David Horowitz: Obama Derangement Syndrome- Conservatives Need to Shut Up About the Birth Cert.

HNN ^ | 12/6/08 | David Horowitz

[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.

[billybudd]

Lack of absolute certainty is not evidence. Also, this stuff should have been addressed *before* the election.

Also, NJ accounts for 15 electoral votes, which would not alter the outcome of the election.

[EternalVigilance]

Absolutely.

[EternalVigilance]

Also, this stuff should have been addressed *before* the election.

That's funny. Before the election they were telling us this question was not "ripe."

[CharacterCounts]

I will take time to read Keyes issues after some court permits him to go forward. I haven't argued every point. My main argument has been that Donofrio and Berg have no standing to bring a case in court. I don't think Keyes does either. So far, all of the courts that have ruled have sided with my position and I believe the Supreme Court will also side with my position tomorrow. And, I don't think the courts that have already ruled nor the Supreme Court are part of a conspiracy.

[April Lexington]

Horowitz is a liberal. He was milking the conservative movement by claiming to have been converted.
Complete BS.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Unless you ar Mr. Horowitz in disguise, I don’t believe you!

[Lmo56]

Lack of absolute certainty is not evidence. Also, this stuff should have been addressed *before* the election.

Also, NJ accounts for 15 electoral votes, which would not alter the outcome of the election.

***

First of all ... IT WAS ADDRESSED BEFORE THE ELECTION AND THE LOWER COURTS REFUSED TO STAY IT ...

That is why Donofrio is at SCOTUS - the lower courts “punted” to the next higher authority.

Second, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH HIS BIRTH CERTIFICATE ... THEY COULD FIND WITH ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY THAT HE WAS BORN ON U.S. SOIL ...

The term “natural born citizen” has NEVER been defined in the U.S. Constitution or in codified U.S. law.

The OPERATIVE phrase of the 14th Amendment expressly states:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside ...”

It says “citizens” NOT “natural born citizens”.

In situations like this, SCOTUS has USUALLY devolved to ascertain what the “original intent” of the framers was ...

What does the 14th Amendment mean and what is its intended scope, as introduced the United States Senate in 1866?

Sen. Jacob M. Howard (MI), who introduced it in the Senate, tells us (as it was being debated):

“The first amendment is to section one, declaring that all “persons born in the United States and Subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the States wherein they reside. I do not propose to say anything on that subject except that the question of citizenship has been fully discussed in this body as not to need any further elucidation, in my opinion. This amendment which I have offered is simply declaratory of what I regard as the law of the land already, that every person born within the limits of the United States, and subject to their jurisdiction, is by virtue of natural law and national law a citizen of the United States. This will not, of course, include persons born in the United States who are foreigners, aliens, who belong to the families of ambassadors or foreign ministers accredited to the Government of the United States, but will include every other class of persons. It settles the great question of citizenship and removes all doubt as to what persons are or are not citizens of the United States. This has long been a great desideratum in the jurisprudence and legislation of this country ... I concur entirely with the honorable Senator from Illinois [Senator Trumbull], in holding that the word “jurisdiction,” as here employed, ought to be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction on the part of the United States, whether exercised by Congress, by the executive, or by the judicial department; that is to say, the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now ...”

Sen. Lyman Trumbull, Chairman of the Judiciary Committee, author of the Thirteenth Amendment, inserted the phrase:

“... All persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens.’ That means ‘subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof.’ What do we mean by ‘complete jurisdiction thereof?’ Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means ... Can you sue a Navajo Indian in court? Are they in any sense subject to the complete jurisdiction of the United States? By no means. We make treaties with them, and therefore they are not subject to our jurisdiction. If they were, we wouldn’t make treaties with them...It is only those persons who come completely within our jurisdiction, who are subject to our laws, that we think of making citizens; and there can be no objection to the proposition that such persons should be citizens ...”

Senator W. Williams further stated:

” ... In one sense, all persons born within the geographical limits of the United States are subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, but they are not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States in every sense. Take the child of an ambassador. In one sense, that child born in the United States is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, because if that child commits the crime of murder, or commits any other crime against the laws of the country, to a certain extent he is subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, but not in every respect; and so with these Indians. All persons living within a judicial district may be said, in one sense, to be subject to the jurisdiction of the court in that district, but they are not in every sense subject to the jurisdiction of the court until they are brought, by proper process, within the reach of the power of the court. I understand the words here, ‘subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,’ to mean fully and completely subject to the jurisdiction of the United States ...”

Rep. John Bingham of Ohio, considered the father of the Fourteenth Amendment, confirms the understanding and construction the framers used in regards to birthright and jurisdiction while speaking on civil rights of citizens in the House on March 9, 1866:

” ... I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen...”

Lastly:

If SCOTUS takes Donofrio’s case, and decides that he is correct and Obama IS NOT a natural born citizen ... then Obama would be DQ’d in New Jersey AND IN EVERY OTHER STATE ... It is called the “Fruit of the Poisonous Tree” doctrine ... ever hear of it?

[DaveTesla]

Calero was not just on New Jersey's ballot.

Roger Calero of the communist Party (born in Nicaragua) was on the 08 Presidential ballots of:

New York
New Jersey
Washington
Vermont
Minnesota
Louisiana
Florida
Delaware
Colorado
Iowa http://www.themilitant.com/2008/7237/Ballot37.pdf I checked as many of the above as I could and he was on the ballots.

[EternalVigilance]

Hehehe...

[Lmo56]

Calero was not just on New Jersey’s ballot.

***

Without a doubt - excellent research on your part, btw ...

My point is that his existence on any one ballot (in this case, NJ) SHOULD provide the exigence and basis for SCOTUS to hear the case.

Then, if they determine Obama (or anyone else) NOT to be a “natural born citizen”, then they would be DQ’d nationwide ...

[TigersEye]

Ah, I see. Horowitz is now flip-flopping, denying he said what he said and running for cover. What courage. Not!

[STE=Q]

"And, I don't think the courts that have already ruled nor the Supreme Court are part of a conspiracy."

No, but Obama's candidacy may have involved corruption and he MAY have even committed a crime. (see #87)

Keyes is simply requesting that the SOS be ordered to verify the constitutionally required qualifications of Senator Obama -- per their job. (see #88)

Failure to implement the above will cast a pall of doubt on the election process. (see #86)

EFFECT OR FAILURE TO GRANT INJUNCTIVE RELIEF

86. Failing to officially and publicly validate the status of the citizenship claims of Senator Obama will cast a pall of doubt on the election process and taint the election results themselves. A proper inquiry into Senator Obama’s eligibility will not constitute a hardship on Senator Obama, and it will not deny his voters the right to vote for him, since this very right is dependent on his eligibility for the office as a 'natural born' citizen. If Senator Obama is not a 'natural born' citizen, and, therefore, not eligible to serve as President, no hardship on him or any other Respondent can be shown. On the contrary, lack of the relief that is prayed for will constitute an insurmountable hardship on the voters of the State of California.

87. Failure to grant the relief sought would allow a potentially corrupted, fraudulent,nomination and election process to continue. If indeed, Senator Obama knew that he is not eligible for the presidency, he would be subject to California Election Code Section 18203, which states,'Any person who files or submits for filing a nomination paper or declaration of candidacy that it or any part of it has been made falsely is punishable by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00) or by imprisonment in the state prison for 16 months or two or three years or by both fine and imprisonment”. Additionally, he would be subject to California Elections Code Section 18500 that states,“Any person who commits fraud and any person who aids or abets fraud or attempts to aid or abet fraud, in connection with any vote cast, to be cast, or attempted to be cast, is guilty of a felony,punishable by imprisonment for 16 months or two or three years'. Clearly it is imperative to vet Senator Obama’s eligibility for presidency and resolve this issue prior to the certification of the election results by the electors.

88. Failure to grant the relief sought, demanding that SOS be ordered to verify the constitutionally required qualifications of Senator Obama not only allows, but promotes, an overwhelming degree of disrespect for our Constitution and for our electoral process, and creates such a lack of confidence of voters in the primary and electoral process itself, that it would confirm a common belief that no politician has to obey the laws of this Country, respect our election process, or follow the United States Constitution.

STE=Q

[TigersEye]

Horowitz has never been shy to get in the mix of things. But his use of words like "embarrassing", "crusaders", "zealots", "obama derangement syndrome", "radicals", yada, yada, yada.....are word bombs that are pretty "destructive" themselves.

Horowitz takes a conservative position on issues but he still thinks like a liberal. All of his appeals are to emotion and none to logic and reason.

[El Gato]

The point is though, all these arguments should have been made *before* the election, not after. The election itself was a certification of Obama’s constitutional right to stand as president, and he has been certified. Overturning a not-close election on something that can never in fact be proven or disproven would pretty much destroy our democracy. Think about it.

The arguments *were* made before the election. Obama, who spent twice as much as McCain, just stonewalled and sent out his legions of lawyers to prevent having to provide a legitimate/certified copy of his long form birth certificate(aka Certificate of Live Birth, ) to a court that verify it's authenticity and his eligibility to the Office of President.

You need to think about what would happen if proof of ineligibility were found *after* he's sworn in. Every law he signed, ever action he took, every appointment he made, would be equally illegitimate.

I suppose you think if he turned out to be 30 (requirement is 35) that provison would also be null and void because the electorate certified it? A very flexible Constitution you have there. So flexible it's not worth the paper it's printed on. So flexible that it won't protect a single one of your rights, when the "electorate" certifies them out of existence.

[STE=Q]

“Ah, I see. Horowitz is now flip-flopping, denying he said what he said and running for cover. What courage. Not!”

Did things get a little ‘hot’ for neo-witz!

LOL!

STE=Q

[DaveTesla]

I stand corrected.
Harris Replaced Calero in Florida, Colorado, Washington, Iowa and Louisiana.

Calero
was on the 2008 Presidential Ballot in:

New York
http://www.elections.state.ny.us/NYSBOE/elections/2008/General/PresidentVicePresident08.pdf

Vermont
http://vermont-elections.org/elections1/2008GEUSPres.pdf

Delaware
http://elections.delaware.gov/results/html/election.shtml

Minnesota
http://electionresults.sos.state.mn.us/ElecRslts.asp?M=S&R=all&P=A&Races=’';

New Jersey
http://www.state.nj.us/state/elections/2008results/08generalelection/08-official-gen-elect-tallies-pres-120208.pdf

That makes five states Calero was on the 2008 Presidential Ballot.

Sorry for the mix up.

[El Gato]

I do not understand how it automatically goes to Biden.

It wouldn't. Although the VP slot would. The electoral college could pick another Dem. If it was after they voted, and at least one Dem elector was "Unfaithful", and voted for some Dem other than Obama (Just in case you understand), then the House could pick that other Dem. Only if there were no unfaithful electors, would the House have no choice....to elect McCain. They must pick from the top three electoral vote getters you see. It's all there in the Constitution for those who choose to read it.

[Political Junkie Too]

I suppose you think if he turned out to be 30 (requirement is 35) that provison would also be null and void because the electorate certified it?

I just read that in 1968 the Peace and Freedom Party submitted Eldridge Cleaver as their candidate, but he was rejected by the California Secretary of State because he was too young.

Maybe Obama will claim Fifth Amendment protections against revealing his birth certificate on grounds of self-incrimination!

-PJ

[TigersEye]

Did things get a little ‘hot’ for neo-witz!

It must suck to realize that liberals are delusional but not be able to stop thinking like one. lol

[El Gato]

when McCain was born, both of his parents are US citizens, and he was born on a US naval base. case closed.

His parents lived on a US naval base when he was born, in the hospital in Colon Panama. That's what the birth certificate, and the extract version as well, that he released says. But that doesn't matter precisely because both his parents were US citizens (that's on his BC too) and had met the requirement for US residency that was in effect at that time.

People born on a US Military base overseas are not automatically US citizens at birth. The same rules apply to them as apply to people born anywhere else outside the country. but almost all military memember who are citizens (not all are) meet the residency requirements, especially since time in the military, or foreign service, counts for US residency time. However if some soldier who is not a citizen marries a local and they have a child on an outside the country base, that child in not a US Citizen at birth.

And of course if a local hire cleaning lady has a baby in the base hospital, and the father is also a local, the baby is not a US citizen at birth just because she was born on US Military post outside the country.

[PhilDragoo]

Hussein won the election so the facts of his birthplace, his natural born citizenship status, his constitutionally mandated status, all of that's moot.

Trumpets, rose petals, stadia filled with card-flashing obamatons CHANGE HOPE OBEY.

David Horowitz on kazoo.

Barney Frank banging his gavel.

"Odow! Odow!"

The auras and the penumbras of the bumps on the heads of the Hawaiian bureaucrats indicate the Kenyan grandmother was mistaken--it was another Barack Hussein who was born in Mombasa.

It was another Barack Hussein who was the Indonesian muslim going to the Indonesian school.

Just because the COLB is a forgery and the photos of the forged COLB are forgeries doesn't mean that there's incontrovertible proof that the Islamo-Commie from Kenya isn't qualified.

I can hear Barney Frank gavelling and shouting, "Poof! Poof! They haff no poof!

And the Mombasa Messiah don't got to show nobody no stinking poof.