Posted on 02/28/2011 11:25:29 AM PST by Hotlanta Mike
There's been a lot of discussion in certain circles on the topic of President Obama's "eligibility." (Incidentally, Dr. William Oddie cogently argues in a recent commentary that Obama is an enemy of the Catholic Church. Click here to read it.)
Charles E. Rice, professor emeritus at Notre Dame Law School — and author of the book What Happened to Notre Dame? — argues that it's time for a new approach on the eligibility issue. His commentary is reprinted below.
(Excerpt) Read more at renewamerica.com ...
ML/NJ
Bump
I wonder: is English your mother tongue? Were you taught to read?
The words you quote were in a paragraph that starts with the words, "The lawsuits have presented a bewildering array of claims ..."
Are you a paid obfuscator, or merely stupid?
ML/NJ
Excellent article! Balanced, even keeled, clear presentation of the Constitutional questions (and NO Conspiracy theories!)... Awesome. He is dead on right. This ought to be on the fax machines, in the email boxes and in the snail mail boxes of every US Representative (especially Republicans) in DC ASAP.
It just might be zer0 who has a good laugh for pulling this off. It is beyond me as to why this is even still a question.
Shooter, my apology. I am in a rush to get out the door.
It was, of course, swain_forkbeard who made the statement re the Constitution.
Clearly, he is the anti-Taitz.
I just reviewed 3 USC 15. Interesting stuff. But I don’t see that it speaks to Presidential qualifications. I do see that it allows for members of the Senate or the House to object to the recording of electoral votes from any given State. But nobody did that when they had the chance.
Even if someone does that, it just goes to the Senate or House to be sorted out. And how would they do that? What standard or process would they use to determine if a candidate was qualified? What definition of natural born would they use? The issue might get to the House or Senate, but we’d be right back where we started. With no clearly defined process, standard, or definition.
So what did I miss?
an exemplary statement/article
The states are responsible for casting ballots for president and vice president. It is a scandal that certain people are apparently able to run for president, and be placed on the ballots of the several states, with no more credentials than an illegal alien.You couldn't get a driver's license as easily as Obama got on the ballot in all 50 states.
Even if he was qualified at birth to be considered a citizen, and a "natural born" citizen is not considered to be anything different than that, Obama apparently was treated as a national by other countries - so is Obama any kind of citizen of America at all? We don't know, and that is a scandal if there ever was one in American politics.
I sincerely apologise for my mistake, and I appreciate the polite and beneficent way you chose to point it out to me. You are a true gentleman.
There are few of us left.
ML/NJ
>He also says that , I quote: Obama identified himself as a foreign student at Occidental College, Columbia University, and Harvard Law School; when Obama traveled to Pakistan in 1981, he did so on an Indonesian passport at a time when Indonesian law forbade dual citizenship, etc., etc.<
I read that as some of the reasons that suits have been named. he was not stating that any of these assertions were true, only that they had been questioned or entered into the questions set before the court
>For this guy’s esteemed title, I am not impressed.<
the point is that he has an esteemed title and is now one of us. It goes a long way to help with the people who would instantly label people “birthers” and dismiss the issue.
Interview with Jeri Corsi on The Peter Boyles Show begins around the 2:28 mark.
Talks about this latest article:
‘No evidence’ of problems with Hawaii health chief
Explanation sought for governor’s removal of department director
http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=268305#ixzz1FIusdBBA
Yes Mlnj told me about 4 posts ago, but thanks anyway.
It seems you missed applying the statute to the issue at hand. That issue is not, as you suggest, whether there is a process for establishing the qualifications of a President elect. Such qualifications are set out, as you are no doubt well aware, in Article II of the Constitution. Any argument that the qualifications are uncertain or not capable of precise determination is nonsense.
Rather, the issue is whether there was a statutory process for certifying presidential qualifications during the 2009 Joint Session of Congress; and, if so, whether that process was followed. The session is called for the limited and sole purpose of certification following each presidential election. The session is not called just to determine whether the Electoral College’s work was without error, but as the Dems demonstrated in 2005 the session may also consider any irregularities in the election process. To put a finer point on it, if the College flawlessly cast a majority of its votes for Mickey Mouse, 3 USC 15 provides the process by which the Congress is to resolve the matter.
…how would they do that? What standard or process would they use…
Recommend you reread the statute. In any event, either chamber could have formally requested of HI formal copies of Obama’s birth records; not just a short form, but all birth records. Not many members of Congress would be willing to certify a non-U.S. citizen as president and the Dems would have thrown Obama under the bus in favor of Clinton.
What definition of natural born would they use?
Obviously they would use the definition accepted by both the House and the Senate. Both chambers were/are loaded with attorneys and former judges. Given that the weight of USSC decisions together with contemporaneous views directly addressing the matter indicate that at the relevant time in our history NBC was only available to a citizen born in the U.S. of two citizen parents the outcome should have been predictable. If the chambers were unable to agree, one or both could have applied to the USSC for an opinion.
But nobody did that when they had the chance.
They did not have the chance, Swain, and in the face of the public outcry over Obama’s lack of apparent qualification, that may have been the biggest fraud in the history of our nation
Why didn’t Cheney follow the statute and call for objection as expressly required by the statute? It was not his first rodeo, certainly he knew what he was doing.
I have several theories. The first, and the theory most favorable to the Republican leadership, is that it had quality intelligence that Clinton, Obama’s obvious replacement, presented a greater threat to national security. That seems hard to believe, seeing the anti-American surge now in play in the U.S. and the world at large. Nonetheless, even if it was a close call, the leadership may have believed that Clinton was the more skilled politician and Obama was an amateur they could better control.
The theory most favorable to Cheney, is that he knew the fix was in but wanted to corrupt the process in order to provide a basis for a more responsible Congress to review the certification.
Other theories are not as favorable.
Why won’t the media address the African Newspaper articles????
**************************
Here are 6 African Newspaper articles calling Obama “Kenyan-Born”
*************************************************************************
Notice the first article was from Sunday, June 27,........... “2004”
Historical News Articles and FactCheck Agree: Obama is “Kenyan-born”
Posted on October 18th, 2009 by David-Crockett
Sunday, June 27, “2004”
Kenya Sunday Standard headline-”Kenyan-born” Obama all set for US Senate
http://www.theobamafile.com/_exhibits/Born04.htm
The Nigerian Observer-Americans will today go to the polls to elect their next President with Democratic Party candidate, Senator Barack Obama largely favoured to win. The “Kenyan-born” Senator will…”
http://www.theobamafile.com/_exhibits/Born01.htm
USAfrica — “Kenyan-born” OBAMA makes history…wins presidential nomination of U. S. Democratic party; eyes on White House…
http://www.theobamafile.com/_images/Born09.gif
AllAfrica.com — ” Little wonder then why “Kenyan-born” Barack Obama, America’s first Black President…”
http://www.theobamafile.com/_exhibits/Born02.htm
GraphicGhana.com — “For Ghana, Obama’s visit will be a celebration of another milestone in African history as it hosts the first-ever “African-American President” on this presidential visit to the “continent of his birth”. The same article, with the same quote, appeared in ModernGhana.com.
http://www.theobamafile.com/.../...5-ContinentOfBirth.htm
The Ghana Times — “So far, the odds favour the once underdog in American politics, Obama, the “African-American Senator” from Illinois state. A Congressional Quarterly (CQ) politics monitored on BBC put the “Kenyan born” American ahead of his rivel, John McCain.”
http://www.theobamafile.com/_images/Born07.bmp
I don’t think he is LHAO. I think he is genuinely scared and worried about having to “wear his birth certificate on his forehead”.
Don’t get your hopes up, but SCOTUS will conference on Hollister vs Soetoro again on March 4. Will Kagan and Sotomayor recuse themselves? Probably not. They should because they have a conflict of interest—Obama picked them to stand up for him. Kagan was never a judge.
Does anyone know about John Roberts said to have a billion dollars in the Vatican Bank being investigated by the FBI? There were supposed to be many politicians in the report. Do you suppose they were paid off to keep quiet about Obama?
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.
