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 ...
I continue to think one of the more urgent "theaters" of the eligibility war, is the push for State-level so-called "birther bills." Just chiming in with a ping that in Missouri tomorrow a public hearing is scheduled for House Bill 283. Unfortunately, I think its one of the weakest of these bills, and might not matter even if it were to pass since it requires only vague "proof of Citizenship,".
Nevertheless, after some painful losses on this front already I thought some of you might want to stay in the loop.
I can only hope that Anderson Cooper doesn't come along and shame them all into believing that they are evil racists for thinking to ask for credentials. His performance with the Montana(?) legislator was chilling.
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.
If any Representative and any Senator wanted to submit a last minute written objection, all they had to do was stand and ask for a “point of order” which suspends normal business at the moment the Senator or Representative is acknowledged. Not one of the 534 assembled Senators and Representatives asked for a point of order. (Al Franken had not yet been seated to make 535 members of Congress).
In a joint session of Congress, any member simply notifies the President of the Senate in advance if they want to take an action.
There's a big problem that several of the legislators who sponsor the eligibility bills don't grasp the issue or what the real problems are with Obama's lack of eligibility. I would love to face down AC as his presumptions are actually easy to debunk.
I thoroughly agree and would also jump at the chance. His arguments are riddled with huge holes. By "his performance was chilling," I didn't mean "formidable." I meant more that it was disturbing to see a such major media news commentor so brashly and transparently lie through his teeth. But why should I be surprised? Media deception like is happening more and more with each passing day.
I don’t think Neil Abercrombie was laughing his ass off when he had to decide whether to go ahead with his plan of unearthing a forged BC, knowing there could be state eligibility bills which would require disclosure of the embedded computer transaction logs and detailed vital records history that would reveal the forgery for what it was. I think when that interviewer casually asked him how the search for the BC was going, he crapped a green gourd and bailed out - admitting that there is no BC for Obama in Hawaii.
Of course then Anderson Cooper, Bill O’Reilly, and David Gregory had to immediately swoop in and every day attack the “crazy birthers” who want state eligibility bills to be passed. Possibly as a result of new threats by Obama’s lawyers, although O’Reilly was probably in return for the Super Bowl interview.
When you get the Hawaii governor admitting publicly that there is no BC for Obama in Hawaii, followed by the media falling all over each other to gush on about how stupid it is for anybody to question the COLB that Obama presented that Abercrombie says doesn’t exist.... you know they are not laughing. They are in deep, deep cover-up mode. And the funny thing is that even after all their ridicule of us, more and more people all the time are realizing that the emperor is naked.
I think Obama is going to push for Egypt-style riots here so he can forego the 2012 election altogether. Either that, or Homeland Security will accidentally let one of the threats they’ve been ignoring actually be successful. Maybe both.
I think Obama is definitely NOT laughing, and that’s what makes this an incredibly dangerous time for America. This is where the real battle begins.
I challenged you quite a long time ago to present authority for your contention that objections were to be submitted in advance of the Session. Such a requirement would be nonsensical - how would it be possible for issues that arose during the session? There is no such requirement and you have no authority for the proposition. That argument is not going to improve the quality of your homework assignment.
The fact that no member stood on a point of order (which you should recognize contradicts your argument above) only goes to the fraud I referred to. As a minor wrinkle, I do believe there is the possibility that there may have been some Republicans who were not on the reservation who advised Cheney that if he called for objection, they fully intended to respond as a matter of honor or oath. If Cheney had not feared such a response, he might have conformed with the (”shall call”) statute.
Let me remind you that several months ago I advised you that even if you were a tall, attractive redhead in a black cocktail dress, we were not going to dance anymore. Now I will put a sharper point on it: I try to avoid intellectually dishonest people.
The state eligibility bills are critical, IMHO. Even if they wouldn’t actually accomplish anything because they are too vague, they are important because it is a chance for the “little people” (those not worth Soros bribing or threatening, who are already so sick of the media’s mocking that it’s just background noise to them already) to speak common sense into the public record and possibly give courage to the legislators in states where the proposed bill has some teeth.
Wisconsin is showing us just how desperately our legislators need to have the right mind and the right facts, and how much they need us to strengthen them to do what has to be done. We can talk about how wimpy our elected officials are, but it’s better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness. These people will have courage when we lift them up in prayer and with our encouragement and promise to have their backs.
At this point even the waterboy has a critical role on the team, because we are truly facing the giant. We’ve got the ENTIRE media against us - that has recently become incredibly clear to me - and we’ve got no law enforcement willing to do their jobs. (A LOT like Wisconsin, where politics has superseded the rule of law at every level and we’ve basically got a yelling match.) If we’re going to hold the line of defense we need every “Yop” (ala “Horton Hears a Who”) to get the job done.
At the state level, people can make the trip to be there for a hearing, or can write a letter to the editor, or can e-mail legislators, or any number of things. This is the perfect level for all the “Yops” to add up. We’ve got our work cut out for us.
No, doubt. I would love to see how AC melts down after his lies are debunked on live TV.
The state eligibility bills are critical, IMHO. Even if they wouldn’t actually accomplish anything because they are too vague, they are important because it is a chance for the “little people” (those not worth Soros bribing or threatening, who are already so sick of the media’s mocking that it’s just background noise to them already) to speak common sense into the public record and possibly give courage to the legislators in states where the proposed bill has some teeth.
Wisconsin is showing us just how desperately our legislators need to have the right mind and the right facts, and how much they need us to strengthen them to do what has to be done. We can talk about how wimpy our elected officials are, but it’s better to light a single candle than to curse the darkness. These people will have courage when we lift them up in prayer and with our encouragement and promise to have their backs.
At this point even the waterboy has a critical role on the team, because we are truly facing the giant. We’ve got the ENTIRE media against us - that has recently become incredibly clear to me - and we’ve got no law enforcement willing to do their jobs. (A LOT like Wisconsin, where politics has superseded the rule of law at every level and we’ve basically got a yelling match.) If we’re going to hold the line of defense we need every “Yop” (ala “Horton Hears a Who”) to get the job done.
At the state level, people can make the trip to be there for a hearing, or can write a letter to the editor, or can e-mail legislators, or any number of things. This is the perfect level for all the “Yops” to add up. We’ve got our work cut out for us.
This will all get sorted out in the next election thankfully.
____________________________________________________________
I thought the same thing in the run-up to the 2008 election. I felt certain we would come to our senses. But nope. Once he had the power of the presidency at his disposal, it became exponentially more difficult. Practically futile! Regardless, I say NOW is the time! We are on the verge of reaching critical mass...keep pushing the issue to the forefront. The truth will prevail!
sfl
I challenged you quite a long time ago to present authority for your contention that objections were to be submitted in advance of the Session. Such a requirement would be nonsensical - how would it be possible for issues that arose during the session? There is no such requirement and you have no authority for the proposition. That argument is not going to improve the quality of your homework assignment.
The fact that no member stood on a point of order (which you should recognize contradicts your argument above) only goes to the fraud I referred to. As a minor wrinkle, I do believe there is the possibility that there may have been some Republicans who were not on the reservation who advised Cheney that if he called for objection, they fully intended to respond as a matter of honor or oath. If Cheney had not feared such a response, he might have conformed with the (”shall call”) statute.
Let me remind you that several months ago I advised you that even if you were a tall, attractive redhead in a black cocktail dress, we were not going to dance anymore. Now I will put a sharper point on it: I try to avoid intellectually dishonest people.
In the two plus years since that Joint Session was held, has ANY member of Congress EVER said one word about being deprived by Vice President Cheney of the opportunity to object to the certification of the vote of the Electoral College? Can you name a Senator or Representative who has stated that they would have submitted a written objection if they had been given the opportunity?
The ONLY order of business for the Joint Session is to count and certify the vote of the Electoral College and to entertain any WRITTEN objections to the certification. There is no debate, there is no discussion. The process of the session is formal. Any issues concerning certification or objections are raised and developed in the period from the Monday after the second Wednesday of December when the Electoral College actually votes in state capitals around the nation until weeks later when the Joint Session actually occurs in January.
I think that your decision to take your ball and go home is a very wise decision on your part.
I think that your decision to take your ball and go home is a very wise decision on your part.
Get back to us when you can present some authority for your advance submittal requirement, until then you are playing with yourself.
obumpa
>>This will all get sorted out in the next election thankfully.<<
He may be gone then but his appointments won’t.
Hey..jamese777 how is the search going for the “scanned” documents with the Lingle and Fukino statements.
You were certain of their existence and would place them online for us to see.
IMO, the Dems keep bringing the issue up, because it helps to gin up their own base. As in, “How dare those loony wing-nuts question the Anointed One!”
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.