Posted on 05/14/2010 3:21:18 PM PDT by bushpilot1
Meandering through my 1928 Edition of Bouvier's Law Dictionary on page 833, Native, Native Citizen is defined:
Those born in a country, of parents who are citizens.
If Obama does not meet the standards of a native citizen how can he be a natural born citizen.
Prove the statement on his website to be false and you will be right and you will prove him to be a liar.
So to follow your logic, I can have multiple wives and every marriage is legal and binding. Polygamy in the US is officially recognized. Thank you for inventing this new law and right; the fundamentalist LDS churches will be glad for your assistance!
A marriage to an already married person is bigamy and is void by State statute. It never happened. Doesn't matter what you did to resolve it, it was void from the beginning.
The crux of the WKA issue is that his parents could never become citizens by statute of Congress; however, his status - by virtue of birth - was set by the 14th Amendment. Congressional statute does not override Constitutional rights. Whether you agree with Grey or not, it is the law of the land, and has been upheld by subsequent SC decisions.
And if he proved he was born in Hawaii, you would drop the issue about his natural born status? Because you've also been arguing about his father's citizenship... So how would you ever resolve that?
Seriously, you're arguing in circles with no train of logic or reason, trying to make some point or position that I cannot deduce. In light of this:
Is the preceding statement on Obama's website true or false????
If the British Nationality Act of 1948 did not govern his status, then why did he say it did???
And why is the statement there at all if it didn't and he didn't agree with it???
You can't have it both ways, You can't say it and unsay it at the same time -- unless, of course, you're Obama or an Obamabot.
Again, is a US citizen subject to the laws of a foreign nation? Answer that question, please. It answers your own contentions, and shows them to be null and void.
It DOES NOT MATTER what another nation claims over you; what matters is what the US claims over you and which you accept for yourself.
And it ain’t horse poop, because that can be composted into nice fertilizer!
They really want him to be illegitimate so that when it is revealed that he was born in Kenya, he’d still have US citizenship.
It’s pretty funny when now they want him to be illegitimate to further their cause!
There is still doubt about his so-called first marriage, a lot of doubt. First of all, if it happened at all, second, if it was a tribal marriage and if it was or was not recognized legally by Great Britain at that time, or were Kezia and Obama Sr just shacking up. The dates of when her first kid was born, and when 0bama Sr left for the US are also all over the place.
The truth on all that stuff is still not ascertained 100%.
“main purpose” of the clause “was to establish the citizenship of the negro” and that “[t]he phrase, ‘subject to its jurisdiction’ was intended to exclude from its operation children of ministers, consuls, and citizens or subjects of foreign States born within the United States.”
Justice Steven Field, joined by Chief Justice Chase and Justices Swayne and Bradley in dissent from the principal holding of the case, likewise acknowledged that the clause was designed to remove any doubts about the constitutionality of the 1866 Civil Rights Act, which provided that all persons born in the United States were as a result citizens both of the United States and of the state in which they resided, provided they were not at the time subjects of any foreign power.
Therefore, it was unanimous that the definition of ‘subject to the jurisdiction did not mean mere local, it meant complete, local & political. The only way to gain political was through descent from the parent or by consent as this is the law of nature which is the law of nations.
Tell me, what law did congress pass after the 14th & the expatriation act which clarified that the US did NOT adhere to dual citizenship, the changed the meaning of subject to the jurisdiction. What gave Gray the authority to overturn his ruling that declared the 14th amendment to in fact be constitutional in its wording that denied citizenship to children born owing allegiance to a foreign power. You always avoid the fact that the intent of the law can not be determined without looking into the history of when the law was made and Grey in Elk, quoted Slaughterhouse, which quoted the framers of the Amendment.
What is your motivation for supporting the eligibility of 0thugga?
Is it because searching for the truth makes “us” look like kooks? (in which case, the MSM and leftists will hate conservatives no matter what we do so that argument is nullified.)
Or it’s hopeless and time should be spent on worthy causes (in which case, why are you on this thread...hmm??)
What is your motivation and reason? You just like to pi** in the cornflakes?
You really, really sound as though you are pushing a purposeful agenda with supplied talking points.
Really, really you do.
DId you read that great comment by Seizethecarp the other day about the military likely recruiting active/former mil for psyops on the internet?
It was excellent. If you haven’t read it I’ll find it and post it.
(Courtesy ping to Seize.)
I would say no -- unless you are a citizen of that nation and/or within that nation's jurisdiction -- which makes this statement from Obama's website quite relevant to your question:
That same act [The British Nationality Act of 1948] governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.
If this statement is true, then he was not born a citizen of the United States, but a citizen of Britain and subject to the British Nationality Act of 1948.
Am I correct???
Which breaks down to who is a subject of a foreign State; who is excluded from the jurisdiction of the United States. That would be consuls, ambassadors, foreign dignitaries. All else are subject to our jurisdiction. Who is exempt from the jurisdiction of the US when on US soil?
correction/calrification:
Tell me, what law did congress pass after the 14th & the expatriation act(1868-1884) which clarified that the US did in fact accept as law the concept of dual citizenship. And for tht matter, why even the need for the expatriation act if dual nationality was in fact part of the law of the land?
I would like to read it — ping me to it if you can find it.
It's call the Constitution and the rule of law. What is yours?
You really, really sound as though you are pushing a purposeful agenda with supplied talking points.
As opposed to you what you have done?
Support of the law and the Constitution does not translate to support of the President; if you try to draw such a connection it says more about your own motives and desires than mine.
Chester Arthur appointed two Associate Justices (no Chief Justices).
Gray, Horace | Massachusetts | Arthur | January 9, 1882 - September 15, 1902
Blatchford, Samuel | New York | Arthur | April 3, 1882 - July 7, 1893
The Supreme Court Web site used to be supremecourtus.gov, now it's supremecourt.gov, when did that happen? The site appears to have been redone in the last month or so. The historic list of justices defaults to a graphic timeline instead of the text version. You can still access the text version through a link.
None, because IT DOES NOT MATTER. The US will not recognize dual citizenship; just because another nation may attempt to lay claim to you does NOT affect what the United States holds your citizenship to be.
How does a person lose their US citizenship? The relevant means here would be willfully accepting the citizenship of another nation. It is an ACT by the person, not by the other nation, that changes your US citizenship. If Britain, or Canada, or Venezuela claims you as a citizen it does not cancel your US citizenship! Only your willful acceptance of such claim would affect your US standing.
Another nation can lay claim to you as it wills; it does not affect your standing here. The US considers it immaterial. I don't know how much more clear this can be.
HA HA HA HA HA!!!
Support of the Constitution and rule of law!!! ROTFLMAO!!!
Priceless!!!
Still chucking....
You expect anyone to believe you???
Still LOL!!!!
What I’ve done? Got curious about 0thugga since summer 2008 - actually before - when I read some articles that cast doubt about his eligibility. So I’ve read for countless hours and hours and hours - everything I could find.
For one reason only:
To know the truth.
That is my motivation.
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.