Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senator Questions Obama Eligibility
World Net Daily ^ | Feb. 22, 2009 | World Net Daily

Posted on 02/22/2009 5:02:19 PM PST by patriotgal1787

WASHINGTON – A U.S. senator has weighed in on the continuing controversy over Barack Obama's eligibility for office by saying he has never seen proof the new president was actually born in Hawaii.

"Well, his father was Kenyan and they said he was born in Hawaii, but I haven't seen any birth certificate," Sen. Richard Shelby, R-Ala., told constituents in Cullman County. "You have to be born in America to be president."

(Excerpt) Read more at wnd.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; Politics/Elections; US: Hawaii
KEYWORDS: 111th; 911truthers; americans; barackobama; berg; bho2008; bho2009; bho44; birth; birthcertificate; birthers; blackhelicopters; born; british; certificate; certifigate; citizenship; colb; commie; communism; communist; congress; conspiracytheories; constitution; corruption; coverup; cranks; democrats; democratscandals; dnc; doublestandard; election; eligibility; fubo; hawaii; homeland; impeach; ineligible; kenya; law; meninyellowsuits; national; natural; naturalborn; naturalborncitizen; nutjobs; obama; obamanoncitizenissue; orly; orlytaitz; patriots; politics; president; scotus; security; senate; senator; senshelby; shelby; supremecourt; taitz; tinfoilhats; toofers; truthers; unitedstates; usurper; washington; whitehouse
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 401-413 next last
To: research99
The stronger arguments, are questions relating to the Indonesian adoption, apparent Indonesian passport use in 1981, and the “dual (Kenyan) citizenship” (which all have been admitted to be factual, and which contradict the “natural born” citizen requirement of the Constitution).

But part of the Donofrio 'natural born citizen' definition is the requirement that the president be born within the U.S. Shelby is just parroting what that theory states.

241 posted on 02/23/2009 5:51:52 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Hilltop
I can say proudly, I’m a son of the south, reside in Alabama and have a Senator with balls.

Where were his balls when the electoral count was certified and he could have objected for the record? Strangely missing.

242 posted on 02/23/2009 5:53:01 AM PST by Non-Sequitur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: patriotgal1787

Right on! I’m slowly seeing our elected officials moving in on this issue. Finally!!


243 posted on 02/23/2009 5:53:53 AM PST by real_patriotic_american
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

Thanks so much for the PING explanation. That was very helpful and much appreciated.

Publius


244 posted on 02/23/2009 6:18:22 AM PST by publius321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 87 | View Replies]

To: Rushmore Rocks

Thanks so much for the PING explanation. That was very helpful and much appreciated. Best!

Publius


245 posted on 02/23/2009 6:19:17 AM PST by publius321
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 98 | View Replies]

To: shekkian

Bitem is still there to see that it is carried through.


246 posted on 02/23/2009 6:34:10 AM PST by Piquaboy (22 year veteran of the Army, Air Force and Navy, Pray for all our military .)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BonRad

Are we about to get some Repubs with some guts? The marxists are going to push a CO2 bill next then gun confiscation etc etc.

Come on Shelby and other Repubs. Get some guts before the kenyan-born marxist destroys America.


247 posted on 02/23/2009 7:12:17 AM PST by Frantzie (Boycott GE - they own NBC, MSNBC, CNBC & Universal. Boycott Disney - they own ABC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RatsDawg

We need to write to Senator Shelby and tell him to keep pushing.


248 posted on 02/23/2009 7:13:26 AM PST by Frantzie (Boycott GE - they own NBC, MSNBC, CNBC & Universal. Boycott Disney - they own ABC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: RatsDawg

Wiki-pedia liars claim Obama has provided “exhaustive proof” that obama is natural born. No but he provided proof he was not based upon his father’s being a Kenyan.


249 posted on 02/23/2009 7:16:02 AM PST by Frantzie (Boycott GE - they own NBC, MSNBC, CNBC & Universal. Boycott Disney - they own ABC)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: April Lexington

Harry Reid says paying taxes is voluntary. That interview alone could be used in court. We voluntarily refuse to pay until Obama shows eligibility.

If you don’t pay your mortgage or car payment they simply take it away. Your credit is ruined and your future for 7 years. You would harm yourself more than Obama.

A revolt of 100 million people saying we are not paying our taxes until Obama proves eligibility would be a revolution of sorts and one they would listen too. It would not be fraud because you would be speaking up to a government that has no rights to tax the people. Obama is a usurper, therefore no rights to tax or govern.


250 posted on 02/23/2009 7:45:40 AM PST by OafOfOffice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 211 | View Replies]

To: Evil Slayer
I notice that you are fairly new to FR. What REALLY interest me is your "in forum" posts are all directed at the BC issue.

Yes. Simply because that is the one issue that has interested me enough to bother posting on.

Would you by chance be working for Team Obama and sent to FR to discredit posters that bring up the BC subject?

No.

Though I've always suspected that if Team Obama were to send people anywhere to say anything, it would be to have them say things that can be rather easily discredited. Like Techdude for example. On the surface, to the casual observer, his "reports" looked convincing. Yet, if you scratch just below the surface, you found that he put things in his reports that were easily discredited. And it wasn't long before he was.


251 posted on 02/23/2009 10:06:43 AM PST by Michael Michael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: dascallie
You idiot. YES they have.

Yes they have what?


252 posted on 02/23/2009 10:12:10 AM PST by Michael Michael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 234 | View Replies]

To: dascallie
McCain’s birth documents are AVAILABLE EVEN TODAY for any who wish to review them.

No, they're not. Again, the documents on the Internet were supplied by Donald Lamb, not by McCain or his campaign. They directly refute McCain's claim as to where he was born and were used by Hollander in his eligibility lawsuit against McCain.

Here is the document that was filed with the court, which includes an affidavit from Donald Lamb that was filed with Hollister's surreply:

Hollander Surreply

You can continue to believe that the Donald Lamb documents were provided by McCain, but then you must also believe that McCain has been lying about where he was born, because all of the McCain birth certificate documents on the web say he was born at the Colon Hospital, in Colon, Panama, and not at the family hospital on the Coco Solo Naval Air Station as McCain claims.


253 posted on 02/23/2009 10:25:28 AM PST by Michael Michael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 235 | View Replies]

To: shekkian
"So, suppose the Zero is finally removed from the Presidency."

He's not. The Constitution is quite clear on this matter. Only impeachment in the House and Conviction in the Senate can remove a sitting President. That's not going to happen because a) The Dems handily control both Houses and b) So far, Barry hasn't committed a High Crime or misdemeanor (although, we did just start this show - anything is possible in the coming years).

The time to take care of this was before he was sworn. Either people couldn't or didn't. So, now we're stuck with him until 12:01 pm on Jan. 20, 2013.

254 posted on 02/23/2009 10:44:52 AM PST by Big_Monkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RipSawyer
I don’t have a lot of time to dig further into this right now but if that quotation is all that matters then any child born to a mother who managed to illegally sneak into the country long enough to give birth is qualified for the presidency. Regardless of today’s goings on I have a hard time believing that is what the founders intended. Certainly they didn’t consider everyone born in this country natural born citizens, that would have meant that slaves as well as all the members of the native american tribes would have been eligible to the presidency which is obviously not the case.

Yes, there were exclusions.

Children born to ambassadors and other foreign diplomats residing in the United States were not considered natural born citizens because there parents were here in the direct service of their respective countries. This was a custom which also came out of English common law.

Slaves weren't included because slaves weren't considered as people, they were considered as property, as were the children born to slaves.

And Indians weren't included because even though they resided within the United States, they were treated as sovereign nations, which had been the custom even throughout the colonial period.

But everyone else born in the United States was a natural born citizen regardless of the citizenship of their parents.

The natural born citizen clause was simply to exclude naturalized citizens from holding the office of President. And again, this concept comes straight out of English common law which prevented naturalized citizens from holding certain political offices.


255 posted on 02/23/2009 10:45:51 AM PST by Michael Michael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 237 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
"If he is found to be ineligible to be president, all EO’s, all laws he signs, all orders he issued to the military, all cabinet appointments and their changes to regulations will all become null and void. Essentially, we reset back to January 19, 2009."

Complete and utter nonsense. Please show me the "If he is found to be ineligible clause" in the US Constitution.

256 posted on 02/23/2009 10:46:41 AM PST by Big_Monkey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Big_Monkey
Complete and utter nonsense. Please show me the "If he is found to be ineligible clause" in the US Constitution.

Well, if you're a liberal, it would be Article I, Section 8, Clause 3, otherwise known as the interstate commerce clause. If that clause can be used to constitutionally authorize Congress to pass a law saying it's illegal to possess a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school zone (which is how the Clinton Justice Department defended it in US v. Lopez), then that clause can achieve just about anything.

Just make some crazy argument that any act by Obama has an effect on interstate commerce and voila. :)


257 posted on 02/23/2009 11:02:35 AM PST by Michael Michael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]

To: Michael Michael

YES they ARE.

McCain has NOT SEALED his birth docs as Obama has.

You can go through ordinary request procedures and gain access to the actual documents— they have NOT BEEN SEALED because McCain has nothing to hide.

You are tedious in your lying and protecting of the fraud sitting in the white house.

No more wasted time on your propaganda.


258 posted on 02/23/2009 11:09:40 AM PST by dascallie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 253 | View Replies]

To: dascallie
McCain has NOT SEALED his birth docs as Obama has.

Obama's birth records aren't sealed. They're covered by the same Hawaiian statute that protects the privacy of birth records for every other person born in Hawaii, which is HRS 338-18.

You can go through ordinary request procedures and gain access to the actual documents— they have NOT BEEN SEALED because McCain has nothing to hide.

Ok, so tell me, who exactly do I go to to request a copy of McCain's birth certificate?


259 posted on 02/23/2009 11:35:18 AM PST by Michael Michael
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 258 | View Replies]

To: Big_Monkey

I don’t have to find an “if he is found to be ineligible” clause. Just look at the Constitution. It has clear instructions on how a bill must be passed into law as well as who is eligible to be president. Only a duly sworn, eligible president can sign a bill into law. Not a usurper. Besides, if it is found that the zero is ineligible and for some reason the courts and Congress refuse to remove him from office, there WILL be a rebellion.


260 posted on 02/23/2009 12:46:24 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money. Margret Thatcher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 256 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 221-240241-260261-280 ... 401-413 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson