Posted on 01/23/2011 11:13:48 AM PST by pissant
The new Republican House majority leader says he doesn't think questions about President Barack Obama's citizenship should play a role in the discussion of policy matters.
Two years into the Obama administration, so-called birthers continue to argue that Obama isn't a natural-born citizen and that he hasn't proved he's constitutionally qualified to be president. Birth records in Hawaii haven't dissuaded them.
House Majority Leader Eric Cantor says he believes Obama is a citizen and that most Americans are beyond that question.
(Excerpt) Read more at salon.com ...
Citizen of Kenya
You said: “Actually, that’s exactly what it does mean. It means that one state cannot subject to its own scrutiny the official acts of another state.”
A forgery is not an official act of any state. It is a violation of the laws of the state.
If somebody at Nebraska’s DOH started cranking out “official” birth certificates for people who don’t even exist, would every other state have to accept those BC’s without question? Suppose the Nebraska DOH claims that 5 billion children were born in Nebraska hospitals in 2010. Would the other states have to accept all 5 billion birth certificates? Would there be ANYBODY who would be authorized to question the lawfulness of those 5 billion birth certificates?
If so, then government bureaucrats are and always will be laws unto themselves. That is SO FAR from the government accountability that the Constitution is about.
No one said anything about a temper tantrum.
Let me tell you something. When somebody calls you a racist, you confront them directly and put that talk to an end.
Or you lose the argument, your standing and your honor.
If you think the answer to such situations, or to winning elections for that matter, is to parse and dance and cozy up to your supporters AND your opponents-—then you and I simply disagree.
Guys like you can look to your Gulianis and G.H.W. Bushes and, for that matter, your Huckabees and Romneys.
I think that for the Republicans it’s going to take a strong mind and soul, one, to win the election and, two, to confront this ailing nation’s problems.
You keep pickin’ your nose and grinning, Hipster-—when you’re looking to fail, as you seem to be, you’re almost always going to succeed, right?
The law now is very similar. Doesn’t require the wife to take the last name of the husband but the rest is pretty much the same, IIRC.
Full Faith and Credit shall be given in each State to the public Acts, Records, and judicial Proceedings of every other State. And the Congress may by general Laws prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof.
I think that, unless Congress prescribes otherwise, if an Hawaiian clerk creates a false birth certificate that becomes one of Hawaii's public records, then the accuracy of that record must be challenged in Hawaii. I believe that so long as Hawaii treats the certificate as valid and accurate, other states are required by the Constitution to treat it as valid and accurate.
Okay. Responding further...
The 20th Amendment doesn’t explicitly say who is supposed to determine whether or not the President elect has “failed to qualify” by Jan 20th.
Article III, however, says that the judiciary is to decide “all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority; ..... to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party...”
Congress does not have the authority to determine Presidential eligibility because they have no authority to decide cases and controversies arising from the Constitution - either in Law (as in defining “natural born citizen” or in fact (as in deciding whether Obama meets the definition of “natural born citizen”). Even if there were objections to a state’s electoral votes on the basis of eligibility, Congress could not decide eligibility; they would have to refer it to the judiciary.
Congress WAS explicitly given authority to decide eligibility for their OWN MEMBERS - which would have been the ideal time for the framers to give them authority to decide eligibility for POTUS also, if that was the intent. But I strongly doubt that was their intent because it would violate the whole purpose for having a judiciary that interprets and applies the Constitution. The separation of powers was very important to the framers.
Congress can declare the electoral winner, but they can’t rule whether or not a President elect has “failed to qualify”. They can’t rule that he/she qualified or failed to qualify. Only the judiciary can do that. If there is no case or controversy brought forward the court has nothing they can decide so the presumption is that there is no problem.
But there WERE cases pending for the judiciary to decide this issue, and they were not decided by the time that Jan 20th got here. Including the question of whether Obama had ever actually lawfully been declared the electoral winner, since Cheney failed to ask for objections to the electoral votes as required by law. The court had a case suing Cheney and Congress for breaking the law, and the resulting question is whether the electoral vote was ever lawfully certified since the requirement of the law had not been completed.If it had been a Miranda warning he had “just forgotten” a whole case could be thrown out.
So as of Jan 20, 2009 there was an official legal/judicial question of whether Obama had qualified, meaning on that date there was neither a “yes” or a “no” answer to whether he had qualified. IOW, he had not specifically qualified.
The 20th Amendment has required Joe Biden to “act as President” since then - if, indeed, the electoral vote was lawfully certified. But that could not be known because that was an issue that SCOTUS still had to decide.
This is confusing stuff. This is all IMHO, which is all I can really go by, because the court has refused to decide the cases. What I get from it all is that if SCOTUS refuses to do its duty and decide critical cases like these, they put this nation’s security at grave risk.
It’s like a hockey game with no rules and nobody to officiate. Bedlam.
I don’t see the 20th Amendment mentioning the oath of office at all. The oath of office seems irrelevant to me, for 20th Amendment purposes. The term begins at noon on Jan 20th regardless of the oath of office, and the requirement that the VP elect “act as President” is independent of any mention of oath of office.
The Chief Justice cannot determine eligibility outside of a case. Administering the oath of office is not a ruling that the President elect is eligible. That could only be done by the COURT, not by one individual acting outside the authority of the court. So I don’t understand what difference the oath of office would make.
Sadly, I think it is too late for SCOTUS to undo the damage they’ve done for the 2008-2012 presidential term. They have abdicated their responsibilities and I don’t see them ever doing anything to correct that, unless Congress will impeach Sotomayor and Kagan for the ethics violation of refusing to recuse themselves from cases where they have a glaring personal and financial conflict of interest. Sad, sad thing. We have no Constitution at all, when SCOTUS refuses to interpret it.
So all the questions about this are sort of academic right now.
What we CAN do is make sure that it never comes to this again. The country cannot afford this. We need at least one state to enact an eligibility bill which would create such a clear-cut situation of both standing and justiciability that the courts CANNOT refuse to hear the case on its merits. The bill that I think can do that is at http://butterdezillion.files.wordpress.com/2011/01/final-short-form-eligibility-bill1.pdf .
That’s what needs to be the focus of every person who cares about the Constitution, the rule of law, and the distrust and non-credibiilty that this whole fiasco has spawned.
Jeff Kuhner said in an interview a while back that the reporters he’s spoken to say they believe there is something big going on with the eligibility issue and they don’t want to report on it because they are afraid that if the truth got out there would be violence.
IOW, they are afraid that the people who don’t care about the Constitution and rule of law will terrorize the whole nation. So they are appeasing the beast they fear.
They already know us lawful people who care about the Constitution are not violent. They don’t have to fear us. What they fear is the other side, because they know the commies ARE violent.
They’re claiming to be held hostage to the violent supporters of Obama, to put it bluntly. You would think it would wake them up, to hear themselves actually admitting that.
The law that Congress passed to “prescribe the Manner in which such Acts, Records and Proceedings shall be proved, and the Effect thereof” said that the way to prove that it is truly the record of the state is with a seal and signature. It’s basically saying that a certified record has to be acknowledged as a record of that state.
That doesn’t mean that another state can’t require more proof than just that record.
For instance, if I used a Nebraska COLB to try to claim that I qualify for DHHL land in Hawaii, Hawaii would not consider my Nebraska COLB as sufficient proof (just as they don’t consider a Hawaii COLB as sufficient proof).
Is that constitutional, or does it violate the Full Faith and Credit Clause? Why or why not?
It is the Christian name..the intent was all born after 1860 have a European first name..this was law until 1967. After reviewing..ssa files since 1960 to 1973 all names..were Christian European.
Legally the state presenting the documents must authenticate them to comply with the Full Faith and Credit clause.
They are then subject to investigation, and with the numerous vague and contradictory statements by Hawaii as well as their actions and actions by the DNC etc, there is easily reason to investigate Obama’s birth and documents. If he was applying for a sensitive position in the Federal Government he certainly would be investigated to the nth degree. He is getting a pass because of the race card and the deal cut with McCain, and because of the news media. It defies logic not to investigate Obama and clear up the record so we can have a tiny bit of trust in our government.
Apparently the powers to be don't care a tinkers darn about what we the people want.
Until we start some non-violent protests and actions, they will continue to do nothing as evidenced by Cantor's words today. Gutless Cowards who refuse to do the job they swore to do.
Just pinging a few names to rolling_stone’s interesting comment.
I agree. Either he is too ignorant of what the Constitution says or he is another person pandering to the politically correct viewpoint. In either case he doesn’t measure up to a worthy president.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,206120,00.html
......
False claim to US citizenship is 18 USC 911 certainly can be investigated by the US government.....
SAN DIEGO — U.S. Border Patrol Agent Oscar Antonio Ortiz brought a certain inside knowledge to his job policing the U.S.-Mexican frontier: He had come to the United States illegally and was once arrested and accused of trying to drive two illegal immigrants across from Mexico.
But his superiors did not know any of that when he applied for a job with the Border Patrol, because he had a fake birth certificate that said he was from Chicago.....
.....He had joined the Navy in 1998 after growing up in San Diego and working a construction job in Utah. During four years in the military, mostly aboard an amphibious assault ship, he collected awards including for good conduct.
Fraser said the agency had believed Ortiz was a U.S. citizen — a job requirement — and was unaware of his smuggling arrest, which took place shortly before he applied to the Border Patrol in October 2001. (He was accused of taking $400 to try to smuggle two people across the border, but was never actually charged.)
“There were no red flags,” Fraser said.
Investigators found Ortiz was really born in Tijuana, Mexico. His attorney, Stephen White, said in court that Ortiz’s mother obtained the fake birth certificate when Ortiz was 3, and Ortiz said he grew up thinking he was a U.S. citizen.
(my note-happens all the time relative files for delayed fraudulent BC-he knew. Congress should know and should investigate.,)
After Ortiz’s arrest, Customs and Border Protection, which includes the Border Patrol and border inspectors, checked the citizenship of its nearly 42,000 employees, Fraser said. He said he did not immediately know whether any other noncitizens were found.....
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Interesting case of delayed fraudulent BC in Texas filed by one of hundreds claiming birth via midwife’s.
...18 U.S.C. § 1001 is designed to protect federal funds and functions from fraudulent interference. In furthering these purposes, it is irrelevant whether defendant knew that his intentionally false statements might eventually influence a federal agency.....
http://ftp.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/712/712.F2d.104.82-2429.html
///////////////////////////
Obama fill out an SF 86?
Theresa Cao informed the whole Congress very clearly, but they are either totally ignorant, tone-deft or scared like hell to display the truth, because they would then also be disclosed as enabler against the Constitution they have lacked to defend!!!
If Paul Ryan join them, well then we have a nice three-clover without cojones in support of hippie Abercommie and the usurper in the Whit-Hut!!!
And now they even want to sit side by side with RATs risking getting flees!!!
They are acting like abused wives. The husband has spent the past four years—but the past two especially—slapping them around and humiliating them. Now he wants to hold hands and play footsie. The Republicans can’t wait—it sounds like such fun!
On a side note. I forgot to tell you, when you were educating me re: rotted, fermented herrings, that I’m a quarter Swedish. Now you’ve got me terrified that a relative ate that stuff. I may still be suffering the side effects!
The problem is that he finally realized that Tim Adams was damn right. There's NO b.c. to be found unless under the name Barry Soetoro, or other incriminating notations that do NOT fits the mold!!!
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.