Posted on 10/25/2008 7:58:24 AM PDT by Technical Editor
Berg doesn’t need my money. He’s not exactly living hand to mouth.
Anyway...the Judge’s opinion is somewhat different than what the MSM described (Shocking!). The Judge did not say that the allegations were frivolous, he said that the arguments relying on statutory law that supposedly distinguished Berg from Holloman (the McCain case) were frivolous. That’s a big difference.
The lack of standing is expected. The fact of the opinion and the reiteration of the allegations is sufficient to sow further doubts about Obama’s claims to be a natural born citizen.
As for how one would challenge a candidate’s qualifications, I think you can’t do it as a mandamus action or injunction, as Berg did. That does require particular interest (injury in fact) and not just the generalized interest that all Americans would share. I don’t agree with the Court that only congress can create standing here—arguably, this is a self-executing clause in the Constitution. Possibly, a declaratory action on behalf of all citizens (e.g., pater patria) could be brought, but that would probably have to be brought by the AG or Solicitor General. I’d look into it more after the election—it’s certainly too late to do anything about it now.
The bottom line is that even if Obama were openly admitting that he did not have the qualifications, it isn’t clear that anyone has the ability to stop him. Contrary to what you might think, that’s true of quite a lot of constitutional issues.
ROFLMAO
Who are you? Sherlock Holmes?
Actually, Schreiber’s website does the best job by far of doing just what you want. It’s the site from whence this posting originated—see link at top.
During the discussion of the SCOTUS ruling on the 2nd it was mentioned that as Congress can raise an army, the Constitutional check and balance on the Congress was the militia.
Obama the Kenyan coup ping!
Cite your evidence for that statement (and "Berg is a wacko" is not evidence.)
THE WHITE HOUSE
Office of the Press Secretary
The President today nominated Berle M. Schiller and R. Barclay
Surrick to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
Big f’in surprise.
Do you think it might be possible to provide a vehicle which would allow multi state submission by various people in many communities with the same information - just laying out the facts and arguments on both sides in a clear-cut way. I can put it into my local paper, but we are in such a conservative area it might not do any good. I would sure like to see someone on Free Republic just post a possible argument-counterargument which is newspaper ready so anyone who wanted to could submit it to their local paper.
This issue, and the way Joe W. had his privacy invaded are both huge issues for me. Joe and his story are certainly out there, but this seems like it should come down to a local issue.
Sadly, it seems a tangled affair.
Let the voters decide with good information.
Thank you.
I totally agree. ALL CANDIDATES must provide their hard copies of birth certificates and post for the public. After all, there are only 2 Constitutional requirements for President and Vice-President: age and birth. These should be proven at the start of an election. You can be a Senator/Legislator (state and federal) or a Governor and not be natural born. We take for granted that these people are qualified for President or Vice President simply because they have already been holding an office.
(No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.)
Ah yes - the tactic of the 9-11 truther.
Name ONE respectable person who is pushing this story.
Perhaps when Governor Palin submits her medical records for examination, she could include her birth certificate, and challange everyone else to do the same.
A public challange for openness seems like a good way to go.
Sorry, Noob, that guy's been here longer than you, has an anti-O tagline, and only linked to something that is probably germane to this discussion.
So, Noob, think I oughta urge the mod squad to toss YOUR butt?
The high level McCain campaign is full of idiots.
And if I were you, I would be very careful who I call names.
You’re not me - so screw.
Somewher there has to be a secretary of state, registrar of voters, or judge that will stand up on their hind legs and say “no votes will be counted in my jusridiction for this candidate until he proves that he is qualified. It is my sworn duty to enforce this requirement.”
He’s an Obama troll. Nothing more, nothing less.
It is not the responsibility of the accuser to prove they are respectible. It is the responsibility of the candidates to prove they are qualified. You have a twisted sense of where the problem is.
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.