And you can tell your BFF Fabia that Obama’s minions used a freedom of religious speech case to support their claims the US adopted feudal subjectship law as the definition of a free & soverreign citizen.
As I stated earlier, the change from S. 2678 to S. Res. 511, a resolution [R]ecognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen] moved curiously swiftly.
I will also not go into all the ‘whereas’, as I have already covered this. You can read them here, along with my commentary. What I will do is pick a couple of them apart that pertain to Olson & Tribe’s analysis, as well as the testimony/analysis of Olson & Tribe. I will also place special emphasis on Tribe who is on record as officially endorsing Obama as well as a current member of Obama’s domestic policy team well before S. Res. 511 was introduced. I do believe Olson’s part, for the most part, was pure decoration for the benefit of the GOP to get them to go along with the scheme. I’ll let you judge for yourself by reading this article from the ‘World Socialist Website’. There could be no better cover-up, than to put a so called conservative constitutional lawyer who is loathed by the liberal left, but also happens to be a closet liberal civil rights activist in bed with a progressive one.
First let’s begin with the written analysis/testimony that was permanently recorded in the congressional record on April 30, 2008 but was officially sent to the Senate on April 8th through the law firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP.
The analysis which begins by citing that the Constitution does not define ‘natural born’ citizen & that Congress has never given a definition either can be argued against. Some argue otherwise, however the best place to find the definition would be in the 39th Congress records of 1866 when the 14th Amendment was being drafted. They then go on to cite Marsh v. Chambers, 463 U.S. 783, 790-91 which is a 1983 Supreme Court case on freedom of religious speech. While this had me baffled for a day or so, it suddenly hit me. Maybe they were not using the deciding opinion of the case. Maybe they went to the dissenting opinion. BINGO! Justice Brennan dissenting wrote:
“Finally, and most importantly, the argument tendered by the court is misguided because the Constitution is not a static document whose every meaning on every detail is fixed for all time by the life experience of the Framers. We have recognized in a variety of constitutional contexts that the practices that were in place at the time any particular guarantee was enacted in to the Constitution do not necessarily fix forever the meaning of that guarantee…”
So basically what they did was take Brennan’s dissenting opinion and use it as precedent to usurp our guarantee, our national security protection under the Rule of Law that the person attaining to the highest office of land, the Commander of our military forces would have no foreign influences or intrigues. But let us not stop there with this opinion, Brennan goes on to write:
“Our primary task must be to translate “the majestic generalities of the Bill of Rights, conceived as part of the pattern of liberal government in the eighteenth century…”
And there we have it, that big ‘it’s my constitutional right to be president some day’ analogy thrown right in our faces. Framers be damned!
Who's the dumbass now? All the dirty details of the cover-u can be read here: http://constitutionallyspeaking.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/the-congressional-natural-born-citizen-part-iii-mccain-s-res-511-were-meant-to-sanitize-obamas-ineligibility-to-be-president/
Uh, I don't follow all of what you said, but I think the feudal stuff came from you, last night on this same thread. Because the way I read your stuff, you said we were getting our law from Saxony whatever, although I think you maybe picked the wrong Saxony.:
Plus, take my word, you don't want to irritate my BFF Fabia Sheen, Esq., because she is VERY smart, and absolutely verbally vicious and ruthless on law stuff. You saw what she did to poor Diogene's Lamp, above. And that was like a 5 minute job for her to read the stuff and dictate the notes to me on what to say. (Oh, I bet he is still having to sit on a pillow!!!)