A "Con"stitutional Question

November 16, 2008
A "Con" stitutional Question

Ok. We've had our election. The national media gave Obama his Rolls Royce ride to the white house. The people" (represented by a much larger percentage of street people bussed to the polls in the weeks before and during election day than had ever been seen in the past :-) have made him the "President-elect". (Republicans have little ability to counter this new form of electioneering except to work to stop all the early voting and make absentee voting much more difficult. It wouldn't stop the election day busing, but it would put an end to the huge numbers that get dragged to the polls in the weeks preceding an election. This is the Republicans only real solution since there are probably very few street people who would vote Republican unless for a specific quid pro quo and Republicans tend to get squeamish about outright vote buying.)

Being president-elect, however, is not a long term position. It is supposed to come to an end, according to the Constitution, on January 20 of the year following the election. But we have over two months left before the scheduled occasion.

So what happens if Obama is disqualified from holding the office before that date arrives? And, even more interestingly, what if the courts were to so determine after he is sworn in as President? I doubt that it will happen but this election has been so strange that nothing would surprise me. I think most people believe it is too late. All those lawsuits challenging his standing to be the U.S. President are generally thought to have gone "poof" with his election. But they didn't.

Interestingly the lawsuits have not been dismissed as frivolous either, which is the common response to the wing-nut lawsuits that pop up virtually unnoticed at other elections. In fact, despite the best attempts by the media to ignore them, the lawsuits have a pesky way of showing up and are not proving susceptible to being swept under the rug. I don't know if it is true or not since it is just an unverified comment, but at least someone apparently counted and says there are 17 cases in the Federal courts on this issue, two of which are currently before the Supreme Court. I assume there are "a bunch" in state courts as well seeking to stop certifications or whatever in the individual states.

Nor are these all nut-case lawsuits. Everyone has heard of the Phillip Berg lawsuit. It has been fairly well scoffed off the table by the mainstream media suggesting just that ... that it is just another nut-case action. Part of the problem with that argument is that Phillip Berg isn't your typical nut-case. Indeed he is the former Deputy Attorney General for Pennsylvania.

Although that is probably the most famous of the cases, perhaps the most fascinating and compelling case is the case brought in California by, among others, Ambassador Dr. Alan Keyes. Dr. Keyes (a PhD from Harvard is not one to be brushed off easily. He also overcomes the big problem that Phillip Berg has with his case is that the court is questioning his "standing" to bring the action. I think the court is hopelessly wrong on that. Any citizen of the United States has standing to bring a lawsuit alleging that a presidential candidate (or president-elect) does not qualify for the office.

However that is ultimately decided, Dr. Keyes does not face that problem. Perhaps fortuitously, he was on the ballot in California as a candidate for President running as the nominee of the American Independent Party. It would be difficult to imagine who would have standing if a citizen of the country who was competing with Obama for the election as President, does not.

You would think that Obama would stop trying to win all these law suits on procedural grounds and just wipe them out on the merits ... if indeed he is right on the merits. All he has to do is wipe out the "vault birth certificate" (the real one ... the kind you probably have to show to get a driver's license! Not that phony certificate of live birth that the experts are split on but that appears there is a good chance it is a forgery).

I have a hunch that Obama may not even have known where he was born until questions came up about it! It isn't like he remembers it. And things were such a whirlwind he probably didn't even take it all seriously when it started. But the wheels of justice grind slowly ... but they do grind away. But even though it isn't the kind of thing one is likely to remember, ignorance absolutely is no excuse.

I can see it, though. His Mom (who was a bit of a wild card anyway) wanted him to have U.S. citizenship as a "born in the U.S.A. type, not as a "naturalized by moving here so young" type, so claimed he was born in Hawaii and told him that. His Grandmother said he was born in Kenya. She certainly had nothing to gain by saying that. Only the vaulted certificate knows for sure. And by now, probably Obama. Or he would have produced it. He was recently in Hawaii for his Grandmother's funeral [no, I'm not enough of a wing-nut to go there :-)]. But I bet he checked the certificate while there. And instead of producing it as he has been court ordered to do and which would make all the lawsuits go "poof" ... he fights them on procedural grounds and keeps the birth certificate in the vault.

But the "no standing" argument presumably won't work against Dr. Keyes. Nor will the screams of racism by his proxies. The fact that Dr. Keyes is a nationally syndicated columnist and a black man who stands about 6' 7" adds a bit to the drama. He has also held substantive governmental positions, particularly in the Reagan administration. And he was on the ballot for President in California.

The interesting question really is whether the issue gets decided before or after January 20. He can't very well pardon himself if he is not the real president (which he wouldn't be if he was not constitutionally qualified to hold the office). He would be, in the words of the Keyes' suit ... a usurper to the office. I don't know what the punishments are. Is it treason? Would the U.S. be after him just as all the Islamic world will be because he is an apostate?

He is forming an army to answer solely to him ... do you suppose he'll put up resistance if the courts order him to get the *%&#$)% out of the President's chair? :-)

But here's the thing. I don't know if Keyes or Berg has thought through. Clearly, if he is found to be ineligible before being sworn in, he gets booted. The Constitution is clear on that. But what if it doesn't happen until after he is seated? Would Pelosi become VP?! :-) Nah. Even the Forefathers would have thought far enough ahead to save us from that! Presumably it would be the same result.

However ... I'm still not certain that Keyes and Berg and the others have thought this through sufficiently! Obama could take his platform and run comfortably in the Socialist party of most countries of Europe. But behind the rhetoric he has shown some surprisingly conservative thoughts. And there is nothing like "real life" to make one more conservative!

He is an unknown. Usually that is bad. Except this time we know who his replacement would be: Joe "no longer Biden his time". And we do know his record. I'm not so sure but what I'd rather take my chances with the unknown!