Posted on 04/20/2010 1:35:31 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Members from all three branches of the Federal government already know that Barack Hussein Obama is ineligible for the office of President. National leaders, to include members of the US Supreme Court, already know that Barack Hussein Obama is not a “natural born citizen” of the United States of America, and therefore, is ineligible for the office he currently holds.
What they don’t know is how long it will take for most Americans to figure it out, or what to do about it.
The diversionary search for an authentic birth certificate is ongoing and Obama has now spent in excess of $2 million in legal fees to keep that search alive.
Eric Holder’s Department of Justice continues to deploy taxpayer funded attorneys around the country to file dismissals on behalf of Obama, denying all American citizens access to the courts as a peaceful remedy, which only fuels the fire of discontent and the questions about Obama persist.
Michelle Obama states that Kenya is Barack’s “home country.” She knows, after twenty years with Barack. The Ambassador or Kenya has confirmed the same His family friends all know it, and are in fact quite proud of the fact that Americans had no hesitation in electing a “black man from Kenya” as President of the United States.
The US Supreme Court knows what the constitutional condition of “natural born citizen” means. Even the most far left member of that court, Justice Ginsberg, is on record proclaiming that a “natural born citizen” is a birth child of TWO legal US citizens.
Democrat Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi knows that Barack Hussein Obama is not eligible for the office of president, which is why she refused to certify the following language when certifying Obama as the DNC candidate for president in 2008.(continued)
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
TWO?
why was this not brought up when US born Dukakis ran for office?
COLB = Certification of Live Birth
Not to be confused with a Certificate of Live Birth which is the long form including the doctors name/signature and the hospital.
Just citizenship is not sufficient according to the wording the founders put in the Constitution. ... But something tells me that you already knew that and you’re just itching to assert ‘prove it’ for us.
FAscinating. If natural born citizen is required of a presidential candidate and that requirement is fulfilled only by having two citizens as parents....then he cannot be president.
But something must be missing here, as the courts don’t seem to interpret that ‘requirement’. They can’t all be bought off. I think the requirement for president is ONLY that he be born in the USA.
FAscinating. If natural born citizen is required of a presidential candidate and that requirement is fulfilled only by having two citizens as parents....then he cannot be president.
But something must be missing here, as the courts don’t seem to interpret that ‘requirement’. They can’t all be bought off. I think the requirement for president is ONLY that he be born in the USA.
I’m 64. I was born in Washington, DC. The week of my birth my Grandmother on my father’s side of the family had my birth announced listed here in East Tennessee in the local Tri-Cities papers (three or fourm can’t remember exactly). When I was in my mid twenties, I found an old newspaper in granny’s storage closet with my birth announcement in it. ... (I wonder if there’s microfiche of those papers?)
Hells Bells I am serious.
I think the only requirement as to the birth of a presidential candidate is that he was born in the USA.
It appears even if I am wrong, our Manchurian Candidate has that all covered with pay offs, forged documents, etc. It will never be exposed.
Lets just get him OUT in 2012.
I still believe there was some kind of shenanigans going on when he “screwed up” the Oath of Office, then took it “privately”.
Huh???
WTF?
Do we know that the passport he got as an Illinois senator was his original issue?
That's important, if it's true.
Yes, obviously he needed a passport to go to Pakistan in 1981.
Bingo! We have a winner. Nothing will happen to push the birther issue further up the field until after the 2010 November Congressional elections.
The next ‘move’ in this ‘game’ is to replace plugs Biden with Hillary!.
Barry resigns, Hillary! becomes President since she is the only one at the top with clean hands (relatively speaking).
And just like the Nixon Administration, the guy at the top of the totem pole (Nixon, Barry) gets a full Presidential pardon, while everyone else below them on the food chain gets a criminal indictment and prison time.
IIRC, there were 26 lawyers in the Nixon Administration who wound up serving prison time for Watergate.
Politics is bloodsport.
...he's a Canadian, ..or he's a Brit, ...or he's a Kenyan, ...or he's an Indonesian, ...or he renounced the citizenship he did not have, ..or he was never a citizen at all, ...or he's a naturalized citizen who was not naturalized......, and on and on it goes. Pick a story and stick with it, thank you.
When I first heard about the question of his citizenship, I thought that he might not have been born in the United States. I still don't know - but since I have researched the question further, I have decided to hang my hat on the question of his allegiance [or lack thereof].
The Founding Fathers had been British subjects - and were, thus, brought up under British Law. They were well aware of Calvin's Case [1608], the seminal English case where subjectship [citizenship] was defined. It said, in part:
... 3. There be regulary (unlesse it be in special cases) three incidents to a subject born. 1. That the parents be under the actual obedience of the king. 2. That the place of his birth be within the king’s dominion. And 3. the time of his birth is chiefly to be considered; for he cannot be a subject born of one kingdom, that was born under the ligeance of a king of another kingdom, albeit afterwards one kingdom descend to the king of the other.
Actual obedience meant permanent allegiance [or permanent ligeance], and not just temporary obedience due by aliens to the sovreign while they resided in the country.
The British Nationality Act of 1730 [which governed British citizenship at the time of the American Revolution] further stated:
" ... That the Children of all natural-born Subjects, born out of the Ligeance of her said late Majesty, her Heirs and Successors, should be deemed, adjudged and taken to be natural-born ... May it please your most Excellent Majesty that it may be declared and enacted, and be it declared and enacted by the Children of natural-born Subjects born out of the Allegiance of the Crown, declared to be natural-born ... That all Children born out of the Ligeance of the Crown of England, or of Great Britain, or which shall hereafter be born out of such Ligeance, whose Fathers were or shall be natural-born Subjects of the Crown of England, or of Great Britain, at the Time of the Birth of such Children respectively, shall and may, by virtue of the said recited Clause in the said Act of the seventh Year of the Reign of her said late Majesty, and of this present Act, be adjudged and taken to be, and all such Children are hereby declared to be natural-born Subjects of the Crown of Great Britain, to all Intents, Constructions and Purposes whatsoever ..."
Blackstone, in his Commentaries on the Laws of England stated:
" ... The children of aliens, born here in England, are, generally speaking, natural-born subjects, and entitled to all the privileges of such ...
Notice that he qualifies their status be writing "generally speaking". He does not state it to specifically exclude the children of aliens who are claimed as natural born subjects of their fathers' country, but he implies it by also stating that no subject can owe two [2] allegiances.
Furthermore, Dicey, in his "A Digest of the Law of England with Reference to the Conflict of Laws" wrote:
(1) "British subject" means any person who owes permanent allegiance [See Note 1] to the Crown.
(2) "Natural-born British subject" means a British subject who has become a British subject at the moment of his birth.
(3) "Naturalized British subject" means any British subject who is not a natural-born British subject.
Note 1: "Permanent" allegiance is used to distinguish the allegiance of a British subject from the allegiance of an alien who, because he is within the British dominions, owes " temporary " allegiance to the Crown.
Furthermore, there is John Jay's letter to George Washington in 1787, stating:
"... Permit me to hint whether it would not be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of foreigners into the administration of our national government ; and to declare expressly that the command in chief of the American army shall not be given to, nor devolve on any but a natural born citizen ..."
Given this, in tota, there is only one reasonable definition that the Founding Fathers intended and that is:
A natural born citizen is born within the dominion of the United States AND of two US citizen parents. Obama DOES NOT qualify ...
I can see that happening on a now and then basis. But I know the papers used to have someone who gathered from the hospitals each day’s births so they could be published each day.
I absolutely agree with you on that 2ndDivisionVet
I knew when they messed up the oath and then the whole country was in an uproar over it that they felt they needed to redo it, only to do it in private????
Yeah, he couldn’t hold the bible and state the oath - he had to hold the Koran which is why it was done in private. I just don’t believe anything this man does! Who knows what they really did behind closed doors.
“But in the end, it doesn’t matter where he was born. He father was not then, or ever, a US Citizen, and that means he cannot be a Natural Born Citizen.”
I was brushing up on my American history on April 19, and I read something I had never noticed before. Apparently the Founders knew exactly what Natural Born meant.
“Maryland’s legislature honored him by making Lafayette and his male heirs “natural born Citizens” of the state, which made him a natural born citizen of the United States after ratification of the new national Constitution.[65] Connecticut, Massachusetts, and Virginia also granted him honorary citizenship.[66][67][68]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gilbert_du_Motier,_marquis_de_Lafayette
They were quite aware of the difference of Natural Born and Honorary Citizen.
I don’t pretend to be a scholar nor a historian, but apparently at the birth of our nation, Natural Born was the highest honor that could be bestowed, meaning Marquis de La Fayette, and his sons, were true American and could run for the highest office of the land, if he so chose.
The Hawaiian records dept. places the ads in the papers of any child who’s birth is registered in Hawaii. In 1961 a child was not required to be born in Hawaii to be registered there. Regardless of place of birth “Natural Born citizenship “ requires that both parents be U.S. citizens at the time of the child’s birth. A “birther” needs a CERTIFIED COPY of obama’s birth records to prove that his father was a kenyan national and makes him ineligible to be President. Don’t allow yourself to be confused by thinking that the issue is his place of birth, obama is in violation of Article 2 (natural born citizen ) clause of the U.S. Constitution
Natural Born Citizenship = Citizenship
Citizenship doesn’t equal Natural Born Citizenship.
Persons born of 1 citizen and 1 non citizen are citizens...Just not of the Natural Born Citizen type.....
This has been pointed out so often on this forum as to be a cliche..... how’d ya miss it?
If this is accurate, I think we need more than term limits, like prosecutions and capital punishment.
“Why not, it is pretty simple. He is removed from office, Biden takes his place, appoints a VP and off we go.”
.
If that were possible, we would not be posting on this thread right now.
It also invalidates Biden, since he is nothing but a choice by an inelligible candidate. If O wasn’t elected, then Biden is not VP!
.
So your arguement is that we should look the other way if the Law is violated because one group or another may not like it? Is that really your view? Amazing.... What you are saying is that we should let the mob rule........Yikes!
I asked:
If you don't know the answer to this question:
The question is whose his daddy?
How can you confidently make this claim:
Barak Hussein Obama is an American born to American parents.
And thus draw this conclusion:
Thus [sic] makes him a natural born american [sic] eligible for the high office.
Do you have a reasonable answer?
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.