I wanted to respond to the column in your April 13 edition of The Courier-Herald. The piece, penned by staff writer Brian Beckley, appeared in the Our Corner section of this edition.

Mr. Beckley laments the continuation of prior administration policies such as the use of military courts in trying enemy combatants. He makes the matter-of-fact point that military courts are “unconstitutional.” Well, sure, of course…everyone knows that, right? While many readers may accept his statement as fact, I’m compelled to make the point that the issue is far more complex as to whether or not the Writ of Habeas Corpus extends to enemy combatants captured on a field of battle. Of course, I am assuming that Mr. Beckley was referencing Article One, section 9 of our Constitution; of course understanding that this provision wasn’t extended to non-U.S. citizens until almost a century after the constitution was itself adopted. Since then, various courts have both reaffirmed this extension or suspended it, depending upon the prevailing political currents and – even more so – on the growing complexities in play at that moment in history. Issues such as today’s non-state sponsored militants engaged in terrorist acts against US interests on foreign soil.

Mr. Beckley seems to find the issue clearly spelled out in our Constitution or perhaps he is simply parroting the popular liberal talking points verbatim. But whether looking at the language used in Article One or the due process clause in the Fifth Amendment (again referenced in the 14th Amendment), this is a far more complicated issue, as Mr. Obama has clearly come to realize, or at least admit. And let’s be clear about exactly who is being subjected to these military courts; these “enemy combatants” are in point of fact, enemy soldiers, terrorists, and/or Al Qaida militants shooting and killing American soldiers on foreign soil and in battle. Mr. Beckley seems to find simplistic clarity in his reading of our Constitution, and therefore, in my estimation, he must be referring to a different constitution or perhaps he has the definitive interpretation of this foundational document and its contextual meaning as articulated in The Federalist papers. Then again, it may just be my ignorance flaunting itself. But I digress.

In any case, the current Supreme Court is also finding this issue complex, and is currently “punting” the appeals being filed on behalf of these enemy combatants back to the lower courts, and may or may not again weigh in. Their silence however, speaks volumes. Maybe they should consult Mr. Beckley.

As you may have guessed by now, I am one of those party-hijacking, crazy, Tea Party members Mr. Beckley referred to in his column. And while I stop short of identifying myself as a “Birther,” I find it humorous how liberals (and Mr. Beckley) immediately play the “ignorant, racist ideologue” card anytime someone even mentions the issue of Mr. Obama’s dearth of what should be public records. But this is simply standard operating procedure for liberals; resorting to personal attacks versus arguing the facts. So here are a few of them:

While Obama’s Certification of Live Birth was in fact released initially, it is also true that this is the short form Birth Certificate and the more detailed Certificate of Live Birth was not released until just this week. Yes, conspiracy theories are aplenty as always (Bush was involved in 9/11, Kennedy was assassinated by the CIA, etc.), and the fact that Mr. Obama waited for two and a half years to release the more detailed document containing items such as signatures of doctor(s), witnesses, vital statistics length and weight, etc. was bound to give rise to this. And let us not forgot who initially made the absence of this document a central issue: no not the racist evil Republicans, but the Democrats during 2008’s primary season led initially by Hillary Clinton supporters and operatives. They’re racist, too? Who knew?

I suppose I too am among those “racist ignorant ideologues” who find it curious that Mr. Obama has spent over $2 million in legal fees to block access to his long form birth certificate for the past two years, along with almost all of his other personal records and documents; such as his passport application records, high school and college records (which we know now will never be released according to Valerie Jarrett), and documents that would explain why he gave up his license to practice law, etc. Curious minds want to know “why?” and no, we are not all demented.

Last week the president did in fact release the document, citing all the attention it has been receiving instead of the serious issues at hand. Uh…I must have been watching the wrong news channels when all this attention was being paid to the birth certificate issue, or distracted by all the coverage of Congressman Paul Ryan’s budget proposal, the debt ceiling, rising gas prices, middle-east trouble, S&P’s downgrading of America’s financial outlook, etc. Maybe I was grabbing another antacid out of the medicine chest when all the birth certificate stories were airing. The President said this was becoming a distraction, but for who? He stated in his Presser that “we do not have time for this kind of silliness,” after which he flew to Chicago to be on the Oprah show. Ironic, isn’t it, but there’s always seems to be time for the Final Four, another game of basketball, round of golf, ice cream junkets and the upcoming White House Correspondents Association dinner and roast. I hear circus music…do you?

So, as Oprah asked, “why wait so long?” Allow me to put on my racist conspiratorial hat, and no, it’s not white and pointy. Perhaps it was to distract from what are truly growing problems for the president: the dismal state of our economy and international affairs; or perhaps his plummeting approval and confidence ratings; or perhaps it’s simply that the “racist-birther” label has gone mainstream and is ripe for use in the scoring of political points…just in time to offset some plummeting poll numbers? Perhaps.

I often wonder at what point I became a racist, ignorant ideologue, given that I am a college-educated, minority and the recipient of racism on and off throughout my life. Maybe Mr. Beckley can provide me with some guidance on this too. As I mentioned above, perhaps Mr. Beckley was simply “parroting liberal talking points,” so allow me to end by parroting a conservative one: If you’re not a liberal when you’re young you don’t have a heart; but if you’re not a conservative when you grow older, you don’t have a brain. Maybe it’s time we all used ours.

Thank you.

John Gonzalez

Bonney Lake