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 ...
Question? Were they lawyers or just trained in law?
Take Jefferson ... wide ranging education/interests including law....but a lawyer?
If I remember most colleges of the colonial period had limited areas of study...Theology, law, Engineering? That was about it! I think Harvard was began as a Theology College....
Liberals all over are keeling over at that factoid.....LOLOLOL
LOLOLOL
How could BIDEN be disqualified?
That is not the way it works. I live in MD - I will use it as an example:
MD has 10 electoral votes. Obama [and Biden] sign up 10 potential elector candidates. McCain [and Palin] sign up 10 different elector candidates. That is 20 people - but only 10 will go to the Electoral College.
Now, we have the election. Each voter casts 1 vote, but FOR 2 people. Winner takes all. In the case of MD, Obama/Biden. The 10 Obama/Biden electors go to the Electoral College - the 10 McCain/Palin electors stay home.
Now, Obama is in office, but lets say SCOTUS disqualifies him and declares the Electoral College count frauduent. The 10 electoral votes cast for Obama by MD are necessarily disqualified. Does that disqualify Biden's votes? Maybe. The SAME electors that cast votes for Obama ALSO cast the votes for Biden.
The reason for the problem lies in the deficiency created by the fact that each voter cast a single vote FOR 2 people. Can it be claimed that a voter WOULD NOT have voted DEM if Obama had NOT been at the top of the ticket in the first place? Maybe. Most people only vote the top of the ticket - and the VEEP candidate is along for the ride. If so, as a consequence, Biden's votes will be tainted. He could not say that he was elected in his own right.
The same problem was in the Constitution as originally written - and resulted in the 12th Amendment. Prior to that, each elector in the Electoral College voted for 2 candidates on a SINGLE ballot [1 for POTUS, 1 for VEEP]. The one with the most votes for POTUS won, and the one with most for VEEP won.
But, with Burr and Jefferson, they both had the same number of votes for POTUS AND the same number of votes for VEEP. The House of Representatives had to decide.
The 12th Amendment rectified the problem by splitting the ballot. One vote for POTUS only, one for VEEP - in SEPARATE ballots.
The way to correct this problem in the general election is to make a voter vote twice SEPARATELY - one for POTUS, one for VEEP. That way, each can claim that they were elected in their own right ...
“No person except a natural born Citizen [having solitary allegiance to the United States], or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
No other additional requirements you’d like to see?
The residency requirement is curious..... since the minimum age for the Presidency is 35 years, and the residency requirement is 14 years.... It seems to say that you must, at minimum electable age have spent your entire adult life in the US......if you are 37 years old shouldn’t you have to have spent 16 years as a resident?
Your opinion?
Not entirely true. A person born in the United States is a citizen at birth - but not necessarily a natural born citizen. It all depends on whether another nation can lay claim to him.
As stated in a lot of my posts, natural born status relies on two [2] facctors - place of birth AND allegiance.
If a child is born of alien parents [specifically the father] AND no nation lays another claim to his citizenship, he is natural born.
But, in the case of Obama, he was a citizen of the US at birth AND a natural born British subject. This creates divided loyalties and, since the original meaning in the Constitution [as the Founders knew it] has NOT been changed, Obama IS NOT natural born.
Citizen, yes - natural born, no.
President Abraham Lincoln, several generations after the revolution was a lawyer without ever stepping foot in a law school classroom. Back then, and up to not that long ago, one could “read” for the law, sort of an apprenticeship or self-directed study course. IIRC, Lincoln found or bought a barrel of law books somehow and used those.
could you clarify?
Quo Warranto [by what warrant] ...
This was originally a method by which a sovreign could confiscate a noble's land that he coveted.
A writ Quo Warranto would be issued and the noble would be obligated to prove that he was entitled to the land - if found to be ineligible, his land reverted to the sovreign. Of course, the sovreign usually got someone to swear [true or not] that the noble was a bastard and, thus, not entitled.
In modern times, Quo Warranto is normally used to try to remove someone from office - or to challenge the presumed victor in an election to prove that he is eligible to the office.
“Thirty-four of the fifty-five delegates to the Constitutional Convention were lawyers. Don’t know how many actually signed - but they would have been heavily involved in the drafting....”
Holy Heck! the same problem we have in the Congress today!
“No - we did not go the Common Law route, with one exception. Many SCOTUS cases declare that when American Law is found lacking, resort must be made to English Common Law - from whence American Law was derived. There was a famous patent and trademark case about this ...”
Even today The US and British Admirality Courts regularily cite each others rulings.....probably because of our mutual Laws of the Sea Treaties, and our very similar overall Philosophy of Law.....
Did I say uninhabitable? Maybe I exaggerate.
Then again, whites with a racial guilt complex, which numbers millions will stand idly by as the rest of us are doled racial justice or might just join the racial justice patrol themselves.
Maybe I'm getting too paranoid but the things I've seen this administration do are just beyond the pale.
BTW, that Hi-Point C9 looks sweet at that price.
Much appreciated. I know that I'm simply saying what lots of others have already said.
WOW! Great article and thanks!
Turn that around ... since when does the United States get to decide which of a foreign country's citizens is eligible? I'm talking about children born in foreign countries to parents who are US citizens. It cuts both ways ...
The Constitution was written in a time when travel was harder and moving was more or less permanent. Aliens in most countries were permitted to be naturalized - and their children were deemed to be natural born. This, since most would never move again. As long as the alien parents' nation DID NOT lay a claim on the child ...
Now, with our ease of travel, the Founding Fathers would accept our current understanding that a child who was born on foreign soil is a natural born citizen, as long as his parents are US citizens and the foreign country DOES NOT lay claim to the child. Otherwise, the child is a citizen - though NOT natural born.
When millions finally see the handwriting on the wall (presupposing this scenario ever happens) I’d almost feel sorry for the Sharpton/ACORN/Civilian National Defense/NOI/Black Panther/Crips & Bloods/ex-felon contingents. A second civil war will make the first look like a Sunday School picnic in comparison. Anyone here who’s served a day in uniform, been an LEO or has any knowledge of modern firearms knows exactly what I mean.
As the article in my tagline asserts, just the DEER HUNTERS in this country outnumber almost every nation-state’s armies, combined!!
Yeah - pretty much. By my understanding of the definition, she was a citizen at birth and a natural born citizen since her parents were naturalized at the time.
Only thing being that if Sweden required her to become a Swedish citizen. Would she lose US citizenship - I think not, as she was a minor and had to do what her parents [and Sweden] wanted. After she reached majority, and decided to return to the US, she elected to keep her citizenship.
The law, unfortunately, cannot be all things, to all people, all of the time - there are going to be screwy situations sometimes. We cannot prepare for "If its Tuesday - it must be Belgium" ...
I will have to read the opinion and get back to you - but as it is almost 4 am ... I gotta go.
So I guess you do not understand, what is a “Natural Born Citizen”? Translation = Both Parents are U.S. Citizens. Obama’s Dad was NEVER a U.S. Citizen?
Perhaps you never had to get a U.S. Passport too? It requires a “Birth Certificate”. You know that has the Doctor’s name, the height and weight of the baby, time, etc.... Thus, “certificate of live Birth”, that does not have the above info (Doctor’s name, time, height, weight, etc) does not give you a U.S. passport. Obama cannot produce this and has spent over 2 million dollars fighting it in court?
Gee go figure?
I’ve always thought, and felt that the most important and maybe prime unstated aspect of NBC was the notion of upbringing.
A child born of 2 citizen parents and raised in country would be hard pressed not to absorb at his/her parents knees the History, Traditions, Laws, Mores, Culture, etc. of the United States. Although not assured, wouldn’t that child most likely grow up to be a Patriot/citizen of the first order?
I contrast the above thought with Obama’s narrative.... Born to an American mother, and a foreign Father, a broken marriage, a marriage to another foreign national by his mother, relocation to Indonesia, adoption and new Indonesian citizenship, another breakup of the marriage, relocation back to Hawaii, raised by grandparents, mentored by a Black, pediphile, communist writter, attending college as a “foreign student” in order to game the system and get financial aide via a Fullbright Scholorship, sponsoring by other foreign interests through Columbia, and Harvard, employment with the most radical elements of US Society, friendships with 60’s era Domestic Terrorists, a radical Church membership that preached hate for the US.....
How close does Obama come to the ideal I think that the founders had in mind?...... Is he the antithesis of what the founders envisioned when they set out the requirements for the Presidency.....I believe so, don’t you?
Riots? Freedom has never come without a high price. How much more government interference in your daily life are you willing to take?
This Census about did me in. I have owned this house since 1991, and; I can tell you- I never got a 2000 census. No one gave a damn. This is all about control, power, and; fear. These looney tunes libs are hard core communists.
The party boss is Chairman Obama. Then we have Chairwomen Pelosi. (Remember Pelosi telling an Army General- “ It is CHAIRWOMEN- not MAM.”) Do not call me mam.
“Only thing being that if Sweden required her to become a Swedish citizen. Would she lose US citizenship - I think not, as she was a minor and had to do what her parents [and Sweden] wanted. After she reached majority, and decided to return to the US, she elected to keep her citizenship.”
I contrast that with Obama....forced to become an Indonesian citizen in his minority, because of his mother’s new marriage, and Indonesian law, Obama later returns to the US, and upon reaching his majority, elects to declare foreign citizenship in order to receive a Fullbright Scholorship.....
Not quite the guy the Founders had in mind was he?
Thank you for your service, Mr. R., but your posts reflect a very poor understanding of the laws of evidence and rules of discovery.
Thanks for playing, we’ll send you home with a version of the home game.
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.