By Douglas J. Hagmann
There is something wrong when simply raising the topic of Obama’s Constitutional eligibility qualifies reasonable and well-researched conservatives the designation of “pinheads.”There is something wrong when presidential candidate McCain is made, by congressional mandate, to prove his eligibility as a candidate while Obama is not held to the same standard.
Now here’s an interesting lesson about the act of civil disobedience. Bomb the Pentagon, lead a domestic terrorist group that was responsible for 30 bombings, destruction of property, and deaths, and suggest that you cannot rule out committing additional bombings, you become a folk hero of the radical left, a close confidant of a sitting president, and hold a position as a professor in higher academia.
Alternatively, give your country nearly 18 years of unblemished military service as a high-ranking military officer until you request proof that the orders you are given are, in fact, made by someone with the ultimate authority to do so, you are stripped of your military rank, your liberties, your income, your pension, your freedom and are sentenced to Leavenworth.
Welcome to the new paradigm of civil disobedience, Chicago style, where self-proclaimed conservative warriors are more MIA than Lt. Col. Lakin on the issue of Obama’s Constitutional eligibility to hold office.
The Washington Examiner published a powerful article by columnist Diana West today about Lt. Col. Terry Lakin, the army surgeon who attempted to verify the Constitutional legitimacy of the deployment orders he received. For his efforts, however questionable in both tactic and venue, this highly decorated military leader was sentenced to serve time in Leavenworth. As Ms. West so eloquently concluded, the guilty verdict against Lt. Col. Lakin settles nothing, except, perhaps, that such challenges within the ranks will not be tolerated.
The most basic question of whether Barack Hussein Obama is Constitutionally eligible to hold office and issue orders to the most powerful military in the world remains unaddressed and unanswered. Accordingly, it remains a national security issue of the highest magnitude.
As I wrote last week, Lt. Col. Lakin chose a particular path to compel, once and for all, Barack Hussein Obama to provide authenticated proof that he is qualified to issue orders to the U.S. military as the Commander in Chief. It was arguably not the best path to choose in a system that was rigged from the start, but at least this man had the grit to put everything on the line for the sake of the U.S. Constitution and ultimately, every American citizen.
Now, Lt. Col Lakin will be paying the price for his actions. One positive although surely unintended consequence of the Lakin case, however, is that it has clearly exposed the wretched hypocrisy of the progressives and their corporate media mouthpieces as well as the duplicity and dissimulation of many so-called conservatives. So that Lt. Col. Lakin’s efforts are not entirely in vain, I believe closer examination into this aspect of the case is necessary.
Ms. West wrote that Lakin’s actions ultimately fell “into the category of civil disobedience, breaking the law to uphold higher principle.” If history has taught us anything, it has shown that acts of civil disobedience and breaking the law to uphold a higher principle are the very tactics that are enthusiastically embraced and praised by the progressives. The activists themselves are held in high esteem, and their activities are often rewarded by academic positions at universities or positions in the Obama administration. Former Weathermen terrorist William Ayers is a perfect example of this progressive principle of legitimizing and even deifying an activist and his cause.
For the advancement of a higher principle, Ayers proudly proclaims that the Weathermen were responsible for 30 bombings aimed at destroying the security and defense infrastructure of the U.S. and that he personally participated in the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972. During their period of “civil disobedience,” the actions of the Weathermen resulted in both death and destruction in the U.S., all for a “higher principle.”
Today, Ayers is hailed as a hero to many on the political left and quite the chum of Obama, despite the desperate denials of leftist, self-proclaimed arbiters of truth like Media Matters, FactCheck.org, and the brain-sharing freak show of Keith Olberman, Rachael Maddow and Chris Matthews. When not fundraising for Obama or shilling for Hugo Chavez, Ayers serves as a professor of education at the University of Illinois. Perhaps more disturbing is that Ayers has not ruled out the possibility of conducting future bombings, as he muses in his 2001 memoir Fugitive Days. But such is to be expected from the morally bankrupt lunatic left.
More troubling than the far left’s position on the Obama eligibility issue, however, is that of the conservative right. It is here, in my opinion, where the most dangerous duplicity exists and is allowed to metastasize. By design or default, this dissimulation is co-opting a strong and growing conservative base. These self-proclaimed, constitutional loving conservatives are more AWOL in legitimately reporting on the Constitutional eligibility of Barack Obama than Lt. Col. Lakin was for his last deployment.
There is something very wrong when those who have the eyes and ears of a vast national audience and the power to educate, inform and even influence millions of Americans choose to remain silent on perhaps the most important, or at least the most fundamental of all Constitutional issues.
There is something wrong when simply raising the topic of Obama’s Constitutional eligibility qualifies reasonable and well-researched conservatives the designation of “pinheads.”
There is something wrong when constitutional scholars are ignored or mocked by conservative pundits, or by talk show hosts who are insulted by the pejorative term “tea-baggers” yet accept and even advance the equally disparaging label of “birthers.”
There is something wrong when presidential candidate McCain is made, by congressional mandate, to prove his eligibility as a candidate while Obama is not held to the same standard.
This is something wrong when a 32-year-old baseball player states that he believes Obama is hiding something regarding his birth certificate (i.e., his eligibility) and gets more press than a highly decorated military veteran who expresses the same concerns under the threat of court-martial.
The corporate-fed conservative forces will be at their microphones and in front of the cameras, assured that their jobs are safe as long as they dare not step over the forbidden topic of Obama’s eligibility and pedigree. They will continue to enjoy their compassionate conservatism as long as they don’t ask for the release of Obama’s long form birth certificate, his passport records, kindergarten records, Occidental College records, Columbia University records and thesis, Harvard Law School records, Harvard Law Review articles, University of Chicago scholarly articles, and a list of other documents that would provide proof of Constitutional eligibility and valuable insight into the current occupant of the house of the American people.
While the political favorites of the Tea Party, the conservative pundits who lecture relentlessly on the virtues of Republicans and conservatism, and the conservative bloggers whose articles appear in lockstep with the old guard lead the masses down the acceptable path of truth and liberty, Lt. Col. Lakin has been unceremoniously denied both.
Sadly, so has every American. Sadder still, most don’t even realize it, and most of those with the moral obligation and opportunity to make a difference are contemptibly silent.
Despite rabid and consistently incorrect assertions to the contrary, Barack Hussein Obama has not provided one single item of authenticated evidence to prove that he is a natural-born citizen and thusly qualified to be president as defined by Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution. Not only has he not provided such documentation, but he has also fought long and hard, and spent what many reliable reports suggest and over a million dollars against releasing his birth certificate and numerous other documents relevant to his background.
By Douglas J. Hagmann
Sadly, there seems to be more talk about ineligibility on any given Sunday during football season in the U.S. than about one of the most important issues in America today. It’s the issue that still hasn’t gone away, despite the best attempts of politicians, media pundits, and well-known talk show hosts from both sides of the political aisle. It’s the issue of the eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama to occupy the highest elected office in the United States.
Many Republicans and conservatives, under the influence of their Kool-Aid-induced agendas, have described the eligibility issue as a “distraction” from the real issues. The majority of Democrats and progressives, for obvious reasons, have resorted to associating the issue with race, bigotry, and hatred. Together, detractors of this issue from both sides have engaged in the methodical marginalization of the message and mocking those who dare act as messengers.
What could be more fundamentally important than ensuring that the person at the helm of our country, the Commander-in-Chief of the most powerful military in the world, the holder of the keys to the nation’s nuclear lockbox is indeed constitutionally eligible to hold this office? I see more outrage on Sunday afternoons by grown men living vicariously by dressing up in the jersey of their favorite football player when a receiver is declared ineligible.
Despite rabid and consistently incorrect assertions to the contrary, Barack Hussein Obama has not provided one single item of authenticated evidence to prove that he is a natural-born citizen and thusly qualified to be president as defined by Article II, Section I, Clause 5 of the United States Constitution. Not only has he not provided such documentation, but he has also fought long and hard, and spent what many reliable reports suggest and over a million dollars against releasing his birth certificate and numerous other documents relevant to his background.
It is not within the scope of this article nor is it my intent to discuss the definition of natural born citizen, the “Vattell Theory,” or other technical matters related to this issue beyond this one fact: Obama could have been born in the middle of the White House lawn at noon on a crowded weekday with John, Jackie and Rose Kennedy serving as witnesses, and with Teddy serving the drinks, but that, by itself, does not make him eligible to hold the office of President of the United States.
While the so-called men in our country are busily fretting over the news that Brett Favre is ending his NFL streak, there is one real man, an American patriot, whose own unblemished record is also coming to an end today. His name is Lt. Col. Terrence “Terry” Lakin, an Army flight surgeon with 18 years of honorable service to our country. His military court martial begins today, and by all accounts, he will be spending the next one to five years in Leavenworth.
In terms of contemporary history, I’d sadly wager that Favre has better name recognition than Lakin. In terms of historical importance, however, I’d wager that the annals of American history will hold a special place of valor, honor and bravery for Lt. Col. Lakin. It will not likely be for the venue he chose, his method and manner of battle, but for the fact that this highly decorated man had the guts to do what countless others haven’t. That is to ensure that as an officer in our military, he was following legal and legitimate orders in accordance with the Constitution of the United States.
I doubt that the start of today’s court martial proceedings of this high ranking military official will receive much, if any, coverage by any of the mainstream talk show hosts regardless of the network. If there is any discussion devoted to the issue, it will likely be limited to the fact that Lt. Col. Lakin disobeyed a direct order and essentially invited his own court martial and paved his own destiny. Perhaps that is the case, or at least the most basic legal element of this case.
Meanwhile, the majority of the mainstream conservative commentators and pundits will continue to ignore Lt. Col. Lakin and the larger eligibility issue or mock those who bring it up, even as they pay lip service to the Constitution of the United States. These media pundits have been issued their “talking points” and a list of topics that are out of bounds. If they wish to continue with their comfortable media careers, they must not stray from the approved script.
Members of the elite conservative bloggers who wish to remain on the “A” list of invitees to network and cable news shows must also conform to the topical standards and avoid devoting any virtual print space to this issue. Whether a co-opted conservative pundit or blogger, or a progressive with an inherent disdain for such inconveniences as the U.S. Constitution and the rule of law, their responses or lack thereof will be similar.
Detractors of the eligibility issue will insist that this case is about a military officer failure to report, or in military parlance, “missing movement” and nothing more. Lt. Col. Lakin failed to obey orders and must be punished, period. This case is about following or failing to follow military orders, nothing more and nothing less.
By that logic, the military guards at Auschwitz and other concentration camps should never have been subjected to trial at Nuremberg or otherwise punished. After all, they were just following orders. As for the detention and extermination of the Jews, well, bringing that up while there was a war going on was a distraction from the real issues of the day.
