Posted on 12/03/2008 8:24:39 AM PST by ckilmer
Originally posted: December 3, 2008 Another thought about the `Where was Obama born?' dispute In today's story, Tax activist's ad challenges Obama's eligibility for office The Tribune examines allegations about president-elect's 'natural born citizen' status , my colleagues Sara Olkon and James Janega methodically take apart the arguments presented by Robert L. Schulz, chairman of We The People Foundation, in Tribune ads this week. Here's one passage • Schulz says that "U.S. law in effect in 1961 [the year of Obama's birth] denied citizenship to any child born in Kenya if the father was Kenyan and the mother was not yet 19 years of age." If a child is born ... to an American parent outside the U.S., the law at the time would require the U.S. citizen parent to be at least 19, which Obama's mother was not. The provisions of this law were subsequently loosened and made retroactive for government employees serving abroad and their families. It appears that this would not apply to Obama's mother. Olkon and Janega point out that "the matter would seem to be academic: Hawaiian officials vouch for Obama's birth certificate," but even if it were to turn out that Obama's mother was actually in Kenya when she gave birth to him, the age requirement was and is absurd and unjustifiable; easily remedied, if necessary, with the passage of a retroactive law smilar to the law that applied to "government employees serving abroad and their families." Schultz is deluded if he thinks the Congress -- even those in Congress who opposed Obama -- or the courts would stand by and allow to unfold the crisis that would ensue if Obama were denied the presidency on a technicality.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.chicagotribune.com ...
Yeah boy. That damned Constitution. Nothing but a whole bunch of lousy “technicalities!” Like the freedom of speech and right to bear arms crap. Technicalities! No wonder the US has been such a weak, poverty ridden, unaccomplished nation for the past 200 years.
Our miltary must step in and uphold the COnstitution and fulfill their oath they took
Hmmmm.
Only those parts of the United States that need to be burned will burn! The majority of the U.S. will be defended.
Raised as a Muslim by a Muslim in a foreign country disqualifies him.
In my lifetime, three Presidents have been either
1. assassinated
2. resigned
3. impeached
I’m still here.
That would be Biden, McCain, and Palin. The VPs are on the ballot and receive votes.
The Trib seems to have taken down the “comments” link. Wonder what that’s all about?
One reason the media, Congress and even conservative journalists would like this to “go away” is the fear that 52% of the American public do not know we even have a CONSTITUTION - much less that there is a “natural born citizen” requirement for POTUS eligibility.
The 150million numbchucks who voted for Obama - would storm Washington DC if the truth ever surfaced on NBC,CBS,ABC or Fox and they would blame George Bush!
The media need only look back to WWII when Germany controlled them. They will either stand up and report the news or do exactly what Washington tells them. This will be another violation of our Constitution when considering “Freedom of The Press”.
Obama has already pre-written all the speeches for his people. If you saw the speeches by Hillary, Biden and now Richardson....they were all written for them. Obama himself, can’t give a talk without it being pre-written....the question is who is writing his speeches?
Don’t you think that Zero already planted the appropriate papers during his late October “visit to his sick grandmother” that lasted for all of 2 hours?
Eric Zorn is a flaming liberal. This doesn’t surprise me.
It seems Detroit will burn on inauguration night if Obama is sworn in and it will burn if he is disqualified! Either way it will burn, but in one of the those scenarios the constitution doesn’t go up in flames!
I don’t think that the technicality that he references is the Constitution. The technicality is that in 1961, under US Immigration law, a US citizen mother, who gives birth to a child in another country, and is 19 years old, can give her child Natural-born US citizenship status, while the same woman in the same circumstance, who is 18 years and 9 months old, as Obama’s mother was, would have a child who does not qualify for US citizenship. In reality, this was a very stupid law.
However, it was the law, and no matter how stupid or technical the author believes it to be, it is still legally binding. Truthfully, I believe that BO was born in Hawaii. If he turns out to have been born outside the US, I would think the dishonesty factor, rather than the citizenship factor would be a bigger issue for the American people.
Is there a way that we could determine that Stanley Ann Dunham was ever in Kenya? And, if so, when?
It seems to me, that if we could, that would go a long way to answering all of our questions.
We really are not equal under the law. Sad. It has all been a big illusion.
If he was born in Hawaii........let him prove it to the American people. Let the people see the Birth Certificate. Let the people see all of his records. Without doing this, half of our nation will never accept him....regardless of what the media or politicians say.
Don't even think about going there.
It seems to me, the burden of proof is on Hussein. If he won’t prove that he’s a naturalized citizen of this country, he should not be allowed to hold office. And screw the fear of riots. Thats the lesser of the evils.
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.