"Whatever it is I am against it!"

"The Brazen Serpent" by Michelangelo 1511, Fresco, Cappella Sistina, Vatican

P.S. Please note that due to some 400 comments on the previous post, and 600 on the post before that, the comments on ATB are from now on being shown in reverse, i.e last comment first. Typepad's new software shows only 50 comments per page, and the commenters in long threads were made to flick some 10 pages, so I changed it.

UPDATED BELOW ON DEC 3RD IN EXTENDED ENTRY

I received the below e-mail from David Horowitz, the Editor of Front Page, this morning, and I have to say I agree with him, we are beginning to sound like winging Liberals.

Like it or not, and my own huge reservations regarding his appeasement policies aside, Barack Obama is here to stay.  We had better start getting used to it, otherwise we will spend the entire next term screaming like headless chickens doing an impersonation of Graucho Marx in "Dunk Soup": "Whatever it is I am against it!"

Having got that off my chest, I still think that producing a Birth Certificate would have helped some 64 million people who voted for him, make a decision between fully legal choices, and not ones that involve the tearing up of The Constitution

Conservatives need to get a grip. My email box is full of right-wing trash talk (sorry, I'm peeved this morning) about Obama's fake birth certificate, his alleged covert Islamism, and Hillary's scandals. Worse, we were running a FrontPage story on this last wild goose until I canned it.

Since not everybody is following me at this point, let's take them one at a time. First, the birth certificate. Is Obama a legitimate president of the United States? Well, let me put it to you this way: 64 million Americans voted to elect Barack Obama. Do you want to disenfranchise them? Do you think it's possible to disenfranchise 64 million Americans and keep the country? And please don't write me about the Constitution. The first principle of the Constitution is that the people are sovereign. What the people say, goes. If you think about it, I think you will agree that a two-year billion dollar election through all 50 states is as authoritative a verdict on anything as w e are likely to get. Barack Obama is our president. Get used to it.

And what can conservatives be thinking when they push this issue as though it were important (as The American Thinker did last week)? Do we want to go on challenging the legitimacy of an election that involved 120 million voters? Have we become deranged leftists like Al Gore, who would attack the one binding thread that makes us a nation despite our differences? The mystique of elections is the American covenant. Respect it.
I'm not even going to go into the Hussein idiocy. Obama spent 20 years in Reverend Wright's Trinity Church. There is much that was wrong with that, but being a Muslim isn't one of them.

As for the Hillary thing, get real. Obama was elected in large part by a leftist crusade for hope and "change." Now, as president-elect, he has just formed the most conservative Democratic foreign policy team since John F. Kennedy, one well to the right of Bill Clinton. Where is your gratitude for that? What is more relevant in his Hillary Clinton pick: her prickly past or the fact that, except for Joe Lieberman, she is the Democrat most identified with support for the Iraq War?

Perhaps I should repeat that. Hillary Clinton is the Democrat MOST IDENTIFIED WITH REMOVING SADDAM HUSSEIN BY FORCE. She lost a presidency over it. So, whatever low opinion you may have about Hillary, on foreign policy she is the very best choice for that position that conservatives could expect to get. Even better, because the ONLY issue that really divided Hillary and Obama was the Iraq War. This is President Obama's way of saying, "Okay, now that I'm in office, I'm going to put my anti-war commitments aside and put the defense of the country first. And in case you didn't get that, I'm going to keep George Bush's Secretary of Defense in place, and I'm going to appoint a conservative Marine general as my National Security Advisor."

Maybe some conservatives out there have forgotten, but Clinton's Secretary of Defense, Les Aspin, was an anti-Vietnam activist. So were his two National Security Advisers, Tony Lake and Sandy Berger. In fact, they met Clinton in the anti-war movement. Conservatives should be cheering right now, not chasing red herrings.

And speaking of red herrings, watch Barbara Walters interview Barack Obama on ABC and look for 'the tick'.

UPDATE DEC 3RD: Another e-mail from David Horowitz this morning:

Among the many attacks on my previous blog, both abusive and not, one common theme seems to stand out. This is the claim that I have slighted the Rule of Law in favor of some misguided principle of democracy, which is not a conservative idea -- or so my critics would argue. My error is to have elevated the principle of majority rule over the rule of law.

I believe the answer to these critics is already in my original blog. The Founders lodged authority for the institution of government not in abstract principle but in the will of the people. True, they put certain restraints on that will to slow it down. But ultimately, the will of the people is sovereign. That is the Constitutional principle of our system of government.

The people voted for Obama. Assuming for the sake of argument that Obama is not a natural citizen of the United States, the question is: what are the consequences of having 9 appointed justices -- or more likely 5 of 9 justices -- tell 64 million voters that their votes don't count? Would our constitutional democracy survive such a conflict, and then would our Constitution?

Ultimately, the answer to these questions lies with the people. They are the ultimate authority not some abstract Rule of Law because the Rule of Law is in any case adjudicated and enforced by (highly political) men and women, while the people in its majority have it in their power to destroy the Rule of Law if they so will. The Constitution itself recognizes this fact by giving the people the right to amend it by a two-thirds vote. This is itself a recognition that the Rule of Law is an institution of men and women.

Granted, the presidential election wasn't won by a two-thirds vote. But would a decision by 9 Supreme Court justices as to whether a birth certificate was authentic be more trustworthy than the decision by 64 million voters that Obama should be president? The presidential election was a very extensive test of the people's will. So much so that I wouldn't be surprised that if Obama were found not to be a citizen, and the question of amending that provis ion in the Constitution were then put to a vote, the amendment would have a good chance of passing.

But all of this is quite legalistic and beside the point. My real question is: Why would anyone who cares about this country want to risk a civil conflict of this magnitude in the midst of two shooting wars with terrorist adversaries and a very hostile international environment. Particularly when the president-elect has appointed a national security team that a McCain Administration could live with?

Comments

[pacific_waters]

Are you obama apologists stupid or just delusional? This isn't a ball game. This is the future of this country. This a republic not a democracy, a government of laws not men. If he was ineligible to start with then nothing he does is legal or constitutional no matter how many people voted for him.

[Micha Elyi]

I'm with David Horowitz and Alexandra on the Obama birth certificate kerfluffle. First, the time to cry foul is when the foul occurs, not after the season is over -- to draw on a sports analogy. There were plenty of GOP state secretaries who could have ruled on keeping a non-citizen off their state's November ballot. None did. That's strong evidence in my book that Obama's proofs of eligibility were then and are now satisfactory.

Second, the GOP's own nominee wasn't born in on US territory. This is a fact, not a rumor. Yet McCain was waved through, put on ballots in all the states and territories, and where were all those questioners of birth-certificate validity who've been howling about Obama?

Obama benefits by keeping the kooks hot and bothered, they taint all of Obama's opposition. The birth-certificate bawlers are useful idiot tools of the Obama's continuing campaign; just look at all the mileage the Left still squeezes out of the decades-old wild charges of Sen. Joe McCarthy.

Obama won. Get used to that fact being a part of the political battlefield for the next four years. Now, get up and back into the struggle to save America from the P-O-R agenda of envy, greed, and government-as-god.

[tony the pitiful copywriter]

A birth certificate? There is a birth certificate.

Should we change the name of the GOP to The Pity Party? You guys lost. Get over it. Oh, and embrace science once in a while, ok?

So I suppose an intelligent woman like yourself would prefer Sarah Palin and her redneck buddies instead?

Why do so many people from privileged backgrounds (just look at your photo) hate democracy so much?

I predict the "new" Republican party will find a black face (done!), find homosexuality "acceptable" and come up with a few more other surprises. Because as the GOP has shown us since 1980, it's all about winning. Not much about governance, just winning.

[elridge]

If the voters had known the truth about BHO, they would not have voted for him. He knows that, and thus, keeps hiding the truth as if it cannot be found. The whole world knows that he is not qualified to be the POTUS. He can't even be in line to be POTUS. That eliminates a lot of other positions. Don't worry about anyone getting upset when his gold metal is taken away from him. People will want him punished just as they have taught their children; most young men have such discussions behind the wood shed but he didn't have a father nor a mother; in this country, he can't use that as an excuse. Lou

[gringoman]

Mac,

Condolences.

[Martin]

Alexandra, I miss this web site, it was great reading & viewing! I had it on my favorite list for several years. I now check back rarely to see if anything is new.

I wonder if your view, of the Obama birth certificate issue, may be a bit jaded? If I recall correctly, you are not a natural born citizen, as well?
That being said, your argument is rather flimsy, in regards to a majority voted for him and majority rules a democracy. We have no idea how many would have voted for him, if in fact the voters knew his birth certificate was not in order. I suspect, he would not have won.

[Ghost Dansing]

Mac..... I'm so sorry to hear this my friend..... death is part of life, but too young.

I'm sure you will continue to be a wonderful father to the boy who will need your strength now more than ever.....

Sometimes doing normal even in abnormal circumstances..... post once and awhile.....

[Alexandra]

Oh Mac, I am so sorry....there are no words that can possibly fill the void.

Please accept my deep and heartfelt condolences. My God she was so young, my father was 62 and I felt that was too young to die, but this....

It makes me think of that book "Why do bad things happen to good people?" written by Harold S. Kushner, a rabbi whose son died at the age of fourteen. There may be a little too much "God" in it for your agnostic taste Mac, but it may just help a little in this very difficult time. Written back in 1981, I hope you can still get a copy, otherwise I will send you mine. Please let me know.

My thoughts and prayers are with you and your son.

[the12thinfidel]

Mac, my sincerest heartfelt sympathies and prayers of hope go out to you and your family!

[mac brachman]

12th: I apologize for not responding sooner. I hope to answer your question in the near future. I also express my wish that the war between Hamas-dominated Gaza and Israel will end soon, but I recognize that the cause has been Hamas's unrelenting attacks against Israel since it (Hamas) took over the Strip.

I can't comment at length now. My beautiful wife, Elizabeth "Betsy" Brachman, passed away 8 days ago (Dec. 20) after a long fight with cancer. She loved life, was a superb knitter, a believing but pluralist Lutheran, a lover of people and of Christmas. She was only 53. Now my son Doug, age 12, and I have to figure out how to construct a life in her absence. I'm an agnostic of Jewish background
, but I have to believe that Betsy is reunited with her father, a wise man named Bil (one l) Reiser, who preceded her in death by only 7 months.

For obvious reasons, I won't be posting often in the near future, but will continue to read. Shalom to all, and let's hope for a better 2009. Mac Brachman

[gringoman]

Ted says:
December 25th, 2008 at 2:21 pm

QUESTION: By the apparent lack of interest of Congress and the Supreme Court in enforcing the Constitution’s “natural born citizen” clause thereby inaugurating an outlaw “President” and Federal Government, what moral and legal authority remains to compel taxpayers to file and pay federal income tax in 2009? Just wondering,

Reply: FROM GRINGOMANIC LEGAL BUREAU After consultation with the Bureau, we advise Citizen Ted:

Whether or not the U.S. enforces the "Natural Born" Law with respect to BHO, it will--repeat--will enforce Tax Law with respect to taxpayers (and by extension yourself).

You can take that to a bailed-out bank.

[Ghost Dansing]

I'm tellin' 'ya Gringoman...... Obama is a British subject and a British sleeper...... his first act in office will be to return America to the Commonwealth..... then America is just a stepping stone to reestablishing Rule Brittania!

link

[chrys]

HI THERE!! A new post!! I must have been sleeping!

[gringoman]

You know Gringoman....... I was expressing my conviction that the Obama Presidency is the artifact of a long term foreign plot by the British. His dual citizenship is pretty much proof of that.

Tavington

Posted by: Ghost Dansing | Monday, December 22, 2008 at 04:41 PM

GD, I'm not sure if the Obamanistas will go along with you on that. Something about Kenya relinquishing the colonial yoke not long after Obama Jr. was born from one of the various wives of Obama, Sr (if one assumes that Obama's 18-yr old Mom did in fact marry Obama's non-citizen father.)

And liberated Kenya feels rather propietary. In fact they have even just now forbidden any of Obama's relatives to speak to the media. This, according to a Govt. spokesman, is in order to assure "a proper flow of information." Previously BHO, in 2006 for example, visited Kenya and members of the extended clan and involved himself rather intensely in Kenyan politics (just the sort of thing, scholars believe, that the Founding Fathers wanted to prevent by making "natural born" a fundamental qualification for POTUS.)

But you are right about BHO's dual citizenship. He (or his handlers) admit that, even at factcheck. No one denies he was born that way.

If, as is likely, this dual(possibly even triple) citizen is Inaugurated, things could get unusually interesting on the legal front. Even dramatic, you might say.

[Ghost Dansing]

You know Gringoman....... I was expressing my conviction that the Obama Presidency is the artifact of a long term foreign plot by the British. His dual citizenship is pretty much proof of that.

Tavington

[gringoman]

Hi Alexandra,

Dare I say it? We seem to be on the same page re the 'Magical Mystery Birth Certificate.' David Horowitz arguments etc boil down to: "Look my friends, don't carry on like wild-eyed birthers....Constitution? A Republic? Don't you know the mob, I mean the people, spoke? You want the mob, I mean the people, burning things down?...Let it go!....Let it go already!"

This view makes a lot of sense, but unfortunately not enough. Alas, if only it was about "sore losers" and "truthers" and "birthers" and, you know, maybe a little "racism" thrown in to round it out. What a relief that would be. So nice and simple. DH et al would have much more of a point.

Sure, Obama will be inaugurated, unless the courts and Congress dare to defy the so-called "popular will." (We know how likely that is. Even SCOTUS can feel vastly out-numbered.)

And Inauguration will finally put the matter to rest? Obama will absolutely be a President, not a usurper? Yes? A "quaint" little matter like having had a non-citizen father and therefore ispso facto not being a "natural born citizen" won't matter, will it? Wonderful to think so, isn't it?

Alas, some of our finest legal minds in the nation---I mean ones who are paying attention--- are not so sure. (See the analysis of Dr. Edwin Vieira, Harvard's distinguished Constitutional Scholar, with 30 years experience at the bar and four Harvard degrees. Not your run-of-the-mill birther.

If the courts continue to cop out, without facing the Obama case directly, and he is inaugurated (very likely)it may get interesting---very, very, very interesting, despite the Lamestream Media's absolute determination to carry Barry. Yes, interesting, and in a way totally unprecedented in U.S. history.

Maybe not?

Maybe.

For the sake of national stability, you can keep hope alive when (sic) President Obama starts carrying out his official duties. The ramifications, both domestic and foreign, are potentially tantalizing.

[Ghost Dansing]

Just sayin' 12th. Obama is pro-Israel. He just won't give them bad advice like Republican rightists did. Unfortunately for Israel, they didn't realize the village idiots were in charge of America.

Things will be better now.

[the12thinfidel]

"Obama is anti-Israel" theme is a product of Republican hyperbole. So sayeth the Ghost Dansing of Hyperbolies Past.

I was referring, in part, to Rashid Khalidi, Chicago neighbor of Barry Soetoro, the former PLO spokesman/press agent from Beirut, (currently occuping a prestigious Professorship Of Arab Studies at Columbia), after his heartfelt sendoff from Chicago from all of the Khalidi's dinner companions, allies, and confidants.

As to 'Van's' comments, he and 'Miguel' are right on the money! A Constitutional Republic must prevail.

[Van]

Mr. Yoski said, "Losers whine, and get distracted by petty things such birth certificates, and loose sight of the bigger picture."

Or, some get distracted by petty things like a popular vote and lose sight of the bigger picture, like the Unites States Constitution and how our founding fathers described who was eligible to lead the Executive branch of our government, and who is not. An investigation into the reasoning behind the laws reveals even more.

There is a usurpation going on.

And we are at the brink.

Mr. Yoski, Mr. Horowitz and some others would do well to dare to read this article: http://texasdarlin.wordpress.com/2008/12/05/stand-by-me/#more-5324.

[Yoski]

Dear Alexandra,

I love the postings of theRenaissance paintings and the contemporary art. Beautiful an inspirering.

I am old school and have been taught and still believe that when Winners (eg. Conservatives) loose, they take stock, evaluate mistakes, examine the win of their opponents, learn from that, engage the enemy and live to fight another day. Losers whine, and get distracted by petty things such birth certificates, and loose sight of the bigger picture. The bigger picture is the fascist orientation of the current administration and its drive for a command economy. Our only options at this point is three fold:1) Hold the current Republican Senator’s and Congressmen's feet to the fire, support and elect conservatives to office; 2) Focus our energy on free market principles, and explain how government interference makes things worse. At every opportunity point out that the economic melt down is a direct result of the Democratic policies. 3) Get involved at the grass root level in our communities. Join neighborhood associations and groups, volunteer for community representation at city and county levels, fight the "Green" trends that are developing in most municipalities, join the PTA and fight the school boards, Infiltrate college and University board of representatives, encourage businesses to invest in grass root efforts, run for elected Judgeships, write letters to the local papers, etc. Most of these type organizations are held by the radical left. To win this has to shift in our favor.

In other words we should follow the principles laid out by Saul Lewinski and apply them to local governments and grass root efforts. In so doing we get our ideas out into the public. What I propose is long term. No easy solution here. This is what the radical left has done done for a sustained period of time.

As Rush Limbaugh commentated last week, ranting about current and future scandals are meaningless and wasted. Most Americans don't care. If they did, President Clinton would have been removed from office. Complaining about Media bias... wasted time and effort. They are what they are and that won't change. We have to developed strategies around their influence. If we take this type of grass root approach, we will win. If my memory serves me correctly, a lot of these ideas were laid out in David Horowitz’s pamphlet on how to elect conservatives. Lets gear up and do battle with the Left and erase this “new Dark Ages” (Denise Pager’s idea) wrought on by the “Destructive Generation” (David Horowitz’s description)of the 60s. We can win because truth and justice is on our side and Americans are all about truth and justice.

Yoski

[Joe]

Though I did not, could not, and would not vote for Obama, he will be my president, like it or not (I don't). However, I have to disagree with those who say the BC issue is "not important". It's not an obssession with me, but the issue of whether a president is constitionally qualified to serve is not unimportant.

Good to see you back. Where you been?

[Ghost Dansing]

"Obama is anti-Israel" theme is a product of Republican hyperbole. Obama's new Secretary of State's comments at AIPAC.

[the12thinfidel]

Even though you are in the majority of the 78% dem Jewish voters, Mac, I'm a bit surprised that BhO's background with anti-Semite friends/associates/mentors didn't have a bearing on your decision to support him since you seem to be an intelligent person. The questionable foreign sourced $33+ millions in donations to the campaign, supporting verbal endorsements from Hamas and others, just doesn't add up to a Jewish vote of confidence let alone a good decision for the middle east.
So why the optimism, Mac.

[Ghost Dansing]

But I still don't trust the Brits as far as I can throw them, Mac..... they're up to something, and as the rest of the world knows, the British are the puppeteers of the entire universe.

British Invasion

[mac Brachman]

Technically, Alexandra is right: Obama's father, a Kenyan, was a subject of the British crown. Obama was born Aug. 4, 1961, in Honolulu; his parents split up not long into his childhood. Kenya became a nation independent of the British crown in Dec., 1963, so Obama had "dual" citizenship. But at the time, he was still a toddler, and there is no denying that his mother was about as American as you can get: a middle-class Kansas-born white woman, though one with rather ahead-of-her-time social attitudes in marrying a Black African and unflinchingly raising a biracial child in Hawaii, Indonesia, and Kansas. My own opinion is that all of this about Obama's birth, his supposed "dual" loyalties, the questions about his religion are simply a collection of tactics to call into question Obama's legitimacy as President. The people pushing these things are sore losers and they need to give it up (as suggested by both Horowitz and von Maltzan) and concentrate on either joining with the President-elect as he tries to sort out the myriad problems he faces when he takes office, or come up with RESPONSIBLE opposition policies (not just negative, "oppo"-style name-calling and phony scandal-mongering) to offer as alternative for what Pres.-elect Obama offers come Jan. 20. It also points out how intellectually bankrupt much of the Right has become after years of winning elections and governing in a perpetual, dirty-campaign, us-vs.-them mode (thank you very much, Richard Nixon, godfather of modern paranoid American politics, even when in power, and Lee Atwater, propounder of modern smear tactics in Pres. elections, and Karl Rove, the master of the art, who cared not a fig about good governance, the public interest, or maintaining the strength and legitimacy of the nation or the welfare of its people but only about WINNING ELECTIONS at all costs) that, instead of accepting defeat (Obama won 53% of the vote, the first Pres. candidate in 20 years, since Bush I defeated Dukakis in 1988, largely by getting dirty on the advice of Atwater, while Dukakis refused to respond to the mudslinging, to win an absolute majority of the popular vote; he won 365 electoral votes, the Republicans lost a net of 7 U.S. Senate seats with Minnesota still to be determined, including the losses by incumbent GOP Senators in NH, Oregon, NC, Alaska, and the loss of GOP seats to Dems. in several places where GOP incumbents retired: Va., NM, Colorado) and being good sports, they are looking to continue the "permanent campaign" by other means. Meanwhile, the domestic auto industry is on the verge of collapse, the financial sector is teetering, the economy has been in "official" recession now for a year with no end in sight, the war in Iraq continues (with the situation on the ground improved but not over), the war in Afghanistan (or, more accurately, Afghan/Pakistan frontier) is, at best, a shambles, North Korea and Iran show no intention of following through with abandoning the pursuit of nuclear weapons, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict remains unresolved, the international Islamofascists continue to be triumphalist (with plenty of Leftist Western intellectual defenders and apologists rationalizing their abhorrent and inexcusable actions) in the wake of the mass murder in Mumbai, the US's long-term debt to foreign creditors numbers in the trillions, and there is no plan to preserve the solvency of the Medicare and Social Security systems. While Obama lines up his domestic and foreign policy teams and White House staff, and works his tush off 14 hours a day before even assuming the Presidency, in the hopes of dealing with these problems (I have hardly exhausted the list: there is also the environment/global warming; just rolling back the Bush Adm. policies of abandoning environmental protection standards will itself take months if not years; there is education; there is health care, etc.) in a coherent way, this fringe group spends millions of dollars for full-page ads in multiple newspapers (the NYT and my hometown Chicago Tribune, to name but two) to try and undo the whole presidential election.

And you wonder why the Republican party is in dire straits. I could go on about the flaws and pitfalls of the now ascendant Democrats (anyone familiar with me on this website know I'm a self-proclaimed moderate liberal but extremely skeptical of the far Left, especially of Leftist cant and sloganizing, but I don't like Rightist cant and sloganizing any better). While Obama, a liberal at heart but a moderate in his brain, seeks solutions, the Right, when not wallowing in self-pity, seeks to attack him, with seven weeks until he even assumes the burdens of the Presidency. Democrats stuck in stale ideology and stagnant defeat, 1980? Meet Republicans, 2008. Shalom, Mac Brachman

[Ghost Dansing]

Now that you mention it, Obama does look British...... He acts somewhat British too. I personally do not trust the British. We did fight several wars against them.

I suspect they want America back as a colony...... could be Obama is a British sleeper cleaverly maneuvered by Great Britain into the Presidency from which his first act will be to rejoin the Commonwealth, or worse.

Proof of the Queen's Conpiracy....... and Piracy on the High Seas!

[Alexandra]

Well I think the Birth Certificate aside, let us assume for argument's sake that he was indeed born in Hawaii.

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4, 1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children.”

Therefore he would have had by definition a dual citizenship at best, i.e according to the above he was automatically made a U.K. citizen no matter where he was actually born. According to The Constitution, and one comes back to it every time, on that basis alone he is not eligible for the office of the Presidency.

Despite the 'birthright by citizenship', which allows him to be a U.S. citizen by virtue of being purportedly born in Hawaii, he still had a dual nationality at birth, which brings us right back to square one .

[mac Brachman]

Great to see you posting, Alexandra. I voted for him and have admired his intellect, his calm, and his commitment, shown since the election, to DO something. I also think the birth certificate issue is a canard. I think Obama will make mistakes (he's human, who doesn't?). But I have hopes for him. Unlike his predecessor, he will ask us (like FDR, like JFK), to participate, beyond just shopping at malls. Wish I could write more but work, illness in family, responsibliities, the same old story. Shalom to all. Mac Brachman

[the12thinfidel]

Looks like Miguel nailed it. Horowitz meant well, but ended up throwing in the sponge in a potentially fixed fight. That is to say, we are a country governed by Constitutional law and a democratic republic, not a majority rules democracy. If BhO cheated the system, the system must prevail regardless. If BhO is legitimate, let him be President. We shall see consequences either way, and so be it.

[Van]

Though I respect Mr. Horowitz, and think that he had some positive and solid things to say, he is wrong that it is right to usurp the law (i.e. Obama's inelgibility as POTUS because of not being born in US) and then change the rules later.

It is not a team of Supreme Court justices that would be responsible for Obama's ineligibility, it would be his parents, who lived in Kenya when he was born.

Further responsibility should be on the DNC who brought an ineligible candidate to the election race.

If I have to fight a civil war to keep the Democrats from breaking Constitutional rules to gain power to then change the rules, as Horowitz suggests with his 'will of the people,' it is worth dying for.

For the 'people's sovereign will' would not have been subjected to the option of Obama had the DNC not set aside the Constitution prior to the election (so wouldn't they then be 'domestic enemies of the Constitution?')

Validating that illegal act with (Horowitz's) assent does not make us a stronger country, or a more united country; in fact it weakens us further. Should we capitulate the entire Constitution to the unethical and illegal Democratic power grab?

Horowitz is wrong.

[David]

Horowitz's rejoinder to the issue of negating portions of the Constitution without following the procedure for amendment is nothing but simple handwaving followed by... wait for it... fearmongering. Yep. He verified my supposition that his real point is that he fers what decieved, defrauded Obama voters might do were it to be demonstrated that Obama does not qualify to serve as president. He seems to fear exactly what I supposed in my original comment: Raila Odinga style rioting and a fracturing of society, rather than an adult response, "OK, let's amend the Constitution and run him again. He's young and it's only four years. He was so great the first time, we want another dose."

What? Does Horowitz so fear race riots from welfare queens (of all sexes) or some such that he'd admit that the Constitution is simply a dead document with no authority (as the Framers designed it to have) to rein in a runaway electorate?

*feh*

The Founders had better reasons than fear for rejecting the unjust rule of an oppressive government, but Horowitz argues--at the root--ONLY fear as a reason to reject the Constitution in favor of mob rule.

May I humbly interject here the third world county corollary to Santayana’s Axiom as a partial argument against Horowitz's suggestion that we surrender the Constitution to mob rule?

“In a democracy, those who refuse to learn from history are in the majority and dictate that everyone else suffer for their ignorance.”

There are more than a few reasons that the Founders did NOT give us a democracy but a representative republic when they framed the Constitution.

[the pistolero]

I wholeheartedly agree with David, the 12th infidel and Bower, even with Horowitz's follow-up message. I'll be saying it on my own blog and I'll say it here as well — which other parts of the Constitution would Horowitz throw out for the sake of political expediency? I know there are many who would do just that to the Second Amendment, and that's probably just a start for them.

[miguel]

Thanks to a wonderful person's speaking to me, I'll add my voice here.

Horowitz has a point, but a point not properly allowing the leftists to understand their own hypocrisy. When he asks why those who believe Obama isn't a citizen of America to just not push for a 5 of 9 Supreme Court decision invalidating the election, he disallows the left to feel what we the people feel when the leftists standard whining to the courts culminates in an ACLU 'judge shopping' until they find a judge who's in their pocket; in order for their operatives to repeatedly invalidate numerous votes of the people (on many fronts) in order to advance their service to their marxist god. One such front is their criminal attacks resulting from the passage of Prop 8 in Ca.

If Obama isn't a citizen and he knew it, then that's on him and him alone, not on the people who call him on his crime of deception, be it that that deception is true. The American people would in that case be the dumb fools they've shown themselves to be by their purposeful refusal to examine the merchandise they've so blindly bought.

Horowitz seems completely unable to see (and therefore has unconsciously accepted) the wholesale hatred the left holds for everything that's not themselves, very much like spoiled children sometimes in my classrooms.

Conversely, Horowitz is blatantly correct in his pronouncements re: the relative worldliness and vague acceptability of the cabinet appointments Obama has made as Obama winds his way through the labyrinth of his self-aggrandizing propelling of himself into the future responsibilities, yet untested and dangerous beyond his real past understanding. For this he needs some known quantities as touchstones; for nuclear war approaches via Iran's insane rulers (a gift of Jimmy), as general war approaches in the Mid-East, as a corrupt UN corrupts ever more, amidst his own party's destruction of our economy through Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac and it's over-taxing/regulation which as forced millions of American workers' jobs overseas, to name just a few problems America faces, largely at the hands of his own party, once my party too.

Here in California, where Obama wants to lead the nation, my former party has patently destroyed the economy of the once 5th greatest economic powerhouse on earth, even as it's utterly destroyed our once-vaunted educational system, while they've secretly gerrymandered the hopelessly dysfunctional and lying legislature which now cannot even draw up a budget, the incapabilities being so great and now so un-solvable.

They've destroyed hundreds of thousands of California/American jobs as they've run so many businesses overseas.

As a JFK democrat, I've resisted seeing the truths I now see; that wherever there is democrat control, there is: elevated crime, drug use, death, homicide, family destruction, horrific 'education', poverty, abortions, un-employment, business/job flight, dying hospitals, M-13 compliant street gangs, 'news'papers and TV 'news' in democrat pockets, government corruption and many more social ills they love so much, so that they can tax us all to "fix" these problems which they've engendered.

But now that I've seen these things, I'm just gonna say them out loud. It's the liberal destruction of our schools and our kids that has powered my realizations. I can now see why the Jews of Europe round-shoulderedly, meekly allowed for their own vile destruction at the hands of the traditionally anti-Semitic Europeans.

Thank you

[Alexandra]

David Horowitz sent another e-mail this morning, and the Dec 3rd update is published in the main text above.

[Huan]

1. good to see you are posting again.

2. we should all give him a chance to get it right

3. we should all criticize him when he gets it wrong

4. skepticism can be healthy

[Ghost Dansing]

Thanks for posting a new picture and post Alexandra..... we can all see the comments better now:)

[Ghost Dansing]

Well I like Obama much better than Dubya birth certificate or not! He will make much better President, and America will be America again.

Thanks for putting up a new picture and post Alexandra...... we were all writing upside down there for awhile because there were just too many comments for WordPress.... is this Wordpress? to handle.

Duck Soup

[Richard Vail]

Alexandra,

Thank you for coming back, and I 2nd (or 100th) the motion:

Your voice has been missed.

I sincerely hope that you will be back on a more regular basis. I have truly missed you insights.

Again,

Thank you for coming back.

Richard Vail
Pikesville, MD USA

[the12thinfidel]

Very accurate and correct comments, David. It has never made sense to me why, instead of producing in public his valid proof of citizenship, it has instead been a response of spending over a $M contesting 17 lawsuits... unless this is a case of knowingly defrauding the voters.

I would bet the dems Congress will propose changing the Constitution depending on the outcome of the Supreme Courts decision to take the case or not on the 5th of December.

[Miluimnik]

It's wonderful to see you back!

Peace,

Michael Travis

[Bower]

Great to hear from you, Alexandra. To underscore one of the comments, “Your voice has been sorely missed.”

Regarding Barack’s legitimacy to hold the office, I’m in the group that believes we either have a Constitution or we don’t. If ANY candidate can’t produce a birth certificate proving he/she meets the birth requirement, he/she can’t run.

I’m not bent out of shape by all this, by the way. I’ve kind of tuned out, resigned to the fact that we lost the election and must allow the victors their time in office

[Mike Anderson]

I, too, would like to see the birth certificate, just to satisfy my nonpolitical snoopiness about what President-Elect Obama is so reluctant to make public. My cynical mind suspects it AIN'T his place of birth.

That said, he will soon be my President, even though I voted for the other guys' vice-presidential candidate. Unlike many conservatives, I vow to GET A FRIGGIN' GRIP, and come up with positive ideas and opinions that make conservatism more attractive than liberalism. The alternative is to cast myself as the Neighborhood Geezer, hollering at kids to stop skateboarding on the sidewalk.

[the pistolero]

Haven't read the post yet, but I wanted to say it's good to see it. Your voice has been sorely missed.

[David]

OK, followed your injunction to look for "the tick" in the Obama/Walters Nerfball session. Yup, it's there, but so? It only reinforces my intention to keep praying for Obama's health. (No rational person wants to hear those Three Most Frightening Words in American Politics: "President Joe [or "Airhead"] Biden". *heh*)

[David]

"Well, let me put it to you this way: 64 million Americans voted to elect Barack Obama. Do you want to disenfranchise them? Do you think it's possible to disenfranchise 64 million Americans and keep the country? And please don't write me about the Constitution. The first principle of the Constitution is that the people are sovereign. What the people say, goes."

This is exactly what's wrong with so-called conservatism in this country today. "...[P]lease don't write me about the Constitution..." followed by a false plea to unbridled democracy is simply ceding the argument for the rule of law--which is at least as important in the Constitution as the will of the People.

As for "disengranchising 64 million people"--who knows? As a matter of fact, the birth certificate issue is precisely that issue: we do not know if Obama is constitutionally qualified to serve, and, not knowing, we do not know whether he and the DNC stole the franchise from those voters or not.

That's right. If Obama and the DNC defrauded the voters, then their votes were stolen.

But we do not know whether that was done or not. We just Do Not Know. THAT'S the birth certificate issue. In a nation where the will of the people is bridled by the rule of law (as opposed to simple mob rule), we ought to KNOW at least this much: does a candidate meet the qualifications under law to serve?

The email's spurious argument ("disenfranchise 64 million voters") seems to me to be rather a plea from fear: what would (some of) those voters do IF (again, we do not know what Obama's birth certificate might say, so IF) it were proven that he had defrauded the American electorate? Would they do as his cousin's Kenyan supporters do when Raila Odinga lost his election and riot in the streets?

Again, we do not know, but fearing what these (possibly) disenfranchised by fraud voters might do is no reason to eschew the rule of law. Picking and choosing which parts of the Constitution are the law of the land is like saying there is no law but King Log and King Stork ("O great Jupiter! Send us a king! No, not that one. Another one...").

Obama's free as a bird. No obstacles whatsoever to him providing a birth certificate to lay this issue to rest. Any conscientious person, it seems to me, would long since have done so.

(Strangely, in 1920, in a presidential election where only about 25 million votes were cast, Eugene Debs had nearly a million votes cast for him as the Socialist (communist) candidate. Strong, strong showing. But there was never a doubt as to his constitutional qualifications to serve, even though he ran from a prison cell.)