Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: Lurking Libertarian; Beckwith
Why are we still talking about this?

Obama can, at best, be a NATIVE born citizen. We knew this in 2006 when Alan Keyes and Obama debated. We also know that he cannot be a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, because his father was not an American citizen. Seems simple enough.

Yet, he is the sitting President of the United States. Unless he resigns, is found mentally or physically unfit by Congress, or is impeached and convicted. He will continue in that office, to which he was constitutionally un-entitled, until 2012. This dichotomy is at the heart of the cognitive dissonance that is plaguing the country, and de-legitimizing our government.

It is clear that efforts to correct this situation must continue for only one reason: there can be no repeats. Since, electorally speaking, the 2012 season is already upon us, we need a fast-track method of handling the possibility that Obama wants to run for a second term. We need speed.

IMHO, the solution lies at the state level. States' Attorneys General ALREADY have the power to keep the man off their state ballots on constitutional grounds. That would immediately ignite the legal process, and whether the plaintiff (Team Obama) 0r the defendants prevailed, (Atty Gens), it would go to the SCOTUS on appeal.

Win, lose, or draw, we need a ruling on Article II from Scotus before the next national election cycle. You cannot run a country on doubt.

18 posted on 01/05/2011 12:11:27 PM PST by Kenny Bunk (A pity Pinochet is still dead. He would have been ideal for 2012 ... or sooner.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: Kenny Bunk
Why are we still talking about this? Obama can, at best, be a NATIVE born citizen. We knew this in 2006 when Alan Keyes and Obama debated. We also know that he cannot be a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN, because his father was not an American citizen. Seems simple enough.

That Obama's father wasn't a citizen was no secret. It is in his autobiographies; everyone knew it. Yet no one claimed before his election that this disqualified him from being a Natural Born Citizen: none of his primary opponents raised this issue; McCain and Palin disn't raise the issue in the general election; not one member of the Electoral College objected; not one member of Congress raised any objection when they certified the electoral votes; Chief Justice Roberts didn't object to swearing Obama into office. During the entire primary and general election campaign, not one lawyer or law professor wrote an op-ed or a letter to the editor claiming that Obama wasn't a Natural Born Citizen. Not one conservative legal organization (American Center for Law and Justice, Pacific Legal Foundation, Judicial Watch, etc.) ever said this was an issue. No conservative media person ever said that Obama wasn't constitutionally qualified to be elected. The only court to have addressed the merits of the eligibility issue (the Arkeny case) said that two citizen parents are not necessary to be a Natural Born Citizen. I would therefore put the odds of any court ever agreeing with your definition at exactly zero.

22 posted on 01/05/2011 12:38:59 PM PST by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson