David Vitter: Birther Lawsuits “Valid”

Another Republican politician sticks his foot in his mouth:

WASHINGTON — Republican Sen. David Vitter of Louisiana says he supports conservative organizations challenging President Barack Obama’s citizenship in court.

Vitter, who is running for re-election, made the comments at a town hall-style event in Metairie, La., on Sunday when a constituent asked what he would do about what the questioner said was Obama’s “refusal to produce a valid birth certificate.”

With the crowd applauding the question, Vitter responded that he doesn’t personally have standing to bring litigation. “But I support conservative legal organizations and others who would bring that to court,” he said, according to a video of the event. “I think that is the valid and most possibly effective grounds to do it.”

He later cautioned that the matter could distract from policy issues.

“I think if we focus on that issue and let our eye off the ball … I think that’s a big mistake,” he said. “I’m not dismissing any of this. I think first and foremost, we need to fight the Obama agenda at the ballot box starting this fall.”

Of course, given the fact that he appears to face some serious challengers, this may well be the least of Vitter’s problems.

Update: Via TPM, here’s the video, yep he really did say it:

FILED UNDER: 2010 Election, Congress, US Politics, , , , ,
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug Mataconis held a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010 and contributed a staggering 16,483 posts before his retirement in January 2020. He passed far too young in July 2021.


  1. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Have you, Doug, ever read the requirements to be President as they are listed in the constitution? Do you understand the difference between a natural citizen and a natural born citizen? Obama is a natural citizen no matter his place of birth. But, since his father was a subject of the British Crown and a citizen of the UK, he cannot confer upon Obama natural birth as a citizen as they would have required Barack H. Obama Sr. to have been a naturalized U.S. Citizen. What you had here was a bit of slight of hand. They had people looking over here with statements about his place of birth which was nothing more than a distraction. Gave them something to ridicule. Make fun of. Let us see how much fun they will be having when we have a congress composed of members who take the law and the constitution seriously. It will not even take a Republican majority in both houses to accomplish this. A house commitee investigation should reveal if Obamas father was Kenyan and not a U.S. citizen. If so, Ole Joe Biden will be called upon to be President of the United States as Obama cannot legally hold the office. Natural Born means both parents were citizens at the time of birth. The exeption was made when the nation was born because they gave it a generation to establish the availablity of natural born citizens. I like that. Nancy Pelosi verified Obama’s eligibiltiy. What a freaking joke. Glad I can see November from my front yard.

  2. ZR3,

    I fart in your general direction.

  3. Neil Hudelson says:

    “Do you understand the difference between a natural citizen and a natural born citizen?”

    Zels, do you?

    “Natural Born means both parents were citizens at the time of birth.”

    Ahh, I see you do not.

    Thank you. That was easy.

  4. Vitter’s primary opposition is token in nature. Traylor has no money and Wooten is a nutball.

    After he slays his primary opponents, he’ll feast on the flesh of Charlie Melancon, who can’t even seem to get within 20 points of Vitter in polling.

    Vitter played that question perfectly. There’s nothing wrong with letting the birfer kooks have their humiliation day in court while staying the course on policy differences with the regime.

  5. Franklin says:

    Vitter played that question perfectly.

    He said he would support organizations that would bring that to court, and then turns around and says it shouldn’t be a distraction. Those are complete opposites. I understand what you are saying about pandering to the kooks, but I think he should have skipped saying he would support them in court.