Replies

I, for one, have a nephew in the service. I’ll be damned if I want him under this gay, man-child, fraud’s “command”, with the possibility of winding up in an international criminal court!!!!!

-------------------------

The smoking gun is the feeble effort to 'bamboozle' America with the phony birth document (Certification of Live Birth) he put up on his web site. That should have brought an FBI visit for forging a birth certificate.

The Certification of Live Birth form is not definitive.

Now the White House insults our intelligence by showing his new passport. It's not his original passport but his new presidential passport with all of the information on it that confirms Barry's narrative of being born in Hawaii.

Where's the old 1980's passport?

He and his administration think Americans are idiots. They know that you are waiting for the piss-stream media to tell the truth but it ain't ever going to happen.

Yes BobP, this is “Where is the birth certificate” is exactly why Lakin was so easily dismissed. If you read the first wave of “Birthers”, WaPo, the NYT, Salon, The Hollander Case, Huffington Post, and a dozen others, they largely understood the definition of natural born citizenship, and understood McCain's problem. The best analysis to date after Breckenridge Long's brief on Charles Evans Huges, is by Gabriel Chin, Univ. of Arizona Law Professor, and a liberal Democrat. Either Dr. Lakin’s defenders were incompetent, or they are working for Obama.

Obama is ineligible because he was born of a parent without sole allegiance to the U.S. The liberal media understood the issue when McCain's eligibility was at issue. Why can't the conservative media understand? Could there be those using conservative blogs who want to promote the misunderstanding?

I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen….

Congressman John Bingham, former Judge Adjutant who prosecuted Lincoln's assassins, principal author the the 14th Amendment, address to the House before ratification in 1866.

Anyone focusing on birth certificates is, intentionally or not, diverting from the Constitutional fact of Obama’s ineligibility. The “Ruling Class,” both Republicans and Democrats participated in the law breaking intentional ignorance of the law, perhaps because they agreed to let McCain run, perhaps because the wand Bobby Jindal to be able to run. Who knows? Obama was always ineligible and all the big progressive media knew it. Just do a little search on “McCain eligibility.” But ask search on “Obama Eligibility” and you'll find the liberal media calling anyone who would ask the question “wingnuts.”

You - we - are being manipulated. Whether Lakin is part of the manipulation is hard to tell. The 501C3 backing him has done little else. That is suspicious. Perhaps Lakin was naive about who was defending him? I hope so.

Least there be any doubt, since the natural question is "why would progressives support someone clearly in violation of the Constitution's eligibility clause?"; here is the answer, from the New York Times in July 2008:

Daniel P. Tokaji, an election law expert at Ohio State University, agreed. “It is awfully unlikely that a federal court would say that an individual voter has standing,” he said. “It is questionable whether anyone would have standing to raise that claim. You’d have to think a federal court would look for every possible way to avoid deciding the issue.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/11/us/politics/11mccain.html?_r=1

Tokaji was correct - so far. No court will dare touch the issue Constitutional or not. They have hidden behind standing. Let the pretender eliminate our weapons, put our troops under UN command, decimate our economy, shut down domestic energy production, but because everyone has been "injured," the injury is not "unique" and the courts will ignore the constitution, as they are doing now.

Yes BobP, this is “Where is the birth certificate” is exactly why Lakin was so easily dismissed. If you read the first wave of “Birthers”, WaPo, the NYT, Salon, The Hollander Case, Huffington Post, and a dozen others, they largely understood the definition of natural born citizenship, and understood McCain's problem. The best analysis to date after Breckenridge Long's brief on Charles Evans Huges, is by Gabriel Chin, Univ. of Arizona Law Professor, and a liberal Democrat. Either Dr. Lakin’s defenders were incompetent, or they are working for Obama.

Obama is ineligible because he was born of a parent without sole allegiance to the U.S. The liberal media understood the issue when McCain's eligibility was at issue. Why can't the conservative media understand? Could there be those using conservative blogs who want to promote the misunderstanding?

I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen….

Congressman John Bingham, former Judge Adjutant who prosecuted Lincoln's assassins, principal author the the 14th Amendment, address to the House before ratification in 1866.

Anyone focusing on birth certificates is, intentionally or not, diverting from the Constitutional fact of Obama’s ineligibility. The “Ruling Class,” both Republicans and Democrats participated in the law breaking intentional ignorance of the law, perhaps because they agreed to let McCain run, perhaps because the wand Bobby Jindal to be able to run. Who knows? Obama was always ineligible and all the big progressive media knew it. Just do a little search on “McCain eligibility.” But ask search on “Obama Eligibility” and you'll find the liberal media calling anyone who would ask the question “wingnuts.”

You - we - are being manipulated. Whether Lakin is part of the manipulation is hard to tell. The 501C3 backing him has done little else. That is suspicious. Perhaps Lakin was naive about who was defending him? I hope so.

Least there be any doubt, since the natural question is "why would progressives support someone clearly in violation of the Constitution's eligibility clause?"; here is the answer, from the New York Times in July 2008:

Daniel P. Tokaji, an election law expert at Ohio State University, agreed. “It is awfully unlikely that a federal court would say that an individual voter has standing,” he said. “It is questionable whether anyone would have standing to raise that claim. You’d have to think a federal court would look for every possible way to avoid deciding the issue.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/11/us/politics/11mccain.html?_r=1

Tokaji was correct - so far. No court will dare touch the issue Constitutional or not. They have hidden behind standing. Let the pretender eliminate our weapons, put our troops under UN command, decimate our economy, shut down domestic energy production, but because everyone has been "injured," the injury is not "unique" and the courts will ignore the constitution, as they are doing now.