Thursday, December 4, 2008

Diehard sticklers for Constitutional propriety take challenge of Obama's Citizenship to the Supreme Court

Dr. Alan Keyes and Barack Obama in debate during the 2004 Senate race in Illinois. Keyes has been contesting President Elect Obama's eligibility to assume the formal title of President, under the citizenship requirements of the U.S. Constitution. Keyes has a petition of his own on file but he supports the Donofrio petition which has just gone to the Supreme Court.

The case of the faked Obama birth registration simply will not go away, and that does surprise me. I thought the issue was as dead as his meaningless slogan "CHANGE". Last night I read a wonderful essay penned in 2007 by an American named Sam Smith on the subject of "Post Literate America" in which he commented on the meaningless rhetoric which pollutes U.S. political culture: "One can, for example, already feel the nation sinking into the semiotic fantasyland of a presidential, treating verbal symbols as substance and mushy abstractions as hardened intent." I have no idea whose rhetoric Smith was referring to, Republican or Democrat, or both, but I wholeheartedly agree.

I encountered that rhetoric this morning as jumped through the Internet, tasting the sweet and sour of websites and Blogs discussing the lawsuits accumulating around the Obama Birth Certificate ploy. Whether Obama is a "natural born" American is a moot point, but what remains certain is that the man does not wish the world to see the original declaration which his mother signed.
A screen capture of yesterday's article in the AFRO, which alleges that Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is biased, and that in entertaining to the Keyes petition which challenges the status of Kenyan-American Barack Obama, he is responding to a highly personal conservative political view.

The status quo American media refuses to touch this hot potato, and if they mention the lawsuits at all, are quick to attack the credibility of the plaintiffs. At least one Black newspaper is addressing the politics of the case - THE AFRO in Baltimore has an interesting and very current article here. In an attempt to discredit Thomas and his interest in the petition of Dr. Keyes, the AFRO is thick with reminders of his ties to Republican presidents: "Thomas was appointed to the Supreme Court by President George H.W. Bush in 1991 and has been one of its most conservative members.
Before his ascension to the court, he was appointed by Bush to the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Earlier, he served as chairman of the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission - appointed by President Reagan - and worked various jobs under former Republican Sen. John Danforth.
It would take a simple majority of five justices to put Donofrio’s emergency stay on the oral argument docket. Because it is an emergency by design, the argument would take place within days."
I had to smile when I saw that one frustrated American posted his own (or perhaps his Dad's 1963 State of Hawaii birth certificate online, Ta Da! , on a X-Box gaming forum. It shows what a legitimate registration of live birth looked like in that registry used by Obama's mother.
I like this fellows comments to another game aficionado on the TEAM XBOX Forum: "See, when I hear something about someone's birth certificate, this is what I think of. The paperwork that was filled out at the hospital, signed by the parents, the doctor and an attending. Real people, who saw you enter the world all slimy and screaming, who sign the paper to say "we were here and it happened."

And the following is the stripped down pro-forma certificate which the OBAMA CAMPAIGN posted on its national website for the duration of the Presidential campaign. I copied it during the campaign. I don't know if it's still archived but there are copies everywhere.

This bare bones certificate offered by the DNC contributes ZERO to the search for the truth. As it printed on a green form revised to "11/01" or November 2001, it was purchased sometime within the last seven years. Genealogists and others, certainly a Harvard trained lawyer and Senator, can purchase database generated documents for a few bucks. Fans of celebrities often acquire them and I have several U.S. birth certificates for biographical research subjects. Actually I never settle for this kind of reductionist printout and have always managed to trace subjects back to source records. In Obama's case, the State of Hawaii is excluding researchers from examining the original declaration signed by Obama's mother. They have no legal grounds for doing so.


And finally, here is the "cover my ass" letter released on October 31, 2008 by Dr. Chiyome Fukino, person in charge of State health records in Hawaii. She claims to have "personally seen and verified" that Obama's original (we are deliberately left to assume COMPLETE) birth registration is on file. She had the gall to quote the statute that prevents her from releasing a "certified" copy of the record, understanding full well that most of the legally curious would be content if she simply held the original in front of a TV camera. Any Martin (in his court filing) made the only statement which has any validity at this late juncture, now that B.H.O. is elected : "Having released what he claimed was the "original," and having been found to have dissembled, Obama has waived any objections to release of the "real" original document."
Millions of Kenyans believe that Obama was born in a hospital in their country, and B.H.O. has made no attempt to discourage them of their belief.

1 comment:

Ted said...

ABC NEWS GETS THE DONOFRIO SCOTUS STORY WRONG
Posted in Uncategorized on December 4, 2008 by naturalborncitizen
Below is the text of a letter Leo Donofrio just sent to ABC News:

Dear Mr. Terry Owens and ABC News.

The story you printed today with the headline, “Supreme Court to Decide Obama Citizenship” is riddled with errors. Allow me to correct the record for you. I have said in my law suit that I believe Obama was born in Hawaii, so I have no idea why your story makes it seem as if my law suit is centered on the issue of where Obama was born. You wrote,

“The President-elect has maintained he was born in the United States.”

The main argument of my law suit alleges that since Obama was a British citizen - at birth - a fact he admits is true, then he cannot be a “natural born citizen”. The word “born” has meaning. It deals with the status of a presidential candidate “at birth”. Obama had dual nationality at birth. The status of the candidate at the time of the election is not as relevant to the provisions of the Constitution as is his status “at birth.” If one is not “born” a natural born citizen, he can never be a natural born citizen.

Furthermore, the case is scheduled for conference of all nine Justices, not eight. You should correct that.

And your reporting, which could have been complete with a simple phone call to the Public Information Office, is also deficient in that it wasn’t Justice Thomas alone who distributed the case for conference of December 5, 2008. That was a decision taken after consideration of the full Court.

There are two docket entries for Nov. 19. One of them shows that Justice Thomas referred the case to the full court. The other indicates that the full court distributed the case for conference of Dec. 5. I suggest you call Patricia McCabe Estrada, Deputy Public Information Officer for the United States Supreme Court. She will set you and your story straight.

The case could have easily been denied after Justice Thomas referred it to the full court. There was no requirement that it be distributed for conference. In fact, the normal procedure in referred applications involves no public mention of such cases until after the full Court has taken some action. There is an official Supreme Court Publication entitled

“A REPORTER’S GUIDE TO APPLICATIONS Pending Before The Supreme Court of the United States”

You may find it here:

http://www.supremecourtus.gov/publicinfo/reportersguide.pdf

It will guide you with accuracy to the actions involved in the case you are reporting upon. On page 3, it states:

“The Circuit Justice may act on an application alone or refer it to the full Court for consideration. The fact that an application has been referred to the full Court may not be known publicly until the Court acts on the application and the referral is noted in the Court’s order.“
Now go back and check the docket url for my case.

http://origin.www.supremecourtus.gov/docket/08a407.htm

Another misleading element of your story is the headline. The Supreme Court will be focused on the issue of Obama’s eligibility to be President, not on his citizenship status. Just being a “Citizen” is not enough to be President. I have no doubt, and I’m sure the Supreme Court concurs, that Obama is a United States citizen.

But the Constitution draws a direct distinction between “Citizens” and “Natural Born Citizens”. Citizens may be Senators and Representatives, but it takes something else to be President. So, your headline is wrong as well as your story.

If you would like to respond to this letter, which I have just published in my blog about the case, feel free to do so and I will publish your response as is.

My blog URL is http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com

Yesterday, a reporter from the Kansas City Star wrote an equally misleading report about my case. After readers of this blog confronted him, he had the decency to call me and apologize for the wrong treatment my case received in his report. We struck up a good conversation and I gave him proper respect for his admission. I am here to talk any time you like. I understand the concepts are technical and non-lawyers have problems with them.

Regards,

Leo C. Donofrio