I’ve written both in OBC access testimony and blogs about my concern that due to Draconian measures such as Real-ID and proposed passport regulations bastards without original birth certificates are in danger of losing the right to run for public office and even to vote (among other rights.). Without that all-important ‘breeder document’–and yes, that’s what birth certificates are called —it is nearly impossible to establish all other identity documents and entitlements. It hasn’t come to banning adoptees from running for office or voting yet, but…
an adoptee running for office in Kansas has fallen victim to dirty tricks over his adoption and his “secret past.”.
Monday the Huffington Post reported that the Kansas Republican Party recently sent out a mailer (see it at the link) to voters attacking Democratic state senate candidate Keith Humphrey, a former actor and screenwriter now operating four aerospace-related companies in the Wichita area.
What can Humphrey be hiding? . A string of drug convictions? Is he on the run from five ex-wives or nine years of back child support?
No, nothing that exciting or mundane. See, when he was 11, Keith Humphrey was adopted by his stepfather and his name was changed from DeSoto to Humphrey.
…Humphrey told HuffPost that he isn’t hiding anything and that he changed his last name from DeSoto to Humphrey] at the age of 11 when he was legally adopted by his stepfather. When he began screenwriting in California, he said, he used the DeSoto name as a pseudonym. As for those business subsidiaries, Humphrey said that when he was reunited two years ago with his biological father — who did not know his son had been adopted — Humphrey wanted to find a way to honor that relationship. He added that the subsidiaries have created jobs.
Kansas Democratic Party Chair Joan Wagnon called the ad “a new low” because it attacks Humphrey for being adopted. “”This is is a sad, desperate mail piece that seeks to play on people’s worst fears and prejudices,” she said in a press release.
This is particularly offensive to me because I once served as Executive Director of the Kansas Families for Kids, an adoption project whose mission was to find homes for children.
The Kansas Republican Party should be ashamed of itself for this offensive and pathetic mail piece. Kansas GOP Chair Amanda Adkins also chairs the Kansas Children’s Cabinet and has been very supportive of adoption – she should know better. At the very least, Keith Humphrey and his family are owed an apology by Ms. Adkins and the Kansas Republican Party.
You’d think attacikng a candidate for being adopted would be enough to shame family values dirty tricksters but it’s not. .
Clay Barker, executive director of the Kansas GOP, said although the party hadn’t known the circumstances of Humphrey’s name change, the mailer was “factually true” and justified. because Democrats were running negative campaign ads against Republicans (llike the one showing a GOP candidate being hauled away in handcuffs.) Put- upon Republicans were only defending themselves from unscrupulous aggressive Dems. So when A beats up B it’s OK for R to smack around K .As far as I can tell, Humphrey wasn’t running negative ads. He’s just collateral damage. No wonder everybody hates the 2012 campaign. If the only bad thing that can be said about a candidate is that he’s adopted, then he must be electable.
I’m no stranger to party politics . I’m skeptical that Barker and his crew didn’t know about Humphrey’s adoption. .Even if they didn’t, there is no decent justification for refusisng to retract or apologise for the mailer other than the current brand of pseudo-Republicans don’t do those things..
Politicians pimp adoption and adoptees to push agendas such as outlawing abortion that have nothing to do with us, Conversely, those issues that do have something to do with us– records access, safe haven: laws, and Real ID-type laws–are ignored by them since they interfere with the adoption myths they so love–not to mention pissing off their owners. Accustomed to bashing bastards and adoptees in the halls of the leguslature, they now find it acceptable to spread lies to the electorate suggesting that the adopted–even the adopted lite–lead perverse lives and carry dark secrets. Next time one of thse “authorities” calls you anti-adoption when you demand yor rights be restored, ask him or her who is anti-adoption. The adoptee who wants the rights or the politician who attacks an opponent for being adopted?.
I think I’ll have more to say about this later.
The Kansas City Star also covered the dust-up and other negative ad cases.
There is a very real worry here. The “birther movement” hasn’t gone away and no doubt as soon as a candidate for POTUS beyond BO runs into issues regarding his or her place of birth, the Orly Taitzes and Donald Trumps of the world will be on it like white on rice. Depending on the political climate when that next happens, they could generate enough noise to propose and pass legislation that would require a POTUS candidate to provide a long-form, original birth cert, effectively discriminating against the potential 6M adopted adults who might otherwise qualify to run. Maybe we need a litmus test in 2016, and should put up an adopted candidate?