Posted on 02/23/2010 8:02:16 AM PST by butterdezillion
Yes, I agree that there are only two classes of citizens: native and naturalized. If one is not naturalized, then one had to be native.
However the State Department in their Foreign Affairs manual says that one who is a natural born citizen by statute does not mean one is such for Constitutional purposes.
That leaves me with the impression that our own government is unclear whether or not all native citizens are eligible for the presidency. Thus my position that we need a SCOTUS ruling to settle the matter once and for all.
If true, we don't know whether Dr. West had seen a report of an HI birth or a report of a foreign birth to an HI resident.
If Toot went to a local registrar to report the Kenya birth of her HI resident daughter on Aug 8, 1961, the "accepted" filing (looking perhaps like the Blaine BC) would have gone into a pile at DOH separate in time from the Kap. hospital BCs.
Such a Kenya birth BC might have been reported to the newspapers one week before the Nordyke twins based on an "accepted by the local registrar" status in field 20 of the 1961 long form. It might not yet have been "accepted by the "Registrar Gen.", as it says in field 22, which may have been the trigger for assignment of a certificate number.
What I am suggesting is that DOH reporting of births to newspapers of births may have been made after BCs were accepted, but before they were filed in some cases. Also DOH may have reported foreign births of HI residents to newspapers without any special notation.
Thus the appearance of birth announcements in HI papers doesn't tell you where the birth took place or whether the BC was only accepted, or was also filed with a certificate number assigned. Fukino and Obuko weren't there so they may be guessing and the people who were there in 1961 are likely dead or retired.
| > Actually, the more I read Wong You mean, the first time, right? It didn't take long for Pansy to start dancing the “After-Birther two-step” when schooled that WONG KIM ARK v US is actually a very bad case to reference in defending your weak stance on Obama's status as a British Subject.
Take solace in knowing that you're not the
|
The HDOH responses to Leo Donofrio’s UIPA requests revealed that there is one, and only one, record for Barack Hussein Obama II in the Hawaii Vital Statistics Birth Index. Obama has no amended vital records on file in Hawaii.
Just FYI - Those requests also revealed that a record exists in the Marriage Index for Barack Obama and Stanley Ann Dunham and that no record exist in the Birth Index for Obama’s sister Maya or for any alias used by Obama.
Or what’s even more likely is that the state DOH didn’t report the births to the papers at all in 1961. But that’s another day’s post. lol.
All kinds of things could have happened. I should know. Most people still think I’m dead, but it was a big set up. I just got tired of all the groupies, the pills, the stress, the phony friends, and the stupid movie contracts. I had to get away and get back to my roots. I still write songs, under different names. I still play for my real friends.
But I just ain’t going back out there again. I sneak into the house every so often. I loved it there. I loved my Cadillac. But I wouldn’t trade it for this little cabin of mine and this old pick up truck. And all that fancy chow—well I traded it all for a slice of Texas cow.
parsy, who says, “That’s all right, now mama... “
"If the baby is born here, and the parents aren’t one of several exemptions, the baby is a citizen."
Once again:
Was Obama SR a citizen — "parents" is still two or more, right?
Regardless, in your own words, "... the baby is a citizen." Not a Natural-born citizen.
YOU are your own worst enemy, Parsley.
Just fess up. I’ll go easy on you. You really don’t have a clue about Wong, do you? And you won’t until you read it.
parsy, who just violated one of Blackstone’s Laws, but I ain’t saying which one
Why **waste** the resources and time of DOJ attorneys at a time when plots were being laid to blow planes out of our skies, and shoot our soldiers on their bases and recruitment centers?
Only a very guilty man would do that, and now I am curious. What's going on here? Apparently, nearly half the nation agrees with me.
Do you have a link to this? Agency law is a twisted area and what it appears to say, may not be what it is saying. I am curious as to the meaning “by statute”.
parsy, who has had to learn this the hard way
Why **waste** the time and resources of DOJ attoneys at a time when plots were being laid to blow planes out of our sky, and shoot soldiers on their bases and in recruitment centers?
Only a guilty man would do that, and not I am curious. Nearly half the nation is wondering about this as well.
I’m going to do you like edge19. No more responses on Wong, UNTIL YOU READ WONG.
Until then, I am wasting my time trying to straighten you out. You are just ramblng around grabbing bits and pieces of things and stumbling all over yourself. While it is funny to watch, the sad thing is that you are only hurting yourself. You’re wasting my time, and the time of others, but you are hurting yourself.
It is obvious that you do not have a clue about case law, how to read a case, what the parts of the case are, and even what LAW is. You can learn these things, Grasshopper, but first you will have to make the sound of one hand clapping.
Then you have to listen and learn. THEN, AND ONLY THEN, you can make meaningful contributions to the discussion. Until that point, you are pretty much stuck in the “I don’t know much about the law, so can you explain______” phase.
Your “s” argument is laughable. Your Blackstone statement borders on bizarre. You will continue in this course until you shut up, read the case, and then ask for help.
parsy, who thinks you are a smart person, and capable of improvement
No, it's because you belong to the O.D.L (obummer defense league)
There a plenty of reasons to question your messiah, and you fight every one of them tooth and nail.
Please tell us why you love and defend him so.
Testing
I am persuaded that there is at least one birth index for BHO II and one marriage index for his parents.
However, in my view the DOH vital record birth index disclosures are inconsistent and inconclusive as to whether there is "at least one" or "one, and only one" index or whether it was amended or unamended.
I will not be satisfied or draw any firm conclusions until the entire vital record file is released, which any honorable public official would have authorized before running for office to remove any suspicion of ineligibility.
You undermine your integrity by leaning on a namecalling crutch. Not sure this shows any capacity for logic; just paranoia and irrationality.
edge19 and bp2 are both on timeout until they read Wong. I expect the adults here, birther and non-birther alike, to present a united front on this matter. Kids will try to split the adults if you give them a chance.
parsy, who has his Stern Parent face on
Well, I asked an attorney that same question. He said that to do so would set a precedent of having the POTUS release private documentation. Obama should have released the long form prior to Berg’s original lawsuit when he knew there was doubt. He didn’t and then he was sued. He has to provide a defense or be subjected to a default judgment against him. He’s not misusing DOJ attorneys. It’s their obligation under the law to provide a defense for the POTUS.
Although this may not be an equivalent analogy, think of it this way ...
A homeschool parent in Texas is accused of not holding school the required number of days per school year and not teaching the required material on citizenship. So the State of Texas sues that parent to prove that she held school the required length of time and taught citizenship class. The homeschool parent has attendance records to show the exact number of days she held class and she has her child’s homework and graded tests to demonstrate the material taught in citizenship class. Being an honorable and trustworthy person, she wants to produce the records to clear her name and put an end to the lawsuit.
However, the Texas Homeschool Coalition who defends parents in all lawsuits related to homeschool violations advises her that there is no law requiring her to produce any documentation. The only legal requirement in Texas is that the homeschool parent agrees to abide by the requirements. The THSC advises her that to release the documentation would set a precedent that might force other parents to keep and produce records that are not required by law. The THSC and parent fight the lawsuit on principle.
Now, that analogy is in no way intended to imply that Obama is honorable or has the necessary documentation. It’s meant only to show that sometimes defending oneself in a lawsuit is contrary to what seems straightforward.
Flame away!
Because such a thing doesn't actually exist or because you don't have confidence you can engage in honest, constructive dialogue or debate without a strawman to poke with your feathered sword??
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.
