Posted on 02/22/2011 10:46:07 AM PST by rxsid
The riddle is:
Natural born United States Citizenship is only possible at birth. It requires that both parents be U.S. citizens at the time of his birth.
If Barrack H. Obama, Sr. is Obozo’s father, it is impossible for him to meet the requirements of the Constitution for holding the office of President.
-
The state of HI officials described him as being a “natural born American Citizen” that is not the same as being a “natural born United States Citizen”. Their statement would be correct if he were born in Canada, Mexico, Honduras, Brazil or any other country on this continent.
The state of HI stated that his “vital records” were recorded as per law. They did not say there was a birth certificate, but that the birth was “on record”.
Not the slightest evidence of his birth place has ever been exposed. NONE. It is impossible for Pelosi to have legally certified him eligible for President.
He is a Fraud. His lack of records indicate to me something that was fabricated by a “spook agency”. No one else could have pulled it off. It will eventually be exposed, when the “right people” decide it is time. Unfortunately it has not happened yet.
So you’d rather trust the two scholars from Factcheck, okay.
Not me. Lefties lie, people die!
The proven part is that there was a divorce where Obama was named the father.
What I meant by saying he is stuck is that to undo Obama Senior as father that divorce would have to be undone and reworked.
DNA tests, etc. would not change that legal determination (at least immediately) even if were in conflict with reality.
Such is the legal world.
Legal Weasel Words by the State of HI=>
Dr. Chiyome Fukino
-Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.
It did not say that there was a birth certificate, it said that there was a “record” of a birth certificate....
That record was most likely a result of a “late filing” by Obozo’s grandmother, without presenting a birth certificate. There is no hospital record of his birth in HI (it is very unlikely he was born in HI). There is no record of Barrack H. Obama, Sr. ever living with Stanley Ann Dunham in HI. The only way that Obama could be a Natural Born U.S. Citizen is if Barrack H. Obama, Sr is not his father.
-
There is NO long form Birth Certificate for BHO in HI. None... Look at the dance the authorities have been doing to avoid admitting it.
Here is the statement by Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Health Department of the State of Hawaii:
“I ... have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen,” Health Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said in a brief statement. “I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago.”
(note- she said a “natural-born American citizen, NOT natural born United States Citizen.)
—
Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Hawaii State Health Director, has issued a second statement Monday, July 27th confirming President Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, HI.
“I, Dr. Chiyome Fukino, Director of the Hawaii State Department of Health, have seen the original vital records maintained on file by the Hawaii State Department of Health verifying Barrack Hussein Obama was born in Hawaii and is a natural-born American citizen.
(note- she said a “natural-born American citizen, NOT natural born United States Citizen.)
I have nothing further to add to this statement or my original statement issued in October 2008 over eight months ago,” Fukino said, in hopes of ending the controversy surrounding Obama’s citizenship.
Nowhere did she say that she had seen the original “birth certificate”
“The state of Hawaii says that the President was born there. That’s good enough for me.”—John Boehner, Speaker of the House
“I don’t think it’s an issue that we need to address at all. It is not an issue that even needs to be on the policy-making table right now whatsoever.”—Republican Majority Leader Eric Cantor speaking on the Obama eligibility issue.
“Do you question his (Obama’s) faith and citizenship?” Sarah Palin was asked during an onstage interview hosted by the Long Island Association. Her answer was brief and to the point.
“I don’t, and those are distractions,” she said to some applause. “What we’re concerned about is the economy. And we’re concerned about the policies coming out of his administration and what he believes in terms of big government or private sector. So, no, the faith, the birth certificate, others can engage in that kind of conversation. It’s distracting. It gets annoying and let’s just stick with what really matters.”
I agree.
There is so much smoke and mirrors and layers of cloaking that the real facts will almost certainly never be known.
The Roberts Court isn’t interested in Vattel. They have denied a hearing to every Obama eligibility appeal that references that Swiss guy.
I think the current Court prefers citations from natural born Americans.
so why didnt she keep Onaka in her second statement, maybe he didnt want to be part of a fraud?
you dont know what the “Roberts” court is interested in, you are a know nothing troll.
BS. I had surgery in Queen’s Hospital years ago and it was often called Queen Emma Hospital.
You’re a disgusting POS liar.
Wrong. He'd have to also be born on US soil.
I am constantly posting the authentification contradicting & misleading statements of the government officials in Hawaii and jamese777.
“Do you question his (Obama’s) faith and citizenship?” Palin was asked during an onstage interview hosted by the Long Island Association.
“I don’t, and those are distractions,” she said to some applause. “What we’re concerned about is the economy. And we’re concerned about the policies coming out of his administration and what he believes in terms of big government or private sector. So, no, the faith, the birth certificate, others can engage in that kind of conversation. It’s distracting. It gets annoying and let’s just stick with what really matters.”
SO THERE!!! ;-)
I am not a defeatist. Many people do indeed know the facts, and it will be made public. I think before 2012, too.
Yes, I agree that you are very distracting and annoying.
Kind of like a buzzing mosquito.
you dont know what the “Roberts” court is interested in, you are a know nothing troll.
so why didnt she keep Onaka in her second statement, maybe he didnt want to be part of a fraud?
Thank you james for providing today's lesson material for logical fallacy 101: circular logic. Observe ...
“The Court observes that the President defeated seven opponents in a grueling campaign for his party’s nomination that lasted more than eighteen months and cost those opponents well over $300 million. Then the President faced a formidable opponent in the general election who received $84 million to conduct his general election campaign against the President. "
Illustration of the 'non-sequitir. The cost and length of the campaign is irrelevant to Obama's eligibility. The number and 'quality' of opponents ... also irrelevant.
"It would appear that ample opportunity existed for discovery of evidence that would support any contention that the President was not eligible for the office he sought."
The court neglects to mention how such evidence was to be discovered and why that opportunity of discovery of evidence is not still available. Second, Obama didn't produce his jpg until AFTER Hillary conceded the primary. Nobody knew he was going to produce a fake document and by the time it was realized, it was too late for these so-called formidable opponents to do anything and still look "formidable" and not "racist."
"Furthermore, Congress is apparently satisfied that the President is qualified to serve."
Well of course. It's a Democrat-controlled Congress (at that time). They would be very satisfied, but this doesn't address the satisfaction of voters/natural born citizens of the United States, does it.
"Congress has not instituted impeachment proceedings, and in fact, the House of Representatives in a broad bipartisan manner has rejected the suggestion that the President is not eligible for office."
A classic example of circular logic; the inaction of this partisan body does not provide legal proof that Obama is or isn't eligible ... just that they are passive about honestly and comprehensively addressing the issue (much like the judge himself).
"See H.R. Res. 593, 111th Cong. (2009) (commemorating, by vote of 378-0, the 50th anniversary of Hawaii’s statehood and stating, “the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961”).”
This resolution was passed without supporting legal evidence behind the claim ... the same legal evidence that the co-author now admits he cannot find as the governor of the state that allegedly issued such legal documentation. IOW, more circular, but fallacious logic.
“A spurious charge questioning the President’s legitimacy may be protected by the First Amendment. But a Court’s placement of its imprimatur upon a charge that is so lacking in factual support that it is frivolous would undoubtedly disserve the public interest.”
The only thing lacking in factual support is Obama's nativity myth. This court obviously didn't want to take a chance on pissing off a blissfully ignorant electorate and party in power, so he used frivolous logic and pointless demonization to make it sound meaningful. It would have been better for the judge to say "I'm too skeered to get involved. Leave me alone."
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.