President Obama Plays with Fire
Why is it that Donald Trump is a creditable candidate with a significant segment of Republican voters? In some polls, he runs ahead of all Republicans save Mitt Romney, and all I have heard him say is that he wants to see our president's birth certificate. Imagine if he would ask to see budget cuts from the president or revenue enhancements.
Frankly, I would like to see President Barack Obama's birth certificate, too. But on the other hand, I have in hand a copy of a notice of our president's birth printed Aug. 13, 1961, from The Honolulu Advertiser. That has to count for something, no? According to the notice, he was born Aug. 4, 1961, but there are a lot of other things about him I would like to know. For instance, I would like to see those aforementioned budget cuts and the revenue enhancements.
At any rate, why is Trump a front-runner for president of the United States when he is running on this one issue, that being a birth certificate? No one ever has won the nomination for the presidency on such a paltry matter. The answer is obvious. It is fame. Trump's fame has given him name recognition. If any other candidate had name recognition, he would be a front-runner, too. That is why I scratch my head when I think of what President Obama is doing for Rep. Paul Ryan. President Obama is giving him name recognition, and that could be dangerous for Obama.
Last week, when Obama asked Ryan, the House Budget Committee chairman, to attend his "fiscal policy" speech, he put Ryan in the front row. There he astonished Ryan by exposing him to one of the most partisanly abusive speeches I ever have heard from a president. He accused Ryan of being "un-American," among other enormities. Ryan was expecting some sort of olive branch to be extended to him. It would be, he thought, the start of serious negotiations between them. Instead, he was put on display as the archenemy of all New Deal, New Frontier and Great Society programs — as "un-American." Ryan was surprised, as he told Mark Levin on Levin's radio show.
Well, he might be surprised, but he also should be grateful. The differences between his budget and Obama's are dramatic. Ryan's budget plan proposes $6.2 trillion less in spending over the next decade. He would return America to its modern-day spending average of about 20 percent of gross domestic product. He would add $4.7 trillion less to the national debt. Even before Obamacare is fully factored in, Obama keeps spending at 24 percent of GDP, a peacetime record. Despite raising taxes, he leaves us with $600 billion annual deficits.
In brief, Obama keeps us on the catastrophic course he has put us on with taxes raised on the rich and a tax increase coming for the middle class. You could actually expropriate the rich, and the revenue stolen would not cover Obama's budget to socialism. Does Obama know this? He gives no evidence of it. Ryan, on the other hand, has suggested something new. He would face up to the deficits and the entitlement catastrophe for which we are heading. Rather than being "un-American," Ryan keeps America on course as the land of the free. Obama heads us off toward Greece.
Now Obama is making Ryan famous. In the months ahead, he is going to make Ryan the face of change. If other Republican candidates do not come forward, Ryan will be the candidate by default, and that is fine with me. He knows the budget very well. He has an alternative on the table for all to see as against Obama tax-and-spend policies, which put the federal government in control of more of the citizenry's life than ever. Ryan is vigorous, is attractive, speaks well and has a pleasant demeanor. Does that put you in mind of any prior Republican president? Ryan may be the Republican candidate, thanks to Obama. If so, he will be president, and Obama can begin work on his presidential library. I am betting it will be in Blue Island, Ill., but possibly it will be in Honolulu, where he could continue the search for his birth certificate.
R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. is the founder and editor-in-chief of The American Spectator and an adjunct scholar at the Hudson Institute. His new book is "After the Hangover: The Conservatives' Road to Recovery." To find out more about R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr. and read features by other Creators Syndicate writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators Syndicate Web page at www.creators.com.
- R. Emmett Tyrrell Jr.'s blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
Newspaper notice? Please.
Submitted by Newsbubba on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 5:10pm.
I had a grandson born about three years ago in Canada, but since the parents were from our hometown, we put a birth notice in the local paper so that people who knew us and them would see the news.
I put in the vital statistics, along with the date and place of birth. I could have told the paper the kid was born at the North Pole and no one at the newspaper would have questioned it.
Having a newspaper notice saying someone was born in a certain place is as worthless as the paper Barack Obama's birth certificate is printed on, and only as accurate as the submitter of the information chooses to be.
I'll also bet that more people actually know my grandson than the number that can be found who say that they actually knew Barry in his early years!
So, just show us the Birth Certificate all signed by the doctor and certified by the state.
I really do not care WHERE he
Submitted by Willis_Leon_Johnson on Thu, 04/21/2011 - 5:26pm.
I really do not care WHERE he was born.
The WHERE is irrelevant.
The CITIZENSHIP status of BOTH HIS PARENTS is of PRIME IMPORTANCE.
The Constitution REQUIRES both parents to be CITIZENS.
The sperm donor daddy was a kenyan national and, at the time of barries birth a BRITISH SUBJECT.
End 'gun violence in America' - Require training and MANDATORY "Shall Carry" by every Citizen.
If harry reid is the best person to lead the senate, what does that say about the other 99 senators?
Say.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 6:19am.
Someone should have brought that up during the election in 2008 huh? I mean, he wrote a book acknowledging his father was not a citizen. So it was not like it was a secret.
I wonder how he got elected with such a clear violation of the rules.
Idiot.
Hey! it's my favorite
Submitted by Willis_Leon_Johnson on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 9:11am.
Hey! it's my favorite troll.
And the reason, since you are so uninformed on the issue, is because the media AND the 'republican' party ignored the issue because;
A: they care less about the Constitution than they do about used toilet paper,
and
B: The big bad media would have picked on them and made them cry.
Any more lapses in your education 'idiot'?
And what is with the childish name calling? Is that your emotional and intellectual level?
End 'gun violence in America' - Require training and MANDATORY "Shall Carry" by every Citizen.
If harry reid is the best person to lead the senate, what does that say about the other 99 senators?
Well then.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 9:21am.
You have a solution. You don't need our help. Why whine here? They ignored you in 2008. Here you are 3 years later still whining like a little baby about it and yet they still ignore you.
Maybe crying and whining ain't the way to get them to
A: care about the constitution
B: stop making the big bad media pick on them
Yes, I am emotinally and intelectually low leveled. But I have not spent 3 years whining like you have so I have a ways to catch up.
Poor little trollish
Submitted by Willis_Leon_Johnson on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 9:39am.
Poor little trollish person.
I do not "whine", I present facts.
Those facts make you cry and (gasp!) whine.
Much the same as when you first chose to begin your assaults on me personally.
I pointed out the the Constitution did not provide the authority to fund programs like npr, which made a woman wimper that her little fair-haired daughter loved some of the stupid programs and there was no other place for her little child to go.
The LIMITATIONS placed on the federal government by the Constitution made the poorly educated and uninformed woman feel bad and you decided that someone should be held accountable for her ignorance of the FACTS so you chose me instead of the men and women that helped found this nation and wrote the founding documents including the Constitution that made her cry.
Way to think your position through.
End 'gun violence in America' - Require training and MANDATORY "Shall Carry" by every Citizen.
If harry reid is the best person to lead the senate, what does that say about the other 99 senators?
Let's see who is winning here.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 11:14am.
Once a month, without fail, I site down and write an email and send it off to the President, both my congressmen, all the major right wing TV and Radio talk show hosts, major right wing columnists, right wing authors, right wing magazines, the editors at the Wall Street Journal, the editors of the top 15 right wing blogs, and the editors, founders, & contributors at NewsBusters. Every single month without fail since President Obama was inaugurated. Every single month for 28 months straight. Here is what I write ---
Let's see, President Obama has managed to stay in office for 27 months solely due to my emails. 27 months down. 21 to go.
Who's winning?
Score
The trollish, emotionally and intellectually leveled, uninformed, crying, assaulting, accountable holding, woman defending Veteran of a 1000 Psychic Wars - 27
Willis_Leon_Loony_As_An_Outhouse_Rat_Johnson - 0
Ha Ha. I did think through my position. Ha Ha. I win.
Oh birther Willis_Loon_Johnson. Birthieboy. Recognise this?
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 11:32am.
willis_leon_johnson: No person except a natural born Citizen...
That quote look familiar boys and girls?
willis_leon_johnson: The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. - Law of Nations, Emer de Vattel (1714-1767)
Johnson claims the framers of the constitution either referenced the book in the constitution or used the book as a reference and should therefore be as good as law.
His quote is from the revised and updated edition (1797) of the book listed. The book was written in French and translated twice before the writing of the constitution. And once after. Here is the actual quote from before the writing -
"The natives, or indigenes, are those born..."
The italics are actually in the book. They did not translate the original French. An actual translation for the word indigenes - indigenous. Not natural born.
The quote from the 1797 updated translation that willis_leon_johnson posted here on NB something like a 100 times - The natives, or natural-born citizens...
Before the constitution - The natives, or indigenes, are those born...
After the constitution - The natives, or natural-born citizens...
odd that you left out the
Submitted by Willis_Leon_Johnson on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 1:08pm.
odd that you left out the actual REQUIREMENTS for a person to be a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN using the de Vattel definition.
Loser of a 1000 physic wars left out a lot of important details. probably because he doesn't want the rest of the readers to look at the ignorance of his position.
de Vattel requires both parents to be citizens of the nation.
Why the omission?
And it is good to see that you cannot crawl above the childish name calling.
End 'gun violence in America' - Require training and MANDATORY "Shall Carry" by every Citizen.
If harry reid is the best person to lead the senate, what does that say about the other 99 senators?
Nothing wrong, whatsoever, with disagreement---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 4:47pm.
between posters; but when one has no ammunition other than to take the path of labeling The Vet as a troll, that poster's credibility, if indeed it ever existed, has flat-lined.
MD
well md, he doesn't like the
Submitted by Willis_Leon_Johnson on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 10:58pm.
well md, he doesn't like the limitations the Constitution places on the federal government.
He is not intellectually capable of understanding the difference between "Native Born" citizen and a "Natural Born" citizen.
And YOU seem to have no problems with the names he has called me for pointing out this failures which causes me to rethink your value to the conversation as well.
Odd that when he rolls out his vulgarities you have no problem, but when I, VERY ACCURATELY, point out his trollish behavior you come running to protect your little fool.
End 'gun violence in America' - Require training and MANDATORY "Shall Carry" by every Citizen.
If harry reid is the best person to lead the senate, what does that say about the other 99 senators?
Vattel Birthers are really quite stupid.
Submitted by The Vet on Sat, 04/23/2011 - 12:07am.
Willis_Loony_As_An_Outhouse_Rat_Johnson: ...to be a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN using the de Vattel definition.
As I already stated, quite clearly, Vattel's book was not written in English and the 2 available translations at the time of the writing of the Constitution did not use the phrase NATURAL BORN CITIZEN but instead used the original words in the original French language.
"The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens"
Those words, however, are quoted from a translation of de Vattel that first appeared in 1797, 10 years after the Constitution’s ratification.
Given that the phrase “natural born citizen” was not in the French, was it in the English translations available to the framers of the US Constitution? The answer is, “no”. The first English translation (thanks to Mr. Greschak for the images) in 1760 follows:
"The natives, or indigenes, are those born in the country of parents who are citizens"
And the first American Edition (1787) issued the year of the Constitutional Convention also does not have “natural born citizen”.
"The natives, or indigenes, are those born in the country of parents who are citizens"
So I ask, how can de Vattel’s “The Law of Nations” define a term that it doesn’t even contain (except in translations a decade after the Constitution was ratified)? If the framers wanted to refer to de Vattel, then they surely would have used his words from the English translation they had, but “natives or indegenes” is not in Artile II of the Constitution.
I have already posted all of this more than a ago in reponse to this quite stupid Vattel birther.
Vattel Birthers are really really quite stupid.
Submitted by The Vet on Sat, 04/23/2011 - 12:22am.
The term natural born simply means you were born into citizenship rather than being naturalized (sworn into citizenship). There is no great hidden meaning. I have shown again and again. The Framers did not get the concept from Vattel. They got it from English common law. Don't listen to me. Never ever trust The Vet solely for your education. The Vet always links to someone smarter, more knowledgeable, more versed, and more certain. Listen to the judiciary of the United States of America.
It thus clearly appears that by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country, and continuing to
the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, and the jurisdiction of the English sovereign; and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject, unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign state, or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the constitution as originally established.
The stupid Vattel birther's argument was heard by a court of law and dismissed.
To the extent that these authorities conflict with the United States Supreme Court‟s interpretation of what it means to be a natural born citizen, we believe that the Plaintiffs‟ arguments fall under the category of “conclusory, non-factual assertions or legal conclusions” that we need not accept as true when reviewing the grant of a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim. Irish, 864 N.E.2d at 1120. Thus, we cannot say that the trial court erred when it dismissed the Plaintiffs‟ case.
Once again, I am correct. I have the law on my side. And the insulting stupid idiot that continues to claim I am wrong is exactly as I stated in my opening post - An Idiot.
Oh stupid Vattel birther. Come back.
Submitted by The Vet on Sat, 04/23/2011 - 12:51am.
Come back. Tell the boys and girls how ignorant I am of the position. You iz so frightful smart and full of facts. Tell the boys and girls how wrong the court was. Come on. Tell the boys and girls how the writers of the Constitution refered to a definition that did not come out until 10 years after the Constitution was written. Come on. You is wicked power smart and the framers had a time machine that could travel ahead 10 years.
Tell the boys and girls how the court crapped all over your stupid argument. From my link above.
The bases of the Plaintiffs‟ arguments come from such sources as FactCheck.org, The Rocky Mountain News, an eighteenth century treatise by Emmerich de Vattel titled “The Law of Nations,” and various citations to nineteenth century congressional debate.
Your stupid Vattel birther conspiracy was heard by a court and laughed at just like we laugh at you. Now insult me some more. Insult the guy that has the facts and the law on his side.
Idiot.
Well, Willis_Leon_Johnson---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 04/22/2011 - 11:48pm.
You really aren't in a position to judge whether someone is intellectually capable of understanding anything if they present same in a way that does not align with your preferred thought process.
I don't particularly care what names you have been called, as I saw your melt down last year and it is quite apparent that you work at earning the labels put on you.
The very fact that you have to capitalize when making your point that you VERY ACCURATELY point out his trollish behavior is a distinct tell that you are not only uncertain about your charge, but that you are hiding behind it as well.
The only ammunition you have when it comes to presenting facts in support of your opinion are the ones you have that rolled off your head when The Vet poured 'em all over you.
While it is obvious that not every single poster agrees with The Vet, or his presentation methods, it is equally obvious that he has your number and rings your chimes pretty much as he chooses.
The Vet neither needs, nor would accept, 'protection' from his adversaries.
He handles your type quite easily, and in doing so, provides free entertainment.
I enjoy it.
MD
poor little trollish
Submitted by Willis_Leon_Johnson on Sat, 04/23/2011 - 9:43am.
poor little trollish persons.
He misquotes, omits large portions, relies on political appointed judges to reword and rewrite documents used by the Founding Fathers to create the system that IS the United States all for the specific purpose of having the opportunity to play childish name calling games, introduce obscenities and vulgarities into the message board.
And you think that makes the both of you look intelligent?
More childish and troll like than anything else.
End 'gun violence in America' - Require training and MANDATORY "Shall Carry" by every Citizen.
If harry reid is the best person to lead the senate, what does that say about the other 99 senators?
Whatever.
Submitted by The Vet on Sat, 04/23/2011 - 12:33pm.
Openly lie like the entire planet can't see what is written here. What, you think we are in a PM and no one can see you lie?
Phweet. The Vattel birther speaks.
As I recall, Willis_Leon_Johnson---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 04/23/2011 - 5:11pm.
neither of the "poor little trollish persons" you mention took a hiatus from this site because they were caught out as being too big for their britches.
As you have been.
While you have the right to twist, turn, and torque your "facts" to fit your 'opinion', no one here is required to pay obeisance to either your flights of fancy, your self imposed status as a Constitutional maven, or feel sorry for you because you continually place yourself in the ten ring on the target board.
MD
oh now little feller, you
Submitted by Willis_Leon_Johnson on Sat, 04/23/2011 - 9:35pm.
oh now little feller, you assume to know why I was missing from this site.
It has nothing to do with inflating the egos of the alinski followers that are prevalent on this site.
Everything you little boys try have been tried before and came up lacking.
Unlike the little minded fools that live in grandmas basement, I do have a real life.
Go ahead and do the saul alinski rules for radicals mantra and prove to everybody who, and what, you truly are.
As long as you are squealing like the little piggies you are, life is good for me.
I have succeeded in bringing your true colors to the fore.
Now, go find someone to change your diapers and wipe the spittle off your computer screens.
oh, and hang in there with the name calling, it warms the cockles of my heart.
End 'gun violence in America' - Require training and MANDATORY "Shall Carry" by every Citizen.
If harry reid is the best person to lead the senate, what does that say about the other 99 senators?
Actually, Willis_Leon_Johnson---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 04/23/2011 - 11:35pm.
All you have succeeded in doing is playing the role of the ass to perfection.
MD
I understand it now.
Submitted by The Vet on Sun, 04/24/2011 - 8:26am.
definitions of troll, alinski follower, and numerous other insults Mr. Johnson has thrown out - anyone that has backed up his assertions with actual facts.
Oh Mr. Johnson,
Still waiting for you to, you know, actually prove I or any of the sources I brought here was wrong. Until then, you just keep on insulting everyone here that is patiently waiting for you to prove you are correct.
We are patient. See, here is the thing, we don't have to resort to post after post of name calling when we are correct. But you go right ahead and show how little class you have by continuing to make the most vile and baseless of insults against fellow right wingers.
Vet, I suspect any day now Willis
Submitted by Jer on Thu, 04/28/2011 - 2:58am.
will be citing the controlling legal precedent established by In re Satchmouth...
while Satch will be referencing the noted Constitutional scholar, Dr. W L Johnson.
Jer
Still at this Willis?
Submitted by shawn. on Sat, 04/23/2011 - 5:22pm.
It would be nice if you would actually back up your point instead of pointing fingers and calling people trolls.
Sorry Vet, I know you and I have not been on the best of terms lately, but I thought this guy actually decided to drop this garbage and now he is spewing his crap again.