Originally posted by danx
In light of all this, is it too much for President-elect Obama to simply authorize the release of his birth documents and settle the matter
once and for all before any further harm comes to our Constitution.
Mr Marrs, “in light of all this”? What is this exactly? There are only speculations, hearsay and blog posts putting forward these
theories.
Barack Obama, or anyone else for that matter, isn’t under any legal obligation to release his birth certificate, at least until a Court requests him
to. And even when that happens I doubt his birth certificate would be released to the public, as it would probably be for review of the Court and
Judges only.
From Obama’s (and his campaign) point-of-view, these theories are all bunk, then why should he give in to these people’s demands when he doesn’t
have to?
Or, perhaps George W. Bush was right when, according to several credible accounts, he described the Constitution of the United States as "just
a goddamned piece of paper."
Obama hasn’t broken any law or violated the Constitution.
Even in the case of Obama not being eligible to be President, he isn’t President yet, and the Constitution already contemplates the possibility of
President elects not qualifying for the Office.
What's clear is that you lack an open mind and simply want the "troublemakers" to go away. I would guess this is how you, personally, deal with
problems in your life - you simply ignore them until they go away or you threaten or belittle those that bring problems to your attention until they
do go away.
If you had bothered to read Marrs' article, you would see that there is an awful lot of action being taken to make sure that the original birth
certificate isn't released - much more than you would think necessary. And too many things have happened in the quest for this truth that defy logic.
Things that should make any logical, thinking man say, "you know, that IS odd. I wonder what's going on there."
1. Why would a Hawaii judge seal the birth certificate under orders that specifically "no one in the press" has access to them?
2. Why post sheriffs to the building where they are stored that are instructed to brush off questions about the birth certificate?
3. Why spend time filing motions to dismiss instead of filing motions answering the charges filed by Berg as simply "untrue"?
4. How was Jerome Corsi's paperwork that they filled out the same day "lost" by officials and why during his 4.5 hours of incarceration was he not
allowed access to a phone or other communication device?
5. Since a California Judge has ruled that the plaintiff's filing suit there DO have standing, why hasn't Obama responded to the charges filed in
that suit?
Fact is, you cannot answer these questions without some kind of snippy reply. Or you would revert to "partisan agendas" and write it off as more
loonie-ism.
The people like us who question the powers that be on behalf of the Constitution are the ones who show consistently that we love this country, not
those like you who simply want the problem to go away so you can put 8 years of Bush behind you as quickly as possible.
