Posted on 12/06/2008 9:43:49 PM PST by pissant
However, I have seen no proof that he was not born in Hawaii. There are some statements from witnesses which are of questionable credibility, and at best fall into the "he said, she said" category. There are questionable claims of documents from Kenya, as though anyone would believe that a corrupt third-world country would maintain accurate and honest records from that long ago, or that such documents weren't forged using modern technology (such as is available from a variety of secret services in hostile countries).
If there was an existing, codified procedure under which all candidates for President must first provide proof of natural born citizenship in order to appear on primary and general election ballots, then Obama could have been required to provide such proof. But there is no such election law procedure.
Under these circumstances, all Obama has to do is present a prima facia case that he is a natural born citizen. That low threshold has easily been met: He has a copy of a Hawaiian birth certificate which was officially issued by that state (even if it's not the original). He has a U.S. passport which identifies his location of birth as Hawaii. There is a birth announcement which was published in a Hawaiian newspaper. Etc.
It would require strong proof to overcome that prima facia evidence. Obama doesn't have to do anything nor reply to his critics; he can treat the entire issue as frivolous, since the burden of proof is now on those who are skeptical of his status. He is treating it as unworthy of a public response, which indeed a reasonable attitude if he really was born in Hawaii. After all, why should he care if a few right-wingers descend into Obama Derangement Syndrome over the matter? Better on something like this than something more substantial that the general public might take seriously.
The Supreme Court is not going to take up the issue, and Obama will be sworn in as President on January 20th. And those people who spend the next four years loudly proclaiming that Obama is an illegitimate President because he hasn't proven to their satisfaction that he's a natural born citizen will be looked upon as the same type of nut cases as Bush Derangement Syndrome sufferers.
There are a couple of things wrong with this assertion:
1. People were bringing this before the election, but the MSM and others were refusing to let the people hear it. Before the election, people who brought it up were called fring conspiracy theorists; after the election they were called sore losers. It was a "heads I win, tails you lose" situation.
2. Before the election, most courts would have called the situation premature, because if Obama lost then the issue would be moot. They would have argued that you'd have to wait to see if Obama won, because there would be no damages and no need for remedy if he lost. Now that he won, and there may be damages, you're saying that it's too late to do anything about it. Again, "heads they win, tails we lose."
3. Before the election, there were lawsuits tossed out for lack of standing. It took the election to determine who had standing to file these lawsuits. Before the election, common voters were not deemed to have standing to ask for the qualifications of the candidates they were voting for. The question of standing was discussed on these forums, but that discussion took us to the election and afterwards. Current lawsuits filed by Alan Keyes were to test the issue of standing because Keyes was an actual candidate running against Obama. If another candidate doesn't have standing to ask for the qualifications of a competitor, then who does? Also, some suits were brought by Electoral College electors. The actual Constitutional elections for President is by the electors in the Electoral College. If these electors don't have standing to ask for the qualifications of the candidates they are voting for, then who does? The Electoral College election has not happened yet.
-PJ
If Americans toss this section of the constitution as not worth enforcing due to the threat of the mob, what else will be jettisoned the next time?
The rest of it, a clause at a time, whenever political conditions require. Sort of like Giuliani's 'broken window doctrine'; If you want to keep the law observe the whole of it, or else lose it entirely.
Obama and his principles and ideology are far more a threat than that of authenticity of his birth certificate. It is to focus on a mole hill while climbing a mountain. When the whole Rev. Wright debacle came out I thought that would kill his chances...I mean how could we elect someone who sat in a church for 20 years and listened to that America-hating vitriolic rheatoric? And his wife's comment about never being proud of America until they got a boat-load of goodies? And the list goes on and on. But we did it. We elected this guy. I'm still in shock.
I think you can say that with some confidence. When the camera panned to the crowd at Obama's acceptances speech, you could see the crazy-eyed excitement in the people that I've never seen before in the political arena.
May a baby Obama be in your manger this xmas,too, David..:)
Are you referring to his recently issued Diplomatic passport, which he only obtained after becoming a US Senator?
If so, there is a poster here who worked in the very building where these passports are created. According to her testimony, a US Senator, or other government VIP can obtain a Diplomatic passport, bypassing the normal red tape we citizens must endure. According to the poster, she often heard the phone calls come in from "the right people" which eliminated the standard verification process for VIPs.
The reason I bring this up, is that there is a possibility that Obama's new passport may well have had any "embarrassing" details scrubbed in this manner.
If your post regards Obama's earlier passport from his 1981 trip to Pakistan, then this is a moot point.
Oh but for Bama and liberals it is alllll about an electoral victory. Big problem though is if the liberals knowingly or unknowingly presented an unqualified contestant on the ballot they are losers. That judge in Nevada recently told OJ that ignorance of the law was NO defense, you are going to jail. So why should Bama or his voters be treated differently? But, Bama knows the truth and I have no opposition to him taking the oath of office because he did indeed get the most votes, IF he is qualified. So why doesn't Bama end this and literally present himself as a leader????
That’s the point. Earlier in this thread I asked why no conservative with any chops at all is even touching this subject.
All I got was the lame excuse that “they don’t want to be wrong” or that “they are part of the MSM.”
More to the point, name me one conservative of standing (and by that I mean stature) who has taken on this issue.
Name me one “high-profile talker or blogger” who is even touching the issue. That, in and of itself, should give pause to the endless, over the top speculation that goes on on these threads.
Horowitz, although even I agree that he missed the point on several issues, simply, and probably out of frustration, addresses the matter dismissively...and that’s how most conservative talkers and commentators are treating it.
I've seen it before...in old black and white footage of early-fourties Germany....that same crazy-eyed excitement and mob mentality...
Empirical evidence is what it is.
The president is not elected by popular vote. The only votes that count are the electoral college votes. One of the final checks and balances thoughtfully provided by the founding fathers.
Yes obviously right. I was thinking in America.
Horowitz hasn’t lost his liberal ability to appeal to emotion instead of reason has he? He hasn’t studied the issue.
You think Rush is afraid? Nonsense.
Given that Obama’s paternal grandmother says he was born in Kenya, why on earth shouldn’t he be required to show a valid birth certificate?
I know you were... but it has to be said again and again...;o)
I’d guess that conservatives getting upset about the Article 2 challenges tend to display some “fear of man.”
Fear of being embarrassed, by someone who displays quite a bit of status consciousness?
Hardly nonsensical.
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.