Posted on 05/18/2009 10:10:22 AM PDT by topcat54
My apologies. Perhaps the satire was too subtle.
See Bart Ehrman.
Finally, someone gets what this guy is talking about. It has nothing to do with Bambi, but is about the birth of Christ.
Ooops, I’m sorry, but I got lost somewhere along the way on this thread... LOL...
I was looking for a key phrase early on like "early witnesses", "canon", or something similar to link it with Biblical criticism, but it took until the number of nurses thing to be sure for me. I saw the Obama birth certificate parallel first.
hmmmm...I wonder if I could make this case to the IRS. The doctor forgot to sign my BC when I was born (no joke!) plus my father has always told me I was “hatched”.
oh well Mom is still mom and my family is stuck with me.
1. The Constitution says "...natural born citizen...." but doesn't say what that is, relying on earlier common law and English tradition, which was certainly clear to the framers, who were all lawyers trained in the English system. Relying on that same tradition, it is clear that Obama is not a "natural born citizen."
His father was and remained a British subject, and then a citizen of Kenya.
2. There is no clear mechanism for enforcing this rule of the Constitution. It has come up before, and just as today, it has been ignored before.
A possible resolution: If just one state legislature were to require by law, that its electors demand documentary proof of constitutional eligibility to run for President, before: (a) placing that name on the official state ballot, and (b) before delivering the states electoral votes to that person, this would force the issue out into the open. Furthermore, this could easily happen before the 2012 Presidential race.
The "Certificate of Live Birth vs Birth Certificate Issue," is IMHO, a bit of a red herring. No matter where our Obamessiah was born, it is his father's citizenship, and his subsequent dual citizenship, that keeps him from being a "natural born citizen."
Also IMHO, the SCOTUS may be viewing constitutional eligibility as a matter controlled by the states. The Electoral College is not a federal body.
The primary check and balance in the constitution is the one between the states and the federal government. The pendulum has swung hard toward the federal side. To get it moving back, this state demand for documentation of Presidential eligibility of candidates would certainly help. And it would surely help toward repeal of the 17th Amendment, and end the anti-constitutional popular election of Senators.
"States Rights," has a pejorative connotation because of the Civil Rights Movement. Time to get beyond that and strengthen local control of the Republic's fate before the Marxists end it for us.
I do not think it is the "natural born citizen" thing. That's a no-brainer. He ain't. There simply doesn't seem to be any authority to answer to on that score.
I think that perhaps he registered at Occidental College .... and even Columbia ... as Barry Soetoro, a "Foreign Student," claiming Indonesian citizenship and presenting his Indonesian passport as documentation. If true, it's likely he did it to get student aid. BTW, he had no student loans.
He also neglected to mention that "Barry Soetoro" name as an alias on his Illinois Bar Application.
Well, on post #28 and #29, I thought those were very reasonable and reasoned posts. And it’s much better than a lot of what I see here on Free Republic.
I would like to see more than one state enact such laws on their books, so that it would be more difficult to overlook the loss of Electoral Votes.
It’s possible that if one state did it, it would result in a court case typing up the issue until after the election, and still having Obama win. But, if several states did it, and too many Electoral College votes were “tied up” in the process of disputing the law in those states, it would make it impossible for Obama to win, until there was a final outcome on the court cases and we saw what the problem was, that was being hidden.
It is probably unlikely that a state legislature in a "big" (read Democrat) state could be organized to demand documentation by law. But if even 1, or better yet 2 or 3 smaller states did it, it would give the legislatures of those states standing to bring the case to the SCOTUS, "standing," being the problem of the law suits to date.
I agree and I don’t know why a lot of FReepers are not pushing this “route” bigtime — instead of pursuing other avenues that have all turned out to be total *dead-ends*.
In fact, some other FReepers have accused those who may pursue this course of action with the states to simply be “Obots” and “trolls” and trying to “derail” those FReepers from doing the right thing... LOL...
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.