Replies

Born in the U.S.A.? By: KEITH PHUCAS, Times Herald Staff 08/25/2008
... Sean Smith, Obama’s Pennsylvania communications director, was contacted Friday about the suit but declined comment.
The civil suit filed by Berg will be reviewed by the U.S. Federal Election Commission, according to Patty Hartman, a spokeswoman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.

If that part of the story is correct, a joint investigation by the U S Attorney's Office and the Federal Election Commission ought to bring the issue to a head.

I have long been of the view that in the final analysis, the political establishment will not take the risk of Obama's election if he is not eligible to serve. For the reason that his election under those circumstances would expose each of his legal acts as President to immediate challenge in Federal District Court under circumstances where the plaintiff will have significant economic interests at risk and resources to mount an effective attack.

All it takes is a single Federal District Court judge to permit this kind of investigation which could well result in a Constitutional crisis that would interrupt the continuing ability of the U S Government to function.

As long as the issue can be swept under the rug with irrelevant disclosures like the recent FactCheck publication, it doesn't have any material impact on the electoral process. But refusal to bring the issue to a head before the election risks continuing function of the government after the election.

Particularly the case under circumstances where both candidates are exposed to the same risk.

Particularly the case under circumstances where both candidates are exposed to the same risk.

The McCain issue is nonsense as well. The court disposed of it recently primary based on lack of standing to bring the suit. See ORDER granting Motion to Dismiss in Hollander v. McCain

McCain's lawyers argued that Congress is the place for these issues to be resolved.

If that part of the story is correct, a joint investigation by the U S Attorney's Office and the Federal Election Commission ought to bring the issue to a head.

Whoops, I forgot this part. The Hollander decision provides all the reasons that the courts have no jurisdiction in the Berg case as well.

But in reality, I think we're making this too complicated. I've come to believe the "natural born" clause refers to C-Section babies. At the time of the framing of the Constitution a C-Section probably left the kid a little touched in the head. Natural birth was better.

Do we know if either of the candidates were born via C-Section?