Here is where I lose when I bring up Barry’s ‘citizenship’ . I can make a great case for the shenanigans around the cover up around the birth certificate, but I really don’t have a good comeback for the following: If Barry’s mother is an american citizen isn’t Barry automatically a citizen, eligible for the presidency regardless of where he is born? In other words, if you are born overseas of an american citizen, is that sufficient or do you also have to not only be born of an american citizen but also born on US soil?
From what I have read “both” the mother and father have to be US citizens and the mother did not qualify under the laws of Hawaii anyway.
So, you may ask, why is it even important to be more strictly a natural born citizen? ... Short answer is That is what the Constitution requires.
So, you may ask, what is the harm if this particular pres__ent is not a real natural born citizen? ... Simplest answer, if we the people can be prevented from having the standing to require he prove his natural boirn status as per the Constitution, then the Constitutional contract between we the people and the federal oligarchs has been abrogated by the federal oligarchs and we the people are no long the sovereigns, thus the 'Constitutional Republic' has ended in a legal sense.
She was not of age at the time of the birth to convey citizenship on him.Thefore barry is of his fathers citizenship.Kenya.
1. Did Soetoro ADOPT Obama before Obama left for Indonesia as a child? If it happened, would the Hawaii long form birth certificate tell us or not tell us?
2. Indonesian school document, the one we see on the web: It says Obama was born in Honolulu, but it also lists his father as Soetoro, and it lists his religion as Islam, I believe.
3. My point is this: If Soetoro, Indonesian citizen and Muslim, legally adopted Obama, does that mean that Obama somehow legally lost his eligiblity to be President of the United States?
4. Obama's short form Hawaii birth certificate we see on the web: If the Hawaii long form is different in any way from the short form that Obama displays on the internet, then Obama could be guilty of perjury and of misleading the American people.
5. Also, the long form birth certificate would have the doctor and birth hospital names on it.
6. This means that we would finally be able to contact the birth doctor, the doctor's friends/relatives, and birth hospital officials in order to find out once and for all whether or not Obama was born in Hawaii and Barack Obama senior was his father.
7. So, even if it is found beyond a shadow of a doubt that Obama was born in Hawaii, there are still more questions that need to be answered before we definitely say that Obama is eligible to be President of the United States.
8. And even if Obama is found to be legally eligible to be President, there is this OTHER question that also needs to be answered:
Is Obama MORALLY eligible---not just LEGALLY eligible--- to be President of the United States, if we find out that Obama lied to the American people by displaying a fake Hawaii birth certificate on his website?
No.
There is an excellent brief posted in July of last year which sets out a detailed analysis of the citizenship law. Our Citizenship statutes are clear and specific describing the circumstances under which a person born outside the US acquires citizenship at birth. Under the law in effect at the date of his birth, in order to pass citizenship at birth, his mother needed to have resided in the US for more than a specified number of years of which four needed to be after she had reached the age of 16. Since she was not 20 when he was born, by definition, she could not have met the statutory test.
The statute was amended in 1984 to reduce the after age limit however the modification was specifically effective only as to persons born after November, 1984, and was thus not applicable to Obama.
No argument. He clearly flunks the "citizen when he came down the shute" test.
Further, that is not dispositive of the issue. Even if he had been a citizen when born, that still would not meet the constitutional test.
The "natural born citizen" test was incorporated from an English common law concept of "natural born subject". Point is that when a person is born, they are subject to the law of the sovereign of the place they are born who has the legal power under applicable international law to control what they can do after they are born.
Drafters of our Constitution were unwilling to permit a person to act as chief executive of the US under circumstances where they were technically subject to the rule of a foreign power. Thus the purpose of the "natural born" clause was to require that only those persons subject to the sovereignty of the US from birth would be eligible.
For example, it was generally argued by Constitutional Lawyers in the U S in 1964 that Goldwater was eligible even though he was not born in the territory incorporated in the states of the US because the territory of Arizona was always subject to sovereignty of the U S and was subsequently incorporated into the state. That analysis was never tested and many DC lawyers continued to argue until it was clear that Goldwater would not be elected, that if he were elected, his position would be subject to challenge under the "natural born" test even though Arizona was subsequently included in the Union.