Posted on 01/30/2009 12:56:39 PM PST by sarah p
i have a question. (actually, i have lots of questions!)
what or who was it that first questioned obama's place of birth?
i am trying to figure out the original source of this info. it seems to me that the key accusation of his kenyan birth came from some who either knew or speculated that his mother traveled to kenya in the summer of 1961. it is certainly a reasonable hypothesis, but is there any evidence or reference that someone can site as to the first person that claimed this?
i think that philip berg was the first to claim that obama's mother traveled to kenya. does anyone recall if he actually was the first and, if so, what he based this claim on?
before you all start calling me an obot, here me out.
I BELIEVE THAT OBAMA IS CONSTITUTIONALLY INELIGIBLE TO BE POTUS, regardless of where he was born because his father was never a US citizen.
it is possible that the kenyan birth theory could have been started to divert our attention from the obvious and well documented fact that obama is not a nbc because his father was a foreign national.
this birth certificate issue has been twisted by the media and others, resulting in anyone who questioned his eligibility to be labeled as "wacko conspiracy theorists, racists, etc. this has resulted in the loss of credibility of this issue in the public eye and hinders otherwise intelligent citizens from looking further into the details of this case.
it is a safe assumption that a harvard trained constitutional lawyer, such as obama, would know the definition of nbc and how he is not one.
of course, i still think it's possible that he was born in kenya. i just think it is easy to get lost in all of the evidence and theories. it would be a good idea for us to step back, look at the big picture and try to determine how this whole mess began.
good bless america! thanks to all who still want to protect our constitution.
Not exactly. The Supreme Court held that Blacks, free or slave, were not and could never be citizens. It took the 14th Amendment to change that. And the same Amendment that overturned Scott v. Sanford also says that if Obama was born in Hawaii then he's a natural born citizen.
i have no idea who pocket5s is. i just typed this up this afternoon, so if someone else posted it under their name, they need to get their own ideas!
what is IBTZ?
It's worked so far. Every case that has made it into a courtroom has been tossed out.
New members’ postings don’t post right away, its possible this person thought it didn’t go through the first time.
Theoretically.
One or the other will get zotted though.
I hear they pick up cheese crumbs up pretty good . . .
Why don’t you ask your leader George Soros - he’s the one doing the string pulling on Obama
-PJ
What started it was the phony birth certificate he posted on his website.
Correction: looks like a tech hiccup put the same summary for two completely different postings. I clicked the link in http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-gop/2175177/posts and it has nothing in common with this one, even though in the “Latest Articles” list they look the same.
You and/or pocket5 seem to have the same trouble capitalizing your *I*s. IOWs, you’re getting picked off as a troll.
IBTZ (in before the ZOT) ZOT means bye-bye.
You said — “We have to remember that the Supreme Court also once held that coloreds were private property...”
Dred Scott v. Sandford,[1] 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court that ruled that people of African descent imported into the United States and held as slaves, or their descendants[2]—whether or not they were slaves—were not legal persons and could never be citizens of the United States, and that the United States Congress had no authority to prohibit slavery in federal territories. The Court also ruled that slaves could not sue in court, and that slaves—as chattel or private property—could not be taken away from their owners without due process.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dred_Scott_v._Sandford
The Supreme Court did not correct itself. It was an Constitutional Amendment that corrected this...
—
The Fourteenth Amendment (Amendment XIV) to the United States Constitution is one of the post-Civil War Reconstruction Amendments, first intended to secure the rights of former slaves. It was proposed on June 13, 1866, and ratified on July 9, 1868.[1]
The amendment provides a broad definition of citizenship, overruling Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) which had excluded slaves and their descendants from possessing Constitutional rights. The amendment requires states to provide equal protection under the law to all people within their jurisdictions and was used in the mid-20th century to dismantle racial segregation in the United States, as in Brown v. Board of Education (1954). Its Due Process Clause has been used to apply most of the Bill of Rights to the states.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourteenth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
It may take another Constitutional Amendment to *correct* the “process” for vetting a candidate for President of the United States, per the Constitutionally listed qualifications. Or else, a number of state laws to do the same thing — i.e., “close up the loophole” in the Constitution...
Michael Rivero but he's obviously back posting under another screen name.........
Welcome to FR!
Obama is as guilty as hell: where there are million pound lawyers covering up for a $12 document, something is very wrong. We just don’t know exactly what.
seriously, someone just copied my post and claimed it as their own!
i am new here. is this normal/acceptable?
pocket5s, please get your own ideas or give credit where credit is due!
but what prompted them to post the colb? who was the first to question bo’s birthplace and what did they base this on?
Yup..... hiccccup!
The same worded post was linked to the Patriot Room.
What was your source?
I realize you are new here. The timing of the exact same post is within seconds. Forgive me if I think that is a coincidence.
Posting the fake COLB caused 99.99% of the population to go back to sleep.
This was exactly my point. The Supreme Court did NOT correct itself, and it took more than a half million deaths to correct their error.
As usual, Non-Sequitur trots in with the Anti-Birther Fog Machine and lays down a thick cloud over the issue.
We ain't seen The Big Wagyu's birth certificate, so get over your bad self, Non-Sequitur. :-)
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.