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.
These circumstances remind us not to place our trust in men.
We have always known we can only trust in God and in the principles of God’s authority (such as our Constitution), nothing more.
What can't be proven and why not?
I expect the arrogance and indifference to the Constitution form the majority of elected hacks. I don’t expect it from conservatives.
Although it may seem cowardly you must remember Rush, Hannity and Fox News are constantly monitored by the left and MSM for anything that could be used against them. They may also be scared of the reemergence of the Fairness Doctrine. For those reasons I'll give them a pass on this. But we and other brave souls aren't hamstrung by these threats.
David's attempt to lay this on just right wing nutcases ignores the calls from Hillary supporters who also have deep suspicion that there's someone illegitimate about "The Chosen One".
I would think Obama would wan to clear this up before he takes office. I'll just mention one word that should give him cause. Whitewater.
Complete BS.
It is rather easy to prove or disprove. If he has a original birth certificate held by the State of HI as he claims that shows he was born there, case closed. IF not, he not only is not natural born, he has committed a serious felony and needs to spend time in prison.
“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?”
Maybe David can lead a nationwide burning of our Constitution as Zero is sworn in!
That comment decoded says “So, who cares if Zer0 is not a viable candidate as per our outdated and useless constitution. Swear him in and whoever else has enough money to win the election as president!”
LOL
At first I thought no way this could be David Horowitz. But he is claiming to be a conservative in his piece, so I have to assume he succumbed to Malkinitis.
What does that mean, anyway?
Granola, food co-ops, communes...it means...HIPPIES.
“...Gotta be a reason, folks.”
What is your reason?
Many of those in Zero’s closet with him on this issue probably have some skeletons in their ancestors closets or personal closets.
Every time I have said that I got the same results, people to dumb to look and read the treaty. If you actually go by the constitution Mccain would have been skating on very thin ice.
Yes, but there is no disagreement about what Article II says.
The disagreement is about WHO can demand WHAT proof, and WHEN, of wannabes.
On these subjects, the Constitution is mute.
No he wasn't! Please stop it.
The imposter will forever be looked upon as an usurper to the throne, the lead character in a comic operetta set in the duchy of Grand Fenwick.
His words will be meaningless, his fiats ignored, his leadership unfollowed.
He'll end up rearranging toy soldiers on the Oval Office rug while a cabal in the U.S. Congress will run the country.....and the presidency.
Leni
“who among conservatives is going with this story? Your answer should tell you how legit it may be.”
The value of individualism and individual thought is essential to conservatism. If we define our own conservatism by the thinking of the individuals you mention, we’re not conservatives.
The constitution is also mute on whether firearms can be sold. It grants the right to keep and bear arms, but says nothing of merchandising. This hasn’t stopped the court from ruling on the question in regards to the second amendment or any other constitutional matter.
I agree. That is why you see 25 lawsuits, because the marxist hasn’t volunteered the info. More coming, BTW.
“Kinda makes you wonder if they were conservatives in the first place or just in it for the money and the publicity.”
They are apparently fakes like so many of the phoney beltway conservatives who turned on Sarah Palin this year.
Any so called conservative talk show host, op ed writer or web site host, who avoids this issue will never have me as an listener, reader nor visitor to the web site.
I have not listened to Rush, Sean nor local so called conservatives talk show hosts the election, because they avoided this issue and never even discussed it.
Amazingly, I am doing fine without them just like I have been great since I stopped reading, listening to and watching the phoney news from the left wing mediots.
Their failure to discuss this issue reminds me of the left wingers on ABCNNBCBS refusing to discussing their beloved Clintoon and his mouthy intern, Monica.
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.