From the National Review, THE voice of the right wing, of the conservative faction, of the Republican party.

Obama Derangement Syndrome
Shut up about the birth certificate.

By David Horowitz

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. The fact that these efforts are being led by Alan Keyes, a demagogue who lost a Senate election to the then-unknown Obama by 42 points, should be a warning in itself.

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. (McCain narrowly escaped the problem by being born in the Panama Canal zone, which is no longer American.)

…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?

Conservatives are supposed to respect the organic nature of human societies. Ours has been riven by profound disagreements that have been deepening over many years. We are divided not only about political facts and social values, but also about what the Constitution itself means. The crusaders on this issue choose to ignore these problems and are proposing to deny the will of 64 million voters by appealing to five Supreme Court Justices (since no one is delusional enough to think that the four liberal justices are going to take the presidency away from Obama). What kind of conservatism is this?

It is not conservatism; it is sore loserism and quite radical in its intent. Respect for election results is one of the most durable bulwarks of our unity as a nation. 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.

http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MjQyOTgxM2M0YWMxOTdhZDcwMzlmMDU1ZGYxNzFkMmQ=

Try harder. Try harder to overcome your natural congenital deficiencies.

Don’t ever let it be said that when the opposition scores a clever point, that Wes George doesn’t tip his hat!

Enjoy the moment, darling, I believe it’s your first this year.

And it turned up here. Who would have thunk it.

http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB122763857669957141.html

“No, the Supreme Court is not going to intervene and stop Barack Obama from becoming president.

Normally this would be “Bottom Story of the Day” material, but lots of crazy rumors have been going around, albeit mostly on blogs and other Web sites of the far-right fringe. Last week, however, David Serchuk of Forbes.com rehearsed one of them, giving us an opportunity to set the record straight. Here’s Serchuk:

You’ve got to hand it to Philip J. Berg: he doesn’t give up easily. You might recall that Philadelphia attorney Berg tried, and failed, to halt the presidential election of Barack Obama on the grounds that he is not a native-born citizen. Game over, right? Wrong.
Berg filed a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court in late October, asking that the highest court review the decision of the U.S. District Court in Pennsylvania. The latter court dismissed Berg’s claims because he lacked standing to bring them. Standing requires plaintiffs to prove they are directly affected by the issue at hand, with evidence of injury that is concrete and particular. In its decision the district court said Berg “does not, and we believe cannot, establish injury in fact.” It also dismissed his claims as frivolous.
Berg takes this in stride. His writ, he says, requires Obama and the Democratic National Council to respond by December 1. . . .
One of the pillars of Berg’s argument is that Obama doesn’t have a legally-valid U.S. birth certificate because he was born in Kenya . . .
In fairness to Serchuk, he doesn’t seem to take this seriously–but he doesn’t quite explain why it is nonsense. So, here goes.

In August Berg filed a lawsuit in Philadelphia’s federal trial court, alleging that Obama was not a “natural born citizen” and thus constitutionally ineligible to be president. No trial was held; on Oct. 24, the court summarily dismissed Berg v. Obama on the ground that Berg did not have standing to sue. (In fact, the judge who dismissed the case opined that Berg’s efforts to establish standing “are frivolous and not worthy of discussion.”)

On Oct. 30, Berg filed a petition for a writ of certiorari–in laymen’s terms, he asked the Supreme Court to hear his appeal. (Note that contrary to Berg’s language, which Serchuk repeats, one does not “file a writ.” One files a petition, and the court decides whether to issue a writ.) On Oct. 31, according to Berg’s Web site, he filed a motion asking Justice David Souter for injunctive relief in the form of halting the following week’s election.

On Nov. 3, Souter denied the injunction. The next day, the election was held as scheduled. You might have read about it, it was in all the papers.

It is true that Berg’s petition for certiorari is still pending before the high court. It is also true that there is a deadline for responses from the defendants (including Obama) of next Monday, Dec. 1. The defendants, however, are under no obligation to respond, and there is no reason to think they will bother.

The probability that the court will actually grant certiorari is, in theory, greater than zero, but it is such a small number as to be incomprehensible to anyone within the ordinary range of intelligence. As Judge Peter Messitte notes in an article for the State Department’s eJournalUSA, the justices typically grant such petitions only for cases “raising particularly significant questions of law, and/or those where there is a division of legal authority, as where lower courts have produced conflicting interpretations of constitutional or federal law.”

An additional rumor, not repeated by Forbes.com’s Serchuk, is that the “response” that Obama is “required” to file next week consists of proof that he is a natural-born citizen. Those who make this claim seem to believe that cert. is two, two, two writs in one. In fact, the only question currently before the high court is whether to hear the appeal at all.

Even in the vanishingly unlikely event that the court does grant certiorari, it almost certainly would consider only the legal issue raised by the lower court’s ruling–namely, whether Berg has standing to sue. In the even more vanishingly unlikely event that the justices rule in his favor, the case would be returned to a trial judge for consideration of the factual allegations.

One Leo Denofrio has a pending petition for certiorari in a similar case that was dismissed by the New Jersey Supreme Court. His prospects for success are approximately equal to Berg’s, for the same reasons. We devoutly hope this is the last item we will ever have to write on this silly topic.”

Its a real problem and nothing to be flippant about. An usurper, under the constitution, is held to be committing the crime of perjury merely by taking the oath. Thereafter all decisions he makes are held to be criminal acts. He has to be arrested. He cannot be impeached. The constitution does not allow for his impeachment since he is not President. But these laws were written when the President would have had a sword, a musket, or a piece of hickory as his only weaponry. And not some massive security establishment.

So one can see the seriousness of the matter and the importance of stopping this Monsourian candidate before he takes the oath.

Now you are wrong. You should live with it. But do you have any evidence that you are NOT wrong? Because once you learn to provide evidence for this sort of easy stuff then maybe you can get a grip on this science stuff that you clearly have no natural calling for.

Where is that empirical evidence fella? Its all induction plus make-believe to you isn’t it?

And the fact is nowhere can anybody find that he ISN’T an undocumented alien. You cannot work this stuff out apriori George. As far as anyone knows he’s an undocumented alien. And thats just the fact of the matter. But it has huge implications, given his associations, since it is the case that an undocumented alien could not have gotten that far unaided.