This Is The Kind of Stuff I Mean

I have to sympathize with Representative Jean Schmidt (R-OH), faced with an upset constituent, who is pretty clearly taken in by the birther nonsense, presumably tries to get rid of her by whispering “I agree with you, but the courts don’t.”  It’s one of the faults of politicians that they want everyone to like them.  But that’s not an excuse for endorsing this kind of garbage.

I don’t like the guy any more than the birthers do.  I took several days off from work, gave up weekends for two months to work gun shows, hit more than a few neighborhood in this county knocking on doors, went to area clubs, and made God knows how many phone calls to try to keep this guy from getting elected.  And all this for John McCain, who a year prior I swore I would never vote for, let alone work to get elected.  But we lost.  Barack Obama is the legitimate President of the United States.  Let’s concentrate on undoing that. Then we don’t have to worry about what’s on his birth certificate.

Related posts (automatically generated):

  1. Things a Gun Shop Employee Never Wants to Hear
  2. You wouldn’t expect a law professor …
  3. My Kind of Politician

9 thoughts on “This Is The Kind of Stuff I Mean”

  1. You know what? Even if by some screwy chance he didn’t plop out of the womb on US soil, his mother at least was a US citizen.

    That’s good enough for me.

    Let’s concentrate on the screwed up shit he’s doing NOW instead of wasting time arguing over whether or not the placenta splatted on US territory….

  4. The Fourteenth Amendment makes anyone born in the United States or under the jurisdiction of the United States an automatic citizen. Most of us are citizens by the 14th Amendment. But people who are born abroad to American parents are citizens by statute.

    Either way, the term has never really been adjudicated directly, is my understanding, but it’s generally regarded to mean that you were born an American, either by constitution or by statute.

  5. Maybe, but that’s irrelevant. The law in 1961 was that you had to either be born on U.S. soil, or to two U.S. citizens, or two one if that person had lived in the U.S. for at least 5 years following his/her 14th birthday. Stanley Ann Dunham was *almost* 19 at the time of his birth, but not quite. A further wrinkle is that if they weren’t really married, mom only had to be in the country for 1 year following her 14th birthday. They were married – I think – but that’s debatable as well since BHO Sr. was married to someone else before, which arguably invalidates his marriage to Dunham. And if they weren’t married, he’s a natural born citizen after all.

    All this assumes, however, that he was born outside the U.S., an assumption for which there is absolutely no evidence. If he was born in Hawaii in 1961, as the birth certificate says he was, that’s game, set and match right there. If Dad is a Mexican who’s never even visited the U.S. and Mom is an illegal alien who first made it across the border 5 mins. before you were born, you’re a natural born citizen.

  6. They law is more complicated that I thought. Like you I thought he was the child of an American citizen and that was all that counted. The 5 years resident requirement was a winkle I was not aware before the controversy.

    But the requirement of being natural born was so the candidate would absorb the American experience and values. Despite the fact he grew up mostly in the states I do not think he really absorbed American valaues. Which is sad comment on the values taught during the last 40 years.

  7. Arguing about the birther crap:

    1) Goes nowhere. Even if it could be proved, no way in hell is he getting pried out of office, and even if he was removed it would cause race riots and provide “evidence” of a “conspiracy” to keep the black man down etc. that I’d rather not have to listen too until the end of time

    2) Makes those arguing about it look like nutjobs, and hands ammunition to the lefties to use against us

    I’d rather focus my efforts to get this man out of office by working to eliminate his rubber stamp majority in 2010 and ousting him in 2012.

    1. In that case, Gaumagus, this should be very relevant to your concerns. She actually won the seat with less than 45% of the vote last time around. If she has another challenger in 2010, then this birther claim will likely be used in that campaign. If you don’t want a rubber stamp majority, then you should want to keep hold of that seat.

  8. I think a better way to get rid of her would have been to say “You have completely lost your mind and you’re hurting our party, now please go away.”

Comments are closed.