Posted on 07/05/2009 12:58:12 PM PDT by ckilmer
A private investigator has released to WND an affidavit that casts doubt on whether Barack Obama's family lived at the address listed in the published notice of his birth in 1961.
(Excerpt) Read more at worldnetdaily.com ...
According to Leo Donofrio, the framers drew a distinction between the meaning of “citizen” and the meaning of “natural born citizen”. A “citizen” can be Senator or Representative, but in order to be President one must be a natural born citizen.
It's the difference between a fact and a legal status.
Whether you are a natural born citizen is a fact of nature which can't be waived or renounced, but your actual legal citizenship can be renounced. The difference is subtle, but so very important. “Natural born citizen” is not a different form of “citizenship”.
It is a manner of acquiring citizenship. And while natural born citizens may end their legal tie to the country by renouncing citizenship, they will always have been naturally born into that nation as a citizen. \ 212. Citizens and natives. (from Vattel's book) The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. Two different sentences. Two different civil groups are being discussed. “As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights…I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
So let’s see if I have this straight. You are saying that if someone were to violate a law, in the Constitution, the Supreme Law of the land, it is not enforceable without additional codes or laws found in the Fed book or U.S. Code?
I challenge you to a battle of wits(opening line for you to parry. I need new material anyway)
It’s already been done. I need to do a little research
Don’t leave. Be adult, deal with the issues of the thread not fellow freepers over pointless ‘last worder’ detritus.
Is this your private board?
Why can’t you have a little fun. You asked about code, laws and whatever, and I have asked for something in return.
All I get is the same question asked a different way. Yet, you come into the discussion challenging a premise with absolutely no rebuttal. Why?
Really, why? You seem to be intellectually floundering or looking for and emotional tree to hug for soothing sap.
What gives? Your challenge question was the premise and you stopped.
Thank you. The last paragraph was new to me.
Will Vince Foster be resurrected?
Gawd that is funny all by itself. Now I have to go see what and who you were responding to.
;o)
However I must confess to some confusion. If a code is required to support another law and without there is no enforcement mechanism, then should our apologies begin?
Richard Nixon - Oops, now there is one I am truly embarrassed about. Poor guy is dead. Oh well.
Ronald Reagan - Well not so much but that Iran/Contra thing had him on TV giving a pretty darn good Mea Culpa.
Bill Clinton - He did have sex with woman and I don't blame him. As the most powerful man in the world a dalliance here or there is to be expected. But, never, ever, lie in court in contradiction to the facts.
That is perjury and for the rest of us it violate one of the basic tenets around our judicial system and truth under a sworn oath.
Better known as perjury.
Come back and play, we like you and we were having fun.
No but look on top of the coffee table. Poor Vince.
I don’t think the black/white mixture was very common. From what I have been told, there were many ethnicities in HI at that time, and that children of mixed race (in general) were quite common. Supposedly there just wasn’t much notice taken of race at all.
I am not speaking of personal experience, but only from what I have been told. My friends who were born and raised there tell me that BO was very much exaggerating the racial difficulties and tensions he experienced as a teen. There was not much notice of race because of the wide variety of ethnicities.
Indeed we do, and not just a right, but a responsibility.
It hurts Obama’s credibility, it hurts his “mandate” to govern. It keeps him off balance.
I dearly hope that you are right!
“think powerful people fear rioting. Your top insurance companies are financially crippled by their involvement in derivatives. They are barely keeping up payments on annuities, and minimum guaranteed returns for cash value life insurance. If Obama is kicked out, and all the blacks go ballistics with rioting in every major US cities. The property damage and payouts would be staggering. That will finish the major insurance companies financially unless the US gov steps in with more bailout money. That is my $ .02 on the situation. We will have to wait till BHO approval drop below 30 percent before this issue can be raised.”
and the threats of rioting by pised off thugs over rides the constitution,HOW exactly?In the event of major riots,due to enforcement of the constitution,the national guard and active component military units can quickly bring the situation under control-IF the politicians have the will to DO it.
The Senate resolution was a non-binding sense-of-the-Senate irrelevance that applied only to McCain, affirmatively, and not to anyone else, such as FreeAlaska's nieces and nephews, who might fit a set of facts different than McCain's. The fact is McCain would have been eligible even if his daddy had been abroad working for United Fruit, as opposed to being a naval officer on active duty. That's because his parents were citizens. The same is true of FA's relatives, but because they were born in Chicago, which is unfortunately in the United States, and possibly also because their mother is a US citizen.
As to a final answer, only a supreme court functioning in a the now defunct Constitutional Republic could have determined that.
We really need a new amendment to settle definitively who is and is not a citizen and exactly who is eligible to be president.
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.