Thomas Jefferson Says Forget About Barack's Birth Certificate

Publius' Forum ^ | 12/09/08 | Warner Todd Huston

[brytlea]

Actually, one cannot be VP if they are not legally eligible to be President.

[FourtySeven]

You are incorrect on the “vault copy”, not being available to Obama.Under Hawaiian law, the “named person” on the vault copy is the ONLY person who can get a copy of the original Certificate of Birth (COB)on file with Hawaii records and stats!

Which would seem to explain why everyone still thinks asking the question, "Why doesn't he just release the original?" is valid. However, with all due respect, I'd like to see proof that Obama can request to see the "vault copy" (under normal circumstances).

Under normal circumstances, the only available method to get a copy of one's birth record is via this form (warning, PDF file!!!). You will see on this form there is no where to check mark "Original vault copy" or anything similar. That is the form that Obama would normally use if he was getting a copy of his BC. So, how could he get the "vault copy" even if he's the "named person"?

Please show me.

[savedbygrace]

Huston sure used up a lot of unnecessary words to say, “The people voted and Obama won, so let’s move on.”

It’s a silly argument. Fraud vitiates all contracts, and fraud vitiates elections. Is he saying he’s in favor of allowing all cases of election fraud to go unexamined, simply because the people voted and one candidate won, so let’s move on?

Yup, it’s a silly argument.

[benasawin]

Well said. I concur and will eagerly be looking for your comments on this and other issues. I’m sure they will be worth my reading. Not gushing, just admiring.

[TigersEye]

(... and deciding by a jury of themselves in all judiciary cases in which any fact is involved),...

What are we to make of these words then?

Take it to court, obviously.

[John S Mosby]

Well, sir, if the SCOTUS does what it should, Constitutionally, then they should address the “injured party” of the electorate of the US, and rule that the “candidate” prove their eligibility. The Constitution and rule of law is my plan. They should do this without fear of the mob. If they find that Obama is not eligible perhaps riots might begin. As a country, we are eminently able to suppress riots with force especially now with Homeland Security and, on a citizen level with armed self-defense.
The actions of the SCOTUS would only turn however, on the effectiveness of the suit being presented to gain their ruling. Such is the fragile nature of our republic’s balance of power. In all reality, hope of such a ruling is not much of a plan. Pursuit of the truth even into this usurpers presidency is a more solid plan. Obama is a lame duck from inauguration. Paint by the numbers.

[Uncle Chip]

Well. I am sure that this is going to anger some of you. But, I have to say it anyway…

No. What you meant to say was:

"I am sure that this is going to make me look stupid, but I have to say it anyway..."

It does.

[Publius6961]

But, it has well reasoned points to make that I don;t think we should forget about so fast.

Well, you are entitled to your opinion, as I am to mine, and I couldn't disagree more.

This is a diatribe on the secondary importance of Constitution. And a mysterious, totally subjective "first principle."
I reject both in total, without qualifications. The very essence (and definition) of a Constitutional Representative Republic clearly screams otherwise.

This classic exercise in sophistry and fuzzy thinking is one of the best arguments I have ever seen to re-examine the genius of the founding fathers. After all, our Constitution took 17 years to be accepted and formalized, and that time was not spent in eating donuts, bombastic promises and creation of carefully crafted, but meaningless sound bites.

Our Constitution had but one major flaw, exacerbated by the 17th Amendment. The founders never envisioned that some states would become so populous as to skew the Constitutional democratic intent so fatally; hence the original expressed intent of the nature of the Senate.

Pure Democracy can't work beyond a certain population, because it then becomes indistinguishable from mobocracy.

The Constitution should have limited states to a maximum size, as well as providing that the notion of what is the will of the people is limited to a member state. I can't imagine the ethics and morals of, say, New Jersey to be imposed on Nebraska or Kansas. Or vice-versa. Or, on the micro level, that a large community of criminals (Mass. & NJ come to mind) would criminalize standards, honesty and ethics.

When a state exceeds a certain size, it should divide into separate parts (as often as necessary) with corresponding Representatives and members of the Senate as originally defined.

There is an original intent that rises above the Constitution itself. ...nearly every member of the founding generation placed a particular emphasis upon the locus of power in the governing philosophy of the American system and...
That locus was in the will of the people.

Then why bother having a Constitution? If "most" saw it thusly why was it not clearly expressed? Perhaps because even those original framers, for 17 years, saw the fatal flaw in the concept, n'est-ce pas?

[Publius6961]

This country shouldnt use their threats of burnin and lootin as a barometer of what approach to take.

Or what is or is not Constitutional. This is not Pakistan or Africa!

[lacrew]

Uh...divided loyalties? Opening campaigning in a Kenyan election? Having close relatives in high office in Kenya? Having close relatives in Indonesia and Japan?

If the civil war in Somalia bled over into Kenya, would Obama’s response be clouded by his divided loyalties?

This is exactly what the original intent aimed to prevent.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

After all, a mere COLB wouldn't have worked for him any more than it would for us.

Another unfounded internet rumor, just like the alleged travel ban to Pakistan. The only thing that the COLB isn't good for is proving you're at least 50% Native Hawaiian, for purposes of certain land grants that native islanders can get. That's it. The version that Obama has presented has everything the State Department requires:

your full name, the full name of your parent(s), date and place of birth, sex, date the birth record was filed, and the seal or other certification of the official custodian of such records.

[Grampa Dave]

Thanks for your support of Just Move On. Now, Felipe de Jesus CALDERON Hinojosa & Schwarzenegger can run for US el presidente in 2112! They can run the pro Gay/Green Governator with the Presidente of Mexico for co el Presidentes of the 57 states.

With the voters in Mexico, South America, Canada, Europe, Iran and "new voters" in the Former USA, the Governator can be co presidente with the Mexican Presidente for life.

They will win by 200 million votes, and that settles that. No one will challenge either one including a lot of Freepers as they will fear riots if the constitution is considered. Just Move on to 2040.

[Red Steel]

So what is with you people? You can't stand the idea that someone pursuing Obama because he could be foreign born, or you do accept the idea that someone born with dual citizenship can be a U.S. president that would violate the natural born citizen clause? Or you don't believe in multi-tasking, walking and chewing gun at the same time?

"...But, it has well reasoned points to make that I don;t think we should forget about so fast."

He hasn't reasoned nothing of the kind. Huston thinks elections results would superseded the Constitution. His interpretation of statements do not support his claim, and they border almost on the absurd. His claims are nonsense.

[Publius6961]

I think the job falls on the congress to vet this guy. If they don’t, and he is sworn in, my flag will fly upside down until they do.

Me?
I'm flying the Gadsen Flag on the appropriate occasions.

Old Glory is safely tucked away for the duration.

[6323cd]

One of the rare voices of reason on this (bogus) topic here.... Thanks for posting.

[mkjessup]

You’ve been watching too many fictional movies...

Don't pretend to know what I watch, or what I think. But if you want to talk about movies, you sound like you've watched Charlton Heston split the Red Sea one too many times.

The pendulum swings in American politics. The Constitution still remains. What is needed is to have our culture go back to our Creator God as the divine founder of our country and the maintainer of the same.

The Constitution is being shredded even as I type these words, and what exactly do you propose that Americans do to "have our culture go back to our Creator God", pray perhaps? You don't think we've been praying, are praying and continuing to pray? Got any other bright ideas?

It’s not so much about politics and/or the Constitution, but more about recognizing God in our country (and in our politics and in our Republican Party) just like the founding fathers did when appealing to God to help them. This is what gives the *real power* (i.e., God, Himself) behind the Constitution. It’s the God of the Bible, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of the Christian faith and belief and of the Savior, Jesus Christ — that people need to appeal to, not the Constitution and not to arms.

You're preaching to the choir. You're not saying anything that American Christians haven't been doing, haven't been believing for years. But it sure sounds good when you post it as if it were your own latter day revelation, now doesn't it?

Without this very same Creator God of the Bible that the founding fathers appealed to in their struggle, there will be nothing gained (by any other means)...

You don't think our revolutionary ancestors were appealing to that Creator God at Lexington and Concord?

I'm all for beseeching the Almighty to have mercy on our Nation (not that I can think of many reasons why He ought to at this point), and I pray for my Country every damn day and night, because I witnessed first hand what happened when our illustrious courts evicted God from America's classrooms, and -what- filled that vacuum and the resulting flood of licentiousness, wickedness, situational 'ethics', narcotics-for-all and amorality-as-it-fits.

What you appear to be saying is that Americans should just sit patiently, keep praying, don't do anything rash, don't let anyone provoke us to violence, and "everything will be alright".

If that advice had been taken in 1776, Prime Minister 0bama would be preparing his Throne Speech for the Queen to deliver next month.

And Sam Adams would be laughing at you.

[Senator John Blutarski]

stockpirate wrote: “I agree, so if this is swept aside can the rest of us ignore the 16th amendment?”

..... Only if you can specify an emotionally edifying reason for doing so.

;-]

[Chief Engineer]

Just a quick note to point out that Sr’s thrid wife Ruth was an American teacher Sr met in Boston. She followed him back to Kenya where they got married although the marriage only lasted 7 years. Sr originally began to go out with her as she had money and could afford to go places and do things which Sr, as a sudent on scholarship, could not do.

[Technical Editor]

Oh, do please call me Ma'am. Yes, I am ready and plan to execute "the plan." Thank you for your response. It's such a delight to talk to people like you who are like me. I just hope you are not suffering as much as I and likely many, many others are. We have, in reality, been terrorized by the spectre, and now the distinct possibility, that Obama will manage to elude justice in the near term. The cost in human terms is nearly incalcuable. I'm talking about the real stress associated with being in an undeclared guerilla war like the one we are in. I don't think I am exaggerating when I say that millions of Americans have already been injured severely by the actions of Obama -- and I don't mean physical injury, at least not yet.

[devistate one four]

Gadsen flag? I don’t know this