Thought Experiment - Obama not qualified to be US President

Pocono Joe

Thought Experiment

The Constitution, Article 2, Section 1, states, "No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President."

The issue of Barack Obama’s eligibility to be US President won’t go away. There remains open several lawsuits contesting his eligibility, and also that members of the House and Senate violated the constitutional rights of citizens by refusing to investigate.

Even though extensions have already been granted to an initial round of requests to delay the proceedings, the government now says it needs even more time to prepare a response. I honestly can’t understand why Barack Obama just doesn’t make a call to Hawaii officials, and tell them to produce his "Birth Certificate" and stop all the questions. He cites an online version of a "Certification of Live Birth" from Hawaii as his birth verification, but many critics point out such documents are actually issued for children not born in the state.

Just for discussion purposes, what do you think would happen if it comes out he was in fact born in Keyna, and his mother was too young at the time of his birth to confer American citizenship to her son under the law at the time, and it is determined he does not meet the requirements of the Constitution, Article 2, Section 1? (I believe the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born.)

I honestly don’t know what would happen. I think Joe Biden (God help us all) should be sworn in as President as a matter of law, but I think there will be emergency Legislation put into action to amend Article 2 of the constitution so Obama can remain President. And with a supermajority, I’m sure it would be passed.



(I don’t think this should be moved to, due to the fact there are numerous lawsuits (past and present), lending credence to this discussion)

New Jersey attorney Mario Apuzzo has filed a case on behalf of Charles Kerchner and others alleging Congress didn't properly ascertain that Obama is qualified to hold the office of president.

Pennsylvania Democrat Philip Berg has three cases pending, including Berg vs. Obama in the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, a separate Berg vs. Obama which is under seal at the U.S. District Court level and Hollister vs. Soetoro a/k/a Obama, (now dismissed) brought on behalf of a retired military member who could be facing recall to active duty by Obama.

Former presidential candidate Alan Keyes headlines a list of people filing a suit in California, in a case handled by the United States Justice Foundation, that asks the secretary of state to refuse to allow the state's 55 Electoral College votes to be cast in the 2008 presidential election until Obama verifies his eligibility to hold the office. The case is pending, and lawyers are seeking the public's support.

California attorney Orly Taitz has brought a case, Lightfoot vs. Bowen, on behalf of Gail Lightfoot, the vice presidential candidate on the ballot with Ron Paul, four electors and two registered voters. She also has brought forward several other cases and has conducted several public campaigns to generate awareness of the issue.

Mr.Micro

The red necks live in hope no doubt? Should not waste their money, if they have any left after the last red neck in the Whitehouse left the country bankrupt. Not a hope in hell of Obama being declared invalid as President. He is too good.

Overheal

While they're at it lets impose a minimum IQ and retroactively impeach Bush.

ghostdancer

yes, I would imagine that Biden would be president.


not that it matters as that ridiculous scenario would never happen.

I would guess you can't imagine Obama not doing that as you probably don't understand that anyone with even an iota of common sense realises that he doesn't need to produce a birth cert for public consumption.
I would guess that you probably don't realise that Hawaii officials have already produced said birth cert, the one which is now on Obama's website to try to and quell this nonsense, but people of obvious mentally deficiency keep it alive.

i'm surprised the people that attempt to keep this going through blog and forum posts aren't cringing at being part of an embarrassing conspiracy theory group with Alan Keyes and Ron Paul supporters...

banquo

I'm pro Ron Paul, anti this theory. What problem is solved by removing this guy? You want Biden?

It's the letter of the law vs. the spirit of the law. They guy's lived in the USA forever, lived in some of the worst places and been to some of the best schools. You think he's not American?

The Mad Hatter

Wow. The republicans are clinging to this like a childhood teddy bear.

Still, it doesn't matter. Once you're sworn in, you're president, regardless of legitimacy. (see Bush 2000 for a precedent)

Nodin

Pocono Joe wrote: »

Thought Experiment

I think you left out "stupid" there somewhere. Seriously, comedians are proffesionals - they don't need the right to make it easy for them.

banquo

Yeah, this is clutching at straws by the anti-Obama crowd. Let's let it die.

dvpower

Surprised to see this one still running. As previously said, the state of Hawaii have confirmed the details of Obama's birth.

You really have to question the motivation (and sanity) of people who are still roasting this old chestnut. I could understand why some republicans might want to put this about during the campaign (FUD), but its now time to let it go.

JohnMc1

He's given us enough reasons to question his leadership abilities.

banquo

Such as?

JohnMc1

Hi over reliance on the teleprompter, his pandering to the left on certain issues [closing Gitmo, and the media circus over the Waterboarding and now Amnesty] and a certain fly-over in NYC.

The Mad Hatter

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Hi over reliance on the teleprompter,

Because no politician's ever used notes for speaking before.

his pandering to the left on certain issues [closing Gitmo, and the media circus over the Waterboarding and now Amnesty]

So, by 'the left' you mean 'international law'

and a certain fly-over in NYC.

You expect him to personally clear every plan put into action by every department under him?

Seriously, if this is the best you can do I'm not surprised you're constantly falling back on this birth certificate rubbish.

JohnMc1

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

Because no politician's ever used notes for speaking before.

He has used it more times than anybody else. Would it really kill him to look like he's smart enough to memorize a speech once in a while [For God Sake Gov. Palin was able to recite a speech from memory when her teleprompter screwed up so surely the "Genius" could too.

"So, by 'the left' you mean 'international law'"

You know damn well making this whole thing a media circus has nothing to do about "International Law". Nice dodge on the other issues though.

You expect him to personally clear every plan put into action by every department under him?

Air-Force 1 is his jet while he's in office so he should be in the know about what is going with it. You know bloody well if this happened under Bush or McCain the hack networks CBS,NBC, MSNBC,CNBC and CNN would be in an uproar and so would you and the majority of posters on this board.

Seriously, if this is the best you can do I'm not surprised you're constantly falling back on this birth certificate rubbish.

I've never once used that and you know it.

banquo

JohnMc1 wrote: »

He has used it more times than anybody else. Would it really kill him to look like he's smart enough to memorize a speech once in a while [For God Sake Gov. Palin was able to recite a speech from memory when her teleprompter screwed up so surely the "Genius" could too.

You know damn well making this whole thing a media circus has nothing to do about "International Law". Nice dodge on the other issues though.

Air-Force 1 is his jet while he's in office so he should be in the know about what is going with it. You know bloody well if this happened under Bush or McCain the hack networks CBS,NBC, MSNBC,CNBC and CNN would be in an uproar and so would you and the majority of posters on this board.

1) Do we have statistics for the first one? Every president has speechwriters. A speech usually works out a 300 words per minute. A 60 minute speech - state of the union, for example - is about 18,000 words. Now, I can't speak for you, but I'm not comfortable with a president prioritizing learning 18,000 words off by heart over other stuff. It's a silly complaint and you know it.

2) While making it a media circus has little to do with international law, international law has everything to do with international law. You can say that America needed to be defended, and that you didn't break the letter of the law with waterboarding, and you'd be correct. But in 8 years the previous administration has changed from what America needs to defend itself against from terrorist attacks to selling out your values via reactionary behavior.

Zell Miller said that he didn't want France to decide when America needs defending. France doesn't get to make the calls on your values. I agree with him. So why do right wingers (and I'd consider myself Republican leaning) now go hiding behind the international community and their laws when it comes to practices like waterboarding? It's torture, whatever other choose to call it. There are countries where I can marry a 12yo girl, but I wouldn't do it just because it's within the law.

3) Air Force One isn't his jet: it still belongs to the taxpayer. Mad Hatter is right when he says that it'd be stupid for the president to OK every single order - he'd be left with no time to make any of his own. And if you're looking for a serious media circus, then you've got one in this story. If Bush had done it I'd be saying the same thing about him. Now let's move on.

Overheal

JohnMc1 wrote: »

He has used it more times than anybody else. Would it really kill him to look like he's smart enough to memorize a speech once in a while [For God Sake Gov. Palin was able to recite a speech from memory when her teleprompter screwed up so surely the "Genius" could too.

I know right. It should be easy enough to remember "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me." You'd think.

Anyway heres some chicken soup for your impromptu soul:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CAse6FIFCsM

I think its unrealistic to expect the president to memorize all of his speeches. Palin memorized her speech, but thats all she knew. Think about it this way do you want the CnC spending an hour of his day memorizing speeches or spend an extra hour of his day being The CnC?

dlofnep

Obama is the man.

Sir Digby Chicken Caesar

surely pocono joe shouldn't drop this issue until 8 years after the last progressive calls bush an unconstitutional fascist hatemonger. fair's fair.

Trouser_Press

Pocono Joe wrote: »

The issue of Barack Obama’s eligibility to be US President won’t go away.

You really are getting desperate now, Pocono Joe. Keep it up, it makes for excellent entertainment.

dlofnep

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Hi over reliance on the teleprompter, his pandering to the left on certain issues [closing Gitmo, and the media circus over the Waterboarding and now Amnesty] and a certain fly-over in NYC.

Closing a concentration camp which held people without trial? How is that "pandering to the left". It's protecting basic civil rights.

Obama is the best American president in a long long time. If you support the torture of people, especially people who have been convicted of no crime - then I've nothing really to say about you.

Trouser_Press

JohnMc1 wrote: »

He's given us enough reasons to question his leadership abilities.

Hi over reliance on the teleprompter

I agree, it's pathetic when leaders use teleprompters to make profound announcements, like, say.....




Ooops.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

his pandering to the left on certain issues [closing Gitmo, and the media circus over the Waterboarding and now Amnesty]

Absolutely, Gitmo was the US Constitution's love-child and waterboarding its wet dream. Torture? You gotta love it! (Um, except when US soldiers are the victims).

JohnMc1 wrote: »

and a certain fly-over in NYC.

Wow, President Obama is a pilot too?! :eek:

Just when I thought there was no end to his talents.......

JohnMc1

dlofnep wrote: »

Closing a concentration camp which held people without trial? How is that "pandering to the left". It's protecting basic civil rights.

Do you really think the people held in that camp care about our civil rights? Plus Obama forgot about one very important thing. Nobody wants them because they know they're dangerous.

Obama is the best American president in a long long time. If you support the torture of people, especially people who have been convicted of no crime -
That remains to be seen. Just because he is a coward like the rest of Europe and loves everything a press issue does not make him the best.

then I've nothing really to say about you.

Considering you my supposed friend couldn't give a **** when my Father passed away two months ago. I could care less about you at this point. Although I'll leave it at this.

GO LEINSTER!!!

dlofnep

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Do you really think the people held in that camp care about our civil rights? Plus Obama forgot about one very important thing. Nobody wants them because they know they're dangerous.

How do you know what they care about? You don't know one of their names. Don't know where they are from. And don't even know why they were locked up in the first place. They are held, without charge and were routinely tortured.

Ask yourself this question - Would you be still so supportive of an institution if it was American citizens, who were held - without charge or trial in a concentration camp in Afghanistan, and were routinely tortured? You could be damned sure American would be crying "Human rights abuse!".

When America tries to set the moral standards for the world, and then fails (by a long shot) to meet them in anyway, shape or form - then it's going to cause a backlash.

That remains to be seen. Just because he is a coward like the rest of Europe and loves everything a press issue does not make him the best.

How is he a coward? What exactly is it that has made him a coward? The willing to engage with other countries and discuss matters for the better of both countries?

Considering you my supposed friend couldn't give a **** when my Father passed away two months ago. I could care less about you at this point. Although I'll leave it at this.

Firstly John - I'm very sorry for your loss. Secondly, I was never aware of your father's passing. I don't think it has any bearing on the topic at hand, but I'm sorry for your loss all the same. Don't take threads like this so personal.

GO LEINSTER!!!

I don't even like rugby! :P

JohnMc1

dlofnep wrote: »

How do you know what they care about? You don't know one of their names. Don't know where they are from. And don't even know why they were locked up in the first place. They are held, without charge and were routinely tortured.

I don't want to know their names. I just know that they couldn't do us harm. Contrary to popular belief these weren't just guys the military picked up outside a pub. Do you you think one of these guys enjoying a pint when one soldier just said "Hey you with the turbin get in the car."

How is he a coward? What exactly is it that has made him a coward? The willing to engage with other countries and discuss matters for the better of both countries?

Because he went overseas and pandered to Europe and everywhere else apologizing that America is so evil. Then he go and shakes hands with Chavez and the Castro Bros. [Real dictators not like the left has tried to make Bush out to be]

Firstly John - I'm very sorry for your loss. Secondly, I was never aware of your father's passing. I don't think it has any bearing on the topic at hand, but I'm sorry for your loss all the same. Don't take threads like this so personal.

I mentioned it on my Bebo. You should have seen a notice when you log in. You were probably too busy weeping for Mask at the time.

I don't even like rugby! :P

It will apply to hurling soon enough. Except it will be Go Kilkenny.

Nodin

JohnMc1 wrote: »

He has used it more times than anybody else.
.

And the source for this suprising group of statistics....?

JohnMc1 wrote: »

You know damn well making this whole thing a media circus has nothing to do about "International Law". Nice dodge on the other issues though.

How exactly did he make it a "media circus"?

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Air-Force 1 is his jet while he's in office so he should be in the know about what is going with it.

'Obama, wheres the limo?'
'Its in the Garage'
'No, its off being washed - You, Sir, are a Failure'
'You are right. Yesterday I thought the puppy was in the girls room, but it was in fact in the kitchen. I resign now, and go to spend the rest of my life in shame.'

dlofnep

JohnMc1 wrote: »

I don't want to know their names. I just know that they couldn't do us harm. Contrary to popular belief these weren't just guys the military picked up outside a pub. Do you you think one of these guys enjoying a pint when one soldier just said "Hey you with the turbin get in the car."

No infact, that's exactly what they did. They imprisoned people, without trial, without a crime, without a charge.

They had a 13 year old, who was eventually released locked up and tortured there - once again, without trial, without charge, and without a crime.

All you know is that "they couldn't harm you". Have you ever thought that they never wanted to harm you in the first place, and that you're buying into the fear-mongering that George Bush created? Of course you are - like a typical neocon American - you swallow that like water.

I see you've completely avoided my question about - what if it was American citizens, in an Afghani concentration camp, who were held, without trial or without a charge and were routinely tortured. Would you consider it OK?

You see - what you fail to understand - is that internment does more harm than good. It will create hate and bitterness in the muslim community for locking up their friends, without a charge and labelling them all as terrorists.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

I mentioned it on my Bebo. You should have seen a notice when you log in. You were probably too busy weeping for Mask at the time.

I have 200+ friends on my bebo - the last thing I do is try to check all of their little updates on bebo. So no, I didn't see a notice. Can we drop this please? While I'm sorry for your loss, it has nothing to do with this said topic.

Nodin

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Do you really think the people held in that camp care about our civil rights?!!!

Some perhaps yes, some perhaps no. Prisoners in US prisons are doubtless much the same, yet they still have them.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Plus Obama forgot about one very important thing. Nobody wants them because they know they're dangerous.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

. Contrary to popular belief these weren't just guys the military picked up outside a pub. Do you you think one of these guys enjoying a pint when one soldier just said "Hey you with the turbin get in the car."

The stats of where they were picked up and what for has been posted on this board before.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

That remains to be seen. Just because he is a coward like the rest of Europe and loves everything a press issue does not make him the best.

'rest of Europe'? America is a part of Europe now? Fascinating.

Why are Europe 'Cowards'? Is it because they wouldn't get involved in Iraq? Years ago, when I was in my late teens, various associates tried to get me invovled in what would be described as petty crime. I said 'fuck off' and was - once or twice - told it was because I was afraid, though my objections were purely on the basis I considered it wrong.

The press picks up on everything a US president does. Everything. Bushs excercise routine and ipod playlist come to mind. Its par for the course when you're in charge of the most powerful state in the world.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

everywhere else apologizing that America is so evil.

Could we have the quotations in question?

Brimmy

JohnMc1 wrote: »

You know damn well making this whole thing a media circus has nothing to do about "International Law". Nice dodge on the other issues though.

Yes because no president has every wanted to increase the statue of Human Rights in their own country and it's always been just to further serve their public image.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Air-Force 1 is his jet while he's in office so he should be in the know about what is going with it.

Air-Force 1 is only his jet while he's on it. Outside of that it becomes a normal VC-25A. And besides they did inform the relative authorities that it would be taken place. It is stupid to espect him to ok every degree of every action.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Do you really think the people held in that camp care about our civil rights?

If those held there are found to be guilty then they were will have some of these rights removed. Torture is not acceptable.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

That remains to be seen. Just because he is a coward like the rest of Europe and loves everything a press issue does not make him the best.

Yes not adhering to the Krauthammer school of thought and moving away from Cold War ideology makes him an idiot. While I wouldn't call him the best he's certainly doing enough so far in a short period of time that if he keeps it up he may have to be considered amongst the best at some stage.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

I don't want to know their names. I just know that they couldn't do us harm.

My grandmother probably couldn't do you any harm either. Should we send her to Gitmo?

At the end of the day it comes down to a very simple point that EVERYONE regardless of questionability of their innocence deserves a fair trial.

Black Swan

JohnMc1 wrote: »

his pandering to the left on certain issues [closing Gitmo, and the media circus over the Waterboarding

Since when is it "pandering to the left" for the USA to honour its international agreements? They not only signed the Geneva Convention, but also prosecuted and sentenced Nazis immediately following WWII citing it in the Nuremberg Trials as grounds for conviction?

JohnMc1 wrote: »

You know damn well making this whole thing a media circus has nothing to do about "International Law".

Geneva Convention, Article 17... "No physical or mental torture, nor any other form of coercion, may be inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind whatever. Prisoners of war who refuse to answer may not be threatened, insulted, or exposed to any unpleasant or disadvantageous treatment of any kind."

Waterboarding qualifies as both "physical" and "mental torture," as well as a "form of coercion" that was "inflicted on prisoners of war to secure from them information of any kind?" Certainly you would agree that it's "unpleasant" treatment?

Who qualifies as "prisoners of war?"
Geneva Convention, Article 4:

"A. Prisoners of war, in the sense of the present Convention, are persons belonging to one of the following categories, who have fallen into the power of the enemy:

1. Members of the armed forces of a Party to the conflict as well as members of militias or volunteer corps forming part of such armed forces.

2. Members of other militias and members of other volunteer corps, including those of organized resistance movements..."

It strongly appears that the Taliban and Al Qaeda were qualified as "prisoners of war" by the above Geneva Convention definition?

The United States of American signed the Geneva Convention and has used it to prosecute offenders since its enactment into international law. Under Bush-Cheney the USA was in violation of the Geneva Convention as pertains to torture. When Obama took office, he has taken actions to bring the USA into compliance with those laws against torture.

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Contrary to popular belief these weren't just guys the military picked up outside a pub. Do you you think one of these guys enjoying a pint when one soldier just said "Hey you with the turbin get in the car."

I guess you have never seen the award winning "The Road to Guantanamo" documentary film of British citizens held for three years at Gitmo, that happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time when they were on their way to a wedding? They claimed that there were many innocent citizens rounded up by US-supported Afghan forces that were victims of similar circumstance and sent to Gitmo.

Source: http://www.roadtoguantanamomovie.com/

LostinKildare

JohnMc1 wrote: »

Contrary to popular belief these weren't just guys the military picked up outside a pub. Do you you think one of these guys enjoying a pint when one soldier just said "Hey you with the turbin get in the car."

According to military intelligence, up to 90% of the detainees in Abu Ghraib, for example, were innocent and should not have been there.

Men, women, and children who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time were simply rounded up for detention, or sold to the U.S. military by Pakistanis for bounties of up to $5000 a head. When concerns about the lack of "battlefield vetting" were raised with the Bush administration, Rumsfeld famously brushed them off, saying "just get the bastards to the interrogators."

Here is what Lawrence Wilkerson (former chief of staff to Colin Powell) says about Gitmo:

The second dimension that is largely unreported is that several in the U.S. leadership became aware of this lack of proper vetting very early on and, thus, of the reality that many of the detainees were innocent of any substantial wrongdoing, had little intelligence value, and should be immediately released.

But to have admitted this reality would have been a black mark on their leadership from virtually day one of the so-called Global War on Terror and these leaders already had black marks enough: the dead in a field in Pennsylvania, in the ashes of the Pentagon, and in the ruins of the World Trade Towers. They were not about to admit to their further errors at Guantanamo Bay. Better to claim that everyone there was a hardcore terrorist, was of enduring intelligence value, and would return to jihad if released.

Wilkerson describes how Rumsfeld and Cheney fought attempts by Powell, Richard Armitage, and Ambassador Pierre Prosper, the U.S. envoy for war crimes issues, to repatriate innocent detainees. Instead, they developed an ad hoc intelligence philosophy to justify keeping many of these people, called the mosaic philosophy.

Simply stated, this philosophy held that it did not matter if a detainee were innocent. Indeed, because he lived in Afghanistan and was captured on or near the battle area, he must know something of importance (this general philosophy, in an even cruder form, prevailed in Iraq as well, helping to produce the nightmare at Abu Ghraib). All that was necessary was to extract everything possible from him and others like him, assemble it all in a computer program, and then look for cross-connections and serendipitous incidentals--in short, to have sufficient information about a village, a region, or a group of individuals, that dots could be connected and terrorists or their plots could be identified.

Thus, as many people as possible had to be kept in detention for as long as possible to allow this philosophy of intelligence gathering to work. The detainees' innocence was inconsequential.

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/2009/03/some_truths_abo/

Overheal

so weve covered AF1, the teleprompter ans the "Pandering".

Now back to the supposed birth certificate scandal, that somehow Kenya is secretly in control of the United States.

Scary really. I mean technically that leaves Kenya with the biggest Nuclear arsenal on earth. Yeah. Nobody better screw with Kenya for the next 3-7 years.

Next thing you know ICBMs will be streaking over the sky aimed at Ethiopia and Somalia, to the sound of In The Air Tonight by Phil Collins.