So, appealing to the cooler-headed FReepers: look, is this a non-issue or not? Is it what Horowitz calls it, the conservative version of the unhinged "stolen-election" rant?
I don't give a feces what Horowitz calls it. Comparing this to the 2000 election is totally specious. Funny how conservatives are now the "moonbats" according to the Left, and right on que "conservative" columnists want to get along to go along and be like the Cubs and say wait for next election.
Well, I don't care who is "disenfranchised" or seeing people weeping in the streets if Obama is disqualified. I don't care about the riots and I say bring them on. We need to have this fight and I'd rather have riots which will die down eventually and our Constitution emerging stronger than ever instead of seeing this travesty and our Republic going to pot.
The side making the accusation has the burden of proof. There is no evidence to support the claim against Obama.
I HATE that Obama has been elected, but he has been elected. Let's work on getting him unelected in '12 rather than spinning our wheels on this -- yes -- non-issue.
Horowitz is an idiot if he thinks the Constitution should be overruled by the majority vote in the election. It just doesn't work that way.
It's a little of both.
If Obama were born outside of the US, and he knows it, then his entire campaign and especially his rapid use of his mythical "Office of the President-Elect" represent a coup attempt unprecedented in its audacity (to coin a phrase).
However, the issues of standing and basis are important - even more so when dealing with someting as important as the choice of 68 million voters.
We've never had a mechanism to deal with the underlying issue. And FReepers who keep saying "we've never needed one" are missing the point.
ESPECIALLY because of Obama's racial/ethnic/internationalist angle (this was, no doubt, a big plus for his 68 million supporters), the invention of a new, post hoc requirement that he provide some type of documentation that has NEVER been required of ANY other serious candidate is a problem.
Once you allow private citizen standing to sue the President, or President-elect, based on internet research and unsworn allegations on nutbar websites, you create a monster.
Unless it can be undisputably proven that Obama is NOT his mother’s son and/or was NOT born on American soil of a U.S. citzen, those with a hope of ever electing another conservative president should give up this foolish lost cause! It is far worse, and will have longer lasting negative effects, than the left’s “Bush stole the election” canard.
Yes.