Posted on 08/22/2008 12:27:56 PM PDT by GaltMeister
Ping.
So, it doesn't matter if both or either of his parents are citizens, he must be born in the USA??
Right???
On page 6, line 24. The complaint states that if he was born in Kenya, then he is not a U.S. citizen unless one parent (his mother) lived in the US for at least ten years and 5 years after the age of 14.
His mother was born on 11/29/1942. Barrack was born on 8/4/1961.
So the complaint is that he is not a U.S. citizen because his mother was only 18 years old and 9 months old when she gave birth. But if the mother was 19 years old, then he would be covered and would be a U.S. citizen.
Typical Clinton like behavior. Arguing over 117 days (3.9 months).
But first they have to succeed in moving his birth from Hawaii to Kenya.
Wrong.
natural born citizens can be born overseas if they are born to American parents.
Both McCain and Obama are covered.
/sarcasm on
Hey, read it again.
“No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution”
Perhaps you can make the claim that NOBODY is eligible to be President. Because clearly it only applies to people who were born (either natural or US citizen) at the time the convention was adopted.
/sarcasm off.
Not surprising. Phil Berg is the lowest form of crackpot, a 911 truther.
Under the current version of the law, he would be covered. Because the requirement now is only 2 years after the age of 14 years old.
“(g) a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years:
Provided, That any periods of honorable service in the Armed Forces of the United States, or periods of employment with the United States Government or with an international organization as that term is defined in section 288 of title 22 by such citizen parent, or any periods during which such citizen parent is physically present abroad as the dependent unmarried son or daughter and a member of the household of a person
(A) honorably serving with the Armed Forces of the United States, or
(B) employed by the United States Government or an international organization as defined in section 288 of title 22, may be included in order to satisfy the physical-presence requirement of this paragraph. This proviso shall be applicable to persons born on or after December 24, 1952, to the same extent as if it had become effective in its present form on that date; and “
So when did the 1952 law change?
It changed in 1986.
“1986 Act of November 14, 1986 (PL 99-653) amended section 301(g) (8 U.S.C. 1401(g)) by striking out “ten years, at least five” and inserting in lieu thereof “five years, at least two”. This reduced the prior residence time in the United States necessary for a U.S. citizen married to an alien to be able to automatically transmit U.S. citizenship to a child born abroad from the former period of ten years, five of which after the age of 14, to five years, two of which after the age of fourteen years.”
http://www.aca.ch/joomla/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=51&Itemid=80
> t’s not against the law for someone ineligible for
> the presidency to campaign for it.
Heck, I’m not aware of any formal mechanism in which
an ineligible candidate would be vetted and stopped.
If one gets the pop vote, who’s job is it?
Electoral College refuses to elect?
House refuses to cert?
CJ SCOTUS refuses to swear in?
> As filed this particular case isn’t going anywhere.
It may not be intended to go anywhere (in court).
If the issue is real, all that is needed is to trigger the
ITNs (In The Tank DNC TV networks) to cover it. The COLB
so far exhibited is clearly a fake. What does (or do) the
real cert(s) say?
The complaint against Obama being a multinational appears to be completely bogus.
I do not know of any law prohibiting the President from being a national for more than one country.
The complainant will lose all his credibility for making this part of his petition.
As much as I do not want Obimba in the WH, the Clintoons getting back in the WH scares me more!
That's what I thought.
I can't see what the hulabaluu is all about.
The hullabaloo is from certain parties trying to win by casting doubt in peoples minds.
If it gets to the Supreme Court, O. will win on this issue.
They should drug test this lawyer.
Perhaps you can make the claim that NOBODY is eligible to be President. Because clearly it only applies to people who were born (either natural or US citizen) at the time the convention was adopted.I thought it meant no C-Section babies.
“This case isn’t intended to be won. It’s intended to scare the delegates at the Democrat convention into nominating Hillary.”
Bingo. “Are you sure this guy you’re nominating is even eligible? Are you *SURE*?”
It seems the only way to get the media to report anything about Obama is to say or do something outlandish - like run an ad of him with Paris Hilton or sue him. Nothing else can disperse the media smokescreen.
Here is a FR discussion thread for it:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2066304/posts
Obama Crimes : Is Obama A Natural Born Citizen? [Berg's Website for Lawsuit: Summary, PDFs, Etc.]
I thought a special law was made to state McCain was eligible to be president since he was not born in the U.S.
Nobama would mean an end to America as we know it. I much rather have Hillary than Nobama. He scares me way more. Anybody but Nobama.
Of course as much as McCain annoys me he is several orders of magnitude better then the Marxist Obama.
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.