Replies

"What does it matter if he was born in the USA. I was told that, in order to be a “natural born US citizen”, that BOTH PARENTS had to be US citizens and the time of the child’s birth."

You were told incorrectly. He only needs to be born a citizen. If he's born in the US, his parent's citizenship doesn't matter.

MLO

YOU LIAR.
Obama has committed FRAUD.

No MLO, being born a citizen is not what The Constitution requires. There were many discussions about why the Natural Born Citizen requirement. Obama is just the sort of candidate for Commander and Chief they were concerned with. Obama is particularly relevant because his mother, a citizen by birth, spent more time outside the US then inside, spending most of her adult life in the far and Middle East, Indonesia and Pakistan in particular. Obama’s advisers know very well how long it takes for a case of these dimensions to make its way through the court. But the allegiances of the father are paramount in both the Locke and Liebniz/de Vattel philosophies which provided the foundation for our Constitution. This is particularly messy because no president has tested Article II before. But the requirements have been stated a number of times, in John Jay's letters, James Madison, the Bingham speech in the 1866 Congressional Record. There is no ambiguity about Natural Born. Obama made a direct challenge to the court. There is no secret of his father's Kenyan/British citizenship, though Univ. of Chicago-Kent paper, clearly written with Obama in mind by Herlihy, argues that Article II should be changed to accommodate ‘globalism’ (yes; read it and count the times she invokes ‘globalism’).

The conspiratorial part of me wonders if senior legal minds have decided to let Obama lose allure, make most of his appointments, and sign most of his bills before they take it on. There are bills sitting in both the Senate and the House to make him natural born, if the Democrats feel they have the support. Two attempts didn't reach the floor. The one in the Senate was coauthored by Barack Obama, with Claire McGaskill. This change seems unlikely, and unwise, and probably would require a constitutional convention to change the meaning - the explicit difference between Citizen and Natural Born Citizen, specified for the Commander and Chief. I've read several authoritative sounding ‘lawyers’, two law school faculty, claim that every act Obama has taken, every appointment, every law, will be nullified if he is found unqualified (a usurper).

I suggest you read a bit. You can find ‘Laws of Nations’ on the Internet, and the Congressional Record is also there.
I've only read references to John Jay's letters (having a
real job interferes with my more important concerns).
Obama appears to be a citizen, though there are reasonable questions, questions my wife, who comes from another country, is asked every time she renews her passport. There does seem little question that Obama registered at Occidental with an Indonesian passport. He clearly falsified his Illinois Bar application, failing to note that he was known by another name, either Barry Obama or Barry Soetoro. He's got problems, and they cannot be a secret to our security agencies. But they are secret to the public, and that is a travesty.

You were told incorrectly. He only needs to be born a citizen. If he's born in the US, his parent's citizenship doesn't matter.

That last statement is just plain silly.

mlo, are you suggesting the “citizen” and “natural born citizen” are one and the same? Because the definition you replied with was the one for basic citizenship.

Do you feel that the use of “natural born citizen” in the constitution is meant to mean nothing more than “citizen”?

I’m trying to fight with you; I’m trying to figure out why you correct a definition of NBC with the definition of plain citizen. Can you help me out here? Thx.