Posted on 10/05/2011 4:44:16 PM PDT by ebysan
From 2003-2008 Congress made..... 8..... attempts to change the clause in the Constitution
requiring POTUS must be born to Parent(s) who are Citizens of the United States of America
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
But even today, no congress critter has the b*lls to pursue the case further and all “conservative” talkshow hosts won’t touch the subject with a 10-foot pole for fear that it may ruin their careers.
SFL
They all had to know about it, yet altho a couple tried to fight back no
one said a damn thing to us citizens.
Well I knew he had some handlers but I didn’t know it was our entire government (plus others around the globe— no doubt in my mind).
“But even today, no congress critter has the b*lls to pursue the case further and all “conservative” talkshow hosts won’t touch the subject with a 10-foot pole for fear that it may ruin their careers.”
We have to keep this information out there!!
Look what they have gotten away with in our Country!!
There is so much Corruption in this administration ..... Obama’s reign MUST COME TO AN END.... Now!!
“....but I didn’t know it was our entire government....”
.
Now you also understand why it took so long to get it out in the open — large numbers of RATS and PUBS may be charged with corruption and may have to be fired and jailed. I hope the guilty lose their retirement pay.
Oh, woe is us.
(Wouldn’t it be nice to see a whole bunch of fresh faces instead of these old boring prunes?)
Blockbuster???
Everyone I know knows this is what is going on. This is no new news to a good portion of America at this point.
I am talking lawyers, former federal judges, business owners. It is an accepted fact in most circles of politically savvy people.
Palin keeps talking about how Obama was never vetted. She really got going tonight on Greta’s show about how Obama must be beaten and driven from the WH. She actually inspired me there for a minute. I’m never inspired by public figures.
“Palin keeps talking about how Obama was never vetted. She really got going tonight on Greta’s show about how Obama must be beaten and driven from the WH. She actually inspired me there for a minute. I’m never inspired by public figures.”
Yes I listened to Palin tonight also..... Congressmen I think are too afraid of their own Jobs so they don’t voice their opinion. ....... It is necessary for Congress to come out & speak about Obama’s in-eligibility
Veteran Defenders of America along with Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely
“A Declaration to Restore the Constitution”
The new declaration explains its goals are:
“the immediate and unconditional orderly resignation of Barack Hussein Obama II” and well as “Joseph R. Biden.”
“In addition to the known fact that the Obama/Biden ticket was advanced by way of fraudulent representations concerning the constitutional eligibility of Barack Hussein Obama II, under Article II requirements for the office of president, the Obama/Biden has committed countless crimes against the U.S. Constitution, our Republican form of government and the American people while in control of the executive branch.
Good to see Vallely hasn’t back down from his assertions. It seems the pressure is mounting on Congress and their dereliction of duty.
“From 2003-2008 Congress made..... 8..... attempts to change the clause in the Constitution requiring POTUS must be born to Parent(s) who are Citizens of the United States of America”
Nonsense. In the period covered, June 2003 through February 2008, no one said that a U.S.-born president’s parents had to be citizens. The eligibility of the native-born had been settled long ago, and no one would say otherwise until October of November of 2008, when birthers grasped for reasons, even bogus ones, why Barack Obama could not be president.
Or maybe I’m wrong. Maybe someone can cite a source from this period that asserts the two-citizen-parent rule, even for the native-born. Anyone?
According to the video, each attempt at amendment or redefinition goes to the elimination of the requirement for two citizen parents. Gee, shouldn’t someone at the time have mentioned that requirement?
Not at all true. The issue was pointed out in the 1880s, and again in 1916. PUT THAT IN YOUR PIPE AND SMOKE IT! Despite every attempt you make to lie to people about this issue never having been brought up before, the simple fact remains that it was brought up TWICE prior to Barrack Obama. You have been repeatedly advised of these two examples, yet you continue to spout the propaganda that the issues is "made up."
Or maybe I’m wrong.
You are always wrong.
Maybe someone can cite a source from this period that asserts the two-citizen-parent rule, even for the native-born. Anyone?
How about from the year 2000? Here is a scholarly article from John M. Yinger who is a "Professor of Economics and Public Administration at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University, and the father of two adoptive children, one of whom, even when old enough, will not be eligible to be President."
According to the video, each attempt at amendment or redefinition goes to the elimination of the requirement for two citizen parents. Gee, shouldn’t someone at the time have mentioned that requirement?
Only the ignorant did not already know of it. I've given you three examples where it was pointed out BEFORE the election. I have plenty more besides those. You are obviously too young to have taken "civics" classes when they were still being taught.
Also, are you Pro-Life?
“According to the video, each attempt at amendment or redefinition goes to the .....elimination of the requirement for two citizen parents...... Gee, shouldn’t someone at the time have mentioned that requirement?”
This was the purpose of these.... “8” ...... attempts by Congress...... They did not want to bring to light that our Constitution.... “Required”...... a person who is elected to be POTUS must be a ..... “Natural Born Citizen”...... NOT .. Native Born.....
A Natural Born Citizen is someone who is born to Parents who are American Citizens at the time of their Birth...... This case whas heard by the Supreme Court in the “Late 1800’s”.
It was confirmed that if your Parents are “American Citizens” at the time of the birth of the Children .... then their Children are considered “Natural Bourn!”!
Sorry !! Miss spelling at end of my post!
It should say ........Natural Born!!
“The eligibility of the native-born had been settled long ago...”
This illustrates your lack of understanding of the Constitution.......and USSC pronouncements on the issue....
Native born is not the Constitutional Article II requirement. Natural Born Citizen is.
The USSC has, in numerious cases determining citizenship, defined Natural Born Citizenship as born in country to citizen parents.
That sir, is setttled law.
The unsettled part of US law is determining who, BESIDES Natural Born Citizens, are born citizens. Barack, if we are to believe his life’s narrative, born in Hawaii to a US citizen mother and a visiting (student visa) foreign father, is just such a person......a born citizen. Not NBC but simply a born citizen.
Come on now, you’re an intellegent person, and surely you can understand and appreciate the difference between the two.....
Notice that throughout this Constitutional Crisis Obama has never claimed Natural Born Citizenship. He always says ....”I was born here. I am a citizen.” Well Barack, you’re a “constitutional scholar (ahem, well at least you had the title as a fill in prof.) and should know the Article II requirement, and the USSC definition of the term.
So that would be 'no', you can not find any reference from the period in question. The last you can find is from 1916, when Brek Long argued: "Mr. Hughes was born before the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution, so the status of his citizenship must be considered as under the laws existing prior to the time of the adoption of that Amendment."Nonsense. In the period covered, June 2003 through February 2008, no one said that a U.S.-born president’s parents had to be citizens. The eligibility of the native-born had been settled long ago, and no one would say otherwise until October of November of 2008, when birthers grasped for reasons, even bogus ones, why Barack Obama could not be president.Not at all true. The issue was pointed out in the 1880s, and again in 1916. PUT THAT IN YOUR PIPE AND SMOKE IT!
Despite every attempt you make to lie to people about this issue never having been brought up before, the simple fact remains that it was brought up TWICE prior to Barrack Obama.You tell not the truth. I wrote that the eligibility of the native-born had been settled long ago. You cannot counter that with essays from before U.S v. Wong Kim Ark or about births prior to the adoption of the 14'th Amendment.
Ah, but you take another stab:
How about from the year 2000? Here is a scholarly article from John M. Yinger who is a "Professor of Economics and Public Administration at the Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, Syracuse University, and the father of two adoptive children, one of whom, even when old enough, will not be eligible to be President."How about quoting the part where he says that a U.S.-born president’s parents had to be citizens? In fact he argues that "natural-born" is more *expansive* than "native-born".
Only the ignorant did not already know of it. I've given you three examples where it was pointed out BEFORE the election.Where? I asked if anyone can cite a source from this period that asserts the two-citizen-parent rule, even for the native-born. You're at zero so far. Care to try again?
You are obviously too young to have taken "civics" classes when they were still being taught.Then let's take a look at some old, though not antique, civics books. According to Our Federal Government: How it Works, 1958: "Anyone aspiring to the highest office in the land must have been born in the United States, and he must be at least thirty-five years of age. To ensure the fact that his interests really lie within the country, the Constitution also demands that the candidate have lived for fourteen years prior to his election in the United States."
According to Civics for Citizens, 1965: "A natural-born citizen is one born in the United States or in one of its possessions."
According to Our Constitution and What it Means, 1975: "The President must be born in the United States or born of citizens of the United States."
Hat tip to Vickery2010 and Kleon for the citations. There's more if you want.
Your turn. Where's a civics book from when any of us might have been in school saying that to be eligible, even a native-born candidate must have citizen parents?
The USSC has, in numerious cases determining citizenship, defined Natural Born Citizenship as born in country to citizen parents.Alas, only in the imaginations of the birthers. When three real judges on the bench of a real court looked at this very issue they unanimously opined:That sir, is setttled law.
"Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are ‘natural born Citizens’ for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents." [Ankeny v. Daniels, Court of Appeals of Indiana, November 12, 2009]
This was the purpose of these.... “8” ...... attempts by Congress...... They did not want to bring to light that our Constitution.... “Required”...... a person who is elected to be POTUS must be a ..... “Natural Born Citizen”...... NOT .. Native Born.....Then cite the opposition to the attempts. The opposition prevailed; these attempts all failed. The video considers the period June 2003 through February 2008. Did anyone in that time say that only those born of two citizen parents are natural-born citizens, even if born in the U.S.?
I can cite a prominent Republican disagreeing with you:
What is a natural born citizen? Clearly, someone born in the United States or one of its territories is a natural born citizen. [Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), Senate Judiciary Committee, Oct 5, 2004]
What’s the deal with the suggested videos on the side?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.