Posted on 08/07/2008 8:42:20 PM PDT by Kevmo
When and How will the Obama Birth Certificate Forgery story break into the MSM? How do we get this out? Will we need to start filing lawsuits in each individual state?
Post your suppositions and activist suggestions here.
We should start using the keyword CERTIFAQUIDDIC.
***Then do what I did and add that keyword to all of the pertinent threads. In the meantime we have CertifiGATE.
It will break with harry reid calling an emergency session to change the constitution.
Obama’s grandmother will say SHE was the one who faked the birth certificate and her little boy is 110% innocient and should not pay the price.
It will only hit the media if they have to admit it is a fake. Right now they are just pushing for the good forgery.
We need one of those viral emails to go out.
(snopes is already carrying water on this one)
The sins of the fathers.
Compare to:
"Fathers shall not be put to death for their children, nor children put to death for their fathers; each is to die for his own sins." [Deut. 24:16]
Why? Because Washington and John Jay were not trivial men. When Washington requested the requirement, he meant it to be a high-bar. They were afraid of a situation just like comes to us with Mr. Obama -- a citizen of multiple countries, who has proved his multiple allegiances, and who has not proved beyond any doubt by courageous or extraordinary service to his country that his allegiance belongs wholly to the US.
To meet that high-bar of "natural born" a person needs not just one parent a citizen -- but both. Not just the son or daughter of some Canadian couple who crossed over to Plattsburg NY in order to take advantage of some US based medical specialist at the birth, for an example.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=71763
Ted Moran, who said he wished to be contacted at brotherbear@solomonsstables.org, said he also was launching a campaign to discern the truth about Obama’s birth certificate.
“I am looking for 50 brave men or women from 49 states and the District of Columbia to join me in suing the secretaries of state in our respective states to prevent them from posting the name Barak H. Obama on the November 2008 ballot until he presents incontrovertible proof that he is a … U.S. citizen,” he said. “The secretaries of state are the ones who by placing a person or initiative on the ballot certify that the candidates or initiatives meet the legal requirements to be on the ballot.
***Bears repeating, so I can search through my own posts to find this item and reuse it.
But also by Kenyan Constitution: "A person who, upon the attainment of the age of twenty-one years, is a citizen of Kenya and also a citizen of some country other than Kenya shall, subject to subsection (7), cease to be a citizen of Kenya upon the specified date unless he has renounced his citizenship of that other country, taken the oath of allegiance and, in the case of a person who was born outside Kenya. made and registered such declaration of his intentions concerning residence as may be prescribed by or under an Act of Parliament." Does anyone have any evidence Obama renounced his U.S. citizenship?
There is no evidence that his mother, Ann Dunham Obama, was located anywhere outside the United States or its territories at the time of the child’s birth.
***I’ve seen some discussion of such evidence on these certifiGate threads. So there is evidence, just perhaps not compelling evidence at this point in time.
All this talk about Nobamas COB reminds me of Bill Klintons medical records that we have never seen.
***The difference is that there is no constitutional requirement towards medical history, but there is one towards natural born citizenship status. Our founding fathers did not want a president with divided loyalties, so they put in that requirement.
Yes, but ... being “natural born” is not a privilege to be withheld as some punishment. It is a circumstance that is conditioned upon the citizenship of the parents, in addition to the place of birth.
Yes.
That leaves the category of people who were citizens at birth, but were not born in the US. In their case, we need either a law or a court ruling to decide whether they are natural-born for purposes of the Constitution.
Exactly. Although I would add constitutional amendment to the list.
We have a law from 1790 which defines natural-born to include someone born abroad to an American citizen. As I mentioned, many of the FF were in Congress at the time. With this law being passed so close to the date of adoption of the Constitution, by many of the people who actually drafted the Constitution, that is a very good showing of the original intent behind the natural-born clause: i.e., that it is meant to cover everyone who is an American citizen at birth, rather than through naturalization.
IIRC, the 1790 law did NOT include just anyone "born abroad to an American citizen." It only covered this circumstance under two conditions: BOTH parents were US citizens AND they were stationed abroad on official US business, either as part of the diplomatic corps, or the military.
You’d have to prove that you are eligible to work in the US to get a dishwasher job.
Should we hold our leaders to a lower standard?
***Only if you’re a democrat. That’s kinda the problem in this country.
The original may have been damaged somehow or faded and someone decided to “clean it up” using image software. Is that possible?
***Then there would be no evidence of sister Maya’s information on the electronic image.
I have chosen to devote my run time to this, as ineligibility to hold the office is an absolute defense against an Obama presidency.
***Well said.
|
His actual allegiance is divided, he campaigned in Kenya for his cousin there.
***From what I read on this thread and elsewhere, this is exactly the kind of divided loyalty the founding fathers intended NOT to allow into the presidency.
It’s been refuted since it can’t be reproduced
***It is in the process of being replicated as we speak.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2058453/posts?page=2
The Israel Insider report said the two analysts it interviewed both have been “able to independently discern the name ‘Maya Kassandra Soetoro’ from artifacts left behind in the process of forging a new fake document for Barack from an image of Maya’s original document.”
Why? Because Washington and John Jay were not trivial men. When Washington requested the requirement, he meant it to be a high-bar. They were afraid of a situation just like comes to us with Mr. Obama — a citizen of multiple countries, who has proved his multiple allegiances, and who has not proved beyond any doubt by courageous or extraordinary service to his country that his allegiance belongs wholly to the US.
***Good writing.
I’m off for vacation, keep up the good work on this thread.
You're making up requirements out of whole cloth here to create a tortured definition of natural-born citizen. To my knowledge, American citizenship laws have never made any distinctions for people born in the US based on the citizenship of their parents.
This concept of a native-born American having to prove his allegiance is so nebulous as to be useless. What kind of concrete standard could we come up with that could be evenly applied in all circumstances?
I didn't see that anywhere in the bill. Take a look and see if you can find it (top of the page at this link):
http://rs6.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=227
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.