Comments on: Barack Obama, Natural Born U.S. Citizen

By: Consul-At-Arms

Consul-At-Arms — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 06:18:48 +0000

I've quoted you and linked to you here.

By: Bithead

Bithead — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 19:05:52 +0000

Why?

By: anjin-san

anjin-san — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:53:54 +0000

I withdraw the 'good work"... misread your comment. My bad.

Hey Bit, why don't you tell us what mischief that Hugo dude is up to down in Argentina today?

By: Bithead

Bithead — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:26:36 +0000

I withdraw the 'good work"... misread your comment. My bad.

By: Bithead

Bithead — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:30:30 +0000

Good work, Cal.

That does not, however, imply that this is such a charge.

Well, perhaps not. There's not a whole buch of 'there' there. Then again, there wasn't a whole buch of 'there' there, either, in the case I pointed up, and you correctly remembered the quote from, that I was thinking of. But of course the question I'm asking is why the bar is set higher in the mindless of the Democrat party for this particular happening. The issue at hand of course is that the crage involves a possible coverup by a Democrat.

By: Bithead

Bithead — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:27:12 +0000

No, don't think so.

You'd better. Here's a clue: "The Plame Game"

By: Caliban Darklock

Caliban Darklock — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 00:06:34 +0000

"there are some charges which are so consequential, that the very charge being made, of itself requires a hearing" That does not, however, imply that this is such a charge. I believe the issue at hand for the Democrats is one of behavior; "did you do this" is, for certain actions, certainly such a charge. I do not believe issues of circumstance - "did this happen to you" - qualify similarly. My fundamental problem with the Democratic party's strongly liberal foundation is that they are willing to make any argument and cross any boundary to achieve their goals. If we are to oppose that in any reasonable fashion, we must draw our own lines in the sand and obey them - even when our opposition does not. We should avoid fallacy and impropriety in our rhetoric, regardless of how liberally the other side may employ them.

By: Boyd

Boyd — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 23:50:11 +0000

If you follow the link from Dean's post, or even better, follow Gadfly's link, you'll see that Obama can only claim US citizenship by virtue of birth within the United States. His mother was too young, according to the law at the time, for him to acquire "natural born" status through her. But regardless, it sure seems simple to put this to rest once and for all. We in the blogosphere get a little impatient sometimes.

By: Pug

Pug — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 23:49:08 +0000

Wasn't the argument from the Demorats recently that there are some charges which are so consequential, that the very charge being made, of itself requires a hearing?

No, don't think so.

By: gadfly

gadfly — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 23:09:02 +0000

Findlaw has more to say about citizenship. Go to page two and read the US Law as it relates to 1961 when Barack was born.

By: Bithead

Bithead — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:55:08 +0000

Uh... wait.
Wasn't the argument from the Demorats recently that there are some charges which are so consequential, that the very charge being made, of itself requires a hearing?

Just sayin....

By: Dave Schuler

Dave Schuler — Sun, 06 Jul 2008 22:24:06 +0000

Yeah, I posted on this story (which I, basically, consider pretty idiotic) a week or so ago. The problem as I see it is that Sen. Obama might be compelled to prove his status in a court of law. I think we've had quite enough of that for one century.