
I'll keep this relatively short, since there's not a lot of input I can add to this situation. A few days back, I did
my little ditty on the Obama birth issue, that pretty much closed my chapter on it. I was part of the questioners, who pondered if he was even a viable U.S. citizen to even be President. Then our wonderful media misrepresented (how often does that happen, right?) the SCOTUS tossing out a motion on the issue. Which, even after a little digging, gave the same result.
If you read the comments section of that previous blog entry I did, commenter TED laid out what actually was tossed, and what is still pending. And in some respects, WHY. The others are, more or less, just mindless ramblings by those wishing to make noise. 'Trolls' if you will. Myself excluded of course.
Then recently, Human Events sent out an e-mailer, labeling any in the Conservative bracket, 'Turncoats' for not being on the bandwagon. This did nothing for me, other than to tick me off! Here, even though I didn't totally dig McCain, I voted for him anyways. As he was better than the 'other option' given us. And now, I'm a turncoat? Needless to say, I dropped a note to the editors of Human Events regarding this. Here's the text of what I sent;
To whom it may concern:
I just received today my standard e-mailer as I usually do from Human Events. It was entitled "TurnCoat Conservatives."
As a Conservative, I too was also rather dismayed that Obama had won the election. And I did in fact look into the Birth certificate/citizenship/certification issue that arose regarding president elect Obama. I had seen the shoty copy of the document posted on the fight-the-smears website, which aided in prompting my doubts about Obama.
But I had also seen the copy posted on FactCheck.org:
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
This has all the "questioned" attributes available to view, that the aforementioned did not. For me, that was enough for the most part, to quell my interest in the issue. And I'm finding it an affront that those like me, are being chastened for no longer being on the proverbial bandwagon to further push this issue, such as the "turncoat" e-mail pronounces.
If anyone has issued "...personal insults and ad hominem attacks..." as the e-mail refers to, It's the writer of the e-mailer that's done it.
WHAT EVIDENCE EXISTS, that those who are continuing to press this issue have to go on? I want/need to know. If it is yet another "trufer" situation such as Philip Berg who claims to have info, but has of yet to release any of it, then I want no part in it. If there is something tangible that I CAN SEE FOR MYSELF, actual evidence, visible proof, then I will be willing to resume the clarion call for legal action regarding Obama.
Until then, I see no further need to pursue the matter on my end. The case is closed as far as I'm concerned unless something is produced, made available for the average citizens like myself to review.
John Well guess what? Another e-mailer has arrived from Human Events today. In which, a little more 'clarification' is given as to what the suit filers (which are growing in number by the way) are specifically after. Was my e-mail responsible for the further clarification? I seriously doubt it, nor do I even want any credit for it. But I'm guessing that many others may have written similar notes to Human Events, prompting more explanation.
As it turns out, what is shown on the
FightTheSmears web site, (and thereby,
FactCheck.org) and resides there to this day, is a CERTIFICATION of Live Birth. What Donofrio, Wrotnowski and many others are after, is a vaulted copy of a CERTIFICATE of Live Birth. Apparently, there is a vast difference. What you can see on the FightTheSmears site, (and FactCheck) is a certification, POSING AS a certificate. A certification is being described as an, anyone who files for it, can get it, sheet of paper. An actual certificate, holds vastly larger amounts of vital info, such as who the attending physician at birth was, what hospital was the birth at, time of birth, attending midwife, etc, etc, etc.
Now, this isn't to say I'm going to hop right on the 'let's get Obama' train. But now, my curiosity is once again elicited. And I'll be keeping an eye on the issue. Who knows, perhaps we will see this issue resolved PRIOR TO January 20th, with a more 'acceptable' result.
4 comments:
SCOTUS has now prevented itself from acknowleding the question whether Obama is or is not a “natural born citizen” (as distinguished from “citizen”) three times and counting: First before the Nov 4 general election and twice before the Dec 15 vote of the College of Electors. Other cases on the same question are at, or are heading to, SCOTUS. Whether SCOTUS ultimately decides if Obama is or is not a “natural born citizen” only after the Electors vote, only after Congress acts on the Electors’ vote, prior to Obama’s inauguration, or only after Obama’s inauguration, SCOTUS will have to decide — or the people and/or the military will. The issue no longer is Obama. The issue is SCOTUS.
Ypu're all fuckin' idiots!
Thanks Christine,...
...For that lovely use of perfectly bewitching use of spelling and grammatical specificity.
I'm glad to see there are such scholarly personages as you amongst us,.... thieving my damn oxygen.
Feel free to stop in again, after you've finished with that copy of ebonics you should be getting for Christmas.
John
What bothers me about all of this is straightforward. If conservatives succeed in getting this issue before the supreme court, and if the supreme court does determine that Obama is not a "natural born" citizen, the left will throw even more hissy fits than they did after the 2000 elections.
I'd prefer to see our Constitution honored and upheld, but I don't think that the same can be said for the left. After all, they invented the notion of a "living" Constitution precisely so that they could make it mean whatever they wanted rather than what it actually says.
Post a Comment