. . . . Check out # 210, please.
Posted on 04/30/2010 7:45:37 PM PDT by Fred Nerks
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2-2E65uFHM
this segment during the ‘anchors aweigh’ music clearly shows tampering with the McCain documents.
a prophet is never appreciated in his own time?
“Just vote the guy out of office the next Presidential election and be done with him”
.
It appears most unlikely that the country can last that long!
If the pretender is allowed to appoint one more judge we are toast.
.
I remember the PUMA girls mad as hell when some Barry distraction brigade was outed online as Hillary “fake” supporters, frau Traveler fits exactly that mole by spamming and hijack ineligibility threads with her nonsense blue prints!!!
I actually watched 1-4 first, the joys of being blonde. The raised letters is a definite give away that it isn’t real.
Thanks, but to nitpick a bit, it seems to be a statement by the director of the Health Dept. of Hawaii. and does not seem to be an official policy statement by the State of Hawaii. Or it may be. I'm confused by it, especially where she states that he is a natural born citizen. What exactly determines that?
It's an official statement by the State of Hawaii, because the Director is an agent of that state, in the capacity the director fills and is the one in charge of the Department that directly handles the original records dealing with the birth certificate and also issues the "certified copy" of a birth certificate to whomever needs a legal copy.
You can't get too much more offiical than that, at least for a public statement. For a court, you can get more "official" -- simply by printing out the "certified copy" and whatever other records they may request.
But, again -- the department that would issue/print those very records, is that same department that made that official statement to the public.
Now, consider if the statement had been made in another department, one that did not directly handle the records, and a department that had nothing to do with issuing the "certified copy" when requested by a court -- would that other department be "more official" for the State of Hawaii than this one?
Well, I think you can tell, right away, that if this statement had been issued by another department, the first thing that would have been said is "How does that other department know this, when they don't even handle the records, they don't maintain the records, they are not responsible for the records and they do not even issue the certified copy of the records to a court for an official copy!" ... I think you can see what I mean, if some other department had done that ... :-)
As far as who makes that determination of who is a natural born citizen ... well when all is said and done -- it's going to be the Supreme Court who makes that final determination for this case -- if -- they ever get around to it -- which is doubtful.
BUT, if the Supreme Court hasn't gotten around to making that final determination -- I guess one lawyer is just as good as the next lawyer for making such a statement -- and the State of Hawaii does employ lawyers for vetting important official statements (as all states do).
So, the "interim answer" for who makes that determination as to what is meant by "natural born citizen" in the Constitution -- it's a lawyer who is employed by the State of Hawaii, making that statement (you can bet they had lawyers all over that statement... :-) ...). And for the "final answer" as for who makes that determination -- it's the Supreme Court who says what the Constitution means in regards to Obama and this issue of his "natural born status".
But he defines a natural born citizen as one born on U.S. soil of two U.S. citizen parents. McCain was not born on U.S. soil.
Ping.
The Democrats did that to protect Obama from criticism pertaining to his eligibility status. If the GOP candidate wasn’t a “Natural Born Citizen”, how could the Republican’s complain about Obama? (I believe Obama was born in Kenya.)
McCain was born in Panama. It was NEVER a U.S. territory. John Sydney McCain III is a U.S. citizen by statute because his parents were U.S. citizens (jus sanguinas - ‘by blood’). Our statutes covering citizenship include sections pertaining to children of U.S. citizens born in Panama.
The GOP’s candidate couldn’t be any more eligible to be president than Obama. That is why I believe Soros donated hundreds of thousands of dollars to McCain’s The Reform Institute.
It all makes me wonder if McCain was bought by the progressives. His Reform Institute sure reads like he is one of them!
I think we all know that the strategy was to accept McCain's eligibility in order to remove the issue of Obama's eligibility at the same time. This is why they seriously covered McCain but ignored and then mocked coverage of Obama.
-PJ
. . . . Check out # 210, please.
You’ve overlooked one detail, mainly, the amount of voter fraud that took place especially in states that were close. I’ve heard the fraud was as high as 24% in areas. Saying that Zero got more votes than McLame, first deduct the fraud out of your equation.
You spew ignorant BS. The very same ignorant BS over and over and over
“...Still, the point was that the MSM didn’t mock those who raised questions about McCains’s eligibility, but refused to take seriously those who questioned Obama’s eligibility.”
This point was made very clear in the series of videos released by Dr R Polland:
Part One:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f2-2E65uFHM
Aw, man.. I don't seem to be able to start a sentence with a capital letter. You?
what foreign Country are you from?
That country where they haven't invented capitalization.
how old are you?
Old enough to capitalize. You?
we support the Constitution of this Nation here.
Can you even read it?
dry up sonny.
Yes, everyone should take the advice of an illiterate child.
No question that McCain served as a stalking horse for Obama. And the Democrat Senate acted swiftly to pass that vote of confidence for McCain. If they hadn’t wanted to do it, they surely would have dragged their feet. And Obama took a prominent part in pushing it, I believe.
Did the left also ensure that McCain got the nomination? Or did they just take advantage of it after he did? It could be a little of both. McCain was NOT really the choice of Republican voters, still less conservative voters. He went over the top with the help of the press and with a primary system that is frontloaded with liberal states and crossover states. That system was set up by the RNC. And he was helped at strategic moments by various figures—Crist and Huckabee in particular, but no doubt others as well.
Good analysis.
Why wasn't McCain's eligibility an issue in the 2000 election? If it could have been dealt with then, McCain wouldn't have been a candidate in 2008, and thus could not have been used by BO to "mask" his own lack of eligibility.
The statutes do not really apply to those born "in the armies of the nation", per Vattel, "Law Of Nations" vol. I section 217. (5 sections after the 'born in the country of parents who are citizens' section, 212). Those born in the armies or the diplomatic corps are considered "born in the country" becaue the parents never left the country's jurisdiction.
If we are going with Vattel's definition in sectio 212 should we not also go with the exception in section 217?
Gunner, sounds like a capital idea to me. :)
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.