President Barack Obama is eligible for election, since a Georgia judge rejected a birther complaint that wanted him taken off the ballots. It looks like Judge Michael Malihi has good sense and a bit more intelligence than the people who are so rabidly against the president.
Judge Michael Malihi rejected the complaint filed by Orly Taitz, ditzy queen of the birther conspiracy theorists. What's funny is that President Barack Obama didn't even have to show up, as expected, nor was he found in contempt of the court. This case was simply just declined. Done. Ignored. He is completely eligible to be on voting ballots, and people simply just need to get over it.
Why not try a little democracy? Why not just let the people decide whether they want him to be president again? Perhaps the birthers realize that he will win re-election in 2012 and still, they just can't handle that the United States has a black president. Take into consideration that recent studies have indicated that racism, conservative political views and low intelligence all go hand-in-hand. As insulting as that may seem, numbers rarely lie.
That is why it seems that the people who buy into the whole birther thing tend to want to just eliminate Obama altogether. They do not want him to even be on the ballots because they know that if he is, he will quite possibly remain president. They are afraid of what the majority may want—and they are willing to flood up the courts with frivolous suits in order to stop democracy from occurring. That's not American at all, if you think about it for a minute.
Chelsea Hoffman is a prolific crime writer and fiction author with several works published. Her writing has been recognized by such entities as NBC Dateline and several others. Contact her directly by visiting ChelseaHoffman.Com.
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 203
There are all kinds of studies Chelsea, including the ones that show that despite your progressive claims of having great compassion for your fellow humans your charity usually extends just about as far as some one elses pocket book, and the one in 2008 that showed approx. 15% of Democrats were concerned with the fact that Obama was black....Oh! Well maybe it's understandable coming from people of the party that spawned the KKK!
(lol)
That's what the study indicated.
Yes Chelsea there are racists on both sides of the political spectrum....It's just that history is filled with Republicans championing minority rights just as well as it showing Democrats rejecting the same.
The Democrats as the party of racism idea is laughable. Southern Democrats were the big proponents of Jim Crow although it was something that was pretty well accepted nationwide by people of every political stripe. In the late '60s in the wake of the passage of the Civil Rights Act and Voting Rights act--both overwhelmingly supported by northern Democrats--most of the Democrats in the south became Republicans, e. g. Strom Thurmond. Thurmond, of course, ran for president in 1948 on a southern Democrat ticket in protest of things like Truman's integration of the military. Thurmond went back to the Democratic party after the election.
Some folks ignore the "flip" that took place in the 1960s. Nixon's "southern strategy" was an active campaign of reaching out to disenfranchised southern voters, in the wake of the Civil and Voting Rights acts. LBJ famously bemoaned the fact that he had lost the south for democrats. He had. So associating today's republicans, who in large part, are the old dixiecrats, with the party of Lincoln is simply wrong, if not intentionally dishonest.
Like George Wallace, Harry Dent (the architect of Nixon's "southern strategy") later repented of his bigoted political initiatives. Thurmond later became a republican, but Robert Byrd, who also repented, remained a democrat.
But the point is, today's republican party ain't your grandpappy's party. It's hard to see Lincoln, Teddy Roosevelt, or even Dwight Eisenhower in today's republican party.
:)
Here's a test for you, Acorn. You know, it was Lincoln, who established the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Sciences is warning us about the threat of anthropogenic climate change. So republicans take that warning seriously - true or false?
"It's the economy, stupid," kills all those, because the American economy is charging upward like a ski-jumper's take-off. By next October/November the "Obama Recession" they love to talk about, will be the "Obama turn-around," and they'll be trying to deny he had anything to do with it.
So-o-o... what's left? Character assassination, ridicule, faked photos of left-handed salutes (which these dolts believe are true in the face of all evidence to the contrary), innuendo and flat-out lying about anything and everything Obama-related. That's all they've got from here on in. And that's not Mitt's strong suit. He wants to argue policy.
Look, Republican policies set the economy on fire. Obama and the Democrats have been the firefighters. The Republican arsonists have spent three years trying to cut the hoses. Why should we put the arsonists back in charge simply because the firefighters haven't completely put out the fire yet? cutting the hose
ugh
Someone who is NOT qualified (I think you actually mean eligible) to be president is a non-citizen and a naturalized citizen. Not in dispute. Case is closed.
Perhaps prophetically he said, "Sitting at the table doesn't make you a diner. You must be eating some of what's on that plate. Being here in America doesn't make you an American. Being born here in America doesn't make you an American."
Does the morphing of Obama's picture into that of an assassinated public figure mean that you're hoping for the same result for the president? Or are you just trying to point out the Obama is black? I knew that already, and it doesn't bother me.
Never
(that makes no sense)
The "birther" thing is what is "nothing" - and so sorry white supremacists, OBAMA IS AN AMERICAN!!! OBAMA IS ONE OF US!!! OBAMA IS OUR PRESIDENT!!!
woo hoo - LOL
Now please calm down and take a deep breath.
;)
In fact, if born in the USA you could have both parents as immigrants and you would still be eligible to be elected president.
But just to clarify, this wasn't a trial. It was an administrative hearing conducted in an office of the Georgia state executive branch (not the judicial branch) so that an Administrative Law Judge could make a recommendation to the Secretary of State. It applies only to President Obama's eligibility to be on the ballot in Georgia. Judge Malihi's ruling can't be appealed in another court. The Secretary of State's decision may be challenged through a petition to the Georgia Superior Court, but as I understand it, that's extremely unlikely to get anywhere.
And I was kidding about the MIB.
Because it's over and the plaintiffs lost.
From Georgia Secretary of State Brian Kemp's press release:Birther FAIL.
Again.
DOH!
LMAO!
The ONLY guy the GOP really wanted (Christy of New Jersey) turned 'em down flat. Why? Take a look at what's happening to the economy, despite every TEA-Twit cum Republican effort to stop it and create a European style austerity disaster. Christy knew they couldn't slow it enough, and it would be steaming right along just in time for the election.
And if you take all the other statements he/she has made, then not one person on the US soil can really become President.
To really take statements apart, the only person whom could be a "legal" President would be an American Indian as in all reality...(by taking KBO own idealistics) they are the only Real Americans. (none of us...again KBO's own reality are real Americans as our families all come from different countries)
And my only statement on this....as some of us have a reality to go to...like family, work and paying bills.
There is no legal definition of "natural born citizen" period. There is no statute and no court ruling about the definition of the term. That's what makes this discussion silly. There are two classes of citizenship, citizenship by birth and naturalized citizenship. There is no super class of citizenship by birth for the "natural born." AFAIK Obama is a citizen by birth by two criteria, he was born on US soil and his mother was a US citizen. I used to work with a man born in Portugal. His father was a Portuguese citizen and his mother was an American citizen. My friend was able to emigrate to the US when he was a young adult after living in Portugal from birth. He was considered a US citizen by birth--never went through naturalization.
I love how rightards always prove themselves wrong without even knowing it!
Well, keep teeing up the "facts" to scotus. I'd like to describe the "facts" as slow curves, but hell, scotus won't even let these cases out of the minor league.
What you're saying is that the American electoral system has no means or practice of checking the eligibility of candidates for the highest office in the land and don't take any steps to verify these details. And yet, in 236 years of operation no one has figured out how lax the process is and taken advantage of it until now. Wow! What colour is the sky in your world?
Since his original demand that Obama appear was based simply on the case brief,, he hadn't seen the evidence. Now, he was forced to review it. THAT is what caused him to "flip-flop." Once he'd seen the 'evidence' the summary judgement was off the table and he could rule based on the 'merits" of the case, of which there were none, of course.
And if you think the Georgia Sec'y of State is gonna take Obama off the ballot in the face of that...
Do you realize that we've had only one other president who didn't qualify as a natural born citizen? Chester Arthur also lied and burned his records so no one would figure it out. Obama spent millions keeping his hidden.
There are supposedly records that show he went to Occidental College as a foreign exchange student. How did he do that?
One of her nitwitted birther buddies has that one secretly before the SCOTUS (which is only the third time I've heard it since Obama's election).
If Arthur was ineligible to be president we have a problem. He signed a few bills into law when he was president. Of course if he really was a Canadian citizen it means that he was morally superior to US citizens and more courteous to boot.
Unfortunately the law doesn't work that way.
Funny thing, though. Democrats have tried getting the definition of natural born citizen changed since about 2002. They kept bringing up bills and nothing was working for them. Then, lo and behold, someone decided that a bill had to be written to say that McCain was a citizen - something not needed at all And in that bill, they slipped a sentence that said that natural born citizen had never been clearly defined. Now they can point to that one sentence as if it is gospel truth.
Sneaky boogers, aren't they?
Obama is not a natural born citizen.
This was my explanation at that link:
"...if we start from, say, 1787, and retroactively declare a noncitizen everyone born on American soil with at least one parent who was not a citizen at the time of his or her birth, and consequently (since those people, believing themselves to be American, never naturalized) we declare their children and the children of their children, etc. noncitizens as well, I suspect we'll have the "final solution" to the problem of America. :)
(In case that needs an explanation, the number of your ancestors in the second half of the 18th century would be about 2^10=1024. Every single one of those lines of descent would have to lead to you in a way that when the line enters the US, the immigrant is naturalized before producing the offspring that starts the American part of the line. The odds of that are actually pretty slim. By your definition, you are probably not an American citizen.)"
That is the (obviously absurd) consequence of your argument.
As for where he was born. This was settled as far as I'm concerned. Argue with me if you like; but I am voting for him.
There are more pressing issues to discuss at this point; but I respect and thank you for your feedback.
I can't imagine voting for ANY of the TEA-Twit/GOP clowns running against him (including Ron Paul).
All I know is that in our area unemployment is down, there are more than 100,000 new jobs, my retirement fund has rebounded significantly, home sales are up, etc. Is everything back to normal? Of course not; but it's only been less than 4 years. Everything is not going to be reversed in one term of office. Even more could be accomplished with the co-operation of Congress.
Don't try to dump him on us, he hates Britain and everybody except our politicians is happy with that.
In an 1829 treatise on the U.S. Constitution, William Rawle wrote that
every person born within the United States, its territories or districts, whether the parents are citizens or aliens, is a natural born citizen in the sense of the Constitution, and entitled to all the rights and privileges appertaining to that capacity.[15]
"As insulting as that may seem, numbers rarely lie,"
How charmingly naive. Did you not know "there are three kinds of lies; lies, damned les and statistics".
A British statesman, Benjamin Disraeli said that in the nineteenth century. It's even more true now.
"Wages are up only 1.9% over the last 12 months. That rate of increase is close to a 70 YEAR LOW."
"According to the St. Louis Federal Reserve, there were approximately 147 million employed persons in the United States in mid-2008 versus something in the neighborhood of 140 million today based on the recent data."
7 MILLION people have disappeared from the size of the work force since 2008 according to Federal Reserve reports.
that is 1.5 million new entrants per year.
The data is from mid-2007 to present. So 6.75 MILLION new entrants have entered the labor market. (4.5 years x 1.5M)
Result, close to 13.75 MILLION people have dropped out of the labor market for whatever reasons since mid-2007 !!!
it shows Obama has had it much easier to achieve a lower unemployment rate.
Go ahead and slam me, I still luv 'ya all! :-D