Posted on 12/09/2008 6:32:38 AM PST by Mobile Vulgus
Well. I am sure that this is going to anger some of you. But, I have to say it anyway…
OK, I have basically stayed silent about this whole Obama birth certificate dust up until now because I have been trying to resolve the dichotomy in my mind between being a Constitutional constructionist and a pragmatist. But, at long last I have realized that the two really aren't as much at odds as it might seem. In fact, I found my answer in the words of Thomas Jefferson -- as well as Madison, Franklin and a few others, but we'll stick with Jefferson quotes for the sake of a sharply focused discussion.
I have discovered that Thomas Jefferson has already told us upon which side we as conservatives should descend over the question concerning Barack Obama's birth certificate and his eligibility for the office of president of the United States. Mister Jefferson would tell you all to shut up, accept cruel fate, and get ready to claim Barack Obama as the 44th president of the United States of America.
That's right, forget about it. Move on. Nothing to see here.
Before you get your Constitutional shorts in a bunch, I absolutely agree with you that we are a nation of laws and not men. Jefferson did too, once saying that we must consider what the original intent of the Constitution was before we rush into a decision and the original intent in this case was clearly to make sure every president was a natural born citizen of this country before being eligible to run for that highest of offices. ("The Constitution on which our Union rests, shall be administered ... according to the safe and honest meaning contemplated by the plain understanding of the people of the United States at the time of its adoption -- a meaning to be found in the explanations of those who advocated [for it]..."-- Thomas Jefferson)
The simple reason that the founders wanted the president to be a natural born citizen was because they were keen students of history. The phrase "let history be our guide" was not just a trope. The founders knew well the many instances when a foreign ruler had entered a country and, using that country's own laws and customs, immorally proclaimed himself the ruler of a subjugated nation. The founders wanted to prevent that possibility and also wanted to make sure that there were no divided loyalties in an American president, that the welfare of the USA would be first and foremost in the mind of anyone elected to that office. What better way than to preclude the foreign born?
So, yes, the proscriptions against the foreign born candidate are important and should not be cast aside. We should never knowingly present a candidate not born as a citizen of the U.S. Further, we should take pains to verify the provenance of every candidate's claim to natural citizenship.
But... and you knew the “but” was coming. There is an original intent that rises above the Constitution itself. In fact, there are a few, but one in particular comes to bear here...
Read the rest at Publiusforum.com...
More evidence indicative of a once fine conservative website that has lost it's moorings. Neo conservatives here have laid waste to Free Republic, once a haven for traditional conservatives who as one body would have very strongly opposed your statement.
Interesting read and reasoned argument. However I doubt it will win many converts on this forum.Yer tellin' ME? I know that the name calling would be ginned up to the highest level, of course. But, I think this had to be said.
This doesn't make logical sense. If Kennedy and LBJ stole the election how was that the will of the people? And, I wonder, had Nixon actually exposed this to the light of day, might we have actually solved the election fraud problem instead of letting it become so ingrained?
If the SOB isn’t an American Citizen then it is not a waste of time. As a matter of fact to not stop him is treasonous. He has to release his original BC, period.
I doubt that Nixon was that honorable. He likely felt that contesting the fraud would hurt his chances in the next election. It is likely the **same** motivation that keeps the Republican leaders from demanding Obama’s documents.
Just a comment on the above, not directed at you....Nixon knew he lost via fraud and so did a lot of other people. Nixon bowed out because he didn't want to tear the country apart by contesting the election a la dip sh*t Gore
Just my $.02
But hey, the Constitution is a living, breathing document! /sarc
All points are valid, but lets also look at an unconventional person named Stanley Ann Dunham. First of all, Barack Sr married a white woman (Ruth Ndesandjo)after Stanley, so he apparently wasn't too afraid of what his father thought of it. Second, Stanley also moved to Indonesia, a third world country, because she was JUST that way. She was the type who liked to thumb her nose at convention and experience the wilder side of life. A trip to meet her exotic husband's exotic tribal family would have been FABULOUS for a person of her nature. And she was 18, pregnant or not. At 18, I took on adventures I wouldn't dream of now.
So if we are going to look at improbabilities, we must also look at the possibilities as well.
I’m with you webschooner.
Scary, isn’t it....
“not the Constitution that was written for the people??!!!”
The Constitution wasn’t written FOR the people.
It was written BY the people.
“WE THE PEOPLE of the United States”..
The capitalization was intentional so that there would be no doubt about who wrote it and whom it protects.
We live in a Representative Republic. NOT a democracy.
This author assumes the ‘democratic’ WILL of the people should prevail over the Constitution and leaves out very important parts of what the Founders, including Jefferson,wanted for the people.
He quotes Jefferson as saying that the Constitution safe guards against any ‘foreign’ leader or citizen of another country from becoming president and rather quotes only excerpts that fit his so called ‘understanding’ of what the ‘will of the people’ is.
His logic is strained and contorted to try to ‘fit’ what HE believes should be the ‘will of the people’..
True. He’s a real nowhere man. Very true. We need to focus on the simple fact that he got elected because the PEOPLE are lulled into somnolence, that is, too many of the people. That’s our problem. Obama is not our problem. That he could be elected is our problem. That the MSM could elect him. That people are so blind—that’s our problem.
I doubt that he qualifies as a natural born citizen but his fails by a fairly slim technicality. Had it been raised by the MSM in the primaries, the response by most of the sheeple would have been a shrug and a yawn—he misses being a natural born citizen by a thread, fine, we’ll just declare that in his case he was close enough.
It really doesn’t help our cause to get him disqualfied by a technicality. He needs to be disqualified by a broadside, by what he stands for, by his foolish policies and associates and illegal funding.
But the Sheeple don’t care about those truly disqualifying factors. If we persist trying to get him disqualified by a real but relatively small technicality, we miss the opportunity to keep hammering away at his policies which will truly destroy our country.
If he could have been eliminated in the primaries because his natural born citizenship problems had been surfaced, that would have been great. Well, maybe it would have been great—then we’d have had Hillary.
But he wasn’t disqualified then. It’s too late to discredit him this way now. He needs to be discredited on the things that really matter.
Give it up, folks. Put your energy into grass roots organizing for 2010 and unifying the conservative wing of the Pubbies so that the divide-and-conquer nomination process that delivered McLame as our candidate doesn’t repeat itself. Put your energy into rescuing as many young skulls full of mush from the brutalizing indoctrination they are getting from the media and in the schools. Let the birth certificate thing go.
It’s no use. No one is listening to logic.
For example, if Obama was not born in Honolulu, then the COLB is fraudulent. The Hawaiian state authorities have falsified their records. If they did that, what would stop them from altering the appearance of a copy of a birth certificate with the state seal? That’s why if they did produce a copy of the original birth certificate, it wouldn’t stop speculation.
Also, Obama clearly produced something in the past that enabled him to get a social security card, a driver’s license and a passport. If Hawaii has a policy of issuing only COLBs to their citizens, this document must have been accepted as sufficient by state and federal authorities. Why should something more be required at this point? Either you can trust the state of Hawaii or not. If not, the fix is in no matter what. Unless you can get sworn statements from witnesses that claim to have personal knowledge of those flights from Kenya to Hawaii within a very narrow time frame, the document issue is closed.
“The founders knew well the many instances when a foreign ruler had entered a country and, using that country’s own laws and customs, immorally proclaimed himself the ruler of a subjugated nation. The founders wanted to prevent that possibility and also wanted to make sure that there were no divided loyalties in an American president, that the welfare of the USA would be first and foremost in the mind of anyone elected to that office. What better way than to preclude the foreign born?”
This is also about a man who spent his childhood and elementary in Indonesia, getting STEEPED in Islamic culture and tradition. I doubt they taught him American history, American social values, historical perspective, european history right down to WW1, WW2 etc etc etc. His base education has nothing to do with american beliefs, traditions or values. His basal beliefs are from Indonesia!
Subsequently, this man rrives in America and aligns himself with the philosophies and likes of AYERS.....
Eduardo Arellano Felix probably knows more of the history (right down to WW1 and WW2) , culture and societal values of the US of A than BO!
That all makes sense. So why does Obama put up a forged certificate and spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to hide a $10.00 piece of paper and refuse to release any corroborating evidence to his citizenship status when a small, but vocal group of people keep spreading the information that he is not a legitimate president?
You’re exactly right. Amending the Constitution is intentionally difficult.
That’s true, as far as it goes. I found the point about the physical impossibilities of two students - one of them fully pregnant - taking a 100 hour series of airplane trips, and paying for it all, to be more convincing.
True, Barack Sr. wasn’t afraid enough of his father to keep him from marrying white women. BUT, he was also doing this in the USA, where he was (literally) half a world away from Onyango.
I was born in Spain, became a citizen in 2000, and can get a US passport now but that does not make me eligible to run for president! BTW, this theory of "moving on to avoid making some people mad" earily reminds me of the Spanish election following the Madrid terrorist attacks. We are better than those Spaniards, aren't we?
You said — “Two words. Electoral College. Can overrule the will of the people. Why was that put in if the will of the people was more important than a foreigner being elected President.”
Very true..., they can do that. And a lot of people (especially here) won’t like that from those Obots... LOL...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.