Saturday, November 15, 2008

Obama: Two Eligibility Issues Refuse To Go Away

There have been many questions regarding Obama's qualifications to be President Of The United States. Obama's experience, Obama's allies and associations, Obama's Socialist policies, and Obama's religious faith. These issues of qualifications were placed to rest on November 4, 2008. However, two issues refuse to just go away. First is Obama's "natural born" citizen concerns and second is Obama's selective service registration. In the event that Obama can not prove his "natural born" status or allegations of fraudulent selective service registration is founded then Obama will not be able to take the oath of office.

There currently are multiple lawsuits against Obama in different stages and in different courts. Philip Berg has his lawsuit at the Supreme Court. Obama has until 1 December 2008 to answer the Writ of Certiorari in the Berg case. The lower courts have said Philip Berg has no standing. In fact Barclay Surrick opened a constitutional crisis by taking the rights of the people away and providing those rights to the Congress. Judge Surrick said if Congress decides a desire for the citizenry to have standing they can pass that into law. There is a lawsuit in New Jersey that may have standing. Leo Donofrio believes the courts have provided standing to voters in previous lawsuits. Donofrio addresses standing in his lawsuit he sites two previous cases in New Jersey, first Ridgewood Education Association vs Ridgewood Board Of Education where the court stated "We see no reason why this State's historic liberal approaches to the issue of standing in general....should not apply to taxpayer suits challenging the quasi-legislative actions of local boards of education." and second Silverman vs The Board of Eduction in Millburn township. Another Lawsuit that will be required to be addressed is from California. Alan Keyes a presidential candidate from the American Independent Party has filed a lawsuit challenging Obama on his "natural born" eligibility. This case should not be dropped for standing because Keyes was on the ballot in California and as a candidate he can show standing and how having an ineligible candidate on the ballot hurt his cause. In all likelihood one of these cases will have to be heard on the merits. Of these three lawsuits someone has to have standing: Berg as a citizen, Donofrio from previous State Court rulings and questioning every candidate, or Keyes a Presidential Candidate himself. Whatever Obama is hiding on his birth certificate is bound to come to light.

The other issue that refuses to die is that Obama may not have registered for the draft. A retired federal agent submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for the documents surrounding Obama's selective service registration. The documents the agent received have big question marks. The documents received have a document location number from 2008 rather than 1980. The form has an unreadable date. It could be a document from FEB 1980 or FEB 1990. Apparently, there was no form dated February 1980 lending credence to the thought the form may be a 1990 revised form. There are no less than nine questions that have arisen that may make this form a fraudulent form. In the event Obama did not legally register for the draft he would become ineligible for the oath of office.

Many supporters of Obama believe it will not matter if Obama is found to be ineligible. They question the ability to overturn the election. After all over 52 % of voters is a majority and that majority should not be over ruled. The Obama supporters do not believe a court would overturn an election. I must beg to differ. I believe that a court would have no other choice but to overturn the election should Obama be found ineligible. The is precedence. The courts have overturned many subjects that have been against the majority of people. Obama hiding something and sooner or later the truth will come out.


Ted said...

Unavoidable scenario: If SCOTUS disqualifies Obama BEFORE 1/20/09 inauguration, McCain is POTUS per remaining electoral college electors; if SCOTUS disqualifies Obama after 1/20/09 inauguration, Hillary likely becomes POTUS per vote of Dem controlled House of Rep. Either way, is clear Obama will NOT be or remain POTUS.

Publius said...

No one but the lunatic fringe ever thought this was an issue to start with, and its been debunked by everyone from Bill O'Reilly on. It's going to be a long four years for you guys if you don't get back in touch with reality.

Anonymous said...

No these issues have not been "debunked". If they were "debunked" these lawsuits would quietly go away rather than keep cropping up.

Alan Keyes was on the ballot as a Presidential Candidate. "Fringe Lunatic" I think not. Philip Berg is a former Deputy Attorney General in PA. "Fringe Lunatic" I think not.

These issues will not die and eventually Obama will have to disclose whatever it is he has been hiding.

CKAinRedStateUSA said...

I posted a piece at American Sentinel on oct. 29: "Would Obama victory provoke constitutional crisis?"

It's at

BTW: If Hussein is not an American citizen and actually takes the oath of office, then that could precipitate things none of us want.

Well, I'm guessing that most of us don't want.

Ace Tomato said...

Another poster on another blog on this topic pointed out that if Obama is not eligible to be POTUS, then he cannot remain in office because nothing he signs would be legal.

Anonymous said...

Ted is incorrect in both scenarios. In the event Obama is disqualified, then no candidate would have, through traditional means, received a majority of the electoral votes meaning the election would then be decided by the House and Vice-President by the Senate. Rules in such a scenario are often written as the issue comes up so anyone's guess what happens. In any event, Hillary was not on the ballot and McCain did not receive a majority, so neither one would automatically become President. Actual Likely Scenario (following endless speculation and no clear answer): House picks President of their own choosing infuriating the electorate regardless; after inauguration, since only Obama would be in question, Biden becomes President left to appoint VP with Senate confirmation pursuant to 25th amendment. Of course, this like all obscure constitutional questions is just more speculation.

misanthropicus said...

In RE Soetero:
1) At the time of his birth, allegedly in Kenya, his mother was only 18. His father was Kenyan. Per Kenyan law, he is Kenyan. Per our law, he is NOT American, because at the time, the American parent had to be at least 19. Ergo, if he were indeed born in Kenya, he is disqualified from the Presidency… and even from being a U.S. Senator.
2) The short-form copy of his birth certificate posted online has been discredited by three (!) different experts. It matters not, because he is simply required by the Constitution to provide proof positive of his qualifications to be Prez. The online, short-form doesn’t cut it. He has failed to offer the necesssary proof.
3) He was sued. The court required that he answer the suit and offer his proof. He failed to do so in the requisite 30 days, thus by law, conceding the point. The case was later dismissed by reason of jursdiction, and has been refiled. The point of law concession is not invalidated.
4) Even if he does prove it, he was adopted in Indonesia as a child, becoming Barry Soetoro, and a legal citizen of Indonesia and no longer American. He need not renounce his citizenship in that case, as Indonesian law aplies, and is recognized by the U.S. He could reacquire his citizenship, setting things right, if he later took an oath after his 18th birthday. There is no record of him having done so.
So, he denies release of his vault copy of his Birth Certificate, which he legally cannot do, because he is required to produce it. Further, records of his Indonesian status has also been denied to us. He refuses to provide passport records of his trip to Pakistan, as it will show he used his Indonesian citizenship status to gain access. The same goes for his refusal to release his college transcripts, as he seems to have used his Indonesian status to gain preferential access to the schools. These each would be damning evidence of his disqualified status, so they are concealed.
The Constitutional and legal requirements are clear, but people just shrug their shoulders, because they want him to be Prez, but we can’t just overlook the Constitution and laws in this. Even if you support him, these facts and allegations should leave you very concerned as an American.
For my part, do not ask me to support him as my next President until he has settled these simple requirements of proof of citizenship.

And what about the Franziskus School enrollement page?

gemimail said...

My understanding of the electoral college is quite different from those shown here. Originally, it was set up to elect the distinguished gentlemen who would decide who would be President. Hence that long list of names under each candidate's name. In 1800, there were eighty some odd ballots because Jefferson and Burr were tied in the college. Only when Hamilton threw his support away from Adams and to Jefferson to prevent Burr from getting chosen, was the matter settled. In recent times, these electors have signed pledges to support their candidate, but they do not have to.

In the event that Obama is disqualified before the electoral college meets, then they and they alone get to decide who is President. Only if a majority of the electors cannot be found for a President and Vice-President would the election be thrown into Congress. That happened in 1824.

One would think that the Democrat electors would simply vote for Biden for President and pick a new Vice-President. You can bet that Hillary will say Biden could never get re-elected and they should choose her. That is where the Republicans might be able to cut a deal by throwing their support to someone other than Biden in exchange for getting to pick the VP.

Anonymous said...

Someone please tell me what this means:
"what about the Franziskus School enrollement page?"


Anonymous said...

Publius said...
No one but the lunatic fringe ever thought this was an issue to start with, and its been debunked by everyone from Bill O'Reilly on. It's going to be a long four years for you guys if you don't get back in touch with reality.

November 15, 2008 11:39 AM

Publius, I couldn't agree with you more! The others commenting here have a serious case of WINGNUTITIS. If they could only "get" how stupid they are to believe the garbage they're repeating here. Poor dummies have a long road ahead of them.

The Lizard said...


If it is so "wingnutitis" answer one question:

Why does Obama refuse to submit the vault copy of his birth certificate?

Juan Laff said...

Notice the repetitious rhetoric of the Obamabots:

1. It's been debunked
2. You're a wingnut
3. Discouraging further pursuit

They don't answer the evidence. The spout pre-written, near identical talking points. They aren't arguing because the will lose.

The are only following orders.

Don't feed the Obamabot trolls.

Juan Laff said...

And "Anonymous" is Publius cheering his own comment, exact same cadence.

You're very stupid, Publius.

You should argue the points, but you can't.


Because they are true and you are too stupid to even make a decent subterfuge.

Now go lick you Obama poster after you're done with Che!

plainjane said...