That being said, I am posting this video because I found it fascinating from a Constitutional stand point. Had it been John McCain I would have posted it as well (equal opportunity blogger!). I know that the people that read my blog are thinkers, and some of you (one of you in particular) has a deep love for the Constitution, as do I.
So watch this video and tell me what you think. Obviously there is a lot behind the scenes and unless we read every court brief and motion on this case we will not know all the details, but the video is a good appetizer.
6 comments:
Interesting, however untrue I believe. Check it out. http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/citizen.asp
Jeremy
J,
I have read the snopes article, but the attorneys claims have nothing to do with Obama's mother's age (as far as I have read elsewhere) as stated in the snopes link. The case and the lawsuit is absolutely true and ongoing however and that was the point of the post.
Obviously attorney Phil Berg finds reason to debate the legality of Barack's run for office due to the Constitution. My point in posting it here was to see what opinion was on Berg's logic.
P.S. This is the center of the suit...
"Plaintiff Philip J. Berg alleged that Defendant Barack Obama is not eligible for the Office of the President because Obama lost his U.S. citizenship when his mother married an Indonesian citizen and naturalized in Indonesia. Plaintiff further alleged that Obama followed her naturalization and failed to take an oath of allegiance when he turned 18 years old to regain his U.S. citizenship status."
...per court documents
ok...how bout this one then? http://www.factcheck.org/askfactcheck/does_barack_obama_have_kenyan_citizenship.html. regardless, sounds a bit silly. I would think the RNC would be all over this if it had any teeth.
J
Again, the point of the post was to hear personal thoughts on the "Constitutionality" of the suit, not someone's previously posted published thoughts.
Of course, in the interest of equal opportunity, it is worth mentioning that the constitutionality of John McCain's presidential bid has also been hotly debated in its own right, since the founding fathers' wording of "natural born citizen" is sufficiently vague as to allow for contrasting interpretations. On a literal level, the phrase would seem to suggest the act of being born on US soil. But what do we do with a man born on a military base in Panama? Of course, the question has already been asked and satisfactorily answered, yet it nevertheless speaks well to the larger issue as to the extent to which we can or cannot read the Constitution to its very letter. The paradigm of 1787 is not the paradigm of 2008. B
Post a Comment