Posted on 09/14/2012 6:03:33 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Less than two months before Election Day, a group of Kansas Republicans, led by a voter ID law advocate, is moving on a withdrawn challenge which may result in President Obama being removed from the ballot.
Secretary of State Kris Kobach, who has embraced forcing voters to produce ID at the polls, said Sept. 13 that he will preside over a Kansas Board of Objections Sept. 17 meeting where a Manhattan, Kans. veterinary professor Joe Montgomery, questioned Obama’s birthplace and the citizenship of his father.
Kobach said that the board is obligated to do a thorough review of the questions raised by Montgomery about Obama’s birth certificate and not make “a snap decision."
However, Montgomery on Sept 14 withdrew his objections, stating that the Kansas roots of Obama’s mother and grandparents, apparently in his opinion, satisfies the U.S. Constitution’s “natural-born citizen” requirement for the presidency,.
The president's mother, Stanley Ann Dunham, and maternal grandparents, Stanley and Madelyn Dunham, were Kansas natives.
The complaint withdrawal came after Kobach made requests to officials in Hawaii, Arizona and Mississippi for copies of the president’s birth records. The birth certificate controversy has been settled in those states and Obama is on those states’ ballots.
In spite of the withdrawal, Kobach said he nevertheless doesn’t believe the matter is dead. "I don't think it's a frivolous objection,” according to Kobach, an unofficial advisor to GOP presidential challenger Mitt Romney’s campaign. "I do think the factual record could be supplemented."
The objections board includes Attorney General Derek Schmidt and Lt. Gov. Jeff Colyer, both Republicans. Current polls indicate that in Kansas, Romney is the current favored candidate at this point in the presidential race.
Obama wasn’t born on american soil, he was born in Kenya which at the time was british soil!
Those who suggest that there is no distinction between "citizen" and "Natural Born Citizen" would have us believe and accept that such a person might have been eligible to run for President of the US simply because he was born in America. According to defenders of the alleged eligibility of Barack Obama (or Marco Rubio, or Bobby Jindal), any person born on US soil to one or more alien citizens could be the leader of the free world. At some point, according to that path of logic, this should have included Anwar al-Awlaki.
So, to say that every child born in America is a natural born citizen is also to say that any foreign interest whose child was born in the US could be allowed to raise that child abroad as an enemy of the US and return that child to this country in time to meet the Constitution's 14-year residency requirement for President.
Considering that Islam has been at war with itself and the rest of the world at least since the death of Muhammad almost 1400 years ago, it takes very little imagination to project how a powerful enemy of the US might take the necessary 35 years and other resources to groom a "Manchurian Candidate" for the US Presidency. If we accept the premise that every person born in the US is a natural born citizen, we allow the establishment of a flawed precedent permitting a family such as that of Anwar al-Awlaki (or a communist government, or a Mexican drug cartel, etc.) to gain control of our country through an orchestrated, long-term attack on the Presidency.
This is precisely what the Framers were trying to prevent with the natural born citizen requirement. A note from John Jay to George Washington explains to us why the Framer's included the natural born citizen requirement for POTUS. It was not, as some would have us believe, to discriminate against any particular race or to keep white men in power. Jay stated outright that the goal was "to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government." This is not a proscription against any ethnic heritage. It was the Framer's best effort, within the framework of a free society, to restrict the trust of our highest office only to persons with the greatest likelihood of being reared with an abiding love of American values.
The Constitution itself argues against the assertion that every child born in America is also a natural born citizen. Constitutional eligibility requirements for members of the House and Senate include that they be "citizens," with progressively tighter restrictions on length of residency for Senators and the President. Following that same pattern of progressively increased restrictions, the Constitution also requires that the President must be, not just a citizen, but a "natural born Citizen."
The natural born citizen requirement is not an incidental flourish of language, but a national security provision of the supreme law of our land. It is not a "big tent" invitation but an intentionally restrictive, but not racist, prohibition. It serves as a foundation on which to permanently secure and preserve the rights and freedoms which are the heritage of all Americans. Its purpose is to ensure, to the greatest possible extent, that every American President has sole allegiance to the USA by virtue of a childhood steeped in the richness of American culture, anchored in a respect for freedom, emboldened by the spirit of independence and innovation, and committed to the continuation of the noble experiment of a republic created and protected by free men and women and their progeny.
http://www.art2superpac.com/blog/?viewDetailed=00011
Did Montgomery take the opportunity to explain that the online BC as an unreliable document?
Hawaii refuses to say that the online BC is the same document they gave to Obama’s attys, nor will they certify that the online BC info is accurate, only that the information on the BC agrees with info in their records.
I believe Obama’s birth record consists of much more than a single unrevised birth certificate. The birth record could be amended to excise a true birth father from the record or it might reflect that Obama later became a citizen of Indonesia - we don’t know. Neither of those specifics is reflected on the contrived online BC, but they might be in evidence in the file. That is, incomplete portions of the birth record might appear on the online BC without revealing the whole truth.
I’m glad to note that the Board is asking for more documentation. Anything they get from Obama’s attorneys has a statistical probability of being a forgery.
Canadians are Americans, Mexicans are Americans...
Hell, people living on the very tip of Chile are Americans.
Really!
So if they were to pass a resolve that "the people" shall be represented by housecats in Congress, then that would be the law of the land?
Or perhaps directing that the Sun should rise in the West?
This is why his college application records are of so much interest. Did he apply as a citizen of the US, or as a citizen of Indonesia? The latter would amount to a de facto denunciation of his U.S. citizenship.
I don’t think it would amount to a hill of beans as far as ejecting him from the Presidency, but it would be extremely politically damaging.
Your sarcasm ignores history and the clear intent of the Founders.
Madison, Father of the Constitution, clearly stated that Congress had such powers to define citizenship.
The Unibomber?
Charles Manson?
Ted Bundy?
Be able to run for President?
Well, yes, up until their convictions for crimes.
At some point, it is the job of the VOTERS, quit looking for a magic wand to protect us from our own stupidity.
What you believe the Founders supported is not supported by history, case law, or their own comments and legislation.
And, “Subject to the Jurisdiction thereof” would make anyone with diplomatic immunity not qualified for citizenship.
I agree, RETROACTIVE citizenship does not confer “Natural Born Citizenship” if that is what you mean.
However, the laws at the time of Obama’s birth did require his mother to be older, or to have spent more time in the US after her age 18 - IF Obama was not born in this Country.
If the child is a Citizen at Birth, that Child is a Natural Born Citizen.
Also? Try to follow a rational, logical, linear argument would you?
I am make the factual case that, IF Obama was born on US Soil, he IS a NBC.
I have made no claim as to the place of Obama’s birth and I agree that Mother Ann was not old enough to pass Citizenship to Obama, at birth, under the law at that time.
Wrong.
If you are a Citizen under the 14 Amendment, you are a Natural Born Citizen.
And see SatinDoll's post #91
Was there or is there still outside pressure on Montgomery?
If there is I am sure its illegal and the state of Kansas should step in to protect him and investigate who is making the threats.
The bill they used for McCain in 2008 is meaningless. All attempts have failed that is why they cheat. Just like gay marriage and immigration they use activist judges to cheat the voters. The Constitution still stands. There is a usurper as POTUS.
“They ought to have the same rights,” said Don Nickles, a former Republican senator from Oklahoma who in 2004 introduced legislation that would have established that children born abroad to American citizens could harbor presidential ambitions without a legal cloud over their hopes. “There is some ambiguity because there has never been a court case on what ‘natural-born citizen’ means.”
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/108/s2128
S. 2128 (108th): Natural Born Citizen Act
108th Congress, 2003–2004
A bill to define the term "natural born Citizen" as used in the Constitution of the United States to establish eligibility for the Office of President.
Introduced:
Feb 25, 2004
Sponsor:
Sen. Don Nickles [R-OK]
Status:
Died (Introduced)
2/25/2004--Introduced.
Natural Born Citizen Act - Defines the constitutional term "natural born citizen," to establish eligibility for the Office of President, as:
(1) any person born in, and subject to the jurisdiction of, the United States; and
(2) any person born outside the United States who derives citizenship at birth from U.S. citizen parents, or who is adopted by the age of 18 by U.S. citizen parents who are otherwise eligible to transmit citizenship.
One universal point most all early publicists agreed on was natural-born citizen must mean one who is a citizen by no act of law. If a person owes their citizenship to some act of law (naturalization for example), they cannot be considered a natural-born citizen. This leads us to defining natural-born citizen under the laws of nature – laws the founders recognized and embraced.
Under the laws of nature, every child born requires no act of law to establish the fact the child inherits through nature his/her father’s citizenship as well as his name (or even his property) through birth. This law of nature is also recognized by law of nations. Sen. Howard said the citizenship clause under the Fourteenth Amendment was by virtue of “natural law and national law.”
The advantages of Natural Law is competing allegiances between nations are not claimed, or at least with those nations whose custom is to not make citizens of other countries citizens without their consent. Under Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes (1866) made clear other nation’s citizens would not be claimed: “All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States.”
Rep. John A. Bingham commenting on Section 1992 said it means “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.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
As far as I know:
1) Yes, Montgomery backed off - withdrew his objection.
2) He was not pressured by the panel but rather anonymous people harassing him, family members and work associates.
3) The panel is still meeting on Monday morning. The SOS has said that without an objection Obama will be on the ballot.
I agree that the SOS should take the harassment/threats as an egregious violation of the process and should continue his investigation. Will he? I don’t know.
Actually, all law enforcement in Kansas should be outraged at the intimidation of this man. This is banana republic s###.
Nope. See the truth above.
I don’t agree with your take on history and stand on my take as being founded in recorded facts which are available to anyone. Have to admit that your reference to ‘Subject to the Jurisdiction thereof’ got me to wondering but not enough to give up my belief on eligibility.
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.