| This is a
WorldNetDaily printer-friendly version of the article which follows.
To view this item online, visit http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=189389
Wednesday, August 11, 2010 BETWEEN THE LINES Obama has lost eligibility issue Exclusive: Farah predicts legislators, media will finally address constitutional question Posted: August 10, 2010 1:00 am Eastern
By Joseph
Farah
Just as Richard Nixon lost the battle of Watergate because of coverup
and stonewalling, Barack Obama has lost the battle over his constitutional
eligibility for the same sins. Not only is it a winning issue, it is the only issue that can
effectively undo the nightmare of the Obama era in one fell swoop. There would be no need for repealing Obamacare if it turns out his
presidency was a sham from the beginning. There would be no need to wait until Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan
retire or die to see them replaced on the Supreme Court if it turns out
his presidency was a sham from the beginning. New strategy
unveiled on answering Obama's eligibility questions. See how you can
help. There would be no need to wring our hands in hopes that future
congresses and future presidents might roll back all of the damage Obama
has inflicted on America if it turns out his presidency was sham from the
beginning. There would be no need to wait until 2011 in hopes that a new
Republican majority might impeach Obama if it turns out his presidency was
a sham from the beginning. There would be no need to wait until 2012 for another chance to replace
Obama if it turns out his presidency was a sham from the beginning. That's why this issue is so important. I've had many confidential conversations with influential people whose
names you would know well – people sitting on the fence on this issue for
too long. They began explaining to me a year or two ago why they didn't
challenge Obama on this issue more aggressively. They were afraid of going
out on a limb that Obama could saw off at any moment by producing his
birth certificate that would clear up all the questions. It should be quite clear to anyone by now that is never going to
happen. First of all, Obama is never going to produce that document. I don't
know why he won't, except that it will reveal something extraordinarily
embarrassing – something completely at odds with his official narrative.
There are just too many other personal documents being concealed by Obama
– student records, travel records, passport records, medical records, etc.
Even
his mother's passport records reportedly have been destroyed! Second, even in the extremely unlikely event that Obama were to produce
a birth certificate that affirmed his birth story, it will merely serve to
refocus the debate on eligibility. The
best-selling new book "Manchurian President" devotes an entire chapter to
exploring whether Obama could be constitutionally eligible as the son of a
Kenyan father. The clear conclusion is no – he can't be. There is no
way that a foreigner could confer natural-born citizenship on a son no
matter where that son was born. In other words, this is a win-win issue for those of us who don't want
to live any longer in the Obama Nation – not now, not next year, not the
year after. A year ago, I was a lonely voice crying in the wilderness on this
issue. No longer. So-called "birthers" now represent a majority of the
American public. (Column continues below) I predict these polls will embolden politicians across the country – in
spite of the ridicule and vitriol inflicted on them by the press
establishment. I predict next year you will see more than one or two state
legislatures approve bills that require presidential candidates to prove
eligibility before getting on the ballot. I predict you will see more
House and Senate members speak out on this issue in 2011, as the Congress
takes on a new look. I even predict a few other members of the media might open their eyes
on this key constitutional question before too long. After all, ultimately it's about the integrity of the Constitution.
Obama has made it clear he has no respect for the law of the land. He has
no respect for what the Constitution actually says and means. He does not
believe in limited government. He does not believe in the rule of law. He
believes in the rule of men – men like himself. And that's why so many of us want to see America freed of his
leadership at the earliest possible moment and as completely as possible.
You tell me if there's a better way to achieve that objective than an
uprising that demands he prove what he should have been required to prove
in 2008. |