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.
Well, we have a little more than that. We have the Official for the State of Hawaii who is in charge of the records affirming he saw the actual birth certificate and that Obama was indeed born in Hawaii.
“The U.S. Department of Immigration and Naturalization has consistent, for nearly ten decades treated every person born on U.S. soil as natural born citizens”
Well, if the above is true (I’ll take your word for it) that solves it!
The law is on Obama’s side (as you state) so he should mediately come forth with his vault Birth Certificate, showing that he was born in Hawaii — as he himself has claimed.
He should be informed that he no longer has to spend thousands of dollars hiding a $12.00 birth certificate.
Indeed, this is good news!
I would like to get the word out as soon as possible.
Thanks for your post!
STE=Q
No. None of them have suffered irreparable harm if Obama is lying about his birth certificate. In order for them to have standing they would have to show that if Obama becomes ineligible, they would become president. This is why Gore had standing in 2000. If the court would have ruled in Gores favor, he would have become president. Actually, the Gore case is very informative of the process and how it works. Gore was able to establish standing - this got him into court - he was unable to demonstrate a legal wrong and this lost him the case.
She said nothing of the sort.
You want to link to where this official said that Obama was born in Hawaii?
So, in your opinion, no one has standing to see that the Constitution’s simplest provisions are enforced.
The following is what Dr. Fukino, said:
“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures,”
Dr. Fukino never said the birth certificate showed Obama was born in Hawaii as you have suggested. She said it was on record.
Maya Soetero-Ng has a COLB from Hawaii as well and I am certain that the documentation can be ‘verified’ as being in accordance with state policies and procedures.
She however was born in Indonesia.
“We have the Official for the State of Hawaii who is in charge of the records affirming he saw the actual birth certificate and that Obama was indeed born in Hawaii.”
Not true.
Official only ‘affirmed’ that Obama was ‘born.’ and registered the birth in Hawaii.
I don’t have the inclination to explain it all as it’s old news, but hopefully someone who types faster than me will.
STE=Q
See what I mean!
What I “want” is irrelevant. The issue is whether Obama is a “natural born citizen”. Dual-citizenship does not mean that he is not a “natural born citizen”.
What?? “CharacterCounts” made that up?? I’m shocked. Shocked I tell you...
They are all just making it up as they go along or repeating talking points they read in a newspaper without questioning the source.
The MSM has a greater hold than conservative believe.
Absolutely.
They way for this case to be properly before the court would have been for one of the Secretaries of State for the various states to refuse to certify Obama's electors. None have. Are they all in on the conspiracy?
I think that if a secretary of State had sued the Obama campaign to produce the certificate, the court would have found sufficient standing because it is that person duty to certify electors.
You're talking about the evidence that Barack Obama meets the constitutional requirements to serve as POTUS, right?
That’s why the Keyes case is being brought against the CA SoS and the CA Obama electors.
This seems like an extremely flimsy basis on which to overturn a democratic election. A definition without any clear, unambiguous, long-standing legal precedent. Which is open to interpretation. Bad idea, let’s move on to the next battle.
Oh yeah. They’re suing Obama and Biden too.
Um, yes it does. That divided loyalty issue caused by dual citizenship at birth is precisely what the framers were seeking to address with the Constitutional provisions regarding eligibility. Think about it for a moment: how can a dual citizenship at birth be only a natural born American? Enjoy your Sunday evening
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.