Jim, all the "talking heads" and "experts" didn't disuade the USSC from ruling in the 2000 election, what makes you think they would at this? The court, as of yet, does not have a majority of Sotomayor's who rule from their feelings and personal opinions and ignore the law.
Valentine Michael Smith
So, are you thinking that we are all his water brothers?
I know it irks many Obama supporters and other scared people to entertain the notion that there is a possibility that Mr. Obama is not eligible to be President. For the life of me, I cannot see why that would be.
I find it difficult to believe that the same level of irritation and self ear-plugging would be evident if we were discussing, say, the question of whether or not Mr. Obama were a closet ballerina. People would join in the conversation or not, but they would not be screaming for the conversation to end. And that puzzles me.
I am a fan of Harry Turtledove / H.N. Turteltaub, so that is perhaps why I find the possibility intriguing, and it is with that in mind that I post the following.
After all the damage that has been done to the constitutional order what's the point in trying to take a stand on the fourth paragraph of Article I, Section 1?
I'm thinking you mean Article 2?
If so, let's say that it were proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Mr. Obama does not meet the requirements.
If so, I imagine there would be three recourses available:
Option #1 is unacceptable, and Vice President Biden would cause as much or more injury to the United States than Mr. Obama. (Plus we would have the bonus of having Nancy Pelosi as the Vice President.)
Option #2 is unacceptable because it would throw the country into confusion and put us in a crisis.
Option #3 is probably the most pure choice, but again, the Constitutional crisis which would ensue is more than SCOTUS would be willing to put us through.
It seems to me that the only thing we would be able to do -- once one takes muskets out of the realm of possibilities -- is to suffer the remainder of Mr. Obama's term and do something in the future about ensuring that candidates are eligible before the election.
I feel the need to point out that the same sort of situation happened in the late 1880s when it was discovered that Chester A. Arthur was likely not eligible.
I'm with you on this Michelle. You've spelled out the options succinctly and their results.
Jim, all the "talking heads" and "experts" didn't disuade the USSC from ruling in the 2000 election
Apples and oranges...in 2000 the question was, who won...today we have a winner and removing a sitting president simply will not happen short of impeachment regardless of that the Constitution says...Now add in DEMOCRAT president with a DEMOCRAT congress and it becomes preordained.
If only the whole issue was the birth certificate. What is Obama's draft status? When did he legally change his name from Barry Sataro?
Dr. Alan Keyes IS an injured party who filed suit in California over Obama's lack of a real birth certificate. He is a well educated, accomplished, and articulate man who is quite civilized. I have always admired him except for him throwing himself in a "mosh pit" back in 2000 during that campaign cycle. He is featured on the below you tube clip. I can't watch it all but got the first minute.
Keyes: Stop Obama or U.S. will cease to exist
Alan Keyes, a three-time presidential candidate, called President Obama a radical communist and a usurper (snip)
Again for the benefit of LMD and BlueJay, as well as those who don't like to watch videos online, his closing statement was this:
"We are claiming that a bankrupt government can save a bankrupt banking system. Explain to me how that happens, because I think that's impossible.
"And the fact that we have just elected an individual who may or may not be qualified, and he presents silly ideas like this and says, "Let's move forward now," and we are all acting like the laws of economics have been repealed, and we can actually afford to foot the bill with money nobody's got.
"This is insane. It's got to lead to the collapse of our country. And it's going to."
Correction, Article II is the executive branch article. The SCOTUS decision on the 2000 election has to come down on one side or the other, annoying one half of the electorate or the other. The half of the electorate who are coming to reject Obama are not necessarily expecting him to be ejected from office. Even the conservative justices will be reluctant to depose a sitting president regardless of the evidence.
If this glib Messiah does not fail on the "merits" of his program than this country and its Constitution has a dismal future anyway. In the meantime his acolytes are using the birth issue as a tool to belabor his critics, representing us as a pack of excitable kooks.
BOTTOM LINE: he will remain in office regardless of all this. You can argue that respect for the Constitution is vital, but indifference to constitutional limits on federal power has been a long time in developing. The provision of Art. II, Sect. 1 is one of the least of the enfeebled protections against overweening power. In fact, it is no protection at all and was not meant to be.
Kenya wasn't a republic until Dec. 1964
So there, Orly Taitz
And this from one of the comments in the link Charlie posted:
"What's even funnier is, that they claimed he was born in a hospital in Mombasa Kenya. Mombasa was part of the state of Zanzibar until 12 December 1963 when it was ceded to be incorporated into the newly independent state of Kenya, which in turn did not become a republic until December 12th, one year later in 1964."
They're looking foolisher and foolisher.
I'm still waiting for someone to show me a Hawaiian COLB that states someone was born in Hawaii when it is undisputed that they were not..........
Newest email making the rounds.
"Hi, I am Barack Obama's great uncle. I am currently in hiding while I try to gather funds to make my escape from Kenya, with Barack's original Kenyan birth certificate. I was there when he was born and now my life is in danger. Please help me escape my country and I am sure that you will be justly rewarded, once the evidence in my posession sees the light of day. I accept Paypal, Money orders, or cash."
Be sure to make your donation to help the cause!
Oops! The template for OrlyTaitz's forgery has been found! Strangely enough, it has close to identical names for the "registrar" and "district registrar" and identical book and page designations.
"What’s more likely — that two Kenyan bureaucrats shared last names with two Australian bureaucrats, and that the numbers on both certificates were identical? Or that someone used this document, available online for anyone who wanted to look, to forge the Obama 'certificate?'"
This is just like old times with Johnny Numbers and Overland Juan -- just keep tossing those clay pigeons up and we'll keep shooting 'em down!
I got a chuckle when one of the articles I was reading referred to the birthers as "ankle biters" -- precisely what Johnny Numbers used to call us who kept shooting down his conspiracy theories.
Glad this is a thread about "new" information!
At what point will the courts have enough of Orly Taitz? And sanction her for being an idiot!
Would seem to me the time has come. She didn't do even the most basic of research to determine authenticity. Doesn't one have a duty to the court (if not oneself) to investigate, at least superficially, before asking the court to intervene?
Q: How do you drive a Birther mad?
A: Put him in the oval office and tell him the President's Kenyan Birth Certificate is hidden in the corner.
I know it irks many Obama supporters and other scared people to entertain the notion that there is a possibility that Mr. Obama is not eligible to be President.
I'm not irked at all, nor scared, and I agree that Obama is at best a closet Socialist. The problem here is that there is not a shred of evidence that he is not qualified by birth. The document that he has produced is the one that Hawaii issues, the Hawaiian government has authenticated it, and all the alternate theories are as full of holes as swiss cheese. These birther theories are doing the right more harm than good. Obama provides plenty of material to attack him on, why concentrate on wacky conspiracy theories. It just makes you look crazy.
mirgliP and Flammenwerfer are correct. This Oily Taste person is doing more harm than good to the right wing cause. There have been sanctions in at least one of the dismissed court cases and there should be more forthcoming.
Here's the latest New York Times take on this foolishness.
Ah. The New York Times! Why didn't you say so? Surely the NYT can tell us all about truth and facts. Thanks for your clarification!
What do you mean, why didn't I say so. I did. And these traditional purveyors of untruths have included this quote, obviously fabricated, from noted conservative strategerist, The Atlantic’s Marc Ambinder:
"But other conservative observers disagree. Ambinder again: “Republicans have to be extra careful. If they give credence to the birthers, they’re (not only advancing ignorance but also) betraying the narrowness of their base. If they dismiss this growing movement, they might drive birthers to find more extreme candidates, which will fragment a Republican political coalition.”
So, what a great situation the birthers have created -- damned if they do and damned if they don't. I think everybody just wishes they would go away and leave the United States alone.
I don't usually listen to Michael Savage, but I channel-surfed by his show the other day, and he had an interesting take on the birth certificate thing; paraphrased, he said that it doesn't matter if Obama is a genuine citizen or not, because he now controls the printing presses, and if he can print trillions of dollars that don't actually exist, he can print a "genuine" birth certificate if he needs to. He also warned that Obama, being the crafty politician that he is, could very well allow the furor over his citizenship to reach a fever pitch, and then produce a "real" birth certificate, as a means of discrediting any other criticism of anything he does. Sort of like how, when Bill Clinton had to give a disposition on the Lewinsky thing, his people leaked that he totally lost control, but when the interview was released, Clinton was calm and controlled---lying through his teeth, of course, but not emotional.
I like it! Now that's what I look for in a good conspiracy theory -- the ability to mutate and adopt to any eventuality to confirm its own validity.
A COMMENT FOR ANN COULTER: "Tardy though they are, we welcome MSNBC to finally joining every major conservative news outlet -- including Fox News, The American Spectator, Human Events, National Review and Sweetness & Light -- in discrediting the idea that President Obama wasn't born in this country and, therefore, is ineligible to be president."
But isn't she a barn-burner who stops at nothing in her effort to destroy Democrats?
VIKIING STAR has a point worth some thought. It's perfectly clear that the Democratrs and their media toadies welcome this agitation as means of diverting attention from far more serious constitutional issues and associating all legitimate criticism with this uproard. It's not going anywhere and they are using it to their advantage.
Well, Savage was saying it's time to get off the birth certificate thing, because it would be now impossible to find out the truth. Unless you assume that Obama is a truthful person (I don't), I can't see how Savage is wrong. Besides, with how Obama is melting down--I mean, the guy is making an "enemies' list"--Barak Nixon, anyone?--I think it's hardly necessary to hyperfocus on his citizenship, regardless of the truth.
It's difficult to understand the why some conservatives continue to play into the hands of the opposition by continuing this birth certificate controversy. The certificate brouhaha has just enough kookiness potential to provide the Obamites with a much needed diversion, however bizarre. As you can see by reading this thread, Obama sycophants, who have been hiding under their desks as their chief's fortunes have fallen, have emerged with tattered cliches waving, once again.
"... Obama sycophants, who have been hiding under their desks as their chief's fortunes have fallen, have emerged with tattered cliches waving, once again."
Some of them, of course, will do that regardless. But, have you noticed that some of the more vocal Usual Suspects from last year and early this year have evaporated, and most of the rest are more interested in bashing conservatives than trying to defend the Great and Powerful O's cascade of blunders?
This story certainly gives them moonbats something to do. i.e., It's been months since democrat posted here in defense of the zero(minus)one, or any of his policies. Unable to defend any of his actions since taking faking the oath of office, they are busily smearing the people concerned that his entire election might possibly be a fraud.
As I stated before, I care not if the zero(minus)one was born in a manger in Bethlehem, he is unqualified to be our president, and uninterested in defending America, bettering Americans, or being an American. He is his father's son, and his father was a piece of work.
This whole distraction could have been avoided entirely had Mr. Obama agreed to transparency.
Oh, wait! He DID agree to transparency. Promised it, even.
This whole distraction could have been avoided entirely had Mr. Obama not lied about transparency.
Q. Why did the Birther stare at the Orange Juice carton?
A. Because it said "CONCENTRATE".
To think for a moment this hasn't been vetted by the best in the business, both "D's" and "R's" is idiotic. The "D's" would not have allowed him to run, and the "R's" would have ripped him a new one if there were any, I mean "ANY" thing to this.
I do find the continuation fun though.
Q: How do you drive an Obamafarian batty?
A: Inform him that it is no longer Bush's fault.