Are you a “BIRTHER” or a “MARK”.

In the old neighborhood we would get a empty Sony TV box, glue cement blocks or bricks in it, reseal it and sell it on the street for $100.00 with the story that it was a $600.00 Sony TV that fell off a FedEx truck. Anyone that bought it without opening it was labeled a “Mark” A Bernie Madoff client, a Schmuck.

The ones that wanted to see what’s in the box before they bought it, today would be labeled a “Birther”

Are you a “BIRTHER” or a “MARK”. Do you believe Obama was born in Kapi’olani hospital? If you do I have a bridge I would like to sell you. It goes from Brooklyn to Manhattan, ready for a toll booth to be installed.

A “Mark” BELIEVED BILL CLINTON WHEN HE SAID: “I DID NOT HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH THAT WOMAN” Then they found the stained dress. He lied and they became a “Birther”.

A “Mark” BELIEVED JOHN EDWARDS WHEN HE SAID: “THAT’S NOT MY BABY” Then the Enquirer exposed him. He lied and they became a “Birther”.

A “Mark” BELIEVED WILLIAM “FREEZER” JEFFERSON WHEN HE SAID: “I DON’T KNOW HOW THAT CASH GOT IN MY FREEZER” Then they threw him in the slammer and they knew he lied and they became a “Birther”.

A “Mark” BELIEVED LINDA LINGEL WHEN SHE SAID: "So I had my health director, who is a physician by background, go personally view the birth certificate in the birth records of the Department of Health, and we issued a news release at that time saying that the president was, in fact, born at Kapi'olani Hospital in Honolulu, Hawaii. And that's just a fact and yet people continue to call up and e-mail and want to make it an issue and I think it's again a horrible distraction for the country by those people who continue this."
Then they learned she lied, Fukino's statement never identified Kapiolani as Obama's birthplace and they became a “Birther”.

Fukino said, "[I have]...personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record...,"

Beyond the lie, if Lingle disclosed Obama's birth hospital without his permission, she has committed a misdemeanor. If Obama gave permission for this public disclosure, then Hawaii no longer has a basis for maintaining the privacy of Obama's birth records.

Welcome to the new members of the growing army of “BIRTHERS”

Chris Mathews, Rush Limbaugh, Hawaii Governor Abercrombie Senator Will Espero and Hawaii Legislators; Rida Cabanilla, Jerry Chang, Joey Manahan, John Mizuno and Calvin Say to name a few.

Proud to be a “Birther”

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Amend the Natural Born Citizen Requirement

Obama's Friends Working to ::
Amend the Natural Born Citizen Requirement


If the Facts Don’t Support the Theory, Destroy the Facts
by: CreativeOgre:
While digging my way through the Internet last night, I came across the following paper, written by SARAH P. HERLIHY. It’s title

AMENDING THE NATURAL BORN CITIZEN REQUIREMENT: GLOBALIZATION AS THE IMPETUS AND THE OBSTACLE

caught my eye, and had to read it…


I had to ask myself, what would drive any American to want to change a clause in a document that is the very foundation of our government?
So, I kept digging, and found that SARAH P. HERLIHY is employed by Kirkland & Ellis LLP http://www.kirkland.com
Noting that this law firm is based in Chicago, the light bulb was shining a little brighter.
Upon looking at the firm, and the partners, I found that
Bruce I. Ettelson, P.C., is Member of finance committees of U.S. Senators Barack Obama and Richard Durbin .
http://www.kirkland.com/sitecontent.cfm … temID=7845 (towards bottom of the page)

In addition, Jack S. Levin, P.C., another partner who, in December 2002 was presented the ” Illinois Venture Capital Association’s lifetime achievement award for service to the private equity/venture capital community” presented by Sen. Barack Obama

So it sure looks like Obama’s people have looked into the matter of “Natural born” as far back as early 2006. What is even more disturbing is that it would appear that they are following the thought of:
“If the facts do not support the theory, Destroy the facts!”
Here is the introduction to the paper… It looks like a road map for Obama’s defense lawyers…And a precursor to a Socialist world.

AMENDING THE NATURAL BORN CITIZEN REQUIREMENT: GLOBALIZATION AS THE IMPETUS AND THE OBSTACLE
SARAH P. HERLIHY∗
INTRODUCTION
The natural born citizen requirement in Article II of the United States Constitution has been called the “stupidest provision” in the Constitution, “decidedly un American,” “blatantly discriminatory,” and the “Constitution’s worst provision.”
Since Arnold Schwarzenegger’s victory in the California gubernatorial recall election of 2003, commentators and policy-makers have once again started to discuss whether Article II of the United States Constitution should be amended to render naturalized citizens eligible for the presidency.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution defines the eligibility requirements for an individual to become president. Article II provides:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Of-fice who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
Although these sixty-two words are far from extraordinary, the natural born citizen provision is controversial because it prevents over 12.8 million Americans from being eligible for the presidency.
In addition to Governor Schwarzenegger, the natural born citizen clause prohibits many other prominent Americans from becoming president, including Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm, former Secretaries of State Madeleine Albright and Henry Kissinger, Labor Secretary Elaine Chao, and over 700 Medal of Honor Winners.
Even though many of these individuals have served in high political positions or fought in a war on behalf of America, they are not able to become president simply because they were not born in the United States.
The natural born citizen clause of the United States Constitution should be repealed for numerous reasons. Limiting presidential eligibility to natural born citizens discriminates against naturalized citizens, is out-dated and undemocratic, and incorrectly assumes that birthplace is a proxy for loyalty.
The increased globalization of the world continues to make each of these reasons more persuasive. As the world becomes smaller and cultures become more similar through globalization, the natural born citi-zen clause has increasingly become out of place in the American legal system.
However, even though globalization strengthens the case for a Constitutional amendment, many Americans argue against abolishing the requirement. In a recent USA Today/CNN/Gallup Poll taken November 19–21, 2004, only 31% of the respondents favored a constitutional amendment to abolish the natural born citizen requirement while 67% opposed such an amendment.
Although some of the reasons for maintaining the natural born citizen requirement are rational, many of the reasons are based primarily on emotion. Therefore, although globalization is one impetus that should drive Americans to rely on reason and amend the Constitution, this paper argues that common perceptions about globalization ironically will convince Americans to rely on emotion and oppose a Constitutional amendment.
Part one of this paper provides a brief history and overview of the natural born citizen requirement. Part two discusses the rational reasons for abolishing this requirement and describes why the increase in globalization makes abolishing the natural born citizen requirement more necessary than ever. Part three presents the arguments against allowing naturalized citizens to be eligible for the presidency and identifies common beliefs about glob-alization that will cause Americans to rely on emotion and oppose a Constitutional amendment.
http://www.patriotbrigaderadio.com/barracks/index.php?topic=250.0

Sarah P. Herlihy - Associate

Sarah P. Herlihy

Chicago
Phone: +1 312-862-7089
Fax: +1 312-862-2200
  • 2005, Illinois
  • Law Clerk to the Honorable Michael M. Mihm, United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, 2005 - 2006
  • Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago-Kent College of Law, J.D., 2005 with High Honors

    Order of the Coif

    Kent Legal Scholar

    Chicago-Kent Law Review, Executive Articles Editor

    Moot Court Honor Society:
    Winner - 2004 Herbert Wechsler National Criminal Law Moot Court Competition - Buffalo, New York
    Second Place Brief – 2004 Herbert Wechsler National Criminal Law Moot Court Competition – Buffalo, New York
  • Indiana University, B.A., Slavic Languages and Literature & Political Science, 1994
Overview
Professional Profile
Sarah Herlihy is an associate in the litigation practice group.
Publications
Note, Amending the Natural Born Citizen Requirement: Globalization as the Impetus and the Obstacle, 81 Chi.-Kent L. Rev. 275 (2006)
Featured in Chicago-Kent Report from the Dean: Six Standout Professionals Reinvent Themselves as Law Students
Prior Experience
Manager of Guest Relations, The Field Museum of Natural History, 2001-2002
Manager of Training and Operational Services, International Theme Park Services, Inc., 1995-2001
Courts
United States District Court for the Central Distric
Posted by at
Labels: ,

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)