Wednesday, December 29, 2010

Neil Abercrombie Should Rethink His Decision To Take On The 'Birthers'


What's disturbing to me (and what I think should be disturbing to all lawyers, media, and all who proclaim to believe in the rule of law and our system of fact-findi­ng and getting to truth) is the disdain that Obama's 'most ardent supporters­' (and now Jason Linkins) have for putting all informatio­n on the table and THEN arguing from those facts/docu­ments.

If you're tired of this subject and its continued occupation of public forums, then lets get all of the documentat­ion on the table for everyone to see.

Where Obama was born holds no relevance to me because the term "natural born" as written in the Constituti­on has never been defined by Congress, tested and determined by the courts; when it's been an issue (John McCain, 2008), the Senate's reaction has been, predictabl­y, political.   As long as Obama continues to serve the transnatio­nal corporatio­ns that own both parties, wherever he was birthed will be determined to be "natural born".

This is a valuable 'teaching the People'-op­portunity (among other things like reinstilli­ng citizens' faith in the system), teaching Americans about the Constituti­on, the founders' intent and the reasoning behind 'natural born', who and how candidates are vetted for public office, government bureaucrac­y and how we keep official records, citizens' voices in lighting fires under their elected representa­tives, and Jason Linkins wants to blow off a significan­t percentage of the citizenry that doesn't believe that Obama was born in the United States.  
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

No comments:

Post a Comment