Posted on 07/01/2008 1:03:52 PM PDT by Red Steel
Fellow Blog Talk Radio compadre David Zublick over at Heading Right says, Maybe Not.
I noted back here that when Kos produced - not a birth certificate - but a certificate of live birth there were several discrepancies noted that pointed to the fact - aside from the convenience - that the document was most likely forged. Since Obama has failed to produce a birth certificate, in-spite of several calls to do so, is telling indeed.
I was born in 1958 in the State of Florida and I can get a birth certificate for ten bucks. I doubt Hawaii was so backward in 1961 that it cannot produce a copy that he could show.
The news orgs are NOT looking into this, but some of us can snoop where others cannot. Well see what we can find. Fellow Blog Talk Radio compadre David Zublick over at Heading Right says, Maybe Not.
I noted back here that when Kos produced - not a birth certificate - but a certificate of live birth there were several discrepancies noted that pointed to the fact - aside from the convenience - that the document was most likely forged. Since Obama has failed to produce a birth certificate, in-spite of several calls to do so, is telling indeed.
I was born in 1958 in the State of Florida and I can get a birth certificate for ten bucks. I doubt Hawaii was so backward in 1961 that it cannot produce a copy that he could show.
The news orgs are NOT looking into this, but some of us can snoop where others cannot. Well see what we can find.
UPDATE: Looks like some have filed the ole FOIA request to force the issue. Meanwhile Doug Ross thinks its legit.
One note, Certificates of Live Birth are NOT considered proof of citizenship in many states including Florida, while in other states it is.
Again, why not then just produce the damn certificate, it clears up the whole thing. Until we see that, the issue isnt closed.
I apparently snuck in before the paranoia requirement was put in place.
Sec. 1401(g) is the applicable statute. In 1961 when Obama was born, the five and two year rules and the 14 year age rule were ten, five and 21 respectively. Sec. 1401(g) was modified by Pub. L. 99-653 which was effective with respect "to persons born on or after November 14, 1986." So the modification doesn't apply to Obama.
I can't seem to find when that clause was put into place. From what I've been able to find, the last revision to the Immigration and Naturalization Law prior to Obama's birth was the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952. That act does not contain the clause you quote. Section 301 (g) reads, " a person born outside the geographical limits of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is an alien, and the other a citizen of the United States who, prior to the birth of such person, was physically present in the United States or its outlying possessions for a period or periods totaling not less than five years, at least two of which were after attaining the age of fourteen years..." By that, Obama is a natural born citizen. Link . There is a second link at the bottom of the page that leads to the actual legislation.
Being born in Hawaii is not enough to make him a natural born citizen by then extant US statute if only one parent is a US citizen. Naturalized maybe. Natural Born, no.
But I think it all starts by learning where the man was born, and NOT to take his autobio at its word....
I agree. Since it is one of only TWO constitutional requirements, than it is incumbent upon HIM to furnish irrefutable proof. I would drop it if he does. One would think that if he is legit, than he would be eager to make this dust up go away. Were he to take the oath of office, and have it be discovered that he is not a natural born citizen, and he would refuse to resign, then we might have a civil war on our hands.
AGreed.
I’m watching Hannity...and that imbecile Colms.. I used to think Colms was intelligent, now he’s simply talking like he’s ot of it..
Anyway, they shoot to Harry Reid and talking about coal, and there’s Dick “I support the troops not the war” Durbin earing an over coat.... I mean what is that all about?
This is true. But in Kenya, he would be his father’s son - not only Kenyan but Muslim.
Rat talking point style. Hmmm.
Ya think?
i.e. Anchor babies. This is a matter in dispute yet to be settled, I predict not in my lifetime, maybe never.
Sorry, I was about to write you a nasty note.
Look, the legal is clearly set out in #148 which is below here but above where I wrote you to tell you where it is located.
This is a simple statutory proposition. Other lawyers won't read it differently--it is just a simple read the statute issue.
Well, if my understanding of the statute is correct, it really makes no difference where he was born. I'll keep following the threads here, but I just don't see anything compelling right now to suggest that Obama is not a natural born citizen.
Just so everybody else gets it the provision that says that the law applies to persons born December 24, 1952 and later is applicable only to "this proviso" which is the provision relating to persons serving in the military. As to the general provisions of (g), the effective date is set out below and it doesn't apply to Obama.
Read the legal in #148.
So the effect of the statute is that he is not a citizen under applicable law.
A secondary point is that even if he were a citizen under applicable law, that would not control operation of Article II, Sec. 1, Par. 4 of the Constitution as to which the Court would apply general principles of Constitutional construction which end up with a geographical US test--Obama flunks that test also.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23841816/
Wouldn't military records have details on where's McCain's family lived when he was born?
Obviously McCain and his team understood the importance regarding the legality of his run for the Presidency.
Not so to most of that. The McCain people never thought this was a threat. And to be fair, it was probably not a threat until it became an Obama problem. Now, it is a threat because there will be a real successful attack on Obama's eligibility to serve as president and McCain will suffer collateral damage.
The opinion McCain's people got was political. It is neither real nor correct. McCain has a problem because he was not a "natural born" citizen under Article II, Sec. 1, Par. 4 of the Constitution.
Whatever the merit of the legal fiction that the Panama base was US territory, he wasn't born there anyway; he was born in a hospital off base that was not part of the U S Lease.
That's not the import of the California litigation--it is part of a much more significant event.
Suits have been started in every state where McCain won the primary seeking to decertify his delegation on the theory that McCain is not eligible to election as President. Anyone who doesn't immediately grasp why that has been done and by whom has never been on the credentials committee of a national convention.
It's really good that you think I am right--it might occur to you that there is law about how this stuff gets interpreted; about which there really isn't room to argue.
If you haven't seen any compelling reason to believe he was not born in Hawaii, you haven't read the material.
His grandmother and two half siblings say they were there in Kenya when he was born. Wayne Madsen reported the end of last week that birth documents from official records in Kenya have been found and are in DC now. The Birth Certificate in Hawaii is a fraud--why do you suppose that is?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2039352/posts?page=159#159
What about the US Ambassador powers?
(personally, I’m all for starting over with new candidates. My issue with McCain has always been the POW/MIAs left behind, not his citizenship status)
Might try looking at the effective date clause at the end of Sec. 1401 which tells you when the amendments were effective by reference to the public law by which they were adopted.
The amendment reducing the ten and five year requirements to five and two were adopted by Public Law 99-653 which was effective with respect "to persons born on or after November 14, 1986." So the modification doesn't apply to Obama.
To look for the ten and five year statute, you need to look for 8 USCA Sec. 1401(7) (the subparagraphs were renumbered so that 7 became g). I believe the period in which Obama was born was subject to an interim statute in which the 10-5 year rules were applicable with respect to age 21--I don't have a copy of the old statute and it is not available on line. But it doesn't make any difference because even if the rule were age 14, Ann (his mother) still didn't make it because to have five years after 14, she would have needed to be at least 19 and she was only 18 when he was born.
Thus you know that if he was born outside the US, he isn't a citizen under Sec. 1401(g), absent a naturalization proceeding. (And a naturalization proceeding would prove he flunks the Article II, Sec. 1, Par. 4 test of eligibility to serve as President.)
I apologize for being abrupt with you. As to the statutory issue, there isn't room for argument; all you need to do is read the statutory material carefully which you are obviously capable of doing.
The bottom line is that if he was born in Kenya which I believe he clearly was, he just isn't a citizen under the statute--period. Further, the Supreme Court isn't going to let Congress define the Constitutional provision with the citizenship statute--otherwise, Congress would have the power to amend the Constitution without complying with the Amendment provisions.
Where's Obama's boyhood home? His Grandmother is still alive, and she doesn't appear to have Alzheimer's. There hasn't been a recent picture of B Hussein and his typical white racist Grandmother in decades. So what gives? We memorialize our President's home towns and early years...yet B Hussein's early years lacks any detail other than an Indonesian upbringing. Such a shame that we have to give up on our tradition of documenting each of our President's early years if B Hussein doesn't lose the next election in November.
I don’t even understand how Obama could have gotten security clearance as CIC. The Luo tribe was/is the controlling stronghold of Mombasa and controlls all the smuggling routes for Al Qaeda. Mombasa was the base for the base for the 1998 embassy bombings.
And now the U.S. Department of the Treasury froze the assests of Revival of Islamic Heritage Society for providing financial and material support to al Qaida and al Qaida affiliates. And Harvard was a grant recipient for funding the Harvard Islamic Society, and Obama went to Harvard?
Just how on earth did this guy think he could hold office?
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.