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?
Amen. Never heard it put so succinctly.
Has nothing to do with Natural Born Citizen and POTUS.
Further to that point, there must be something terribly wrong with all of the rest of his "documents" that have been sealed or are now "missing." There are less records available about this person than the overwhelming majority of all citizens. One can barely even trace the person's origins through adulthood to the present, just some scant shadows here and there. Is it any wonder that such person felt the need to publish 2 books in advance that create the "story" so that no one need bother with ever trying to look it up and discover it? Sadly, this approach has worked for the vast majority of our fellow citizens. After all, we have devolved into a country that is willing to submit to have our Freedom, Liberty, Society and Economy be destroyed on the basis of "settled consensus."
Has it been confirmed that both parents must be citizens? I always thought he just had to be born on American soil. Please explain it to me.
Nancy Pelosi certified Obama as eligible, but left off any language on the certification as Constitutionally eligible in the AZ form submitted. DNC and Pelosi are who they should be attacking. AZ is just trying to enforce the law.
Only his lover boyfriend who was patiently waiting for him to come home to their "nest".
In order to win this argument you must clearly show that there are 3 types of citizen.
TYPE 1: A naturalized citizen who is born elsewhere and moves to America and becomes a citizen. (Everyone agrees not eligible).
TYPE 2: An American born of American parents who is "natural born".
TYPE 3: An American born to at least one foreign parent who is granted "citizenship" at birth but not "natural born" status. I have read everything you have presented and I see no evidence any such citizenship has been granted anyone. Why do you think no prominent conservative constitutional lawyer has taken the case? Because they're all in on some kind of conspiracy? Maybe they know something you don't.
I posted this yesterday, on what turned into a dead thread. I laugh because for the past nine and a half years, it seems that every thread I post on then fizzles to a halt asap. :) I am intrested to hear what people have to say about this case:
First off, I think this is a good thing, and I believe it would end up with the courts determining definitively what a ‘natural born citizen’ actually is. Regardless of opinions here, it is still vague. (And yes, I have read ALL of the arguments about Vattel, etc.)
Here is a question for those who think that it is cut and dry:
My son is twelve. He was born in Virginia. Through his mother (me) he is descended from men who fought in the revolution (letters from Valley Forge in our possession!), as well as both soldiers fighting for the north and south in the Civil War. Also, we have a claim that we are related to one of the original supreme court justices, as well as one of the founding families of Washington, DC. He is totally American.
I was not married to his father (and if you dare tell me off for being a tramp, etc, you can kiss my derriere—I could have avoided that and had an abortion, but I didn’t!!!) who was living in the US as a German national on a work visa. He decided he didn’t want anything to do with the situation, once he was back in Germany. My son has never met him, and has never been to Germany, other than driving through on our way to Spain.
When my son was born, I called the German consulate to see how I might get some child support. They told me that my son was not eligible to be a dual citizen, as we were not married, and the father’s name was not on the birth certificate.
So, if my son is NOT a dual citizen, is not a naturalIZED citizen, was born in the US to a mother who was in her mid-twenties, how is he not a natural born citizen? What court in 2010 would contend that the rights of citizenship would go through his father, whom he has never met/had contact with, as opposed to his mother? What court is going to assign him some type of “lesser” citizenship than a kid whose mom might not know who his dad is? NONE.
This type of case, which is probably fairly common, is what would keep the courts from deciding that there is a third type of citizen (not implicitly stated) in the Constitution.
I know a lot of people screaming about natural born citizenship determined ONLY by two US citizen parents disagree, but I think that the fuzziness of the meaning, and the lack of explanation by the founders, can give the courts a lot of leeway in deciding the way that makes the most sense for the US today.
I am not a troll, and anyone who calls me one is a joke.If there is proof that Obama was born in any other country than the US, you bet, I agree he is NOT a NBC. I loathe the man, and can’t even listen to clips of his voice on Rush, but I do not agree that (if born in the US) he is not a NBC because of his father’s citizenship.
Sorry, but it does. Note that I didn't use this to say that it equates with natural born citizenship, but explained why it doesn't.
And as pointed out above, please do not come back with the same old lame references to Blackstone & English common law, ...
I didn't cite Blackstone. The reference to English common law is discussed because it is used by the Supreme Court. But again, you're making an argument that, in general, supports mine.
I’ll agree that there are some unusual cases, such as yours. (And by the way, thanks for choosing life.) But the principle is a sound one, I think, namely that when both parents are not American citizens, there is the potential for the non-citizen parent to exert influence. Even if that parent were absentee, there could be influence at some later time.
Founding fathers(congressional records): Children of Citizens(that mean both) shall be considered Natural born.
U.S. Supreme Court: Children whom Parents(both parents) are U.S. citizens are Natural Born.
To prove that obama is not a natural born citizen, you must first get a CERTIFIED COPY of his birth record showing that his father was a kenyan national. If obama was born in Hawaii to one parent U.S. citizen he is a Native born citizen and ineligible to be the president.
If father is unknown, the only way to establish which type of citizen a person is would be through the Mother. However, you have constructed a strawman because both you and Barry the Fraud know whom is the father and neither your son nor Barry Soetoro, aka Barry Obama, aka Barack Hussein Obama is a natural biorn citizen according to the way the founders used that term. [BTW, my Mother conceived me due to rape and she chose my birth and life rather than kill me early in my lifetime already begun.]
For clarification:
The verbiage used by the DNC on the 2008 (Obama) certification form was the same as the verbiage on the 2004 (Kerry) and 2000 (Gore) certification forms. None of the included a statement that their presidential nominee met the Constitutional requirements. So nothing was “left out” for Obama in 2008.
However, the State of Hawaii requires the certification form to include that statement. So the DNC did provide a separate certification form to Hawaii that included the required verbiage.
The RNC certification forms do have a statement indicating that their presidential nominee meets the Constitutional requirements.
Yes, I knew that citizenship was very much tied to the Father in the past, but if one posts everything on knows or would like to know on a subject, the post would be waaaay toooo long. LOL.
I see that your profile says you’re back. Is this the kind of behavior that got you thrown out the first time?
It is weak.
Also...Obama MISUSED and WASTED Department of Justice resources and U.S. attorney talents to play a political joke of “gotcha”.
I don't think the American public will be amused that he distracted the DOJ and U.S. attorneys from their important job of getting the bad guys at a time when plots were being laid to KILL our soldiers on their bases and recruitment centers and blow planes out of the sky.
NOT funny!
I don’t understand all the angry and screaming either....since all of Barrack Obama’s supporters say, without waiver, that he is a NBC. So, what is the problem?
I suspect that there is one of four possible motivations:
(1)Many of the current POTUS’ pundit supporters suspect he doesn’t meet the NBC requirement and they don’t want the issue to be forced.
(2)Many know what the NBC requirement was intended to mean (i.e. both parents US citizens), but they consider this to be another “outdated” or “passe” thing that should not be enforced...but they lack the will to attempt to ammend the consitution. Therefore, they are attempting to ammend it by a precident in the form of this current administration.
(3) They are just ignorant and don’t care what the constitution says. The “rule of law” only counts to them when it favors them.
(4) This is just a cover for critism of other issues. Maybe they believe that the current POTUS is a NBC, but they think this issue will cost him votes when added to all the other unpopular things this administration has pushed.
Read above.......
And maybe study some world history and current events. There is more to the world than America and it’s policy. I am definitely not implying that any are better, but I did “assume” that the opinions of those on FreeRepublic were based on a knowledge of the way things were outside of our box.
And yes, I know what happens when I assume, and boy did a select few on here remind me of that.
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.