If you are interested in such right-wing kookery you probably heard that the Supremes don't have the Donofrio v. Wells case on the docket. I went into some detail about the events in question in "Can You Hear Me Now?" a couple of days ago. I have decided to wrap this into The Obammunism Chronicles under the premise that it is difficult to cover and analyze the impact of Obama's "change" without acknowledging his full-scale rape of our legal, political, and electoral systems.
Reportedly 1.2 MILLION people sent correspondence to the Supremes in hopes that their constitutional concerns wouldn't go unaddressed. Today, at the behest of Justice Thomas, a conference was held on the case to determine if arguments would be heard. NOW WE WAIT. While I am not optimistic on the disposition of the case, it has little to do with the legalities in question. My lack of optimism stems from my concern that the groundwork has been laid to perpetrate a fraud on the American people.
First is our touchiness about racism. Being called a racist has been one of the most pejorative terms in the English language for a generation. No white American feels comfortable questioning America's first black President-elect on a technicality, if for no reason other than that the media has drummed into our heads how racist that would be. It is my opinion that the people pursuing this are doing so at great personal cost and risk. I don't have any idea where Obama was born, but I applaud the fight for transparency, because our constitution does matter, after all.
Another reason is that the basis of the dismissal of the suits regarding Obama's eligibility (most notably the Berg case) have not been based on findings of fact, but rather on findings of standing. In other words, elitists in robes have decided that an average American citizen doesn't have the right to question our leaders on matters pertaining to the constitution. I can see WHY the self-declared demigods of our federal judiciary might be concerned about that. I mean what would be next? A citizen questioning our dear leader on the second amendment? Maybe on abortion and the "right to privacy" that Roe v. Wade made up out of thin air. The point here is that our constitutional underpinnings have been under attack for some time now. Reportedly, even the FEC and the Solicitor General's office support electing Obama without ever checking his documents.
In April 2008 the Senate passed a non-binding resolution that approved McCain's eligibility. The GOP nominated the only person it could find who, at first glance, has similar issues to Obama. A deeper look, however, reveals that they are very very different situations. The Phil Berg court filings at www.obamacrimes.com go into excruciating legal detail to show that. Even so, the McCain nomination doesn't put the GOP on suitably high ground to flood the room.
What seems self-evident is that while millions of Americans feel strongly that the President of the United States should be vetted fully and with regard to the letter of the law, those few in positions of power who could make an issue of this seem bound not to for some reason. That's part of why it was so encouraging that Justice Thomas stepped to the plate. It's not right that it takes more of a background check to rent a video than to be President. Maybe the fix is in, but it isn't unanimous.
No comments:
Post a Comment