Powered by TypePad

« The Government Will Come Out Tomorrow | Main | Barry, We Hardly Knew Ye (Or Wanted To) »

April 10, 2011

Comments

PD

In other words he's out of US Treasuries!

Yeah, he announced he was going to do this a couple of weeks ago.

You're right, ZeroHedge is a downer site. That's what gives it its special charm. :-)

Sara (Pal2Pal)

Long form Hawaii BCs:

http://www.wnd.com/images/misc/longform.jpg

http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=105347

http://www.obamaconspiracy.org/2011/04/2011-hawaii-long-form-appears/

There that three, actually four since one link shows certifs for twins.

Tell me again why the president can't get his?

Jim Ryan

PD,

I don't notice any correlation between quality of sleep and ringing.

Did the bruxism start at the same time as the tinnitus? My ear infection, bruxism and tinnitus all started at the same time (late June 2010) and on the same side (left). I therefore blame the bruxism and tinnitus on the infection, though the ENT said he couldn't figure out exactly what the causal chain was. I think the brux and tinn were and are mutually reinforcing. Anyway, you might see if you can improve your sleep somehow and check for correlation with tinnitus. For me stretching any tight muscle but good works well.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

I want to apologize for what appears to be lots of typos and dropped letters in my comments. My keyboard is going whacky. Sticking keys and a half-functioning right shift key and an "s" that is so shy, I have to pound it to get it to show up. And yes, I've cleaned out all the chips and crumbs, but it is just getting worse.

narciso

That happened sometimes when my desktop was down, and I had to use the Iphone for some posting, but I didn't notice it. Anybody familiar with Microsoft activator, to set up
Office

Jack is Back!

narciso,

All oc a sudden your comments are aligned. Are you OK? Is there someone there putting you under duress?

Charlie (Colorado)

Seems to me it's a truism that if the rate of increase in spending is less than the rate of increase in revenues, a future equivalence is a certainty, as is a subsequent surplus.

Well, "theorem": is mathematical for "truism" so I obviously agree.

As to the other, well, the budget deal made the rate of change -3 pct. The trick is can it be done long term

Interestingly, the Ryan plan works much this way: it's not the cuts that do the job, it's refusing to continue increasing speading as fast in the future.

Jack is Back!

oc=of

I hate my iPad!

Charlie (Colorado)

I thought it was actually the opposite problem, at least according to the former Mrs. Woods...

Oh, thank God I didn't say that.

narciso

OBAMA; Hey Dave I got an idea, for my next step

PLouffe; What is it Mr. President?

OBama; I'm going to give a speech about the need for cutting the budget

Plouffe; Sir, we just threatened the military to get out from under the shutdown.
It's going to look a little strange.

OBama: Well just tell them, that tomorrow

Plouffe; (Under his breath) God help me, God help me.

Charlie (Colorado)

Need a good, rip-roaring yarn, fellas? Louis L'Amour's The Trail to Seven Pines will not disappoint.

I'm very fond ot L'amour. Among other things, in one of his books, he has a character more or less riding across my grandfather's ranch, and from the description and the places he mentioned, I could have placed him to within a few miles.

That guy did his research,

Charlie (Colorado)

Show of hands please for JOMer's who have Tinnitus.

Right ear. Sort of a running water sound.

Charlie (Colorado)

What do you have against simplistic tautologies supported by pretty graphs? After all, that's how the CO2 Monster was created.

Rick, with all due respect, fuck you.

fdcol63

I used to have tinnitus in my right ear.

Now I just have 20% hearing in it.

sbw

BTW, mine is a hiss, not a ring.

DrJ

Mine sounds like the earlier description of angry cicadas in 100 degree heat. Lots of them.

Threadkiller

--“A lot of people have lied for a helluva lot less than to protect the manufactured life story of a powerful, desperate, light-weight fraud like Barack Obama.”--

Speaking of lies, here is a whopper.

Hat Tip to Walter for suggesting I look in Law Reviews and equally to Leo Donofrio, Esq. for having already done so:


“The Michigan Law Review published an article by Lawrence Solum, the John E. Cribbet Professor of Law at the University of Illinois College of Law, entitled, “Originalism and the Natural Born Citizen Clause”.

The article focused upon the issue of whether John McCain was eligible to be President despite his birth in Panama. The article did not even mention Barack Obama. The direct citation is Michigan Law Review: First Impressions Vol. 107:22 2008.

The opening paragraph of Solum’s article states:

“What was the original public meaning of the phrase that establishes the eligibility for the office of President of the United States? There is general agreement on the core of its meaning. Anyone born on American soil whose parents are citizens of the United States is a ‘natural born citizen.’” (Emphasis added.)

SOLUM SCRUBS:
On April 18, 2010, Solum republished the article under the same exact title but with a vastly different second paragraph. The revised article was released online via the Social Science Research Network. The citation for the scrubbed article is Illinois Public Law Research Paper No. 09-17. The second paragraph now reads:
“What is the legal significance of what we can call “the natural born citizen clause”? There is general agreement on the core of settled meaning.2 As a matter of inclusion, it is beyond dispute that anyone born on American soil with an American parent is a ‘natural born citizen.’3″ (Emphasis added.)

The Michigan Law Review has not published Solum’s revisions. To their credit, the article remains unscrubbed at their web site.”

Anyone know why Solum would do that?

Janet

NYT FRONT PAGE MONDAY: COURIC, LAUER, ZUCKER MAY RE-TEAM FOR SYNDICATED TALK SHOW...

The rival papers should headline...WHO THE HELL CARES ABOUT COURIC, LAUER, ZUCKER: SHOW US THE BIRTH CERTIFICATE!!!!

Rick Ballard

Charlie,

Thanks. Do you have any graphs regarding the humidity of water available? Or maybe something on the general direction in which an object moves when dropped?

Melinda Romanoff

glasater-

Keep in mind that Bill Gross hasn't been able to break above 4% for the last seven years, or so. As such, the Hair-On-Fire Department at ZH is right on target again. Bill Gross runs the biggest show in town, so far as the bond market is concerned, but his returns have been dependent upon access to "other information sources".

or so he's made evident.

And Bill Gross is short the Treasury market, in some form, at all times. Especially in options, which is what I used to trade on the floor.

narciso

This is like the last Streisand or Celine Dion concert they keep promising, they never go away:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110409/ap_on_re_us/climate

Danube of Thought

"Can't you understand that many of us aren't questioning the place of birth, but are very curious to know why he refuses to reveal anything about his birth or early years?"

I do indeed understand. I want to know all the things you do. At some point, if enough people conclude that his failure to disclose to us various things that it's in his power to disclose makes him unworthy to be president, let them express themselves in November 2012. Keep the questioning going, for sure. My advice, for those who would like it, would be to shy away from forgery theories and Senator Bingham. Other than that, let 'er rip.

clarice

TK, I read the proposed revision as an effort too make clear his statement in the original was not the only meaning of NBC and perhaps he had'e made that clear because when he wrote the original he was focused on the fact situation respecting McCain and hadn't considered the Obama situation.

clarice

revised with corrections:
TK, I read the proposed revision as an effort to make clear his statement in the original was not the only meaning of NBC and perhaps he hadn't made that clear because when he wrote the original he was focused on the fact situation respecting McCain and hadn't considered the Obama situation.

Ranger

Well, this is kind of "interesting":

Milwaukee County DA, state board schedule news conference on 'significant investigation'

The state Government Accountability Board and Milwaukee County district attorney's office has scheduled a news conference Monday afternoon to discuss the results of a "significant investigation."

Threadkiller

Should I steer clear of the Senators that pushed for the 14th amendment too?
Sen. Lyman Trumbull:

” The provision is, that "all persons born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens." That means "subject to the complete jurisdiction thereof." What do we mean by "complete jurisdiction thereof?" Not owing allegiance to anybody else. That is what it means.”

Sen. Jacob Howard:
” [I] concur entirely with the honorable Senator from Illinois [Trumbull], in holding that the word "jurisdiction," as here employed, ought to be construed so as to imply a full and complete jurisdiction on the part of the United States, coextensive in all respects with the constitutional power of the United States, whether exercised by Congress, by the executive, or by the judicial department; that is to say, the same jurisdiction in extent and quality as applies to every citizen of the United States now.”

By the way, those statements went uncontested on the Senate floor.

I feel like the Black Knight from Monty Python. If I am clipped from using congressional record, I will look for something else.

PD

Did the bruxism start at the same time as the tinnitus? My ear infection, bruxism and tinnitus all started at the same time

I'm not sure, because I don't remember when the grinding or ringing began. I haven't had problems with ear infections, though.

PD

Anyway, you might see if you can improve your sleep somehow and check for correlation with tinnitus.

I sleep a lot better now since getting my prostate lasered out last year (a.k.a., The Blessed Surgery), but there's been no difference in the ringing.

PD

the Hair-On-Fire Department at ZH

Does ZH have another type of department?

Melinda Romanoff

PD-

Yes, I actually pick up some good stuff there, and in the full, flaming comments.

Sue

Ranger,

Wonder what that means?

glasater

Yeah Melinda...and PD-

I couldn't figure out why Bill Gross would be in cash!! That would be long USD and what in heck would a person like him do with that!! :-)

So I waded into the comments and Oh Dear:-)

Comments on that thread are mostly reasonable--so far.

PD

New thread.

Ranger

I have no idea what it means, except that it will be a long wait until 2 tomorrow afternoon.

Threadkiller


Clarice changing “had’e” to “hadn’t” seems like a logical revision, you were correcting a typo.

If “it is beyond dispute that anyone born on American soil with an American parent is a ‘natural born citizen”, Solum would have realized that and known it was unnecessary to mention parents (plural) in his first go round.

If it was a matter of clarification, why do these statements remain the same in both the original and the new version?

“How would an originalist approach the question whether the original meaning of the natural born citizen clause would permit McCain (and others not born of American parents on American soil) to become President?”

“If the American conception of ‘natural born citizen’ were equivalent to the English notion of a ‘natural born subject,’ then it could be argued that only persons born on American soil to American parents would have qualified…”


“This could result in the interpretation suggested above—which would limit “natural born citizens” to persons born of American parents on American soil.”

They all should be changed to parent since Solum is now clarifying.

Donofrio’s Conclusion:

"If Solum felt that the original article had been misinterpreted, he should have written a follow up report with a new title explaining the issue.

Solum chose to use “parents” – plural – throughout the original article, no footnote necessary. So when people took him at his word, he scrubbed his word.

That’s not what an ethical professor does. He doesn’t publish research in an esteemed journal and then republish the same article with the very same title after scrubbing a controversial paragraph.

That’s intellectual cowardice and it’s also a professional disgrace. Shame on you, Larry. You know it and so do your colleagues. You are, after all, the “John E. Cribbett Professor of Law”.


Danube of Thought

What legislators offer as their interpretation of unambiguous words does not affect the meaning of those words under the law. If they had wanted their thoughts about the words to carry the force of law, it was up to them to ensure that those thoughts be incorporated in the language itself. They didn't. We can be sure that those who disagreed with those thoughts, but did not assert their disagreement on the Senate floor, were content to let their own views be expressed in the words themselves. It was those words, not the interpretations of them by any Senators, that became law.

That's the way it works. That's why the issue is settled except on the very weird fringe. If you want to hear mocking laughter in any discussion of it, start quoting Senator Howard and Senator Trumbull. You'd be better off quoting Nostradamus or Orly Taitz. Maybe the Rev. billy James Hargis could aid your cause. Or Lyndon Larouche.

clarice

ranger, Milwaukee's been the site of massive Dem vote fraud for a few years now. I expect that this time they got caught at it. Thanks for the tip.

Ranger

Well, we can hope.

Threadkiller

I have to admit, I did chuckle when you quoted Fukino.

Jim Miller

Hit - (And all the others who like roses) you might like what Orwell said about cheap Woolworth's roses, and the pleasure they gave him

(He came back to the subject in his essay, "A Good Word for the Vicar of Bray")

Threadkiller

--"it was up to them to ensure that those thoughts be incorporated in the language itself."--

The lack of debate, on the floor, ensured they used the correct language. Duh.

Porchlight

Was that Milwaukee where they had several thousand votes for Kloppenburg only, no other races? Or was that Madison? I don't think I ever saw confirmation either way but I thought I had originally read Milwaukee.

Threadkiller

I will discuss this no further and my word is as good as DoT's on this matter.

Porchlight

several thousand votes

Ballots, that is, with no other votes on them other than Kloppenburg.

Danube of Thought

"I will discuss this no further and my word is as good as DoT's on this matter."

Not really.

Threadkiller

Boy, I get challenged on everything.

MJW
It's a Department of Health record and it can't be released to anybody," he said. Nor do state laws have any provision that authorizes such records to be photocopied, Wisch said. If Obama wanted to personally visit the state health department, he would be permitted to inspect his birth record, Wisch said.

I don't think that's true. The section of the Hawaiian code dealing with birth and death certificates provides:

§338-13 Certified copies. (a) Subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18, the department of health shall, upon request, furnish to any applicant a certified copy of any certificate, or the contents of any certificate, or any part thereof.

(b) Copies of the contents of any certificate on file in the department, certified by the department shall be considered for all purposes the same as the original, subject to the requirements of sections 338-16, 338-17, and 338-18.

(c) Copies may be made by photography, dry copy reproduction, typing, computer printout or other process approved by the director of health. [L 1949, c 327, §17; RL 1955, §57-16; am L Sp 1959 2d, c 1, §19; HRS §338-13; am L 1978, c 49, §1]

That seems to not only allow photocopies to be made, it seems to require it, on the request of a qualified applicant.

Danube of Thought

TK, you could probably benefit by going back and reading your 10:35 and asking yourself, "who are these people I am quoting? How have they fared in persuading others in the maeketplace of ideas?'

Then you might ponder this: there are millions of lawyers in the US, and certainly scores of thousands of them who are politically consevative. A significant number of these conservatives are scholars, i.e. Those engaged in research and teaching. Why do we not find a significant number of these conservative legal scholars coming forward to assert that, there being no dispute that one of Obama's parents was not an American citizen, Obama himself cannot be a natural-born citizen? Why is it left to Peter Berg, Orly Taitz and you?

Why has not a single respected conservative legal scholar ever endorsed the view that so obsesses you? Please tell us how you account for this lack of scholarly support?

Frau Steingehirn

An earlier article from HI quoted an "official" saying that there were *no* more original long form BCs because the system went paperless. That's one more plate full of carp.

Governor Mr. Natural Abercrombie said he couldn't find it much less look at it. Dotoressa Fukino needed at least three tries to say what comprised the hallowed document. Why give such details on the phone after she was no longer in office? Perhaps her earlier responses were of necessity tightly scripted.(Since there is only one record of her political contributions and that to Republicans, she didn't do or die for the donkey party.)

TK, natürlich, Unter- oder Uebergehirn is still better than Steingehirn.

clarice

The announcement apparently is not about this election.

It's hard to tell if Fukino was wrong, parsing over much or merely misquoted by Isikoff..I think she meant the original could not be handed to anyone not authorized to handle the records or photocopied by Them. I don't think there ever was any doubt that if O requested it the HI authorities could provide him with a certified copy of the long form b.c.

Jim Rhoads a/k/a vnjagvet

One of the recent comments to the article Ranger cited says it has been confirmed with the LA office that the subject of the investigation had nothing to do with the WISC election.

MJW

If it looks like I'm looking for loopholes in the rather definitive recent Fukino statement, perhaps I am, but I do wonder,

1) Why didn't she say this a few years ago? Why the previous weasel words?

2) Why call it a "record of live birth" instead of a "certificate of live birth"? At first I thought maybe the original was called a record of live birth, and the copies were referred to as certificates of live birth. That still may be the case, but the Nordyke's certificates are clearly photocopies of an original document titled "Certificate of Live Birth."

Frau Steingehirn

The ruthless SEIU goons have schlepped in a pitiful group of care-givers to sleep on the cold, cold ground of the state capitol in Olympia, WA. And all they get is a lousy navy shirt. WI got red. What's that all about

Threadkiller

A trick! I will bite. Do you consider John C. Eastman or Edwin Meese to be respected conservative legal scholars?

MJW

Also what's with the "half typed and half handwritten" stuff? Would anyone describe the Nordyke certificates that way? The only handwriting is to sign and date them. Obviously all signed documents are signed by hand, but that doesn't make them half typed and half handwritten.

Danube of Thought

"1) Why didn't she say this a few years ago? Why the previous weasel words?"

Perhaps she didn't anticipate the depth of the lunacy that was to ensue.

"2) Why call it a 'record of live birth' instead of a 'certificate of live birth'?"

Ditto.

Come on--are you really serious about this? If she's carefully parsing her words so as to obscure some unknown truth, why is she doing so? If she's really corrupt and dishonest, don't you think she'd be willing to go whole hog and say she'd seen a "certificate of live birth," if that's what it would take to complete the deception?

Frau Steingehirn

Sung to the tune of "Who's that knocking at my door? What's that ringing in my ears?
"My tinnitus is loudest in my left ear and is an electrical hum. I wish it were a little more like Kepler's music of the spheres. Perhaps this is an extended tune-up of tat orchestra. I have never listened to loud music or been around loud noises other than school yards. Do you suppose?
My best auditory possession is my Zeppelin sound which manifests itself when I am in bed. It is a wonderful, comforting low hum like being in the belly of an ocean liner. When it began, I actually thought an airship was circling over our house at night. This sound does not travel with me unfortunately.

Threadkiller

I had hoped that was an easier question than it has proved to be.

Jim Ryan

I'm not sure, because I don't remember when the grinding or ringing began.

I have sufficient doxastic incontinence to leap to the conclusion that they happened at the same time.

Threadkiller

How about Edward J. Erler? Is he a respected conservative legal scholar?

I knew it. It was a trick. Silly me.

Threadkiller

Mark Levin? He has to be on the list. No?

Threadkiller

Yale Law School Proffesor Peter Schuck?

Threadkiller

Oops. Proffesor Professor

JM Hanes

DoT:

"The Founders did not intend that every last question be susceptible to adjudication; they understood that an aroused electorate would always have a remedy at the ballot box, and in the more immediate term an aroused congress would always have the remedy of impeachment and removal."

I'm not talking about every last question, I'm talking first questions and paramount tests. The Founders, in their wisdom, didn't award the power to adjudicate Constitutionality to the Supreme Court either, of course.

I assume you realize that I'm concerned with way more than the birther issue here. I've begun to think that preemption, per se, may be the emblematic issue of our times almost across the board. The questions raised and differences between everything from preemptive vs. defensive war, and crime prevention (a la terrorism) vs. ex post facto law enforcement, to preventative health practices vs. curative care, have monumental implications. But I digress!

Part of the reason that the growth of government has become virtually inexorable is that voting is an awfully blunt instrument. By the time a law is actually struck down, the bureaucratic architecture for the next incremental expansion has already been cemented in place. Indeed, in most cases, legal standing doesn't even exist until that has, in fact, already been accomplished -- with years of litigation yet to go.

Threadkiller

Dr. Rogers M. Smith?

Are none of these guys up to snuff? No conservative scholar is good enough?

You must know they are dirty so now you will keep your promise.

I have to admit it; you sucked me in by asking me a direct question. Good one!

narciso

Well that's true, and open ended legislation like Obamacare, and 'Sutton Dillinger' are the kind of bureaucratic nightmare that would awaken Zombie De Tocqueville, from his slumber,

The legitimate amendment process has been preempted by excessive, some might say 'rogue' interpretation of the law, I certainly started noticing this with the Florida 2000 cases, specially the state supreme court decision, that had little to do with the point of law in question, The
whole raft of detainee cases from Hamdi on,
in the amicus briefs, almost denied the
precedents, that interfered with their goals

Manuel Transmission

Frau,

Your Zeppelin sounds like the dreaded Taos hum. I actually corresponded with one of the reaseaechers that tried to get to the bottom of that particular phenomenon. I have heard it myself in a few unlikely places.

MJW

DoT: Perhaps she didn't anticipate the depth of the lunacy that was to ensue.

1)Well, lunacy or not, it had already ensued.

2) She used the term "record of live birth" in her latest comments. Are you proposing she's presently unaware of the "lunacy"?

Come on--are you really serious about this? If she's carefully parsing her words so as to obscure some unknown truth, why is she doing so? If she's really corrupt and dishonest, don't you think she'd be willing to go whole hog and say she'd seen a "certificate of live birth," if that's what it would take to complete the deception?

Let me quote her previous statements

I, as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.

And,
I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, director of the Hawai'i State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawai'i State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawai'i and is a natural-born American citizen. I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008, over eight months ago.
Are we supposed to believe it just didn't occur to her that a bit of elaboration would have helped? That she didn't think it would matter that not only had she seen that the certificate was on record, she'd actually seen the certificate -- half hand-written, half typed -- with her own eyes? Was not mentioning a birth certificate in the second statement merely an oversight? Her words were obviously carefully chosen. I don't know why. Perhaps she was hiding something; perhaps she felt she couldn't say more due to privacy restrictions.

You ask if she was hiding something, why she didn't just lie. You, a lawyer, need to ask that? Have you never seen anyone -- any government official -- hide behind a technically true statement? or are you simply trying to trick me into the false choice of accepting her statements at face value or calling her a bald-faced liar?

Threadkiller

MJW, note that she did not actually say that she saw the BC in the first statement.

She verified the dept. has it on record.

A librarian verifies a book is in the library by looking in the computer, not in the book itself.

This is a word game.

MJW

Thanks, TK. I actually did mention that, though perhaps in an overly roundabout fashion.

I notice in her first statement, she was apparently able to use the usual term "birth certificate" instead of the new, improved "record of live birth."

Threadkiller

Like the Constitution, the term seems to be evolving too.

Sad.

Goodnight MJW.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

If she's carefully parsing her words so as to obscure some unknown truth, why is she doing so? If she's really corrupt and dishonest, don't you think she'd be willing to go whole hog and say she'd seen a "certificate of live birth," if that's what it would take to complete the deception?

Why do you always try to make it the responsibility of the person asking questions to provide the motives of the person being questioned before giving them the respect of an answer.

I don't care why she said or does anything. I just want a straight answer and she is either lying or going to great length to obfuscate with language.

narciso

Isikoff has long since lost the benefit ofthe doubt;


http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2005/10/scoring_mike_is.html

MJW

Well said, Sara.

I think DoT's trying his lawyer wiles on me. That would work if I were sweating it out on the witness stand, but usually not when I have time to think before I reply.

MJW

Narciso, I agree Isakoff is a bit of a dim bulb. I wouldn't be particularly surprised if Isakoff misconstrued much of the Fukino and Wisch said.

MJW

...much of what...

One bad effect of spellcheck is that it leads me to carelessly miss correctly spelled, but entirely incorrect, words.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

2nd Division Vet say it best.

Sara (Pal2Pal)

Damn my keyboard and the missing s.

daddy

Was gone all afternoon studying for annual Re-qual training. Ughh.

Frau, I'm jealous. I want your Zepher sound. Instead I've got the cicada's. They're always there, but we're like an old married couple now and get along just fine.

I thought this Oliver Sacks book from a few years back Musicophilia: Tales of Music and the Brain, was interesting on this topic. It's a bunch of bizarre case studies of folks who have developed some peculiarities related to music, many, like us who are now hearing things inside their heads, but instead of Zepher's or Cicadda's, they're full blown symphonies. And they can't turn them off!

Not one of Sack's finest IMO, but worth a look if you want to make yourself realize how much worse it could be than our standard brand tinnitus. Here's one of the more interesting studies from the book: "A Bolt from the Blue: Sudden Musicophilia".

TC,

The champ is still only 14. Junior is a year younger. That's what I mean when I say anybody up here who can play decent tennis in HighSchool is a Big, big fish in a small pond.

Thomas Collins

OK, thanks daddy. When you mentioned that she won the state championship (I believe it was last October or so), I checked out articles on her, and I must have assumed that anyone mowing down what seemed like all the high school tennis players in Alaska must herself have been an older teen. I stand corrected. She is in the process of compiling quite a record!

sbw

Sara: Damn my keyboard and the missing s.

Ju*t *ub*titute a different character for your "*". We'll decode.

hit and run

Sara:
I want to apologize for what appears to be lots of typos and dropped letters in my comments.

The JOM stylebook (h/t Jim Ryan) calls for apologies to be completed in the following manner: "but I won't. That's how I roll."


Threadkiller:
Boy, I get challenged on everything.

I challenge you to prove that you get challenged on everything.

Show me.

What's cute is that Fukino can obfuscate, and Isikoff can parse, and it won't convince anyone.
===============

boris

"I think DoT's trying his lawyer wiles on me"

probably

Threadkiller

Hit, normally I would be chomping at the bit to accept such an easy challenge. But I won't. That's how I roll now.

Threadkiller

For any one who is a little curious how all those conservative legal scholars got on the list, here you go.

DoT asked:

--“Why has not a single respected conservative legal scholar ever endorsed the view that so obsesses you?”--

All of the scholars I listed invoked Representative Bingham’s and/or Senator Howard’s and/or Senator Trumbell’s statements.

They used those statements to show the 14th was never intended to give citizenship to “anchor babies”. (Please refrain from making this an argument on the issue of anchor babies; you will be dodging if you do)

Their collective arguments focus on being born here, a dual citizen, was opposite of the original intent of the 14th . They are quite compelling, using the same statements that are mocked here.

--“ Please tell us how you account for this lack of scholarly support?”--

That is the tough question.
They argue that a dual citizen is an impossibility as the 14th was written and, more importantly, as the country was founded, with regard to an “anchor baby”.
They have never come out and publicly said they have revised their stance.

How can a dual citizen be qualified for POTUS if the conservative scholars say “being born a dual citizen is not even recognized for basic citizenship”?

Their lack of arguing against my stance keeps their position un-revised. Now that they have gone silent, I rely on their last public opinion on the subject.

(Again, please refrain from making this an argument on the right/wrong issue of anchor babies; you will be dodging if you do)

Thomas Collins

Threadkiller, because you seem to be so interested in the background of the natural born citizenship requirement of the US Constitution, and on the rules governing qualifications to act as POTUS, you might want to do some research into the issue whether it is ever proper for a federal court to attempt to enjoin a Presidential action on the ground that POTUS doesn't meet the natural born citizen requirement, and on the question of whether the structure of the US Constitution leaves virtually unlimited discretion to the Electoral College. My concern with the flow of discussion in this area is that there seems to be a sense among some (I'm not ascribing this position to you) that Obama's actions as POTUS are somehow illegitimate unless he can prove that he is a natural born citizen.

If you really get into the question of what is the appropriate role for the federal courts in our federal system, see LUN for some resources that you will find helpful.

I have my own position on these issues, as I have stated before: (i) Obama is the duly elected POTUS under our Electoral College system, and it would be a perversion of our federal system for a court to attempt to enjoin any action of Obama on the ground he did not meet the natural born citizen requirement, (ii) although I think it would be a colossal waste of Congress's time and not in the country's best interests, it would not be constitutionally improper for Congress to investigate this issue and subject Obama to the impeachment process if it concluded he is not a natural born citizen, and (iii) although I think it would redound to Obama's benefit in the 2012 election, folks certainly have the right to try to persuade others not to vote for Obama in 2012 on the ground that he is not a natural born citizen.

boris

"ever proper for a federal court to attempt to enjoin ..."

Is the consitution a contract between the branches of government ... or between the government and the people?

Because if it's the latter then arguments like "no controlling legal authority" to pervent the government from doing something forbidden by the contract looks like breach.

Ya, the vote is one method for dealing ...

Threadkiller

I am more interested in getting facts straight before the next election. He should be disqualified prior to being placed on any ballots.

TC, what if it turned out he was only 30 years old when elected? Would it be a perversion of the federal system to act on that broken law?

Threadkiller

Thanks for the link, TC.

Thomas Collins

Yes, Threadkiller, in my opinion, it would be a perversion for a federal court to enjoin Presidential actions of a 30 year old whom the Electoral College elected POTUS. The underlying problem here is that there is a tendency, most prominent among progs but also among many conservatives, to view federal judges as capable of addressing every issue involving the Constitution.

In any event, enjoy Hart and Wechsler, and let me know if you get interested enough to apply to law school!

MJW

I disagree with Thomas Collins. There are areas in the Constitution, such as impeachment, which are clearly assigned to other branches of the government, but that's not true for Presidential qualifications. In the few cases where the the question is a judgement call, it should be left to the electorate; but deciding whether a 30 year old meets the age requirement isn't a judgement call, so there's no reason it shouldn't be left to the courts, like about 95% of other Constitutional questions.

Let me add, though, that I believe the question of whether a candidate born in the U.S. of a citizen mother and an alien father qualifies as a natural-born citizen is properly left to the electorate.

boris

"whether a candidate born in the U.S. of a citizen mother and an alien father qualifies as a natural-born citizen is properly left to the electorate"

As long as the voters have access to proper documentation. Who would enforce that rule?

MJW

Boris, I see nothing wrong with requiring Presidential candidates to prove their eligibility, even if it requires sightly more than is demanded of youngsters signing up for Little League.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Wilson/Plame