|
> This is what a REAL birth certificate from Hawaii looks like:
Examples of the abbreviated SHORT-Form "Certification of Live Birth"
Examples of LONG-Form "Certificate of Live Birth"
|
Posted on 04/21/2010 8:28:03 PM PDT by MrChips
OK, so I have read a little, listened a little, and figured that the question of Obama's citizenship and birth would never be answered, so why dive into it. But just now, I listened to Anderson Cooper on CNN (I know, I know, why am I watching PRAVDA?) blabber on and on in a very assertive, denunciatory tone to someone from Arizona over that state's recent passage of a bill requiring presidential candidates to prove their citizenship. Cooper went on ad nauseum about how stupid anyone is who questions Obama, how the birth certificate has been PROVEN to be authentic, that the matter should be settled. But the adamancy in his voice bothered me. Why is he so exercised about it if that is really true? He'd be calm, or so I said to myself. Anyway, anybody else watch this?
I’ve never had a “who cares?” attitude about this issue. I’ve always maintained that Obama’s status is questionable and that we need a SCOTUS ruling.
Your statistical analysis regarding the chance of successful challenge is duly noted.
From all the records, his mother took him as a newborn, by herself, to Seattle to attend classes. Obama Sr. was not in the picture. The whole thing is odd, strange, and certainly dysfunctional.
Another issue is ... who paid for all of his schooling? His mother and grandparents would not have been able to afford expensive tuitions. Did Barry travel with a US passport? There is much for Berry to hide, and I hope things are soon uncovered.
My personal opinion is that he is an illegal president for what could be a variety of reasons. He is certainly an incompetent one.
If that were the case, then someone like Kim Jong Il, Hugo Chavez, Achmedinejad, or any other enemy of the USA, could just move here, spawn a kid, raise that kid to become president, and destroy the USA from within, and from the highest level.
The founders discussed the risk of someone with divided loyalties doing such a thing, and put the "Natural Born Citizen" clause in the Constitution to guard against just such a situation.
Today, we are seeing exactly why.
Not really relevant.
You think he’d be the Dem nominee if he isn’t on the ballot in one state?
If Obama was the nominee and wasn’t on the ballot in, let’s say, Arizona, Obama would become a laughing stock and be crushed. Reagan 1984 style.
I would run to everyone who supported Obama in 2008 and ask them to explain why Obama was NOT ON THE BALLOT IN ARIZONA.
Listen to them speak.
And then say “or maybe he’s not American.”
They’d realize I was right and most if not all would stop supporting him.
If Obama is not on the ballot in all 50 states it’s immediately fatal to Obama.
The Supreme Court had two good chances after the 14th amemdent was passed to say that it redefined natural born citizenship. They did not. Minor v. Happersett says you have to look outside of the constitution for a definition and Wong Kim Ark cited this same passage. Minor proceeds to give a definition for which there is NO doubt: "... 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." How can you get anymore practical than that??
Good point, but I'm curious how Obama's mama paid for her college when she was raising a newborn infant.
Bullshit.
True SCOTUS has never ruled on NBC, but they ROUTINELY resort to Common Law for guidance when American Law is deficient. Many SCOTUS decisions say so.
If AZ passes the eligibility law and Obama is denied, he would have to go to SCOTUS for relief. Since there is no precedent [stare decisis] to go by, they will go back to the Founding Fathers' original intent - basically "What did they know - and when did they know it".
So, SCOTUS will be examining the same cases and documents that the Founding Fathers did when they wrote the Constitution. Based on the applicable law at the time of the Founding Fathers, SCOTUS will have to decide what their intent was ...
Sissy Cooper knows Obama is not a natural born. So Waaaaaaah!!
The 14th Amendment defines citizenship, not natural born citizenship. It is improper to construe "citizen" to mean "natural born citizen." If one did that there would be no bar to construing "shall" to mean "shall not." Of course, that wouldn't bother any self-respecting liberal judge.
continue reading... "Some authorities go further and include as citizens children born within the jurisdiction without reference to the citizenship of their parents. As to this class there have been doubts, but never as to the first. For the purposes of this case it is not necessary to solve these doubts."
Currently, all persons born in the US are given citizenship including "anchor babies" whether we think it is right or not, that is the law. The case you cited specifically defines 2 types of citizen. Naturalized and natural born. They just balk when it comes to answering whether children of foreigners get the natural born status, but that precedent has long since been answered.
The first case is the definition of being natural born, the second case is described at the Dept. of State website
Since President Obama's father was not a U.S. citizen, he would have to have been born in the U.S. to be a natural born citizen.
Wrong. Neither the State Department, Congress, or anyone else can determine "natural born citizen" - since it has never been expressly defined. There are only 2 ways to define it - by Constitutional amendment or by Supreme Court ruling.
|
> This is what a REAL birth certificate from Hawaii looks like:
Examples of the abbreviated SHORT-Form "Certification of Live Birth"
Examples of LONG-Form "Certificate of Live Birth"
|
You are really cruisin' for a bruisin' on this thread ...
You were asked to supply your documentation - you answered, "14th Amendment."
Well, here is the relevant part:
" 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside ..."
Just WHERE does it say "natural born"? And DO NOT give me your opinion ...
Who falls into such an area, and how was it framed? Returning to Minor "as to these there have been doubts, but never as to the first," with the first being born of the soil and born of citizen parents. Obama was born to a father who was not even a resident alien. There are doubts about Obama that remain unresolved.
And??? It says one defintion has doubt and the other doesn't. And despite saying it's not necessary to solve the doubts, Minor does anyway by acknowledging that original naturalization acts were dependent on alien parents becoming naturalized before their children could be citizens. If they believed the children of aliens were automatically citizens, then there's no need for the 14th amendment.
Currently, all persons born in the US are given citizenship including "anchor babies" whether we think it is right or not, that is the law. The case you cited specifically defines 2 types of citizen. Naturalized and natural born. They just balk when it comes to answering whether children of foreigners get the natural born status, but that precedent has long since been answered.
The precedent is that the 14th amendment creates citizens of the United States, but not natural born citizens unless the parents are citizens. This is covered in the Wong Kim Ark decision.
Well if that's true then perhaps he will be deemed ineligible since he is black. After all, blacks weren't considered citizens at the time of the Founding Fathers.. This whole notion of a 3rd form of citizenship is simply that, a notion. It has never been codified.
What I can't understand is how such intelligent people as all of you who obviously can understand the world well enough to read these laws and research these cases can possibly believe that the Supreme Court is going to evict Obama from the White House. To believe that the Supreme Court is going to kick out the first black president on an issue that fewer than 1% of the people can even understand (i.e. the nuanced difference between born a citizen not a naturalized citizen but also not a natural born citizen).
Lmo56,
If douginthearmy is truly in the US Army, he’s undoubtedly motivated to go out of his way to define, at least in his mind, that Obama is a natural born citizen, despite the fact that he has admitted that he was born, like our Founders, with dual US (maybe) and British citizenship. If douginthearmy were to be convinced that Obama is not qualified to hold office, he would be honor bound by oath to defend and protect the Constitution by refusing any unlawful orders emanating from a pretender Commander in Chief. For many, ignorance is bliss.
No - thats the problem ...
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.
