Sunday, November 21, 2010

This is scary

OK, now this is scary.  No sooner had I posted my little piece on Frank Rich's essay about you know who than did this nonsensical "comment" hit my inbox:
Governor Palin is a courageous person, no doubt. In view of her massive following, SARAH PALIN CAN SAVE AMERICA WITH ONE SIMPLE ACT  if she would simply, briefly, tweet about the upcoming case before the US Supreme Court next week, it would change the course of American history. 
November 23, 2010 marks a fork in the road for the future of America of more than historic proportions — perhaps on par with events leading to the Civil War. To date, virtually all federal and state courts where actions have been brought seeking decision on the meaning of the Constitution’s Article 2 “natural born citizen” clause as a prerequisite for Barack Obama to be a lawful President and Commander in Chief of the United States (Mr. Obama having been born to a father of British/Kenyan nationality and father not a citizen of the United States), have been shut down, never getting beyond the issue of standing. To date, courts have very strategically (narrowly if not artfully) characterized and applied law and legal procedure steadfastly to prevent the question from ever rising to the merits — this on a host of different types and classes of plaintiffs, causes and defendants — admittedly under the most intensely implicit (if not more) pressure to do the same. 

The national media (some say our 4th branch of government) has aided and abetted the avoidance by mischaracterizing this as a “Hawaii birth” a/k/a “birther” issue which is nothing more than a “red herring” in that the issue for Article 2 “natural born citizen” is Mr. Obama’s father. Moreover, the legal community has aided and abetted the avoidance by mischaracterizing the 1898 Supreme Court Case, Wong Kim Arc, which dealt with the meaning of “citizenship”, not the meaning of “natural born citizen” under Article 2. 

November 23, 2010 may very well be the last chance for the Judicial Branch realistically to take up the issue, this on a case of legal standing solidly presented by Attorney Apuzzo and Commander Kerchner. If the Court finds no standing here, by a narrow interpretation of the same or otherwise, coming after all the rest of the “no standing” cases, it is doubtfull this important Constitutional issue can and will be resolved in any court of law. The question will nevertheless continue to fester, at tremendous national cost, never to abate, potentially to reach crisis stage, and in any event to undermine the structure of our Constitutional Republic. 

It is more than chilling and says volumes that NOT ONE member of Congress will publicly speak on this or, better yet, since the Congress of the United States has more than a vested interest, opine if not as a “friend of the court” at the Supreme Court, in the court of public opinion — BEFORE the Supreme Court convenes on November 23, 2010. 

The world is (should be) watching! 


Anonymous said...

The Supreme Court will take no action on Nov. 23, and nothing will happen because the US Congress has already voted UNANIMOUSLY to confirm his election. That, in turn, is because Obama has already shown that he was born in Hawaii with his official birth certificate and the confirmation of the officials in Hawaii.

And Obama's Natural Born Citizen status is not affected by his father's citizenship.

“Natural born citizen. Persons who are born within the jurisdiction of a national government, i.e. in its territorial limits, or those born of citizens temporarily residing abroad.” — Black’s Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition

Also, such prominent conservative Senators who are also lawyers as Orren Hatch and Lindsay Graham say that a Natural Born Citizen is simply one who was born in the USA:

Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), said:

“Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.” (December 11, 2008 letter to constituent)

Senator Orrin G. Hatch (R-UT), said:

“What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born within the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen.” (Senate Judiciary Committee hearing hearing on OCTOBER 5, 2004)

Ted said...

Citizenship is NOT the same thing as Article 2 "Natural Born Citizen" for POTUS qualification purposes.

Anonymous said...

Re: "Citizenship is NOT the same thing as Article 2 "Natural Born Citizen" for POTUS qualification purposes. "

Answer. We agree completely. SOME US citizens are not natural born. Who are they? Naturalized US citizens. They are not eligible. However Natural Born citizens ARE ELIGIBLE.

Under the longstanding English common-law principle of jus soli, persons born within the territory of the sovereign (other than children of enemy aliens or foreign diplomats) are citizens from birth. Thus, those persons born within the United States are "natural born citizens" and eligible to be President. Much less certain, however, is whether children born abroad of United States citizens are "natural born citizens" eligible to serve as President ..." Edwin Meese, et al, THE HERITAGE GUIDE TO THE CONSTITUTION (2005)

Anonymous said...

Re: "Citizenship is NOT the same thing as Article 2 "Natural Born Citizen" for POTUS qualification purposes. "

Answer: We are in complete agreement. Some citizens, naturalized citizens, are not eligible to be POTUS. All Natural Born Citizens, meaning all US citizens who were citizens at birth, not naturalized citizens, are eligible.


Blog Archive

Cluster map

Search This Blog

ICAHD - 18,000 Homes Campaign (large banner)