Kan. GOP Sec. of State Moving on Obama Birther Nov. Ballot Challenge

Afro ^ | September 14, 2012 | Staff

[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Less than two months before Election Day, a group of Kansas Republicans, led by a voter ID law advocate, is moving on a withdrawn challenge which may result in President Obama being removed from the ballot.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.

[Smokeyblue]

So why do S.O.S. Kobach, et al., keep asking Hawaii for anything, and trying to collect the data themselves, instead of requiring those who seek to put Obama on the ballot to submit verifiable, documentary proof of his eligibility? Logically, it should be The Kansas SOS should establish “No proof, no ballot access”

Exactly!

“No proof, no ballot access”

[DiogenesLamp]

If Obama was born on US soil, he is a Natural Born Citizen.

Period.

And the stupid idiot opens his mouth again.

There is absolutely no living legal authority, no Judge, no Elected Official, no Elector, no Immigration Attorney, no Member of Congress, and no Governor who disagrees with me on this point.

There isn't a one of those people who UNDERSTAND the point. They are ALL IGNORANT, just like you. What do you have when a bunch of ignorant people think something is correct? You have a fallacy based on ignorance, just as when the entire population thought the world was flat. They were wrong, and so are you and your ignorant judges and governors and electors.

The Citizenship of the parents ONLY matters if the birth does not take place on American Soil.

Or unless the Parents are Indians prior to 1922, or Slaves prior to 1868, or British Loyalists after the Revolution, or the Children of Ambassadors, but holes in your theory don't bother you at all do they?

This is the law.

PERIOD!

No, it's what ignorant butt heads THINK is the law. Here is another example, ignorant butt head. This one comes from James Monroe. You may have heard of him?

James Monroe, Paris 4th July 1795

A Mr Eldred was lately apprehended at Marseilles and sent here under guard upon a charge of having given intelligence to the British of some movement in the French fleet. Upon inquiry I found he had my passport granted too upon the most substantial documents proving him to be an American citizen; but I likewise found that in truth he was not an American citizen, for although born in America yet he was not there in the course of our revolution but in England, nor had he been there since. From what I hear of him, he is not a person of mischevious 1 Page Break

disposition nor one who would be apt to commit the offence charged upon him, but yet I do not see how I can officially interfere in his behalf, for when once a principle is departed from, it ceases to be a principle. More latterly I was requested by the commissary of foreign affairs to prohibit our consuls from granting passports, which was immediately done. I was afterwards requested by him to furnish a list of the Americans actually in Paris, and to render a like list every decade of those who should in the interim arrive, and which was promised and will be punctually executed. I herewith send you a copy of my instructions to the Consuls and correspondence with the commissary on this subject.

OMG James MONROE stabbed you in the back!!!!! He reached out from the 217 years in the past to bitch-slap you here in the present! Get a clue jackass!

[Kansas58]

You THINK you are smarter than everyone now alive, in the legal world.

This does not mean you are smarter.

It does prove you are DELUSIONAL!

[DiogenesLamp]

This is the law.

This is the foolish consistency which is the hobgoblin of a little mind.

[Kansas58]

That “foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds” was penned by a LIBERAL.

Many of your thoughts are VERY liberal.

[DiogenesLamp]

I am stating, honestly and factually, that if Obama was born on U.S. Soil, he IS a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!

He may be a "born citizen" under the 14th amendment, but anyone who requires the 14th amendment to make them a citizen, is NOT a "natural citizen."

[DiogenesLamp]

Blackstone had FAR more influence on the founders than the Frenchman, Vattel.

He was SWISS you stupid f****** moron! He wrote in French because that was the language of Diplomacy.

There are COUNTLESS cases that support my side of the argument.

I only know of one. Ankeny v Daniels, and it was a recently decided case, ruled on by an ignorant idiot and is an abomination, much like your argument. Judges that actually knew what they were doing don't agree with you at all.

This is why NO LIVING LEGAL AUTHORITY IS ON YOUR SIDE!

Maybe not, but all the dead ones do, and they are the only ones that count. Modern people are just ignorant, and unwilling to learn how ignorant they are.

[Kansas58]

You are wrong.
You have absolutely no living legal authority on your side.

Those dead people you CLAIM are on your side would call you an idiot, if they were here to listen to your birther blather.

You have absolutely no understanding of the law.

[DiogenesLamp]

Hypothetical: If Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Cristina Fernandez happened to be a couple visitng the USA, and she gave birth to a child while visiting, would that child be eligible for the Office of POTUS?

It would according to THAT idiot's (Kansas58) stupid theory. It never occurs to these people that the founders were not morons.

[DiogenesLamp]

A citizen at birth IS a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!

There are only two classes of Citizenship:

Natural Born

Naturalized

Which one was Aldo Mario Bellei?

Ignorant shitheads like you should just f****** shut up and quit spreading your ignorance.

[Kansas58]

Radical Birthers who believe that BOTH your parents must be United States Citizens and you MUST be born on American Soil to be a Natural Born Citizen -—

Radical Birthers who think that there are more than 2 classes of citizenship, in the United States -—

Make up less than 5% of the total population of this country.

You are “special”

You are “far above the intellectual understanding of ordinary people”

YOU ARE A FREAKING NARCISSIST WHO DOES NOT CARE ABOUT ANYTHING BUT BEING DIFFERENT AND “BETTER” THAN EVERYONE ELSE!

[DiogenesLamp]

If Ann gave birth to Obama in Canada, as I suspect, she was not a resident 5 years past the age of 14 as the law at that time required for her to pass citizenship to her child.

This is what I suspect as well. Barack Obama Sr.'s INS file revealed that they planned to give him up for adoption. Vancouver had well known Salvation Army homes and adoption facilities for Unwed Mothers, but I expect Stanley Ann ran into a snag when she discovered that 1961 White couples weren't interested in adopting a half black baby, leaving her with no choice but to take care of him herself. The rejection of her baby is Probably another reason she hated her own folk so much.

Showing up in Seattle in mid to late August of 1961, and not knowing how to change a diaper indicates to me she was in the region all along, and didn't fly there just after he was born. (As others have pointed out, the airlines wouldn't have allowed it.)

Aunt Eleanor Birkebeile lived in Canada at this time, so I suspect she stayed with Aunt Eleanor initially. Of course, Idiot "Kansas58" probably thinks he'd be a natural born citizen anyway, even though the law explicitly says that Stanley Ann wasn't old enough to convey citizenship.

[DiogenesLamp]

You are the “light weight” -— if your argument had ANY merit you would have a victory under your belt, somewhere, instead of abject humiliation and defeat.

You have lost.

Where is our victory over Roe v Wade? Are we wrong because we do not have one?

Do you support Roe v Wade?

[DiogenesLamp]

There are but TWO forms of Citizenship:

Natural Born

Naturalized

No other form is recognized by US Law.

And again Mr. Idiot, what form of citizenship did Aldo Mario Bellei have?

You know nothing, and you repeat it very often and loudly.

[cynwoody]

I agree that Mother Ann was not old enough to pass Citizenship to Obama, at birth, under the law at that time.

Actually, she was old enough to pass on citizenship. The age requirement you mention only applied to married women. But, whether or not she knew it at the time, Stanley Ann's marriage to BHO, Sr. was bigamous and therefore invalid. Thus, the little bastard was a NBC no matter where he was born, as long as Stanley Ann was his mother.

[DiogenesLamp]

Replying to Kansas 58, Red Steel said:

Your error is that the 14th Amendment naturalizes or in other words, it makes citizens by statute at birth.

Many people do not comprehend the fact that the 14th Amendment was created to specifically overturn the Dred Scott v Sandford decision which denied citizenship to slaves. The authors of the 14th weren't arguing that the Supreme Court had decided the case incorrectly. Indeed, the 14th amendment was created precisely because many people felt the court had decided the case exactly in accordance with the existing law, and therefore the law had to be specifically changed.

Thus the 14th amendment was needed to give former slaves a pathway to citizenship because due to Dred Scott v Sanford, they had no existing legal path to becoming citizens.

To argue that the 14th made them "natural" citizens, after the fact, is just idiocy, the like of which I would expect from Kansas58, but not from any sensible person.

[DiogenesLamp]

You THINK you are smarter than everyone now alive, in the legal world.

No you idiot, I am not smarter, I am more KNOWLEDGEABLE regarding this issue than most (if not all) legal authorities. Why am I more Knowledgeable? Because I have studied it, and they have not. Just the other day Supreme Court Justice Scalia admitted he doesn't know what "natural born citizen" means.

What you, and other pinheads do not realize is that NOBODY (legal authorities) studies this stuff. They simply accept what they have heard as true, and don't bother to find out if it really is true. Those of us who have gone to the bother of finding out what is the truth have discovered that many people suffer from a common misconception about what being a "natural citizen" really is.

This does not mean you are smarter.

I don't know if I am "smarter" or not. I suspect I'm smarter than MOST legal authorities, but I have been quite impressed with Mario Apuzzo, Leo Donofrio, Richard Epstein's, et al legal analysis, so I am quite confident there are people out there as smart or smarter than am I, but that is not the issue. What *IS* the issue is whether any of those "smart" people have ever bothered to learn about this issue themselves, or merely accepted what they've been told by ignorant people such as yourself.

Do you think George Will is an idiot? If not, read what he has to say about this issue.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/03/26/AR2010032603077.html

Read what George Will has to say and then tell me *HE* is an idiot.

[DiogenesLamp]

You are wrong. You have absolutely no living legal authority on your side.

Thank God for that! They have shown themselves to be complete morons. I am greatly relieved that the Modern Day courts are in disagreement with me, for if they were not, I would then think I must have made a mistake somewhere.

Kelo? Wickard? Roe? and this latest Obamacare ruling? Glory Halleluiah they disagree with me!!!!

We need to expunge these idiots from out of our court system, root and branch!

Those dead people you CLAIM are on your side would call you an idiot, if they were here to listen to your birther blather.

Here is James Madison to disagree with you.

OUCH!!! Another bitch-slap from the past!!!! James Madison, Oct. 1, 1811.

You have absolutely no understanding of the law.

I know what modern judges THINK the law is. I know what the law actually IS. It is our duty to make the Judges change their minds. It is not our duty to fool ourselves by accepting their misdirection.

[KennethJohnKelly]

Elderd was born on British soil, not in the iUnited States, obviously. More interestingly, yours is the first suggestion I “ve read that a man born of American slaves in, say 1864, would have been legally barred from running for President. Are you sure of that?

[DiogenesLamp]

Actually, she was old enough to pass on citizenship. The age requirement you mention only applied to married women. But, whether or not she knew it at the time, Stanley Ann's marriage to BHO, Sr. was bigamous and therefore invalid. Thus, the little bastard was a NBC no matter where he was born, as long as Stanley Ann was his mother.

Given that women could not pass on citizenship AT ALL until 1924 with the Women's citizenship act, how is it possible for someone to meet the 1787 definition of "natural" citizen when a law which would make them a citizen wouldn't be written for another 137 years?

If it requires a special law, it isn't "natural."