Justice Clarence Thomas and the Obama factor

Family Security Matters ^ | Saturday, November 29 | Dave Bertrand,

[autumnraine]

According to a document a poster posted earlier, all that was needed for the state of Rhode Island was a signed statement that said “I certify that this candidate is qualified constitutionally to hold this office” signed by Barack and two witnesses.

So yeah, we are supposed to take his word.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/2139899/posts

[BlessedBeGod]

I don’t believe that the Justices will declare him ineligible.

They’d have to look over their shoulders for the rest of their lives. There’d be too many people who would want to get revenge for the Supreme Court’s decision.

[autumnraine]

Hey! Did they ever really prove he went to Pakistan on an Indonesian passport? I had heard it speculated due to travel rules at the time, but never anything concrete.

[Mogollon]

....the "powers at be" will just get to the point with the American people and say, "so what!! What are you going to do about it??"

I think there is going to be hell to pay.

[RegulatorCountry]

They’d have to look over their shoulders for the rest of their lives. There’d be too many people who would want to get revenge for the Supreme Court’s decision.

Didn't stop them with desegregation, and emotions ran very high about that for many years, still do in some places. Didn't stop them with Roe v. Wade, with the same result. Either we are a Constitutional Republic or we are not. Enforce the provisions.

[TonyStark]

I don’t believe that the Justices will declare him ineligible. They’d have to look over their shoulders for the rest of their lives. There’d be too many people who would want to get revenge for the Supreme Court’s decision.

I hear ya, but consider this: Judges regularly sentence mob kingpins. Granted, the Democrat Party is the largest mob in America, but I think the mindset of Justice Thomas is robust enough in the face of political opposition to actually uphold the Constitution, TeeVee editorials and illiterates by the 10s of millions be damned.

[IbJensen]

...there's no way our government would allow a non-citizen to scam his way into the presidency??

I wouldn't want to bet my ranch on it.

This egotistical, empty-suited socialist, trojan horse fits nicely into the plan our puppetmasters have in mind.

Americans may wake up from this stupor they're in over this bozo.

[cripplecreek]

Either we are a Constitutional Republic or we are not.

Damn straight. The constitution is the supreme law of the land and even overrides the will of the voters.

[nclaurel]

It was my understanding that the SC is not being asked to rule him ineligible, but rather to rule that candidates must show their birth certificates/proof of being natural born citizens. It would be Obama not the SC that showed he was ineligible by being unable to show the proof. But since this would be a ruling that covered all candidates it could not be said to target only him.

[CMAC51]

I don’t believe that the Justices will declare him ineligible. They’d have to look over their shoulders for the rest of their lives. There’d be too many people who would want to get revenge for the Supreme Court’s decision.

It is very easy to believe that the supremes would choose to avoid a crisis. The one thought that comes to mind though is what did the oath of office mean to Justice Roberts when he was sworn in. Is he a man who could take that oath then stand and swear in a president that was potentially unconstitutional? I know I couldn't do it. Can he? That is what we the people don't know.

[tioga]

the Supreme Court ruled in the 2000 election, I believe they will stand by the constitution.

[RegulatorCountry]

I just don’t understand all this bleating about “overriding the will of the voters” from the left, anyway. Haven’t Federal circuit court judges routinely done just that, in California and elsewhere? They’re trying to override the will of the voters regarding Prop. 8 in CA right this very moment. So, this argument doesn’t wash with me.

Here, we have a candidate, a complete cipher, who has concealed just about everything pertaining to his life leading up to election, who has had questions raised about his eligibility for office, almost from the outset, who is absolutely unabashed about using legal technicalities to remove his own opposition. What’s the problem, then? Hold him to account.

[Ahithophel]

In situations like that, all that’s needed is for the Justices to roll out Justice “Per Curiam” - a means whereby the Justices issue an opinion without ascribing it to any particular Justice (assuming its unanimous - big assumption, but they are the guardians of the Constitution after all).

[cripplecreek]

The SOB needs to follow his own advice.

Let me also say that I remain distressed that the White House during this confirmation process, which overall went smoothly, failed to provide critical documents as part of the record that could have provided us with a better basis to make our judgment with respect to the nomination. This White House continues to stymie efforts on the part of the Senate to do its job. I hope with the next nominee who comes up for the Supreme Court that the White House recognizes that in fact it is its duty not just to the Senate but to the American people to make sure we can thoroughly and adequately evaluate the record of every single nominee who comes before us.

Remarks of Senator Barack Obama on the Confirmation of Judge John Roberts

[ponygirl]

Very good article. Go read the whole thing.

[RegulatorCountry]

Disclosure for thee, but not for me.

[hinckley buzzard]

I agree. And have for the duration. The SC will not overturn the election, which is what is at stake. They didn't even really want to get involved in 2000 but they had to after the SC of Florida went rogue and did violence to its own laws.

I don't know just what their legalistic excuse will be, but they will duck this issue.

[thesetruths]

Fabulous find!

[RGPII]

Let me also say that I remain distressed that the White House during this confirmation process, which overall went smoothly, failed to provide critical documents as part of the record that could have provided us with a better basis to make our judgment with respect to the nomination. This White House continues to stymie efforts on the part of the Senate to do its job. I hope with the next nominee who comes up for the Supreme Court that the White House recognizes that in fact it is its duty not just to the Senate but to the American people to make sure we can thoroughly and adequately evaluate the record of every single nominee who comes before us. - BHO

First I'd seen this. Thanks for showing us.