HOW LONG CAN THE ISSUE BE “EVADED?”
February 10, 2012
It has now been over three years since I last wrote you begging for the good of the Country the Court take on the Presidential Eligibility issue which continues to cause division and angry discourse among the Citizens. The opportunity has been before you multiple times and still you deny the American people a hearing on the Merits. Justice Thomas in a House subcommittee last year appears to have confirmed that the Court is intentionally “evading” this issue which indeed seems to be the case. If this is the case to what good end do you see this avoidance? I do not desire to cast aspersions but I am perplexed at the workings of the court seeming to hear and decide cases which, in the weight of importance, pale in comparison. I shake my head in disbelief. Rest assured I would not raise such questions as these and those I am about to if I had not heard Justice Thomas indicate you had taken a course of evasion.
I know as an experienced Physician an early diagnosis and treatment improves outcomes. Do you not think the same principle applies to the healing of our Nation? We are now headed rapidly into another general election with the question of the Framers intent relevant to Mr. Obama regarding the “Natural Born Citizen” clause hanging over us. To add significant weight to the situation we now have several Republican candidates for President being vetted with a parent born overseas.
We are divided on the issue and in need of resolution. I am now hearing my fellow Citizens who support Mr. Obama begin to cry foul that those on the Right who challenge him on the eligibility issue “hunker down in silence” when it comes to the “Darlings of the Grand Ole Republican party”. Take for instance Bobby Jindal and Marco Rubio who some have touted as excellent choices for Vice President or perhaps President in the future. I am convinced that NEITHER Mr. Rubio or Mr. Jindal meets the requirements under the definition of a Natural Born Citizen. I am NOT saying that either of them would NOT be a good President. This is NOT about political views as it is NOT with Mr. Obama. This is NOT about race as Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum whose fathers are foreign born are also not immune. I am saying that the “cult of personality” or the partisan desire for power does not trump the rule of law for if it does we are NOT a Nation of laws but rather of men.
Those who accuse the Right of hypocrisy are absolutely justified to do so! They were right in 2008 when they questioned the eligibility of Senator John McCain only to have their concerns ignored and then “fixed” by Senate resolution 511 (interestingly supported by Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Obama himself ) declaring McCain eligible. Is this how our system is intended to work? Issues of Constitutional import get “fixed” by Congressional Resolution? I think not. While Rome is burning it appears the system of “Good Ole Boy” and to not leave out the ladies “Good Ole Girl” cronyism has no problem reaching across the aisle when it comes to helping themselves. No wonder John McCain dared not broach the Obama eligibility issue as he was already beholding to Mr. Obama. No wonder the “Established Republicans” sit on their hands mute like guilty children paying penitence and do NOTHING but to ignore pleas from their own constituents to support the Constitution. Shame on all of them; they are a National disgrace. How can they wonder why the public holds them in such low esteem? But I digress.
I am certain the court must be aware of the recent ballot challenge in Georgia in which the defendant Mr. Obama chose willfully to ignore the Court and not produce any documentation to support his claim that he is eligible to be on the ballot. It is obvious that the decision by Judge Malihi in favor of the defendant is fatally flawed as the defendant produced no documents, no sworn testimony and in fact the defendant produced absolutely nothing in defiance of a court order even though the burden of proof according to Georgia law resided with the defendant in the affirmative. This decision and Secretary of State Brian Kemps decision to uphold the ruling no doubt are going to appeal and there are other cases pending. Does the court not think it wise to settle this issue urgently? Certainly the Court recognizes that the preservation of the integrity of the free election process we are approaching hangs in the balance. To this effect there are pressing questions that deserve immediate answers.
· Is it your intent to continue “evading”, as Justice Thomas has implied, and deny application to hear this case leaving us divided with no clear answers going forward into the general election and beyond?
· If you do plan to hear this before the general election exactly when do you intend to do so?
· What if Mr. Obama indeed fails the eligibility test? Is it not reasoned the longer you wait the less chance the Democratic Party would have in fielding and vetting a qualified candidate? Would a delay into late spring or summer tip the balance and even decide the election for the Republicans? Can you imagine the outrage and rightful indignation of the Democrats should this occur? What about the Republican candidates? Permit me to suggest that it may be wise and prudent to settle this issue so that the Parties and the States can verify the Candidates on both sides meet the eligibility requirements without anymore delay.
· Do you not consider this as an important issue? Are you content to let the Constitution die a slow death by a thousand small cuts? Have you rendered yourselves irrelevant other than to determine the pace at which we dispose of it?
· Do we still have a Constitutional Republic or is it an illusion? If it is lost do you not have a moral and ethical duty to inform the Soldiers who are dying in an effort to defend it? The questions can go on and on ad infinitum.
In spite of the questions, I am not willing to accept that all we have fought for is gone. This for me is to think the unthinkable! So, perhaps the truth of why you are evading the issue is more straightforward. Might I be so bold as to state the obvious: your actions suggest that you are evading hearing this issue because you ALREADY KNOW THE ANSWER and you are afraid of the social and political consequences of that decision. This has all the appearances that through the deliberate actions of some and the inaction of others, we have created in essence a colossal mess; a constitutional crisis of immense proportion that must be addressed before we have yet another botched election process.
I ask the court to forgive my lack of decorum if my letter is perceived as deficient for I am certain it is but I trust that you will accept that my intentions are honorable and I mean no disrespect to the Court; but I cannot hide my own frustration and fears and I wish to convey a sense of urgency and a desire to see that our Constitution is upheld. My argument to the Court is simple; the time to settle this case is NOW. It goes without saying that any officers of the court that have a vested interest in this case should recluse themselves; in particular those whose appointments would become null and void should Mr. Obama be proven to NOT be eligible and thus lack the legal authority to appoint them. The American People are watching. The World is watching. We the People deserve and demand answers.
This issue is not going away. A YouGov poll in January of 2012 shows a full 41% of Americans doubt the Obama birth narrative in spite of his releasing a “long form birth certificate”. What question before the court this very moment is more important than the determination the person holding the Office of President of the United States has the LEGAL AUTHORITY to hold that office? Certainly not Health Care for if Mr. Obama did not have the legal authority to sign it in the first place the law is VOID and your deliberations on the merits are worthless. In Minor V. Happersett did the court not determine the citizenship status of Virginia Minor before moving forward and that she being born of parents who themselves are US citizens and being born in the United States was a “Natural Born Citizen”? Given the myriad questions surrounding Mr. Obama and the doubts of the citizens Mr. Obama was even born here, should you not first establish as FACT that he has the authority to sign the Health Care Bill? What have you seen as tangible evidence that he does? A Birth Certificate on the Web or what he presented to the Georgia Court…absolutely NOTHING? Millions of people see the Emperor has no clothes; I trust you would not wish to put the court in such a humiliating position as the Emperor.
What I saw occur in Georgia this past few weeks is absolutely frightening and I myself am afraid. You must understand the concerns among the Citizens that we no longer have the rule of law are not completely unfounded. Who among us can willfully disregard a court order, not pay a penalty and then prevail in a Court of Law? If allowed to stand what precedent does this set? Is he really above the law? I saw Mr. Obama at the State of the Union address of 27 Jan. 2010 show a flagrant contempt for the Judiciary. What makes you so confident that he would even abide by your decision should you find him not eligible and willingly step down? I have seen nothing to suggest he would. I hope I am wrong.
Our Constitution is precious. To me the words written on that parchment are more than just the ramblings of old men whose ideas have run their course. The words are a sacred promise, purchased with the precious blood and treasure of those who have come before, between the Government and the Citizens that we will NOT HAVE OUR GOD GIVEN RIGHTS INFRINGED UPON OR TAKEN FROM US EVER AGAIN. This promise, the covenant crafted from the laws of God and Nature requires for its survival an independent Judiciary, committed to the elucidation of truth, armed by the conviction of the human spirit humbled before our Creator, unafraid and undaunted to stand on the side of Justice regardless of the price. If the Supreme Court “evades” our concerns who are we the citizens to look to for relief? The nature of man is corruptible and MUST be restrained by the rule of law. Our right to have a President that respects the law, does not hold himself above it , fulfills the Constitutional requirements to hold the office and who defends the Constitution is implicit. As I did in January of 2009, I again plead with you to settle this issue of concern for the challenges we face as a Nation are many, the time is short and we must not fail.
Dr. David Earl-Graef LtCol USAFR MC