As I have indicated in previous postings, trying to modify, restructure, replace, or anything of the like in laws and especially those directly involving the Constitution is asking for much hashing of many ideas, words, and expressions. There has been no success with a frontal attack on the matter of Obama’s eligibility because of congressional and judicial bodies not being pro active as to the oath to defend the Constitution. I do think that bit- by-bit the attack will succeed. Before that time I believe a worthwhile course, simpler, direct and in less time,is to by law open very widely the exposure of all candidates to a rigorous public scrutiny of qualifications along with recognition in law that everybody, including individuals, has standing to challenge the eligibility. There will be less turmoil making such a specific law apart from the existing Constitution. Some will plead a tremendous burden on the courts. Let the courts be busy with this important part of our Government. Instead of the courts dismissing actions because of no standing of ‘We the People’ on the part of petitioners the courts can show their character and judgements by ruling ‘frivolous’.
As I have indicated in previous postings, trying to modify, restructure, replace, or anything of the like in laws and especially those directly involving the Constitution is asking for much hashing of many ideas, words, and expressions. There has been no success with a frontal attack on the matter of Obama’s eligibility because of congressional and judicial bodies not being pro active as to the oath to defend the Constitution. I do think that bit- by-bit the attack will succeed. Before that time I believe a worthwhile course, simpler, direct and in less time,is to by law open very widely the exposure of all candidates to a rigorous public scrutiny of qualifications along with recognition in law that everybody, including individuals, has standing to challenge the eligibility. There will be less turmoil making such a specific law apart from the existing Constitution. Some will plead a tremendous burden on the courts. Let the courts be busy with this important part of our Government. Instead of the courts dismissing actions because of no standing of ‘We the People’ on the part of petitioners the courts can show their character and judgements by ruling ‘frivolous’.
“It’s a valid State of Hawai’i birth certificate.”—Janice Okubo, Director of Communications, Hawai’i Department of Health
“It’s identical to my own [COLB].—Janice Okubo, Director of Communications, Hawai’i Department of Health
“It’s crazy, I don’t think anything is ever going to satisfy them [the birthers].”—Janice Okubo, Director of Communications, Hawai’i Department of Health
“If you were born in Bali, you could get a certificate from the state of Hawai’i saying you were born in Bali. You could not get a certificate saying you were born in Honolulu. The state has to verify a fact like that for it to appear on the certificate. But it’s become very clear that it doesn’t matter what I say. The people who are questioning this bring up all these implausible scenarios. What if the physician lied? What if the hospital lied? It’s just become an urban legend at this point.”—Janice Okubo, Director of Communications, Hawai’i Department of Health
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawai’i Department of Health have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii Department of Health verifying that Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai’i and is a natural born American citizen.”— Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of Health, state of Hawai’i.
“For more than a year, the Department of Health has continued to receive approximately 50 e-email inquiries a month seeking access to President Obama’s birth certificate in spite of the fact that the President posted a copy of the certificate on his former campaign website.”—Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of Health, State of Hawaii
“It’s been established. He was born here.”—Governor of Hawaii, Linda Lingle.
“The state of Hawai’i says that the President was born there. That’s good enough for me.”—Representative John Boehner, Speaker of the House
“This is one of several such suits filed by Ms. Taitz in her quixotic attempt to prove that President Obama is not a natural born citizen as required by the Constitution. This Court is not willing to go tilting at windmills with her.”—Chief US District Court Judge for the District of Columbia, Royce C. Lamberth
“A spurious claim questioning the President’s eligibility may be protected by the First Amendment, but a Court’s placement of its imprimatur upon a claim so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.”—U.S. District Court Judge Clay R. Land, Middle District of Georgia Federal Court
“We conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born citizens” for purposes of Article II, Section 1, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”—Indiana Court of Appeals, Ankeny, et. al. v Mitch Daniels, the Governor of Indiana
“Congress is apparently satisfied that the President is qualified to serve. Congress has not initiated impeachment proceedings, and in fact, in a broad bipartisan manner has rejected the suggestion that the President is not eligible for office. [See H.R. Res. 593, 111th Cong.(2009)] commemorating, by a vote of 378-0 the 50th anniversary of Hawai’i’s statehood and stating: “the 44th President of the United States was born in Hawai’i on August 4, 1961.”—U.S. District Court Judge for the Middle District of Georgia, Clay R. Land
“Plaintiffs have encouraged the Court to ignore mandates of the Constitution; to disregard the limits put on its power put in place by the Constitution, and to effectively overthrow a sitting President who was popularly elected by “we the People”—over sixty-nine million of the people.
Plaintiffs have attacked the judiciary, including every prior court that has dismissed their claims, as unpatriotic and even treasonous for refusing to grant their requests and for adhering to the terms of the Constitution which set forth its jurisdiction.
Respecting the Constitutional role and jurisdiction of this Court is not unpatriotic. Quite the contrary, this Court considers commitment to that constitutional role to be the ultimate expression of patriotism.”—U.S. District Court Judge David O. Carter, Barnett, et. al. v Obama et. al., October 29, 2009