the "controlled opposition", you have to give the man one thing: When he starts talking about something, people start acting on it.

I've said may times before that as Americans become more and more incensed with this man's actions (and inactions), this eligibility thing would gain ground. If enough people are dissatisfied with his "work", then you may see something happen. People even may stand up for the natural born citizen clause instead of settling for a native born citizen just to get him out.

RWR