|
|
Post by moondog on Dec 3, 2008 17:03:23 GMT -5
Ambassador Dr. Alan Keyes has petitioned the court with a writ-of-mandate to prevent the Secretary of State from certifying the election as well as preventing the electors from casting their votes. I read the entire writ and I agree with it. Here it is for you to read.Pravada also has a very interesting article titled Barack, The Amazing Mr. Obama which points out some interesting parallels with other gifted speakers we encounter in our society. You will enjoy this read, to be sure. |
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Dec 8, 2008 14:03:43 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Dec 8, 2008 14:42:01 GMT -5
That is one down. But I don't expect the Court to take any of them. If it did, it would have to rule. And no matter what the decision was, it would cause more harm than good.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Dec 8, 2008 14:59:36 GMT -5
Appreciate your honesty Joe.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Dec 8, 2008 15:04:49 GMT -5
The action that the court rejected is but one of 15. Most of them are specious and without standing necessary in the federal system to get action. The suit by Dr. Keyes, a declared presidential candidate who was on the ballot, joined by an actual presidential elector, is likely the best action that will come forth. They both clearly have standing in the matter, the question becomes whether or not any competent court will have the stones to issue an order to the State of Hawaii to present the original document in question.
My money is that no court will.
Having said that, I honestly think that Barack is more than likely constitutionally eligible. There are, however, legitimate questions around that eligibility in his case that should really be answered before he takes the oath on the 20th of January.
If Barack wanted to put the matter to rest once and for all he would waive privacy and have the original document on file with the State of Hawaii released. His failure to do so only stirs the question that much more, giving rise to further suspicions as to the content of that document. What could there be in the document that would be harmful to him or his family that outweighs the question of his eligibility to hold the highest office in the land?
|
|
|
|
Post by subdjoe on Dec 8, 2008 15:22:42 GMT -5
I agree with you on all points Big Dog.
His reluctance to quickly and easily put out this fire is troubleing to me. And is in accord with his actions in the past, he refuses to give any details on anything, stonewalls on hard questions, cuts off access to those who dare to try to find out where he stand on anything of substance. He is much too secretive for me to trust him.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Dec 8, 2008 15:53:45 GMT -5
He hasn't done it because he doesn't have to. Fact is, he has already provided a valid copy of his birth certificate. Why should he go to more trouble to appease the whiny "sore-loser" right-wing contingent. He's moving forward to try and solve the crises America is in. The fact that you keep dragging this on is a testament to your own partisan hackery. You would rather be bogged down in this than talking about the real issues?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Dec 8, 2008 16:07:23 GMT -5
Not true Saunterelle. Not true at all.
What has been released is an abstract. It is merely a certification by the State of Hawaii that they have a document on file attesting to his live birth. It is not a full and complete substitute for a test of citizenship. That abstract does not include any of the pertinent data that one typically finds on a birth certificate, such as location of birth and name of the physician in attendance.
There is nothing sore loser about this at all on my part. If Barack were somehow to be declared constitutionally ineligible to hold the office, Joe Biden would become the president on January 20 so it's not like the Republicans gain anything. In fact, the first suit brought, the Berg action, was filed by a rabid supporter of Mrs. Clinton, so if you want to apply the sore loser label you might want to look to your own side of the aisle.
For me this is about a search for the truth, be it inconvenient or otherwise. The fact that you keep trying to paper over these shortcomings is a testament not only to your partisan hackery, but also to your complete ignorance of the law and standards of proof. As far as talking about real issues, that is all Barack can do until January 20. He has no power to do anything other than run his mouth and float people's names for nomination.
You seem to forget that small detail as well in your rush to deify The One.
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Dec 8, 2008 16:17:32 GMT -5
So your real gripe is with the state of Hawaii? You don't trust that they're telling the truth about the document they have on file?
|
|
|
|
Post by The Big Dog on Dec 8, 2008 16:49:10 GMT -5
No, my gripe is with Senator Obama. The state is following the law and releasing all that they are allowed to release under public record and privacy law without consent of the person named.
He is, apparently, not willing to release anything more substantial than an abstract. And while I am certainly willing to trust government officials (?!?!?) to a point, when it concerns the presidency of the United States, I want to make absolutely sure that every T is crossed and every I is dotted.
We are a nation of laws, the most fundemental of which are in the Constitution. Barack is going to swear to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, but if he is not abiding by it how can he fulfill his oath?
|
|
|
|
Post by saunterelle on Dec 8, 2008 16:52:42 GMT -5
He IS abiding by it. He has done all he needs to do. Do you think he was serving in the US Senate without anyone checking his birth certificate? This is just another ploy by Republicans to take our focus away from the issues.
|
|
|
|
Post by barneyfife on Dec 8, 2008 17:09:10 GMT -5
He IS abiding by it. He has done all he needs to do. Sure, well except for the fact that if you or I or anyone on this board. Tried to take that document he has released, to the DMV, a bank, to get a passport, to buy a home....we would be denied..due to insufficent documentation in any state in this country. So you mean to tell me it should be more difficult for you or I to get a bank account, than to become POTUS? Seems silly. |
|
