Posted on 09/19/2011 7:52:54 AM PDT by Windflier
JUPITER ISLAND, Fla. – The Republican presidential candidates appearing in last Monday's tea-party debate in Tampa made plenty of news when it came to issues such as Social Security, job creation and Big Brother mandates, but one subject that was not brought up during the event was the constitutional eligibility of Barack Obama.
Yet once the debate was over, some were willing to address the matter.
Former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum told WND, "My understanding is that issue was solved. If there's evidence to the contrary [showing Obama is not eligible], they should bring it forth."
The Constitution requires a president to be a "natural-born citizen," which many legal analysts believe means being the child of two U.S. citizen parents at the time of birth.
When that was pointed out to Santorum, he responded, "I don't think that's what the Constitution requires, and he (President Obama) was born in the country, so it doesn't matter."
(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...
You're assuming there's a valid document out there confirming his eligibility. Well, the State of Hawaii refused to confirm his eligibility due to lack of documents. Nancy Pelosi took it upon herself to confirm the man.
He can. All it takes is Nancy Pelosi to confirm him as eligible just as she was forced to do with Obama (after he won the nomination). Hawaii could not find any documents that proved he was born in Hawaii. None.
Only days before Obama released a PDF of his longform Hawaii repeated that they could not find Obama's longform BC.
That tells me it's a fake even without the layers and the fact that it was released as a PDF.
LLS
anchor babies are a DIFFERNT legal phenomenon.
in 1996 congress pass a law eliminating the anchor baby. IOW custody goes with the parents not parents in custody of the child. So, deported illegal parents took their us citizen child who THEN could return at 18 and THEN they had to stay in the USA for 10 years before any children of theirs born outside the USA would be automatic citizens.
under the law there are only two types of citizens. those who are naturalized and those who are born in the USA (or of at least one US citizen parent). That is it.
Do not confuse the anchor baby with native born.
NONE OF THE CANDIDATES ARE ATTACKING NOBAMA’S INELIGIBILITY.
The crickets are in an uproar.
But we’re getting what’s infinitely better than deposing an illegitimate candidate turned occupant placed in power by the political class: four years of real-world experience in what happens when a marxist/anarchist/wannabee-islamist is placed in the Presidency.
This is the process of the numbskulls who voted for him or did not bother to get off the couch and go vote against him being educated about making such a poor decision.
“Eligibility, immigration status and all other Vital records are not confirmed by words and suggestions. They are confirmed with documents. Real ones.”
What are you talking about? I was responding to your suspicion that he is an anchor baby, which cannot possibly be based on any “documents.”
“US v Won Kim Ark is the dominant case on that matter.”
Pardon me!!!!
WKA was the application of the 14th Amendment, that provided “born” citizenship to persons that were not “Natural Born Citizens.” ie no reason to be naturalized. Had they had been NBC, born in country to citizen parents, there would not have been a reason for the court case in the first place.
Originally intended to provide citizenship to the children of slaves, (and remove the spectre of their having to try and become naturalized in the post Civil War environment) the text of the Amendment allows application to other circumstances of birth, ie. non slave parents.
While the 14th Amendment certainly expanded the parameters of “born citizenship” it did not alter the very basic legal understanding/definition of the term “Natural Born Citizen.”
Concurrent with WKA (a few years prior in 1875) USSC decision Minor v Happersett provides us with the formal USSC recognition of the term NBC. All subsequent USSC decisions concerning citizenship reinforce that definition......born in country to US citizen parents.
You’ll note that WKA cites Justice Grey’s words from Minor in the body of it’s decision. The WKA decision partially resolves Justice Grey’s unanswered question of what other circumstances of birth result in born citizenship other than being a Natural Born Citizen. ( The answer to those questions went beyond the scope of Minor because Minor was a Natural Born Citizen, and the case resolved around a citizen’s rights. ie women’s sufferage.)
Although the USSC has yet to hear a case concerning Article II eligibility, vis “Natural Born Citizenship,” there are numerious simple “citizenship” cases that address the definition of NBC, which, in any event, is the gold standard of citizenship, that is, where there is no question of a persons citizenship because of birth in country to citizen parents.
From Obama’s life narrative, and an examinition of the documents he has provided we can easily determine that he does not meet the USSC recognized definition of the term NBC, and is therefore ineligible to hold the office that he has been elected to. The entire circumstance of Obama’s Presidency is cause for a Quo Warrento legal action.
As USSC Justice Clarence Thomas has so famously stated, half in jest, “We’re avoiding that case.” To mind there is a whole cascade of events, starting with the press’ and the DNC’s failure to vet Barack Obama at the very outset, up to and including judicial cowardice that has led us to the present quandry of our Nation’s current Constitutional Crisis....with implications of moral, legal, economic, and international importance.
God save us from those that would absolve us from following our own laws to both their letter and spirit.
No, I don’t feel let down. Rick Santorum is a nice guy but he tends to be a follower, not a leader. He doesn’t have a chance being President, and will remain in congress following mostly the Elite GOP direction.
Thanks for that reference. I noticed the case is from 1898. Travel in those days, especially across an ocean, was probably not too convenient. Settling in might have been considered de facto evidence of a desire to assimilate and pursue "Life, Liberty, and Happiness".
We now have air travel, borders that seem porous, and it is far easier to "visit" this country and begin reaping benefits. In my feeble mind, there's a difference between "moving" to the USA and "visiting".
I will spend more time looking at the opinion.
Herman Cain:
“so I don’t have an opinion on that. I’ve seen only some of the stories, but I have not studied all of the evidence weighing both sides in terms of his eligibility.”
Until now, I used to respect Cain. It turns out he is nothing more than a lying weasel. If he hasn’t done his homework, he is as worthless as the cheeky Kenyan bastard.
You are off my list, Cain.
You’re fired.
Nope, Santorum is not right. He shares the same fallacious understanding of the 14th amendment as most Americans.
And I shall not be surprised if they get it wrong. Any legal system that can produce Abortion out of the 14th amendment is fraudulent.
If the law does not recognize three, then it is obtuse. Prior to 1922, it was not possible to have an American citizen born to parents of different nationalities. After the Cable act, it was.
Native born Dual citizens came into existence in 1922, and no, they aren't "natural born citizens" .
Sure, if they are willfully ignorant.
My pet peeve or irritation is when people discuss boarders [sic] and they are talking about geography not people.
“my speling is imaculate”
NO you’re speling is KNOT immaculate!
actually, I’ve had a thing about spelling since grade
school, probably owing to the satisfaction that I got when
it always turned out that the final two spellers in EVERY spelling bee were me and a Filipino Army brat in my class
named Ramon Sabordo.
I’ve also often wondered why some people I’ve noticed on game shows like Wheel of Fortune simply can’t see the word puzzle when it’s staring them in the face with only a few letters missing. I came to the conclusion that they just hadn’t exposed themselves plain and simple to the written word enough. Otherwise the puzzle would simply reveal itself. I once got a ‘famous name’ puzzle with NO
letters showing. A four letter first name with a nine letter surname beneath it. I blurted out Jack Nicholson~
My wife was astonished when that’s what it turned out to be.
Wonder what happened to ole Ramon Sabordo? Think I’ll google him.
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.