Posted on 12/03/2008 11:43:31 PM PST by BP2
Considering Obama’s only claim of expertise is in community organizing and specializing in Constitutional Law, I do not feel his stonewalling the issue does anything to promote forthright harmony where communal adversity exists.
Excellent fix, Jim. Thanks.
Chapter 7 of the Foreign Affairs Manual (7 FAM 1130, pg 8) says (and yes, I know it addresses children born abroad):
The Constitution does not define "natural born". The “Act to establish an Uniform Rule of Naturalization”, enacted March 26, 1790, (1 Stat. 103,104) provided that, “...the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born ... out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States.”
This statute is no longer operative, however, and its formula is not included in modern nationality statutes. In any event, the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes."
For later
> For the gazillionth time... The Constitution requires
> that the President be a Natural born citizen, not just a
> citizen.
Even if both Teh Won’s parents were 3 eyed aliens from the planet Zork and had just landed in Hawaii moments before his birth, he would still be a natural born US citizen.
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/citizen.asp
Oh, Leo Donofrio is on RIGHT NOW (at 823 pm CST) on http://www.plainsradio.com/chat.html
If this was from API I could believe this would go somewhere.
This fact is especially troubling, and bodes ill for what type of person this man is, and whether he has the intestinal fortitude, the education, experience, or sense of ethics to actually execute the duties of President at all.
Naturally, I'm saying that from an analytical perspective. From everything I've seen and heard from this man, he is far out of his depth, and should have never even been considered for candidacy to the office. It's a damning testament to how incredibly debased the entire Democrat party has become.
Certainly, a "constitutional scholar" understands the deep implications of withholding the one document which might validate his claimed eligibility for office, especially in light of the fact that he is being challenged to come forth with this very thing in courts across the land.
Surely a "scholar" and "statesman" of Obama's reputed brilliance can readily grasp that he is causing a great many Americans to distrust his motives, and to suspect him of some sort of malevolence, by his stonewalling the release of his birth certificate and other records.
You'd think that a man who could reach the pinnacle of political power would recognize that he himself is creating the very controversy that may result in the perception of illegitimacy in the minds of the people.
This begs the question yet again: who is Barack Obama?
In addition Obama is so slick he and Axelrod have obviously gone on a campaign of trying to appease everyone on our side as much as possible and as quickly as possible. He called ros Lehtinen to get her take on Cuba! Now what the hell do you expect she will say! It's all BS! He already knows! It's all gathering support! Turfing enemies, turfing his way to success.
They know the proverbial caca will hit the fan sooner or later and they want everyone possible to be of the mindset of:
oh isn't he such a nice guy, shouldn't we just overlook all this obvious racial bias by the hard right
That's how they will turf all this(sore losers) and make no mistake these guys, obama/alxelrod, never stop astrouturfing, ever, even for a moment--it's their all.
They try their best to create allusions,mindsets in peoples minds of anything they want to brainwash within a certain group and through the use of lots of dough, computers and in obamas case now, personal phone calls to anyone who can advance his cause.
They will BS their way to victory.
It's all he knows,and all they have ever done. Works well.Theme and diversion.
It's slick stuff and he has been getting away with it for as long as anyone knows.
They hide everything. anything that will hurt his cause and lie about anything and everything and create allusions "turfing" their way through the really hard stuff like not having a true BC.
It's the old saw that rats fall back on so often. Ask them a straight question and get a completely different answer. They have been getting away with this BS forever.And this will be the final coup.
No one will no the true Obama until he is sworn in,then all bets are off.
Thanks!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2142619/posts?page=309#309
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2142619/posts?page=333#333
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2142619/posts?page=467#467
The Justices will consider things like the Federalist Papers, Blackstone's Commentaries, and other documents of the time. They'll probably look at the differences between "citizen" and "subject," and how that relates to Art 2, Sect 1, Clause 5.
I have come to the conclusion, that this is what they will have to do, in order to make a valid determination of what the Framers meant by Natural Born Citizen in the Constitution.
And, until Barry Obama shows up with some documentary evidence, we won't know how this will affect him. He's playing a waiting game with this, which does not bode well for his real status. The longer he stonewalls, the deeper the public suspicion about him.
Freepers! Please ping all your friends to listen to Joe Thunder and Leo Donofrio on Plains Radio now!
http://www.plainsradio.com/
He never will. It probably does not exist.
No telling what he fabricated when he went to Hawaii with all those other lawyers.
This guy is slick and will have every base covered several times.
I fully expect him to be very polite to the Supremes but bottom line is he will give them nothing incriminating. He is too smart for that.
Following that path he can probably BS his way into the presidency using everyone he has been blowing smoke at, the DBM, with massive public opinion on his side and a bunch of loud mouths he will probably get in.
Once in office it would take a proverbial act of Congress to get him out.
I understand. We're all troubled by the lack of clarity about US definitions (or lack thereof) regarding the exact classifications of US citizenship.
It's my opinion that the case of Barack Obama has brought this festering murkiness to the surface, and now it will have to be fully confronted and defined by the US Supreme Court.
It's my guess that they will consult The Federalist Papers, Black's Commentaries, and other historical writings to determine the intentions of the Framers for using that exact phrase, and what they meant by it.
If the high court decides that the phrase Natural Born Citizen comports with the historical meaning that a person takes their citizenship and loyalty from their father, then it won't matter where Obama was born.
The historical understanding of that phrase also includes the concept that a person who is born within the territorial jurisdiction of "the King" is by birth, a citizen of the realm, their father's citizenship being a qualifier.
The Donofrio case contends that Obama cannot be a US citizen, yet alone a Natural Born Citizen, because his father was a Kenyan national with British citizenship at the time of his birth.
The other question it begs:
Who is backing and financing 0bama? Who is mentoring him? Who gives him advice?
And who will be blackmailing him (if they aren’t already)?
“Doesn’t sound very American, does it? Because it’s not.”
That’s an exhageration. American exceptionalism has a limit. We do have class distinctions, and always will. Like I said before, married people form a seperate class from singles, as do children from adults. There are all sorts of licenses given out by state, local, and federal agencies granting people certain privileges, from practicing medicine to fishing. There are net tax payers and net tax receivers, who John C. Calhoun warned us would eventually form seperate classes. In the face of all this, the presidency is such a small thing.
By the way, I am not among those who believes that children born on American soil aren’t necessarily natural born citizens. Everything I’ve ever read tells me they are.
“Elg was not a natural born citizen...1 foreigner parent (Sweden) and 1 US citizen parent (naturalized by US statute) and Born in Brooklyn, NY (USA)...This is not in my words - this was the case! She was considered a citizen!”
Please explain to me how she can be considered an American citizen by virtue of her birth in the U.S., but not a natural born citizen? Are you among those who maintains that in order to be a natural born citizen you have to have two citizen parents? If so, please tell me what law defines natural born status as such. ‘Cause I couldn’t find anything in that case that said so.
Don’t go bringing common sense into one of these threads. It can only end in tears.
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.