Founding Fathers: Permission for "naturalized" citizens to be POTUS is EXTINCT!

Constitutionally Speaking ^ | 8/21/2009 | patlin

[patlin]

Posted by constitutionallyspeaking(patlin) on August 21, 2009

Following up after a very informative debate on Wednesday evening, I set my sights to further research St. George Tucker and his commentaries on the Constitution. During the debate, the lawyer for the liberal cause was quite adamant that the 1790 Naturalization Act,even though it had been repealed, was the one law that backed his claims that Obama is constitutionally qualified under A2 S1 C5 of the Constitution. Supreme Court Justice Joseph Story who was also the founder of Harvard Law School begs to differ with the libs and wishes to set them straight.

[patlin]

Pour yourself a cup of refreshment, then come back and join me in learning some more Constitutional history; history that you will be teaching to future generations for decades to come. What I have I uncovered is the ‘nuclear bombshell’ that blows Obama’s claims to constitutional eligibility to smithereens.

http://constitutionallyspeaking.wordpress.com/2009/08/21/constitutional-nuclear-bomb-blasts-obamas-eligibilty-to-smithereens/

[Safrguns]

Instead of asking candidates on the state registration forms if they are “constitutionally eligible”, I guess they should spell it out... “I was born in the United States, and both of my parents are citizens of the United States”.

So I guess Obama will be able to beat the fraud rap after all when there’s a legitimate legal question of what constitutionally eligible means.

[patlin]

It is a dangerous precedent that has been set by allowing Obama to remain in office and I have to wonder why the entire Congress just sat there and let it happen.

Our founding fathers are rolling in their graves at the thought of the country they fought and died will once again be ruled by foreigners and its citizens individual liberties remain no more.

[HuntsvilleTxVeteran]

Below is from George Washington’s Farewell Address!

Warns against the party system.

“It serves to distract the Public Councils, and
enfeeble the Public Administration....agitates
the Community with ill-founded jealousies and
false alarms; kindles the animosity of one....
against another....
it opens the door to foreign influence and
corruption...thus the policy and the will of one
country are subjected to the policy and will of
another.”

[Texas Fossil]

Link

http://constitutionallyspeaking.wordpress.com/2009/08/21/constitutional-nuclear-bomb-blasts-obamas-eligibilty-to-smithereens/

[iowamark]

Obama was almost certainly never naturalized. He is either a natural born citizen or a non-citizen. The fact that he has held a US passport since age 5 or 6 argues for the former.

However, I, like you, would like to see the evidence.

And welcome to Free Republic!

[wiggen]

let it? they aided and abetted.

[PubliusMM]

Please...what is the evidence that his childhood passport was US? And, what passport did he use when he traveled to Pakistan?

[iowamark]

I suppose that he could have gotten a Kenyan passport somehow at age 5. But, is it at all plausible to believe that he has used it for many years as a US Senator and presidential candidate and have nobody notice?

[Uncle Chip]

Obama claims that his British citizenship changed to Kenyan citizenship in 1963 when Kenya gained their freedom from British rule, he also claims that since he did not act on that Kenyan citizenship upon coming of age (another clever smoke screen), this inaction automatically caused him to lose his Kenyan citizenship. That may be, however, research has shown that at the coming of age, Kenyans who were born during the time of British rule, had to formally renounce their British citizenship for if they did not, they would remain subjects of Great Britain and subject to the rule of the monarchy.

So then in other words, Obama is a British citizen, and his claim that he let it lapse in 1982? is a mere smokescreen. He would have had to formally renounce it, which he never did.

So, the questions remain, what country’s passports has Obama travelled on during his extensive world travels in the 80’s & 90’s when he was a poor struggling college & law student as well as his travels abroad while he was a US Senator?

a British passport???

[Jude in WV]

Any Congressman or Senator who does not understand and follow Justice Story’s line of reasoning is NOT fit to Serve!

[Jude in WV]

I have been wondering since last August who is holding our goverment hostage. When G W said he he was abandoning his free market principles to save the free market, I knew something very dark was happening. He looked like a little whipped pup when all through his time as President he had come off like a guy who was his own man and cowtowed to no one. I know something very sinister is going on of which we know nothing. All of the rest is a smokescreen.

[emissarium]

Congratulations, patlin! Clear, concise and devastating analysis.

It should be required reading for all members of Congress, Scotus and media mouthpieces with an obligatory public response [rebuttal, if they have the ‘audacity’]. Not that they aren’t all knowingly part of the deception.

The mistake made by Justice Roberts when administering the oath of office to BO, always struck me as rather curious. Technically, it was not a valid oath. Did he know BO was ineligible? Was it an intentional slip? Did his conscience impose a moral restraint that made him administer the oath in the privacy of the White House without the traditional swearing on the Bible?

[roylll]

Welcome to Free Republic!

[vanilla swirl]

“I have been wondering since last August who is holding our goverment hostage. “

Ahhh... the question of the century ;-)
With research we can get glimpses. I’m leaning toward Russia/radical Islam in partnership. I think Russia is pissed that we defeated them (if we truly did). Dark times ahead.....

[MamaTexan]

That may be, however, research has shown that at the coming of age, Kenyans who were born during the time of British rule, had to formally renounce their British citizenship for if they did not, they would remain subjects of Great Britain and subject to the rule of the monarchy.

Untrue. According to that same Kenyan Constituion, the change in citizenship was automatic.

Chapter 6 - Citizenship - Section 87
Persons who became citizens on 12th December, 1963
1. Every person who, having been born in Kenya, is on llth December. 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December, 1963: Provided that a person shall not become a citizen of Kenya by virtue of this subsection if neither of his parents was born in Kenya.

2. Every person who, having been born outside Kenya is on llth December, 1963 a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies or a British protected person shall,if his father becomes, or would but for his death have become, a citizen of Kenya by virtue of subsection (1). become a citizen of Kenya on 12th December. 1963.

IF Zero was born in Hawaii, he would fall in the 'outside Kenya' provision in clause 2.

He and his father became Kenyan citizens on the same day.

[patlin]

a British passport??? Yes, unless he formally renounced his British citizenship, it very well remains intact to thsi date. So the question begs an answer..British, Indomesian or US passport..which one is it?

[patlin]

Welcome to Free Republic! Thanks, This is just one of the most amazing sites. I couldn't get in here on my old pc, don't know why, but with this new one I am free to freep.

[patlin]

He and his father became Kenyan citizens on the same day. While oabma's daddy might have formally renounced his British citizenship, he could not do that for his son. It was up to the son, upon coming of age, to formally renounce Great Britain himself. Thus, you neglect to address the process children born before 1963 have to go through. Are being deceitful on purpose? What is yopur mission in the quest to restore the constitution?

[MamaTexan]

While oabma's daddy might have formally renounced his British citizenship, he could not do that for his son. It was up to the son, upon coming of age, to formally renounce Great Britain himself.

Could you show me where anything had to be formally anounced. According to the Kenyan Constituion, it was automatic.

-----

Thus, you neglect to address the process children born before 1963 have to go through.

No, it was addressed in the initial post. Both clauses in Chapter 6 Section 87 are declaratory clauses. They declare the citizenship to be changed due to a change in governments. No 'process' is necessary.

Every person who, having been born in Kenya, is on llth December. 1963 'Having been born' is PAST tense.

-----

Are being deceitful on purpose?

Deceitful? What are you talking about? I merely presented the facts.

-----

What is yopur mission in the quest to restore the constitution?

My mission? I guess I would say it was to get the People to understand that Natural Law is inherently superior to positive, or man made law, in order to acknowledge the source of our inalienable rights.

What's yours?