Or Ann T. Christ.
That could have been a Garbage Pail Kid, you know.
FYI
I believe he was born in Hawaii, but I’m beginning to believe that the COLB is a forgery.
If Frank Davis is his father can he be removed for fraud if it comes out?
Obama?
We just don't know the facts.
I would think that a person born of two US citizens would be a natural-born citizen, no matter where born. (Good luck trying to avoid taxes by saying you were never a US citizen!) It’s only recent judicial decisions that focus so much on the location of birth.
Then again, if the conclusion is that neither Obama nor McCain is eligible I can live with that. :)
I’ll admit to not having read every word in the article.
If this bill was passed wouldn’t it have to be ‘grandfathered’ or something in order to cover Obama since he is already in office?
Just ignore me if it was explained, lol.
Ridiculous.
If Lincoln had been born in Illinois (statehood 1818), he would not have been eligible to be President by that reasoning. He was born in Kentucky (statehood 1792), so then that made the difference?
Does it say in Article 2 Section 1 that American soil is the determining factor concerning "natural born" status?
Obama's daddy is/was a Kenyan citizen. That makes him ineligible to be POTUS.
Obama could have been born in Central Park on live TV and he would still be ineligible.
Maybe because they were both drooling at the thought of running against a weak old candidate like McCain.
Stanley Ann where were you on the night of August 4, 1961 ???
Not good.
How did mccaakill win in the great state of. missouri? I saw her on I
Bor and was not impressed
But the powers that run the world wanted him to be. So there he is. obama is pure unadulterated evil and so are his deciples. He and they will do the bidding of their one world masters.
obama have got their marching orders from their masters.
Their marching orders tell them to pass socialized medicine. This they will do because the Democrat Party controls both Houses of Congress.
The question that begs to be answered is, what will we do?
Will we go peacably to our graves, or will we resist?
Claire McCaskill = Miss Piggy
She is a sinister person.
Obama knows it is just a matter of time before he is exposed, but he has a couple of cards he has to play before he brings about the destruction of the United States.
I have no doubt that this healthcare bill will be rammed down our throats, and that Obama has waiting in the wings even more socialist programs that this nation cannot pay for. Watch for them to be fast tracked as well.
But the two that are going to break this country are amenesty for illegal aliens and reparations for slavery.
He has been holding back on reparations and amnesty because they will be played just before he is forced to step down with in a month of any sort of disclosure you will start to hear talk about them from all the usual sources.
Those cards dealt will light the fuse of anarchy and the destruction of the United States of America as prophesied but all those in Obama life that have dreamt of that moment.
This is lengthy, but includes the pertinent passages from Blackstone, Vattel, and the British Nationality Act of 1948. Otherwise, you have to get it off the ‘Net yourselves ...
In order to understand the concept of “Natural Born” citizenship, it is necessary to understand NOT ONLY WHO is a “Natural Born” citizen, but ALSO WHAT the traits and characteristics of a “Natural Born” citizen are …
FIRST:
We look at the question of the applicability of English Common Law to the United States Constitution, vis-à-vis SCOTUS.
From Wheaton v. Peters (January Term 1834), Minor v. Happersett (March 29, 1875), Smith v. Alabama (January 30, 1886), and United States v. Wong Kim Ark (March 28, 1898):
Although SCOTUS has ruled that there IS NO Common Law in the United States, it has ALSO ruled that Common Law ought to be consulted in cases where original intent necessarily needs to be construed.
SECOND:
We now look at the question of a “Natural Born” subject in English Common Law vis-à-vis Blackstone.
From Commentaries on the Laws of England
Book I, Chapter X: Of the People, Whether Aliens, Denizens, or Natives
“… Natural allegiance is such as is due from all men born within the king’s dominions immediately upon their birth … Natural allegiance … cannot be forfeited, cancelled, or altered, by any change of time, place, or circumstance, … the natural-born subject of one prince cannot by any act of his own … put off or discharge his natural allegiance … and cannot be divested without the concurrent act of that prince to whom it was first due. Indeed the natural-born subject of one prince, to whom he owes allegiance, may be entangled by subjecting himself absolutely to another; but it is his own act that brings him into these straits and difficulties, of owing service to two masters; and it is unreasonable that, by such voluntary act of his own, he should be able at pleasure to unloose those bands, by which he is connected to his natural prince …
… Local allegiance is such as is due from an alien … for so long time as he continues within the king’s dominion and protection: and it ceases, the instant such stranger transfers himself from this kingdom to another. Natural allegiance is therefore perpetual, and local [allegiance] temporary only …
… An alien born may purchase lands, or other estates: but not for his own use; for the king is thereupon entitled to them. If an alien could acquire a permanent property in lands, he must own an allegiance, equally permanent with that property, to the king of England; which would probably be inconsistent with that, which he owes his own natural liege lord …
… And this maxim of the law proceeded upon a general principle, that every man owes natural allegiance where he is born, and cannot owe two such allegiances, or serve two masters, at once …
… The children of aliens, born here in England, are, generally speaking, natural-born subjects, and entitled to all the privileges of such …
… A Denizen is an alien born, but who has obtained ex donatione regis letters patent to make him an English subject … A denizen is in a kind of middle state between an alien, and natural-born subject, and partakes of both of them … And no denizen can be of the privy council, or either house of parliament, or have any office of trust, civil or military, or be capable of any grant from the crown.
… Naturalization cannot be performed but by act of parliament: for by this an alien is put in exactly the same state as if he had been born in the king’s ligeance; except only that he is incapable … of being a member of the privy council, or parliament, etc. …”.
THIRD:
We now look at the question of whether a person may sever ties with his Sovreign (more on this later in the “CONCLUSIONS” section).
From Law Of Nations
Chapter XIX: Of Our Native Country And Several Things That Relate To It
§ 220. Whether a person may quit his country.
“ … 1. The children are bound by natural ties to the society in which they were born; they are under an obligation to show themselves grateful for the protection it has afforded to their fathers … They ought, therefore, to love it, as we have already shown, to express a just gratitude to it, and requite its services as far as possible, by serving it in turn … But every man is born free; and the son of a citizen … may examine whether it be convenient for him to join the society for which he was destined by his birth. If he does not find it advantageous to remain in it, he is at liberty to quit it …”.
FOURTH:
We now look at the question of dual nationality vis-à-vis the British Nationality Act of 1948.
From Part II, Section V:
(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth:
CONCLUSIONS:
What does this ALL mean ???
1. The Founding Fathers DID NOT consider English Common Law to be the controlling law in the Colonies. For if they DID, as “Natural Born” English subjects, they NEVER could have severed ties with England without the Sovreign’s consent (per Blackstone).
2. The Founding Fathers seem to have borrowed from Vattell as justification for the severance. This seems to verify that the Founding Fathers DID NOT ENTIRELY rely on English Common Law when founding the United States.
3. Blackstone states that the children of foreigners born on English soil are, GENERALLY SPEAKING, “Natural Born” subjects.
4. HOWEVER, Blackstone ALSO declares that a “Natural Born” subject CANNOT serve two masters.
5. Therefore, per Blackstone, a child of a foreigner appears to be a Denizen rather than a “Natural Born” subject – assuming that the foreign father’s country recognizes the child as one of its citizens (dual nationality).
6. Per Blackstone, a Denizen enjoys MOST of the rights of a “Natural Born” subject – except that he CANNOT hold high office.
7. The British Nationality Act of 1948 recognizes OBAMA as a British subject AND the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution recognizes him as a United States citizen (dual nationality), IF he was born in Hawaii.
8. As a dual national, OBAMA DOES NOT have fit the definition of “Natural Born” as the Founding Fathers knew it.
QED ...
