Posted on 12/03/2008 8:14:35 AM PST by Scythian
This birth certificate issue has been going on for some time now and for those hoping for some kind of dramatic outcome you are in for another big disappointment.
First, there is always the chance that there is a valid birth certificate proving Obama to be a US citizen.
Second, enough time has passed such that the Obama cult has manufactured and installed a phony certificate that will re-route us back up to option 1 above, he will have a valid certificate. Who do you think works in these kinds of government offices? They're all democrats.
Third, no court is going to force Obama to prove himself to be a citizen, the burden is on those making the accusation that he is not a citizen. A criminal doesn't have to prove he didn't commit a crime, the state has to prove that he did.
=================================
Flame on, and sorry for the Vanity, but this is driving me nutz, this issue gets my hopes up but then common sense dashes my hope on the rocks, and this now is a daily occurrence. You are going to find a valid certificate at the end of this road if you are lucky enough to get a judge to demand it, and that is very unlikely, whether the certificate be real or phony it won't matter, and will never be able to proven either way.
Why are you posting on a subject that you are sick of... why promote it further if you are tired of it??? I do not care where he was born but I do want the truth to be known. Even Ted Olson will not venture to guess what the SCOTUS will do and that means you have no insight past your own prejudice.
LLS
You are correct. The Constitution does not define it.
The big issue here is whether the SC has any respect for the Constitution.
***I agree. And on the day they make their decision we will either mourn the republic or celebrate the constitution.
The Roman Empire started when Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon. Let’s hope the American Empire doesn’t start on the day the Supremes decide.
No court of law will ever come to that conclusion.
If SCOTUS punts and dismisses the cases, thats a huge sign that this was all for nothing.
***It wasn’t a waste of time, though. Because if the SCOTUS punts on this, it is the end of our republic. Historians will record that very day as the first day of the American Empire.
Um, We The People have this piece of paper called the Constitution which stipulates that someone applying for the job of president MUST be eligible by the Constitutionally specified means. Sorry to blow out your little candle, but the burden of proof is squarely on the applicant not the people, to prove eligibility. Try thinking of the issue aqs a man applying for a job that has stipulated requirements for security clearance which he must provide or be ineligible.
When that standard is flipped on its head the way you tried to do--asserting We The People must prove a candidate ineligible, the Constitution is voided. Don't expect the SCOTUS to go along with that.
Though mine is but one voice among thousands writing, here's the letter I sent to the SCOTUS in that regard:
To the Honorable and very highly esteemed, Justice Clarence Thomas:
We The People are literally hiring a man to be President of OUR United States, thus We The People have the authority to demand Barack Obama prove his eligibility. The citizen cannot prove a negative; the Burden of Proof regarding citizenship has always been on Mister Obama. And he has never met it.
There appear to be two items at work in the perniciously lingering issue of Barack Hussein Obama’s certification of natural born citizenship and thus qualification to ascend to the office of President: Standing, and Burden of Proof.
With regards to the first, Standing: several courts are dismissing cases from American citizens demanding Barack Obama prove eligibility based on lack of plaintiffs' standing. This is outrageous! Each and every American citizen has standing to demand through the courts that a candidate prove his eligibility for elected office. For any court to rule otherwise is a travesty!
For the courts to suggest that The People must go through Congress or the Secretaries of the Several States to force production of proof of eligibility smacks of obstruction of justice. These are the same courts which do not hesitate to manufacture "rights" out of whole cloth. We The People are not asking that this man be subjected to a kangaroo court such as you endured, Your Honor, at the hands of Congressional devils. But We demand that Barack Obama prove his eligibility to even run for the office! Every document a fraudulent President signs will be a Constitutional travesty and an outrage.
Regarding the second, Burden of Proof: this is always on the candidate, for any position. Congress and the courts do not have the authority to withhold Mr. Obama's qualifications or keep from the People a factor of ineligibility; nor does Congress have the authority to eschew Constitutionally defined requirements except by a well defined Constitutionally defined process. By the Tenth Amendment it is a right reserved to The People to demand to see a Presidential candidate's qualifications.
If this is a Constitutional Republic still, then the people in government work for me and 299,000,000 other sovereigns of the Republic. We ought have the right to assurance that this Chicago thug is at least eligible to run for the office. Please, Sir, see to the appeals from We The People regarding this matter. [See please, docket # 08A407 ]
Highest Regards,
Third: A court already threw a presidential candidate off the ticket because he didn’t meet the Constitutional requirements. It was appealed all the way to the Supreme Court where he lost also.
***But this candidate won the election. It’s an old fashioned showdown.
If Obama really had a forged copy on file in the gov's office then he would have ponied up his "Birth certificate" already in one of the court cases. You don't spend a million bucks unless you have something serious to hide.
Occam's Razor 101.
Look what the AD made the MSM do? They promptly dismissed the birth certificate allegations and citizenship issues.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/politics/obama/chi-obama-ad-03-dec03,0,3124041.story
Here are the allegations raised in Schulz’s ad, and some relevant facts:
•The birth form released by Obama was “an unsigned, forged and thoroughly discredited” live birth form, Schulz says.
Last summer, Obama’s campaign presented a digital copy of his certificate of live birth. After critics questioned its authenticity, staff at FactCheck.org, a project of the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania, said they had seen, held and examined the actual birth certificate.
•”Hawaiian officials will not confirm” that Obama was born in their state, Schulz says.
Initially, Hawaiian officials said that privacy laws prevented them from releasing a copy or confirming that Obama’s copy was authentic. But in late October as questions persisted, Hawaii’s health director and head of vital statistics reviewed Obama’s birth certificate in the department’s vault and vouched for its authenticity.
•Schulz says that legal affidavits state Obama was born in Kenya.
The affidavits that Schulz refers to are filings by the Obama critics themselves in the court cases challenging Obama’s citizenship.
if really the constitution is going to be pervetted, this would not be the first time?
you know that, dont you?
we already gave too much power to govt over the last 100 years.
aint gonna stop it now.
especially since we are now bailing out every sector.
fasten the seatbelts. Bush already made us socialist.
when the govt (or you) take me to court, the burden to prove me guilty is not on me, but on you?
im innocent until proven guilty.
until proven fradulent, the burden to prove he is is not on BHO, but on the “BC movement”.
its as simple as that. and that is the law my friend.
my own queries at the local university law school somehow suggests that “a single mother can transmit natural citizenship” at any age.
is scotus definition of NBC makes obama eligible, and his BC (confirmed valid by Hawaii), then there is no damage whatsoever to BHO.
the real damage will be to the “BC movement”. next time we start to challenge his policies and programs, we shall be reminded of this.
once obama is inagurated, it does not matter, all LAWS and DEEDS he signs are valid.
thats just how it is.
unless you are saying that if a president is impeached, then all laws he signed are invalid?
if we find out today that Bush lied to the people before he was elected and should have been removed from office in 2001, it will NOT affect any law that he signed.
why? coz bush does not make laws. Congress does.
all that bush’s office does is sign them for records.
only SCOTUS or Congress can subpeona a presdient.
if on friday, they dismiss the case, its all over.
Yeah, you’re right. I had forgotten about all the other stuff he’s using to build a stonewall. He has to knowwhere he was born and he also has to know that he won’t be able to keep it buried forever. He’s got a tiger by the tail and he doesn’t dare let go.
It could be that we are being set up.
***Then there is no harm whatsoever in pushing this thing through the courts.
Bingo.
The rubicon was cross in 1890-1932 when we formed the Federal Researve.
I agree with you Drew.
there is not a single court definition of NBC as that.
NBC could even probably have met “born of natural means, through pregnancy, not adoption or extra terrestrial or test tube, etc”.
If we stuck to that rigid view, what does it say about adoptions from abroad? how about next 20 years when 40% of americans will have immigrant blood?
Im now more convinced that SCOTUS may actually help to extend this definition to all clauses and dismiss the cases.
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.