Posted on 05/06/2009 7:47:05 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
I hope I am proven wrong.
I hope for the sake of our country that I and many other concerned citizens across the country are looked upon as well-intentioned but ultimately misguided individuals who chased a bad rumor based on lies and distortions.
The reason I hope to be thought wrong (although well-intentioned) is because the price of being right about the constitutional requirements to be president not being met by the current occupant of the Oval Office is too disturbing to be imagined.
If, in fact, Barack Obama does not meet the requirements set out by the U.S. Constitution in Article II, Section I, it would throw this country into a constitutional crisis. Vice President Joe Biden would, obviously, become President Biden. The harrowing part of this taking place is that every appointment made, every piece of legislation signed, and every executive order issued by Barack Obama could, and should, be considered invalid.
Full-moon time? I know, I know; I sound like a raving lunatic. So where do I draw my conclusions that this is even a valid issue to entertain?
Let's review what's been accepted as "fact" by the mainstream press and the vast majority of Americans: Barack Hussein Obama was born on August 4, 1961 in Honolulu, Hawaii, to Stanley Ann Dunham, 18, and Barack Obama Sr., 25.
Now let's look at some of the questions challenging these accepted "facts":
Concerned citizens across the United States since well before the November election have questioned Barack Obama's "natural born" qualification for the presidency. From sea to shining sea, at least 18 lawsuits with plaintiffs including a former presidential candidate, a former deputy attorney general, state legislators and retired and active duty members of the military, are attempting to compel him to verify his citizenship.
Candidate Obama's own Web site, fightthesmears.com, posted a "Certification of Live Birth," which, according to the Web site, proves that Obama is in fact a natural born U.S. citizen. What the Web site won't tell you, however, is that a "Certification of Live Birth" is not a birth certificate, and that at the time, the state of Hawaii allowed foreign-born children of U.S. citizens (Stanley Ann Dunham) to have their births registered with this document based on a statement of only one relative. The obvious question must be asked: If Obama has an original "long form" birth certificate issued on the day of his birth by the state of Hawaii, why would he also have a "Certification of Live Birth"? It would not be necessary. Critics have called upon President Obama to just give the state of Hawaii his permission to release his original "long form" birth certificate. The "long form" birth certificate would include all the pertinent information about his birth: name of the hospital, name and signature of the attending physician and a seal of the Hawaiian Health Department. This simple action by President Obama would immediately end all speculation about his citizenship and the reasons for the various lawsuits. Instead, President Obama is spending time and money hiring lawyers to fight these lawsuits. Why?
Why doesn't the mainstream press cover these lawsuits? I mean, in 2004, Dan Rather did a bang up job covering something a lot less important. Rather had "authentic" memos critical of President George W. Bush's Texas Air National Guard service record. Yet there are some legitimate questions about the constitutional eligibility of our president, and yet not one single major press outlet is covering it. Part of the reason is that this issue has supposedly settled by the independent authority on Obama's birth certificate, FactCheck.org. Yet on their Web site, FactCheck.org states:
"The document is a 'certification of birth,' also known as a short-form birth certificate. The long form is drawn up by the hospital and includes additional information such as birth weight and parents' hometowns. The Hawaii Department of Health's birth record request form does not give the option to request a photocopy of your long-form birth certificate. We tried to ask the Hawaii DOH why they only offer the short form, among other questions, but they have not given a response."
So the independent authority on this question has admitted that they have not seen the original long-form birth certificate. And the questions remain.
I sincerely hope that Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, in 1961 and therefore meets the constitutional requirements to be president. If not, our Constitution must be followed and procedures put in place for future elections wherein all candidates on the ballot must prove they meet the requirements set forth by the law of the land, the U.S. Constitution.
***********
Peter Aparicio is a resident of Victoria and a government teacher at Memorial High School.
Biden won a majority of votes in the Electoral College. That is how he became vice president. The party nominating process is irrelevant as a matter of constitutional law; Obama NEVER had the authority to name Biden or anyone else to the office.
I'll get the Caterpillar if you get the bucket of water.
The problem with that premise is that (in this construct) the fully plausible argument of fraud on the face of the ticket.
THE face of the ticket - was Obama. Biden dropped out of the primaries long before, as a non-viable contender. The reason the electors gave him a majority of votes was because he was Obama’s selection for the number two position on the ticket.
The majority of the ticket’s appeal to voters was Obama - without him, the ticket went nowhere.
Biden at the head of the ticket probably would not have carried ten states. The taint of having been selected by Obama would be too much; the fact of having been “voted” upon, or ratified by the electors would be seen as a technicality. I doubt they would stick with him.
It is wide open as to how much Pelosi might be tainted by all of it. She would be a terrible next choice, having been the principle author of the $787 billion stimulus bill.
I have no idea how it might all play out. There is no direct precedent for it in American political history.
I think theoretically, if Obama were proven to have been Constitutionally ineligible to run in the first place, he could easily be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, but if the proof were sufficient even without a series of impeachment hearings, the Attorney General would be charged with arresting him.
Holder, Obama’s AG, would be almost certain to lose his job, being an appointee Obama had no right to choose - so then, would he have the actual legal authority to arrest Obama and cause him to be detained, before himself being relieved of his position?!
I think even the lawyers among us are speculating about what the laws say, what the realities are, and how the two would ultimately be reconciled. Something like this is so truly unprecedented that we truly would not know until we arrived there...
AAC
My son, even as young as four, would sit and cross his legs like his Father.
Gait and gestures are evidently hereditary.
You say "stick with him" as if he were asking to head the ticket in an election. You're treating this as a purely political situation, dismissing the Constitution as a technicality. Biden is the VP; that he wouldn't have gotten there but for the hypothetical crimes of Obama is irrelevant. When Nixon stepped down, Ford wouldn't have been next in line but for the crimes of Spiro Agnew.
I have no idea how it might all play out. There is no direct precedent for it in American political history.
No court is going to set that precedent. I'll tell you how it will play out: Barring a natural or artificial death, Barack Obama will stand for re-election on the Tuesday after the first Monday in November 2012.
I think theoretically, if Obama were proven to have been Constitutionally ineligible to run in the first place, he could easily be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors, but if the proof were sufficient even without a series of impeachment hearings, the Attorney General would be charged with arresting him.
If the Attorney General ordered the president's arrest, the president would simply fire the AG. Arrested or not, in custody or not, the AG doesn't have the constitutional authority to remove the president from office. An attempt to do so would be nothing more or less than a coup d'etat.
If the proof were sufficient without a series of impeachment hearings, the House could simply vote articles of impeachment, and the Senate could hold a quick trial and convict. It could be done in a day, unless John Roberts is out of town.
Or a majority of the Cabinet can transmit to the speaker of the House and the president pro tem of the Senate their declaration that the president is unable to discharge the duties of his office. That would take him out of the Oval Office while an impeachment trial could be arranged.
I think even the lawyers among us are speculating about what the laws say, what the realities are, and how the two would ultimately be reconciled. Something like this is so truly unprecedented that we truly would not know until we arrived there...
This whole scenario is predicated on someone claiming and exercising the authority to undo an election, brushing the Constitution aside as a technicality. Once that Rubicon is crossed, throw all the law degrees out the window, because that someone (or someones) is effectively ruling by fiat.
I wonder what happened with the congressman who proposed a law that all future presidential candidates must present more convincing proof of being a natural-born citizen. I don't recall if he was proposing a certifying body and obviously there are some kinks to work out such as an exact definition of "natural born". But I think this guy was on the right track.
such as Obama having large majorities in both Houses of Congress.
As I understand it, Hawaii is the only state that has the word or phrase concerning "eligibility" in the document, a document that a representative from both the Democratic and Republican parties must sign before presidential candidates are allowed to put their names on the November presidential ballot.
..because it would be like investigating a well chewed piece of gum....she would blink, shocking most, then say something that would be so idiotic, and indefensible, it would lead the investigation into numerous spirals of non productivity costing a few billion more of our tax payer dollars
“Be patient everyone. They’re almost finished aging the forgery and it will be “discovered” shortly.”
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The problem they face in fabricating a BC is the identifying number- you know, that number that was BLACKED OUT in the one posted on the twerp’s site last year?
Yes, that blacked out number that made that forgery a...forgery, since at the bottom of the document it clearly states that any alterations invalidate the document.
If a new forged BC is ever produced, you can bet the first thing that the “experts” will be checking out will be that number that supposedly corresponds to the birth, and searching for who that number really belonged to, and why and whether it is out of numerical order.
In all of these 154 posts, no one has any update on where the lawsuits are that reached the SCOTUS, which ones stuck, which ones the media are NOT reporting (likely all of them), etc. Does anyone know? Without sarcasm, can anyone provide an update?
But you also did NOT have to be born in Hawaii to qualify for the certificate of live birth. They would issue them no matter where you were born.
Hence the believable assertions by Polarik, et al, that the COLB was doctored (changed place of birth)
One can hope that his forgery will be incomplete. Ideally he will leave a mistake th undetected by his handlers but quickly found by a Freeper expert after the lie has been firmly planted, and as if reaching back from the grave, the pitiable forger will have replied to his torturer.
HF
Unless, of course the Dems seeing this coming down the line and remove Pelosi as Speaker. Then they’d probably appoint someone like Barney Frank Speaker. Then we would have President Frank and possibly down the road a first “lady” named Steve. :-)
Will the Commucrats EVER permit the truth to come out?
Bill Posey in Indialantic(?) Florida...or Rockledge ... don’t remember the outcome if any...yet.
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.