Posted on 01/13/2011 10:16:28 AM PST by DontTreadOnMe2009
CBS News allowed the following comment to be published on its website, following an article about Obama’s visit to Arizona yesterday:
... Who were the doctor(s) and nurse(s) at Kapi`Olani that delivered Barack? My ex-wife worked at the hospital and I understand the records at Kapi’Olani are impeccable. Where are the foot prints? What public records exist that can even demonstrate that Mrs. Obama was even at Kapi’Olani on the day of Barack’s birth? Talk at Kapi`Olani, would have been unabashed, the city of Honolulu at the time very racist towards black people.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
You obviously know little about law. I’ll leave it at that. You have a habit which is typical of most birthers, which is you don’t answers questions which show how stupid your theory is. Was McCain a NBC?
I obviously know a whole lot. You on the other hand, lie and BS your way all over FR.
BTW again, what was your last zotted FR name?
In the arena of ideas, communists always lose. The only way they won through history is by scaring the population economically, physically, by starvation and use of massacres by police/military, etc.
In our case here, the left is trying to completely enslave an armed free population, which is a unique case by itself.
So far, we're not intimidated and we set them back in '10. They are waiting for (I wrote about this before) for an incident as in Tucson, followed by retaliation and the more the better to enact martial law, suspend the Constitution that they shredded and clamp down on any freedoms we have. IOW, enslave us.
They're not stupid. The only way to takeover is to follow their manuals that led to their previous successes.
The only problem they have is that we're not cooperating.
Was McCain a NBC?
No. Answer this...did the Framers of the Constitution consider themselves to have been natural born Citizens?
There is no requirement in a statute or in case law that mandates both jus soli and jus sanguinis to be present for one to be a nbc. In fact the case law and 9 U.S.C. 1401 says just the opposite.
Now, have figured out if McCain was a NBC, or are your birther buddies still voting? LOL
LOL
Okay, I agree with every single thing you wrote. My only hesitation this time is with the FR trolls. All they’re doing is making themselves really, really unpopular. I fail to see any purpose that serves, other than solidifying and energizing our side [against them]. However, on all your other points I quite concur.
Aren’t you at all curious to see 0h0m0’s education records?
If you’re not, why the lack of interest?
Is your answer gonna be “LOL”?
They don’t care how unpopular they are. The more the merrier. It’s their game.
Don’t you think that some of them have popular names out of their multiple ones?
Dr Jekyll and Mr. Hyde come to mind!
Are you claiming both candidates for POTUS were ineligible? Wow and nobody caught this, not Scalia or Roberts or anyone.
Any review of what has been said in the last 2 weeks in our exchanges would tell us a completely different story to any would be reviewer. You don't seem to grasp the difference between natural law, which natural born citizen written in clause 2 of our Constitution is apart of. Amendments are laws made by man they are not gods laws they may invoke laws of nature but are still made by man.
The 14th Amendment was not just an actor legislation, it is an Amendment to the Constitution.
Actor legislation? What troll and future zot? Lets take a look on how an Constitutional Amendment gets made:
"The Constitution provides that an amendment may be proposed either by the Congress with a two-thirds majority vote in both the House of Representatives and the Senate or by a constitutional convention called for by two-thirds of the State legislatures. None of the 27 amendments to the Constitution have been proposed by constitutional convention. The Congress proposes an amendment in the form of a joint resolution. Since the President does not have a constitutional role in the amendment process, the joint resolution does not go to the White House for signature or approval.
http://www.archives.gov/federal-register/constitution/
Well gee now stupid troll. We see that it is all a legislative process besides it being constitutional convention, and according to the the National Archives, none of the 27 Amendments have been been proposed by constitutional convention. You see troll it is man made and not natural law.
You're slipping and getting short-fused, TNT, don't blow up in a blaze of glory!
Attacking Scalia and Roberts is a very liberal slip. It simply gives you away.
[No, the founders put an exception in requirements to be POTUS because no one could otherwise qualify and be a nbc for at least 35 years after the ratification of the Constitution. It had nothing to do with their parents, but rather their own particular circumstance.]
Attribution to Leo Donofrio @ http://blogtext.org/naturalborncitizen/article/29871.html
The most overlooked words in that section are: “...or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution...” You must recall that most, if not all, of the framers of the Constitution were, at birth, born as British subjects.
Stop and think about that.
The chosen wording of the Framers here makes it clear that they had drawn a distinction between themselves - persons born subject to British jurisdiction - and “natural born citizens” who would not be born subject to British jurisdiction or any other jurisdiction other than the United States. And so the Framers grandfathered themselves into the Constitution as being eligible to be President. But the grandfather clause only pertains to any person who was a Citizen... at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution. Obama was definitely not a Citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution and so he is not grandfathered in.
And so, for Obama or anybody else to be eligible to be President, they must be a “natural born citizen” of the United States “at birth”. It should be obvious that the Framers intended to deny the Presidency to anybody who was a British subject “at birth”. If this had not been their intention, then they would not have needed to include a grandfather clause which allowed the Framers themselves to be President.
If you click through to Factcheck.org, a more detailed discussion as to why Obama was a British citizen at birth explains the relevant statutes:
“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.’s children:
British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.
In other words, at the time of his birth, Barack Obama Jr. was both a U.S. citizen (by virtue of being born in Hawaii) and a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies (or the UKC) by virtue of being born to a father who was a citizen of the UKC.’ “
The article goes on to state that Obama’s British citizenship was transferred to Kenya as Kenya became independent from the UK and that Obama’s Kenyan citizenship expired when he turned 21 years old. But none of that is relevant since the Constitution requires that every President be a “natural born citizen”. The word “born” is proof positive that the status must be present “at birth”. If this were not the case, then, as stated above, the Framers would not have needed to put in a grandfather clause.
The Framers recognized that even they were not “natural born citizens” and so they wrote the grandfather clause in to allow any of them to become President. But the grandfather clause only pertains to those who were Citizens at the time of the Constitution’s adoption. And so, Barack Obama is not a “natural born citizen” of the United States and neither is John McCain who was born in Panama, and neither is Roger Calero who was born in Nicaragua.
[Are you claiming both candidates for POTUS were ineligible? Wow and nobody caught this, not Scalia or Roberts or anyone.]
Are you claiming now that it’s the responsibility of SCOTUS to vet the presidential candidates?
Besides, what does his grades have to do with whether he is eligible to be POTUS. Did you know Reagan's grades? He was the greatest President in the 20th century and nobody cared or asked.
Scary thought—but you could well be right. Trolling is by its nature deceitful, and the longer a person does it, the better and, by necessity, more deceitful they become. To be a good troll, you’d have to start out with a shifty, dishonest character/MO.
No thanks. Out of a few hundred possible jobs and hobbies in this world, trolling would be the one I’d least want and least enjoy.
Besides, what does his grades have to do with whether he is eligible to be POTUS. Did you know Reagan’s grades? He was the greatest President in the 20th century and nobody cared or asked.
Reagan wasn’t a marxist...marxists lie.
If I ever get anything right it’s either by sheer chance or God’s mercy.
:-)
Yawwwnnn stupid troll. I don't know how many times that this has been answered on FR, but I would hazard to guess about 10,000 times in the last two years. Statute 1401 does not even suggest who are natural born citizens. There is no there there dingbat.
BTW, what was your last FR name again?
And is Obama a natural born citizen?
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.