Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

David Horowitz: Obama Derangement Syndrome- Conservatives Need to Shut Up About the Birth Cert.
HNN ^ | 12/6/08 | David Horowitz

Posted on 12/06/2008 9:43:49 PM PST by pissant

The continuing efforts of a fringe group of conservatives to deny Obama his victory and to lay the basis for the claim that he is not a legitimate president is embarrassing and destructive. The fact that these efforts are being led by Alan Keyes, an unhinged demagogue on the political fringe who lost a senate election to the then unknown Obama by 42 points should be a warning in itself.

This tempest over whether Obama, the child of an American citizen, was born on American soil is tantamount to the Democrats' seditious claim that Bush "stole" the election in Florida and hence was not the legitimate president. This delusion helped to create the Democrats' Bush derangement syndrome and encouraged Democratic leaders to lie about the origins of the Iraq War, and regard it as illegitimate as Bush himself. It became "Bush's War" rather than an American War with destructive consequences for our troops and our cause.

The Birth Certificate zealots are essentially arguing that 64 million voters should be disenfranchised because of a contested technicality as to whether Obama was born on U.S. soil. (McCain narrowly escaped the problem by being born in the Panama Canal zone, which is no longer American.)

What difference does it make to the future of this country whether Obama was born on US soil? Advocates of this destructive campaign will argue that the Constitutional principle regarding the qualifications for President trumps all others. But how viable will our Constitution be if 5 Supreme Court justices should decide to void 64 million ballots?

Conservatives are supposed to respect the organic nature of human societies. Ours has been riven by profound disagreements that have been deepening over many years. We are divided not only about political facts and social values, but also about what the Constitution itself means. The crusaders on this issue choose to ignore these problems and are proposing to deny the will of 64 million voters by appealing to 5 Supreme Court Justices (since no one is delusional enough to think that the 4 liberal justices are going to take the presidency away from Obama). What kind of conservatism is this?

It is not conservatism; it is sore loserism and quite radical in its intent. Respect for election results is one of the most durable bulwarks of our unity as a nation. Conservatives need to accept the fact that we lost the election, and get over it; and get on with the important business of reviving our country's economy and defending its citizens, and -- by the way -- its Constitution.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; US: Hawaii
KEYWORDS: aatinfoil; alankeyes; artbell; bendoverbilies; birthcertificate; certifigate; choomgang; crackerheads; deadhorse; enoughalready; frightenedobamagirls; getalife; getlostobamtrolls; horowitz; irony; larrysinclairslover; notthisshiitagain; nutballs; obama; obamatransitionfile; obamatrollarehere; obamatrollsshutup; obamatruthfile; obombafromkenya; ods; offthedeepend; paidobamahacks; pissantswindmill; reddiaper; rightwingtroofers; rubberroomcrowd; stupid; thedeclineoffr; tinfoil; tinfoilphobicneocon; unholyalliance
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 761-776 next last
To: jetson
Allot of legal BS

Right! the law means nothing! Just ignore it!

321 posted on 12/07/2008 5:47:06 AM PST by CharacterCounts (1984 was supposed to be a work of fiction, not a how-to manual.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Exactly,after 30 years in talk radio both full time and part I don't have a clue why the big talkers are taking a pass on this one.

Its rare that they totally ignore the more intellectual part of their audience,especially the part that feeds them their daily bread.US!!

Someone/something has gotten to them.I wish I knew what or whom.

322 posted on 12/07/2008 5:47:37 AM PST by rodguy911 (HOME OF THE FREE BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE--GO SARAHCUDA !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]

To: EyeGuy

Logic doesn’t prevail here, as you and I both realize.
<p?
Yes, it ought to be routine to validate one’s eligibility for office, as you would for joining the military, getting college scholarships, or applying for a passport. It ought to be a no-brainer to require that people prove their identity before casting a ballot.

But only in America can the left get away with claiming that requiring ID “disenfranches” voters. What a crock. It is merely done to hide fraud.

And only in America can the left get away without having to prove Obama’s eligibility. Mark my words, not only the left but the entire world — the U.N., European newspapers, everyone — will demand that Obama take office anyway.

Sigh ...


323 posted on 12/07/2008 5:49:29 AM PST by tom h
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts
Kind of a cheap shot here(hit and run)

If the four months of evidence I have seen,everything from Dr. Polarik on down is not enough for a full vetting of a potential potus candidate than what is.

324 posted on 12/07/2008 5:51:06 AM PST by rodguy911 (HOME OF THE FREE BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE--GO SARAHCUDA !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 309 | View Replies]

To: pissant
Off topic (a little). You and I disagree about whether or not the legal system can be used in this way to deal with Obama.

But there is no doubt that, if he is what you think he is, that he will eventually have to be dealt with in the regular way for dealing with such persons.

325 posted on 12/07/2008 5:51:06 AM PST by Jim Noble (I have read a fiery gospel, writ in burnished rows of steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 307 | View Replies]

To: rodguy911
after 30 years in talk radio both full time and part I don't have a clue why the big talkers are taking a pass on this one.

Have you taken a look at the possibility that they're right and you're wrong?

Can happen, you know.

326 posted on 12/07/2008 5:53:02 AM PST by Jim Noble (I have read a fiery gospel, writ in burnished rows of steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 322 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts
Right! the law means nothing! Just ignore it!

The law is the law if not distorted by WAY too much rhetoric and hurtles that can slow down the finding of the truth. Politicians love the law because loop holes are forever found. There is no law when law is ignored so often. Lets use illegal aliens as an example.

327 posted on 12/07/2008 5:53:42 AM PST by jetson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
I don't see how you can trash four months of in-depth research by numerous sources as allegations on nutbar websites,there are lot of really significant sources,reams of well documented info that has been researched over the past few months. Waaay too much to just casually discard as you.
328 posted on 12/07/2008 5:55:40 AM PST by rodguy911 (HOME OF THE FREE BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE--GO SARAHCUDA !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 314 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts

The supreme law says you must be natural born to be president. If it is a requirement, then so is the need to demonstrate it.

Obama’s word may be good enough for you, but it isn’t for any thinking conservative.


329 posted on 12/07/2008 5:56:35 AM PST by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: pissant
It is his burden to demonstrate he meets that criteria.

You're more or less correct about this.

But "burden of proof" in the political arena and before the bar of justice are two different things.

Before the voters, the burden was, as you say, on Obama.

Before a court, he must prove nothing.

NO COMPETENT AUTHORITY has asked for his birth certificate. No matter how many times you repeat what he "must do", until a competent authority asks for it and is refused, there's nothing here.

330 posted on 12/07/2008 5:56:36 AM PST by Jim Noble (I have read a fiery gospel, writ in burnished rows of steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 301 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
But "burden of proof" in the political arena and before the bar of justice are two different things.

Crooked lawyers are always two different things.

331 posted on 12/07/2008 5:58:20 AM PST by Sir Francis Dashwood (Arjuna, why have you have dropped your bow???)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble

The competent authority is the Constitution of the US. It is the only one that matters in this arena. It is not a “political” issue. It is a matter of the supreme law of the land.


332 posted on 12/07/2008 5:58:56 AM PST by pissant (THE Conservative party: www.falconparty.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 330 | View Replies]

To: Jim Noble
Have you take a look at the possibility that they're right and you're wrong?

Not really the issue.

The issue is why haven't the talkers at least explored the topic as an important news story for right wing bloggers without taking sides. That's called journalism. Not what the DBM practices which is called selective journalism.

According to you its OK for the heavy hitter right wing talkers to plagiarize our stuff constantly 24/7(which they do) but when they get one story they don't want to cover they just ignore it and it's supposed to be OK with us?

I don't think so.....

333 posted on 12/07/2008 6:01:55 AM PST by rodguy911 (HOME OF THE FREE BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE--GO SARAHCUDA !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: CzarChasm
Dear Alleged Journalists:

Ha ha ha!

I desperately hope you actually e-mailed this to a bunch of "Alleged Journalists"

You may well have coined a new acronym..."What a bunch of 'AJs'."

334 posted on 12/07/2008 6:02:13 AM PST by ROCKLOBSTER (RATs...nothing more than Bald Haired Hippies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 83 | View Replies]

To: Texas Eagle
“Obama may be withholding his birth certificate for the sole purpose of driving some Conservatives crazy.”

I think he is capable of it, but it would hurt him tremendously at this point to reveal that he has been playing a game. There is no good reason for him to have withheld his BC.

335 posted on 12/07/2008 6:02:16 AM PST by TalBlack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 120 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Bingo exactly!!


336 posted on 12/07/2008 6:02:39 AM PST by rodguy911 (HOME OF THE FREE BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE--GO SARAHCUDA !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 329 | View Replies]

To: pissant

Horowitz demonstrates very sloppy thinking with several points of self contradiction. No coherent logical argument can be found in the article.

He suggests we are pushing this because we’re sore losers, but also because we want to uphold the constitutional requirement for presidential candidates, and then he asserts that such requirement is less important than majority rule and that it’s not conservative to give priority to the constitution.

Mr. Horowitz, you need to start again from the beginning and simply write a new essay. Please show that you understand the principles of our Constitution as well as the premise of your own argument. I think you should focus a lot more on clarity and consistency of logic.


337 posted on 12/07/2008 6:02:52 AM PST by reasonisfaith (In lying to me, Mr. government official, you have granted me moral authority over you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharacterCounts

“Right! the law means nothing! Just ignore it!”

Why not? Everyone else does! ACORN, Joe the Plumber, Brunner, Al Franken’s discovered ballots, Obama opening up of sealed divorce records to win an election, Zombie voters, campaign finance fraud, etc.

And now we should just ignore the constitution as well. Why? Well because that would upset the liberals who have their bright shiny candidate, and they might just burn down the city if we ask impolite questions.

Yeah, it is becoming very clear that the law means NOTHING.


338 posted on 12/07/2008 6:03:41 AM PST by Sharrukin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 321 | View Replies]

To: TalBlack

It’s one thing to piss off a few conservatives it’s another to ignore the Supreme Court, if it comes to that.


339 posted on 12/07/2008 6:04:08 AM PST by rodguy911 (HOME OF THE FREE BECAUSE OF THE BRAVE--GO SARAHCUDA !!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 335 | View Replies]

To: pissant

A whole lotta bloodsucking politicians and their ilk should have their sux stfu—the absolute arrogance of so-called public officials is way outta hand, and has been for some time now.

http://gunnyg.wordpress.com/2008/12/07/gunny-g-re-those-stinkin-basturds-in-congress-again/


340 posted on 12/07/2008 6:05:14 AM PST by gunnyg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 301-320321-340341-360 ... 761-776 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson