Is this a constitutional crisis or just a bunch of nuts?

Being one of those liberals, you know I drive a hybrid vehicle (and have since 2004). PriusChat.com is a web site for Prius owners, but somebody posted the question there which is the title of this article.

After slogging through the sewer of anti-Obama web sites, it’s nice to see what normal people are saying. Their response is summed up by this video:

About Kevin

Just an old guy with opinions that I like to bounce off other people.
This entry was posted in Obama Citizenship Denial. Bookmark the permalink.

23 Responses to Is this a constitutional crisis or just a bunch of nuts?

  1. Truth says:

    Yes Jasper, you have to choose your words correctly in here, being careful not to just quote something you read or heard, but that it is without a doubt a Fact. SEALED, well that isn’t exactly a fact. (I’m not being sarcastic towards you Kev, but instead the system)

    I hear you about setting a precedence for the future, your exactly right. I think maybe AVOIDED is a more accurate description of what BHO has done. He knows there are many people wanting to see the Vault B.C. His representatives(for lack of a better word) KNOW this. EVeryone knows that it has been requested to see the vault copy, yet where are we after a few months? Instead of just having it shown, we hear all the rhetoric about why it should not be shown, or more accurately why IF it is shown that seeing it won’t be good enough, then the people asking will want to see something else.

    BHO was “IN” Hawaii recently for how long? A week or more? I don’t know exactly. Why would a professional mature person not take a small bit of time to walk down the street and get what everyone wants to see? I lived there 3.5 years, it is not a big place, he probably drove past the building a dozen times while staying there, if not walked, if not..cough cough….visited the actual records department with a Christmas gift.

    BUT, Sealed, oh Heavens no, his B.C. is not Sealed. It just can’t be seen or shown or looked at by anyone other than BHO and a Hawaii Rep. saying “Yep, we have one.” I mean if it is good proving him Born in Hawaii, and the COLB posted online is such an equivalent document and IT is posted online, WHY NOT shut everyone up and get the Real Doc. posted online? The answer(s) to that depends how you voted on Nov. 4th.

    Jaspar, the precedence HAS been set. People want to see CHANGE. Well, they are about to get it, like it or not. Have you heard how loosely BHO uses the term “Trillion” dollars lately. How did we jump past “Billions” so fast, when just a few weeks back that sounded like the end of our economy?

    Be Strong

  2. Jasper says:

    I know you are an advocate of the use of the dictionary to define words – so looking up the term sealed on http://www.thefreedictionary.com/sealed you will find the following:

    sealed – undisclosed for the time being; “sealed orders”; “a sealed move in chess”
    concealed – hidden on any grounds for any motive; “a concealed weapon”; “a concealed compartment in his briefcase”

    So going with that definition and some quick research on the internet…

    1. Occidental College records — Not released
    2. Columbia College records — Not released
    3. Columbia Thesis paper — ‘not available’
    4. Harvard College records — Not released
    5. Selective Service Registration — Not released
    6. Medical records — Not released
    7. Illinois State Senate schedule — ‘not available’
    8. Law practice client list — Not released
    9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate – – Not released
    10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth — Not released
    11. Harvard Law Review articles published — None
    12. University of Chicago scholarly articles — None
    13. Your Record of baptism– Not released or ‘not available’
    14. Your Illinois State Senate records–‘not available’

    To me the term “not released” “sealed” “not available” “undisclosed” “hidden on any grounds…” are the same…

  3. Jasper James says:

    Sorry I should have said “not available” or “not released”

    Records Not Available

    Records sealed at Illinois
    http://beltwayblips.dailyradar.com/story/barack_obama_records_sealed_at_illinois/

    Records sealed in Hawaii
    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=79174

    Michelle Obama records sealed
    http://www.redcounty.com/sarasota/2008/12/another-sealed-obama-record/

    Daley Library records sealed
    http://www.swamppolitics.com/news/politics/blog/2008/08/obamas_sealed_records_daley_li.html

    Kenya Records ?
    http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Talk/talk.politics.guns/2008-11/msg01914.html

    Internet Funding Sources
    http://alanpetersnewsbriefs.blogspot.com/2008/07/obamas-campaign-funds-legal.html

    Passport records not available
    http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=Njg2YzAyMDNmNTczNjliMTdmZDQxYWYyOTYxODlhMDQ=

    Senate Records not available
    http://citizenwells.wordpress.com/2008/04/07/obama-records-obama-senate-records-obama-personal-records-larry-sinclair-november-4-1999-subpoena/

    1. Occidental College records — Not released
    2. Columbia College records — Not released
    3. Columbia Thesis paper — not available, locked down by faculty
    4. Harvard College records — Not released, locked down by faculty
    5. Selective Service Registration — Not released
    6. Medical records — Not released
    7. Illinois State Senate schedule — “not available”
    8. Law practice client list — Not released
    9. Certified Copy of original Birth certificate – – Not released
    10. Embossed, signed paper Certification of Live Birth — Not released
    11. Harvard Law Review articles published — None
    12. University of Chicago scholarly articles — None

    • Kevin says:

      The selective service registration was released under FOIA.

      Certified Copy of Original Birth Certificate is released. Certified PHOTOCopy of Original Birth Certificate is not released.

  4. Jasper says:

    Kevin, its not just the BC issue that bothers me. It the precedent being set by Obama. Seal your records, hire lawyers to keep your past sealed. Right now you probably like Obama for some reason and its OK if he seals all his records, but what if the next presidential canidate is a James Buchanan, or David Duke. Is it OK if they seal all their records? Thats where the problem is – what’s next? You need to fight Now to prevent this type of hiding behind privacy issues to prevent a proper Vetting of the man running for office. He is in a Public Office – his right of Privacy is forever gone. That is just the way it is. Remeber Nixon? Before Kennedy was shot – he warned us about the secrecy… The very word “secrecy” is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control. And no official of my Administration, whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes or to withhold from the press and the public the facts they deserve to know.

  5. Jasper says:

    Vetting is a process of examination and evaluation, generally referring to performing a background check on someone before offering him or her employment. Without Vetting the Election Process is a mockery. Barry has prevented a proper vetting of his eligibility by sealing relevant documents about his past life such as his BC, Passports, School Records, Parental Passports, Parental Marriage Documents, Parental Divorce Documents and much much more. Some say that his COLB Proves he was born in Hawaii, but does it really? Is it not possible that he born at home, or Kenya, or Canada, or who knows where and then register his birth in Hawaii? The only way to know for sure would be to look at the BC. Some say that the records that he has sealed are Private. But what is so private about any of these records anyway? Nancy Pelosi has signed a document that says that Obama is “qualified” for the job as President, but what did she do to verify that fact? Has any official come forward and said they checked out his records, his BC, his passports, his adoption records and verified the truth? Has the FBI done this? If so- why not state for the record that he is qualified- but better let the people see the records so they can be satisfied for themselves that the man they have selected for the most important job in the World is qualified – and that he is not hiding something that he can be blackmailed for.

    You neglect the fact that so far no court has ruled that NBC is the same as a CAB. Legal Scholars debate this issue and write article and Congress has tried to pass several bills to clarify the meaning of NBC. Ergo – its not resolved no matter how logical your point of view. Without a definitive court ruling a Dictionary defining the meaning of NBC is irrelevant. For me – our fore-fathers and Framers of the constituion would not consider Barry an NBC as they meant the term.

    • Kevin says:

      You say: “Barry has prevented a proper vetting of his eligibility by sealing” but this implies an activity that Barack Obama undertook that caused a record which was available to become unavailable. You make a long list, but you cannot show the actions by which Obama made an available record unavailable.

      That is, you just made it up.

  6. TRUTH says:

    “NOW that we know..???” That is a peculiar way of putting it coming from you Kevin. As if, well I’ll leave it at that and not speculate. It speaks for itself.

  7. lukemcgook says:

    Well, Kev, why do you think Obama won’t release the original? Seems a pretty obvious step to take. What’s he got to lose? You must have a guess as to the reason.

    • Kevin says:

      My guess, and this is really speculation, is that a second birth certificate would be greeted with as much skepticism as the first, resulting in distracting publicity. Now that we know definitely that the Obamas were married when Barack Jr was born, I can’t think of any other reason not to make a copy available.

  8. Kevin says:

    The video is nicely produced and it does a good job of summarizing the misinformation being spread about natural born citizen.

    Despite what the video says, there is widespread consensus among constitutional scholars, courts and government officials that being born in the United States is sufficient to be a “natural born citizen” and this is the message many people are getting from their congressmen when they write to them about this natural born citizen redefinition craziness. My Senator, Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, wrote: “Every child born in the United States is a natural-born United States citizen except for the children of diplomats.”

    Representative Bingham’s comments (and I don’t think they are fairly quoted in context) are still just an isolated remark made by one congressman during one debate over the Civil Rights Act of 1866, which itself was made obsolete by the 14th amendment two years later (replacing the language “born not subject to any foreign power” with “under the jurisdiction of the United States”). Representative Bingham was instrumental in crafting the 14th amendment.

    The comment that case law supports the “Meat and Two” citizenship model is blatantly false. The most important case on citizenship is United States v. Wong Kim Ark, in which the 6-2 majority stated plainly that the children of foreign nationals born here are fully and completely under the jurisdiction of the United States (except for ambassadors who by law enjoy exception from our jurisdiction, and invading armies). In fact the Wong case goes so far as to cite British common law (upon which much of American law is based) in saying that anyone born in England is a natural born subject, and then goes on to say that it is appropriate to substitute “citizen” for “subject” when replying to our country.

    The comment about Senate Resolution 511 is an example of the formal fallacy of denying the antecedent (look it up in the Wikipedia). It goes:

    Anyone born of American citizens is a natural born citizen
    Barack Obama does not have two American Parents
    Therefore Barack Obama is not a natural born citizen

    That is equivalent to

    Anyone with a broken leg will have trouble climbing these steep stairs
    Joe has no legs at all (broken or otherwise)
    Joe will not have trouble climbing these steep stairs

    Then the sound track says”McCain…born on a military base in the Panama Canal Zone” over a (probably fake) image of a birth certificate that says McCain was not born on the military base but in the city of Colon, outside the Canal Zone. Hit PAUSE and read it! I got a big laugh out of that one.

    It is true that Barack Obama was born with dual American/British citizenship (as was President Chester A. Arthur) and stated so openly, but this is no disqualification. British law has no power to nullify our Constitution. Presidents and Vice Presidents have the same qualifications for office (12th Amendment) and Vice President Curtis was born in the Kansas Territory (which was not in the United States at the time) of a mother who was an American Indian (and not a citizen at that time in our history).

    The video goes on again to emphasize “not subject to any foreign power” from the 1866 act, ignoring the fact that this was replaced by the 14th amendment’s language “subject to the jurisdiction”. And even if that language had lasted more than 2 years, still the argument in the Wong case would have said that a child born in the US is not subject to a foreign power even if that power were to claim him. The Emperor of China could not tell Wong to do this or do that if he were in the US.

    I would not call emergency motions for relief to the Supreme Court denied as soon as they are filed “active lawsuits”. The Supreme Court only hears a small fraction of the cases that come before it. If the supreme court had any intention of hearing a presidential qualifications case, they would have done so at the earliest possible time so as to allow arguments and make some kind of a determination before the inauguration. But they did not which tells me that these cases are totally dead.

    There is no evidence that I know of that Obama has spent any money to prevent the birth certificate from being revealed. He has defended lawsuits that make broad claims that include the birth certificate, but I know of no case where he has made any legal defense in a case that only demands the birth certificate.

    I think the video’s own words: “trickery and deception” best apply to the video itself.

    For further reading:

  9. TRUTH says:

    Before posting the link, I have to reply to that Dec. 14th post. I don’t think $10 is a concern of Obamas, the TRUTH is his concern. He has spent a lot of money preventing the original B.C. FROM being seen, so NOT spending $10 because it would be a waste of money can’t be the reason he has