Posted on 04/12/2011 2:07:15 PM PDT by kevinaw2
Ann Coulter was being interviewed by Sean Hannity last night and she succinctly laid out the case against Trump and this resurgent interest in an Obama birth certificate. I've always thought this story was crap from day one. First, as Ann Coulter points out there is fundamentally no difference between the long form birth certificate and short form. They are both certified.
Personally, I think the Obama team is loving the attention being given to it because it gives them an opportunity to force each prospective GOP candidate for President to answer the question and take away vital time from important issues like oh.....the economy,gas prices,the national debt, etc. Trump is making a fool of himself and risks everyone being tarred with his foolishness. To all the "birthers", I ask this: Do you really think ruthless characters like Bill and Hillary Clinton could not have found the evidence and used it against him? The Clinton's of "war room" politics? Those liberal versions of Nixonian politics and paranoia?
If not the Clinton's then how about conservative iconic publications like "Human Events" and "The American Spectator" as Ann Coulter pointed out. I loathe and utterly detest conspiracy theories as they are the product of irrational supposition from incomplete portraits suggesting an inability to differentiate chance and order. The notion that everything is the product of planning is absurd.
The absurdity of this crackpot theory is rooted in the bizarre notion that the infant Obama was identified at birth as a future President and an intense cover up was implemented to shield the truth. All this over a man no one had ever heard of as recent as 2004 before his keynote address at the DNC. John Kerry chose him to deliver the speech, so maybe he was in on the plot, huh?
It's time to stop with the irrational and ignore desperate pleas for attention from media whores like Donald Trump. Our stake in the future of the nation is too important to waste placating the vanity of a man who will leave egg on all our faces. Sean's interview with Ann Coulter is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-c7zd0mMRSE&feature=player_embedded
Did I make it to the pile-on in time?
Both of my parents were British Subjects at the time of my birth, and all of my brothers and sisters births. Hence, no Natural Born Citizenship.
Even if BHO Sr. was his real father, which I doubt. he could not confer NBC.
Oh, Kevvy, we hardly got to know ye!
IBTZ!
http://www.freerepublic.com/~kevinaw/
http://www.freerepublic.com/~kevinaw2/
Now, what’s the difference between the two?
My suggestion for Donald Trump is that he study up on the Roger Calero case and bring it to the media.
The media wants to pretend it can’t happen but Calero is a resident alien (Previously deported illegal alien) who was on the ballot in a handful of states as a socialist party presidential candidate.
If it can’t happen, how did Calero get on a single ballot?
Nothing like that at all, Ann. You're so insightful at times, so I can only think your misdirection on this one is intentional.
ANY parent of that era, and even now, knows that being an American Citizen is far more helpful than being a citizen of any country. So, claiming American birth is a logical thing for ANY family to do if they can get away with it.
Let me present illegal immigration as a case in point. Are all those parents suggesting that their kid will some day be president? No, they just want the benefits of American citzenship.
“My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen,” Chertoff replied. “That is mine, too,” said Leahy.”
Has the definition of natural-born citizen changed since 2008? Has it changed since 1874 when Chief Justice Morrison Waite said, in Minor v. Happersett:
“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”
Has it changed since 1814, or 1778, when founder, framer, and Chief Justice John Marshall said, in The Venus, 12 U.S. 253:
“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.”
If I included twenty other citations, most would stop reading. So I'll include just one more, because Obama’s protectors are trying to confuse by quoting Title 8, the expansion of the 14th Amendment, which never mentioned natural born citizens, because, as its principal author, Congressman, Judge, John Bingham clarified for the House in 1866:
“I find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen….”
Anyone who ignores our founders, framers, and law has another motive, or is too lazy to read original sources. These individuals are complicit in the destruction of our republic. Most people are confused. Who reads Marshall, Ramsay, Waite, Bingham, or, for that matter, Pat Leahy. Not even our lawyers spend time with Wilson, Story, St. George Tucker, or the above. So I don't mean to insult those who have been mislead. But now you see the objective; it is time to learn the truth. Our framers and founders anticipated a leader who hides his allegiance. It is about allegiance, and our framers depended upon a very basic idea. People are most likely to inherit the allegiance of their parents. Even the British don't permit naturalized subjects as Members of Parliament. We were enlightened. Our framers allowed naturalized citizens such as Obama (because he was likely born in the U.S., and of one citizen parent, to hold every office but the presidency or vice presidency.
The points she uses to diffuse are the same as the left’s talking points.
What is dispute in anyone’s mind that has actually taken any time to review the issue are the following?
What is the definition of a natural born citizen? One commonly held view is that to be an actual natural born citizen both of your parents have to be US citizens at time of birth or you were already here at the end of the revolutionary war.
If you believe that definition then there is a serious question in this regard.
Why did the state of Hawaii refuse to accept a nomination certificate that had the US Consitutition requirements spelled out in it for Obama? When in the past they didn’t reject that?
Yes it is true that both long-form and short-form are legal documents but the son of the President of Japan has a COLB from Hawaii but he wasn’t born there. The fact is at the time Obama was born almost anyone could get a COLB from Hawaii.
In regard to the newspaper notice. I don’t think any reasonable person would ever say they actually think they conspired 50 years ago to subvert the US Presidency.
The announcements do NOT prove Obama was born in Hawaii, in fact the two newspapers were owned by the same company so there was only one annoucement submitted and printed in two newspapers. Additionally if it were submitted from a hospital the newspaper would actually have a record of that. This announcement was actually submitted by a private indvidual and there were many reasons back then to do announcements.
Now add to that Obama has been proven to use multiple SSN’s...why would he do that?
Why is everything hidden? College records...financial aid...
Why did both Obama’s give up their law licenses in IL?
The list goes on and the bottom line this guy carries the codes in the football and can send our kids to die we deserve the truth regardless of topic area!
Laus Deo...
Man, that’s the most succinct statement on the issue I’ve read in awhile. How’s the health, BTW?
The birther thing seems to be working for Trump. Long form, short form, just something official would be nice, and maybe an explanation of that Connecticut SS# would be fun. The only people who are crazier than people who believe in a conspiracy every now and then are those who don’t. To question any and all conspiracies is to say that two or more people never got together on a lying scheme. That doesn’t sound like Baraka Hussein Abu Moopoo and the left. Wherever the guy came from, he’s a fraud.
“Do you really think ruthless characters like Bill and Hillary Clinton could not have found the evidence and used it against him?” I dunno. Maybe the ruthless people around Barry know a thing or two about the Clintons.
“The notion that everything is the product of planning is absurd.” Yeah, and the notion that some things aren’t is equally absurd. Sometimes it takes a little digging around for the truth to find out which viewpoint is absurd.
Boy, am I glad I called you to the party...
It would have to go to SCOTUS to be resolved. The definition of a NBC, as defined in the Constitution as part of the eligibility to be President, has never been tested in the courts, especially the Supreme Court. The circumstances surrounding Chester A. Arthur would have been a good test, but it was never challenged legally.
I agree with you that this is the elephant in the room clearly visible to everyone, but the MSM and the pundits totally ignore it. Obama has already admitted that his father was a British subject. And jus solis is not sufficient to prove natural born for eligibility for the Presidency under the Constitution.
An excerpt from Wikipedia:
Sun Yat-sen was born on 12 November 1866 to a Hakka family in the village of Cuiheng, Xiangshan (later Zhongshan) county, Guangzhou prefecture, Guangdong province (26 km or 16 miles north of Macau), in the Empire of the Great Qing of China.
In March 1904, he obtained a Certificate of Hawaiian Birth,[9] issued by the Territory of Hawaii, stating he was born on November 24, 1870 in Kula, Maui.
I’m just scratching my head.
Jim Rob's here. Only a matter of time, IMO...
Yeah, once the big guy sees you, uh oh.
Like watching grains of sand falling ever so slowly through the hour glass. It feels like time is standing still...
Who knows what grains of sand are left to us. Jim Rob do....
We are on Earth on loan, our time is not our own.
There is no http://www.freerepublic.com/~kevinaw/
Try it with http://www.freerepublic.com/~Darksheare9/ etc.
No, the American People would demand he step down!
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.