As I'm sure you're all aware by now, the Supreme Court declined to hear an emergency appeal regarding President-elect Barack Obama's Constitutional-eligibility. From the Washington Post:
The Supreme Court this morning unceremoniously declined to hear an emergency appeal from a man who claimed President-elect Barack Obama is not qualified for the presidency because he is not a "natural-born" citizen.
The court without comment declined to hear "Donofrio v. Wells," a suit that had attempted to keep Obama off the New Jersey ballot. Leo Donofrio of East Brunswick had claimed Obama had dual nationality at birth, because of his Kansas-born mother and his Kenyan-born father, who was a British subject at the time.
The only conclusion a thinking person can draw from this, is that the end of the Constitution has officially been declared. The United States of America is no longer a free nation under the rule of law, but now a country under the rule of man.
Yes, unfortunately it is that simple. These two positions are mutually exclusive, it can only be one or the other.
While I do believe the Democratic Party to be dumb enough to run a candidate who is not eligible to be president, I highly doubt Hillary and the Clinton-machine would concede the nomination to someone ineligible.
In my opinion, Barack Obama is more than likely a natural citizen of the United States. But none the less ... the question still remains. So why does he refuse to disclose the original copy of his birth certificate?
Barack Obama's refusal to provide the original document, legitimizes this birth certificate controversy!
Neocon Wonder Boy David Horowitz, however, disagrees. In fact, he says we should "Shut up about the birth certificate."
Let's take a look at how Horowitz, Mayor of Loserville, gets it all wrong.
The continuing efforts of a fringe group of conservatives to deny Obama his victory and to lay the basis for the claim that he is not a legitimate president is embarrassing and destructive.
Horowitz starts his column by claiming those preferring to follow the rule of law, to be nothing more than a "fringe group," who are "embarrassing and destructive."
By opening this way, with an ad hominem argument, he gives away that he has no actual intellectual support for what he is about to say. This is a common tactic of the Left, and one shouldn't be surprised since Horowitz is an ex-Marxist (who obviously still has a lot of growing to do before being considered as a genuine conservative).
The birth-certificate zealots are essentially arguing that 64 million voters should be disenfranchised because of a contested technicality as to whether Obama was born on U.S. soil.
Nobody is trying to "disenfranchise" anyone. This is simply a Constitutional matter. Obama could have (and still can) released his original birth certificate. By not doing so, Obama himself has created this controversy. So why not release it?
Besides ... if he's not eligible, it would be Obama and the fraud he perpetuated, who would be responsible for any such "disenfranchisement."
Advocates of this destructive campaign will argue that the constitutional principle regarding the qualifications for president trumps all others. But how viable will our Constitution be if five Supreme Court justices should decide to void 64 million ballots?
David, you have it completely backwards. The question you should be asking is, "How viable will our Constitution be if we simply ignore what it says?"
Conservatives are supposed to respect the organic nature of human societies.
The "organic nature" of society does not nullify the Constitution. If you don't like what the Constitution puts forth, there is an amendment process. But you obviously prefer simply ignoring it all together! This is why Mr. Horowitz, it is you and those who share your opinion, that are not defenders of, but in fact enemies of our Constitution and the rule of law.
It is not conservatism; it is sore loserism and quite radical in its intent.
The only people experiencing "sore loserism," are those who, like yourself, are guided by expediency rather than principle. You have not even an ounce of conservatism in this absurd argument of yours.
If you want this issue put to rest, instead of resorting to misguided temper-tantrums such as this, advocate for Obama to "unlock" his original birth certificate. To be our president, an original birth certificate is quite a small request. Don't you agree?
Conservatives need to accept the fact that we lost the election, and get over it; and get on with the important business of reviving our country's economy and defending its citizens, and - by the way - its Constitution.
Nobody denies losing the election. Unlike your hollow claim however, we actually DO want to defend our Constitution!