Tweet
Of Presidential Eligibility, Doubling Down and Linguistic Torts, Part 1
WHY DOES “NATIVE BORN” NOW EQUATE TO “NATURAL BORN?”
The Post & Email
Joseph DeMaio, ©2012
2/20/2012
Excerpt:
"So many issues, so little time.
Introduction
With apologies to readers, of necessity this presentation is lengthy. It is composed in response to an even longer November 14, 2011 formal “Report” issued by the Congressional Research Service (“CRS”) purporting to buttress (again) Barack Hussein Obama’s claim of eligibility to the presidency as a “natural born Citizen” under the Constitution.
Moreover, why, after having issued two other CRS “Memoranda” reports to Congress in 2009 and 2010, and why at this juncture after the incessant drumbeat of the mainstream media that anyone who would dare even hint (more on “hints” later…) that the Emperor has no clothes must be lampooned as a “birther,” the CRS – or someone – deemed yet another report necessary remains a mystery. Who asked for this report? Who authored or contributed to it? Time and other constraints preclude the dissection of all the errors and misrepresentations presented in the November 14, 2011 CRS Report or a review of the original quotes therein where an ellipsis omission appears, but the more prominent and egregious ones mandate a response.
As a preliminary matter, it must be noted that the CRS is an appendage of the Library of Congress. It states as its mission the providing to Congress of access to “the nation’s best thinking” and the production of “product” aimed at answering important questions in the form of papers which are “authoritative, confidential, objective and nonpartisan.”
On all points, lamentably, the November 14, 2011 CRS formal Report (hereinafter “CRSR”) not only falls far short of meeting the CRS mission statement; it “doubles down” on the deceptions of its prior “products” on the issue.
Chief among those deceptions is the still unexplained manipulation by ellipsis of the language – and thus the meaning – of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939). That decision was first included in a CRS Memo to Congress dated April 3, 2009 and resided at the core of the memo’s suggestion that the eligibility issue as to Mr. Obama has already been essentially settled. That linguistic tort committed in the first CRS Memo is addressed here. There has been no explanation for the ellipsis manipulation yet forthcoming. And as for the claim that the constitutional eligibility issue as to the president is settled: respectfully, no, it isn’t."
.........................................
View the complete article at:
http://www.thepostemail.com/2012/02/...-torts-part-1/
WHY DOES “NATIVE BORN” NOW EQUATE TO “NATURAL BORN?”
The Post & Email
Joseph DeMaio, ©2012
2/20/2012
Excerpt:
"So many issues, so little time.
Introduction
With apologies to readers, of necessity this presentation is lengthy. It is composed in response to an even longer November 14, 2011 formal “Report” issued by the Congressional Research Service (“CRS”) purporting to buttress (again) Barack Hussein Obama’s claim of eligibility to the presidency as a “natural born Citizen” under the Constitution.
Moreover, why, after having issued two other CRS “Memoranda” reports to Congress in 2009 and 2010, and why at this juncture after the incessant drumbeat of the mainstream media that anyone who would dare even hint (more on “hints” later…) that the Emperor has no clothes must be lampooned as a “birther,” the CRS – or someone – deemed yet another report necessary remains a mystery. Who asked for this report? Who authored or contributed to it? Time and other constraints preclude the dissection of all the errors and misrepresentations presented in the November 14, 2011 CRS Report or a review of the original quotes therein where an ellipsis omission appears, but the more prominent and egregious ones mandate a response.
As a preliminary matter, it must be noted that the CRS is an appendage of the Library of Congress. It states as its mission the providing to Congress of access to “the nation’s best thinking” and the production of “product” aimed at answering important questions in the form of papers which are “authoritative, confidential, objective and nonpartisan.”
On all points, lamentably, the November 14, 2011 CRS formal Report (hereinafter “CRSR”) not only falls far short of meeting the CRS mission statement; it “doubles down” on the deceptions of its prior “products” on the issue.
Chief among those deceptions is the still unexplained manipulation by ellipsis of the language – and thus the meaning – of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Perkins v. Elg, 307 U.S. 325 (1939). That decision was first included in a CRS Memo to Congress dated April 3, 2009 and resided at the core of the memo’s suggestion that the eligibility issue as to Mr. Obama has already been essentially settled. That linguistic tort committed in the first CRS Memo is addressed here. There has been no explanation for the ellipsis manipulation yet forthcoming. And as for the claim that the constitutional eligibility issue as to the president is settled: respectfully, no, it isn’t."
.........................................
View the complete article at:
http://www.thepostemail.com/2012/02/...-torts-part-1/