Posted on 03/09/2011 1:39:10 PM PST by patlin
During a debate (see pg. 2791) regarding a certain Dr. Houard, who had been incarcerated in Spain, the issue was raised on the floor of the House of Representatives as to whether the man was a US citizen. Representative Bingham (of Ohio), stated on the floor:
“As to the question of citizenship I am willing to resolve all doubts in favor of a citizen of the United States. That Dr. Houard is a natural-born citizen of the United States there is not room for the shadow of a doubt. He was born of naturalized parents within the jurisdiction of the United States, and by the express words of the Constitution, as amended to-day, he is declared to all the world to be a citizen of the United States by birth.” (The term “to-day”, as used by Bingham, means “to date”. Obviously, the Constitution had not been amended on April 25, 1872.)
Notice that Bingham declares Houard to be a “natural-born citizen” by citing two factors – born of citizen parents in the US.
John Bingham, aka “father of the 14th Amendment”, was an abolitionist congressman from Ohio who prosecuted Lincoln’s assassins. Ten years earlier, he stated on the House floor:
“All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862))
Then in 1866, Bingham also stated on the House floor:
“Every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))
No other Representative ever took issue with these words on the floor of the House. If you read the Congressional Globe to study these debates, you will see that many of the underlying issues were hotly contested. However, Bingham’s definition of “natural born citizen” (born of citizen parents in the US) was never challenged on the floor of the House.
Furthermore, the Supreme Court’s holding in Wong Kim Ark did not address Presidential eligibility, nor did it define “natural born citizen”. It simply clarified who was a “citizen”. Had the framers of the 14th Amendment sought to define nbc, they would have used the words “natural born” in the Amendment. But they didn’t.
Do not allow the opposition to state this definition as “Vattel’s definition”. Challenge that tactic every time. Vattel didn’t make it up. His text on the law of nations compiled known existing law. Vattel was not a legislator.
It is proper to say, with regard to US Constitutional law, that this was the House definition as stated on the floor by Representative Bingham. And this definition was never opposed on the floor. And that is exactly where it should have been opposed if it were not the truth.
Debate upon issues of Constitutional law such as this belong on the House floor. And when an issue this important comes before the nation on the floor of “the people’s House”, and the issue is not challenged by any Representative of the people, then it’s certainly proper to infer that the House of Representatives, as a whole, agreed with that definition. After all, our nation is governed by debate on the floor of the House. But there never was debate on this issue because it was a proper statement of Constitutional law.
The definition of natural born citizen as stated on the House floor = born in the US to parents who are citizens. It’s not like those cats were incapable of correcting each other’s mistakes. Since no Supreme Court case ever stated a different definition of “natural born citizen”, and no Represenative ever challenged Bingham on this point, the House definition stands and officially remains unchallenged as of today. If the House wants to change this definition, let them bring the issue to the floor now and properly debate it.
Until then, call it the House of Representatives definition as offered by the father of the 14th Amendment who was never challenged upon it.
Don’t let history be rewritten by propagandists. The evidence is mounting on a daily basis that the current Commander In Chief is not eligible to hold the office of President. You have a voice. You have freedom of speech. You have access to your federal and state representatives.
The courts don’t want to hear from you.
So find someone who must to listen to you and be heard. The Constitution cannot survive unless you breath life into it. We are responsible to future generations. Do something with that responsibility. Use the law. Obey the law. Respect the law. Fight for the law.
by Leo Donofrio, Esq. (hat tip to my main researcher who shall remain anonymous for now…)
Please explain how “vote the sumbitch out” equates to Obama support.
“Taqiyya”
The word “Taqiyya” literally means: “Concealing, precaution, guarding.” It is employed in disguising one’s beliefs, intentions, convictions, ideas, feelings, opinions or strategies.
Falsehoods told to protect oneself, or to promote the cause of Islam are sanctioned in the Qur’an and Sunna, including lying under oath in testimony before a court, deceiving by making distorted statements to the media. A Muslim is even permitted to deny or denounce his faith if, in so doing, he protects or furthers the interests of Islam, so long as he remains faithful to Islam in his heart.
— edited extract from Understanding Taqiyya Islamic Principle of Lying for the Sake of Allah, Islam Watch
Does the Constitution say that Muslims can’t be elected President?
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;...”
Why Humbug? You don’t like response to your silly graphics.
Are you unable to explain why voting Obama out is an invalid strategy?
Is Birther Voodoo the only way to make him gone?
It hasn’t worked so far. Voting bad presidents out has a long history of success.
Voodoo? Not so much.
I didn't say it was invalid. It is also a no brainer NOT to support state ballot eligibility laws that make Obama or any other candidate prove that they are natural born citizens before they are placed on state presidential ballots.
You're not against that are you?
Is Birther Voodoo the only way to make him gone?
It's no "voodoo." It is to honestly vet Obama to see if he is a natural born citizen. It's an honest endeavor. We can't say that about the Obama media or his OBot supporters since lying comes second nature to them.
He's obviously not.
That fact seems to be less than effective in his removal though.
Am I dreaming? Did you just say that Obama is “obviously not” a natural born citizen? It must be an Ambien haze. Tomorrow morning when I wake up, this comment will either be gone or gibberish.
Yes, but you must have the ultra-super-secret decoder ring to find out where in the Constitution. I could tell you how to obtain such a ring, but then I'd have to kill you. I'll give you a hint. It has nothing to do with Velveeta.
Yes, but you must have the ultra-super-secret decoder ring to find out where in the Constitution. I could tell you how to obtain such a ring, but then I'd have to kill you. I'll give you a hint. It has nothing to do with Velveeta.
A deliberate omission on my part.
I figured real trolls would self identify by being unable to discern sarcasm.
It would appear my hypothesis was proven...
You passed, BTW
Further, the b.c. issue is secondary for me and many other's whom you would refer to as "birthers." His being born with dual citizenship and the foreign citizenship of his father are the issues I'm focused on. Therefore, "dualer" would be more appropriate.
And yes, I'm well aware of what Leo has to say on these matters. Why do you think he's back to doing the research? Hint, (see above).
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume that you, yourself, are not restricted to being single threaded. Why would you assume those who seek answers regarding Barry's eligibilty are? Do you have a superiority complex?
BUMP for History. BUMP for Liberty.
Lets find it in the Congressional record..at their website we have the link somewhere..in our threads.
Dr. John Emilio Houard
I was not a Muslim, not raised by a Muslim. And in my town and among my associates I have a solid and earned reputation for honesty.
Obama was a Muslim as a child, his school’s enrollment ledger notes that he was. Obama was raised by a Muslim, that being his adopted Dad, Lolo Soetoro. There in Indonesia, Obama was a Muslim in a Muslim country. Obama’s purported birth Dad, Barack Sr. was a Muslim from a Muslim family — although he claimed to have fallen away from that religion and become a Marxist. Obama has admitted his love for the sound of Muslim prayer, and has engaged in Muslim outreach more than any of the Presidents before him, including asking NASA to add Muslim outreach to its mission. Obama’s sister Maya and his Kenyan relations are all Muslim.
Is Obama Muslim? There’s plenty of real indicators that he is or may be.
Further, Obama’s life and career are full of deceptions and lies, each to achieve a political goal or career goal. This goes far beyond the level of inflated facts in a resume. It goes far beyond the level of deception and lies engaged in by most politicians — although there are too many politicians, well-known, at a same or worse level (e.g. Bill Clinton).
Thus even if Obama is, by his own true volition, not longer a Muslim, he applies Taqiyya-like deceptions politically all the time, and would, as raised a Muslim by family and pervasive culture in his youth, and by at least intellectual studies in adulthood, be familiar with and appreciate the practice. Obviously so, because he employs Taqiyya in all but name, throughout the daily practice of his political career.
working link to 42nd congress pg 2791 natural born citizen defined and not contested:
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llcg&fileName=104/llcg104.db&recNum=106
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.