Posted on 07/27/2009 5:54:29 PM PDT by pissant
Title and link only
http://www.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/20090727/BREAKING01/90727082/Obama+Hawaii+born++insist+Isle+officials
Did you catch this bit:
“A congressional resolution introduced by Hawaii Rep. Neil Abercrombie commemorating the 50th anniversary of Island statehood was postponed today apparently because of a “whereas” clause noting Obama’s Hawaii birthplace.
The line “Whereas the 44th President of the United States, Barack Obama, was born in Hawaii on August 4, 1961;” has been construed by some who believe Obama is not a U.S.-born citizen as a thinly veiled attempt to get Congress to affirm Obama’s U.S. citizenship.”
(end snip)
Let’s think about this for a minute. For this last week and a half(since the Orly/military case in Georgia had to be covered due to the military issues) the Obama press has been frantically trying to paint birthers as nuts, fringers, racists, etc. No one in the print or audio media have allowed an honest report of the many issues on the birther side of the argument in detail. Not even Dobbs really.
Then..as soon as the media thought they had successfully painted us as nuts and racists, they begin to ask prominent republican leaders and politicians to ‘weigh in on the issue’, etc. Of course, everytime they are asked about it, the question goes something like this: “Senator Republican, Obama has ‘proven’ he is a citizen..are you a racist crazy birther too?” LOL
Now we have the same Hawaii congressman involved in the hospital controversy and letter trying to sneak in a whereas clause to get every rep on the legislative record ‘affirming’ Obama’s ‘birthplace’.
This is very strange indeed. I am with you Starwise...it sounds and smells like something is coming down the pike with this issue. Something big.
The media and the democrats don’t want this to bring them all crashing down when the truth comes out, so they are desperatley trying to get ‘cover’ by the republicans for their own lies, complicity and malfeasance when the constitutional crisis hits critical mass.
Just a thought.
The fix is in. It was done in December I think.
Who is this Barrack guy?
Nope.
Wong Kim Ark case was bad law in many ways. For one it ignored, abridged, a treaty with the Empire of China that all Chinese subjects shall not be made US citizens or their offspring born inside the United States shall not become US citizens. As you should know, treatise take precedence in the US Constitution as if it was apart of it.
To the point, Wong Kim Ark, Justice Harlen did not call Ark a Natural Born Citizen in the facts of the case or in his holdings. The US Supreme Court in about a half dozen case call all persons native born instead of using the phrase Natural Born to differentiate that their parents were citizens of other countries. The only time the Supreme Court used the phrase 'Natural Born Citizen' when it was clearly that the parents were citizens of the United States and the person in question was born on US soil. see Perkins vs. Elg 1939.
I bet he's a friendly reporter who put this story out to confuse the issue. It may be retracted in a few hours, but in the meantime the internet and some news organizations will report it as truth.
Correction: Judge Harlen = Judge Gray
What part of NATURAL BORN do you not get? Who said anything about citizenship? Only the president has to be NATURAL born.
I disagree with your assessment. If you read Wong and thoroughly analyze it you will see that Justice Gray decimated the jurisdiction requirement. You may think he was corrupt or didn’t know what he was talking about or it was bad law...but Wong is the case the courts need to look at under the Supremacy Clause.
In case you don’t know what I am talking about..you can try this:
“The foregoing considerations and authorities irresistibly lead us to these conclusions: the Fourteenth Amendment affirms the ancient and fundamental rule of citizenship by birth within the territory, in the allegiance and under the protection of the country, including all children here born of resident aliens, with the exceptions or qualifications (as old as the rule itself) of children of foreign sovereigns or their ministers, or born on foreign public ships, or of enemies within and during a hostile occupation of part of our territory, and with the single additional exception of children of members of the Indian tribes owing direct allegiance to their several tribes. The Amendment, in clear words and in manifest intent, includes the children born, within the territory of the United States, of all other persons, of whatever race or color, domiciled within the United States. Every citizen or subject of another country, while domiciled here, is within the allegiance and the protection, and consequently subject to the jurisdiction, of the United States. His allegiance to the United States is direct and immediate, and, although but local and temporary, continuing only so long as he remains within our territory, is yet, in the words of Lord Coke in Calvin’s Case, 7 Rep. 6a, “strong enough to make a natural subject, for if he hath issue here, that issue is a natural-born subject;” and his child, as said by Mr. Binney in his essay before quoted, “if born in the country, is as much a citizen as the natural-born child of a citizen, and by operation of the same principle.” It can hardly be denied that an alien is completely subject to the political jurisdiction of the country in which he resides — seeing that, as said by Mr. Webster, when Secretary of State, in his Report to the President on Thrasher’s Case in 1851, and since repeated by this court”
You may be onto something there! If the democrats can get the Republicans to sign onto the same lie the democrats have been supporting for lo these many months, then when the truth hits the democrats are not the focus of why the heck was this gross lie not opposed and fixed much earlier in the demcorat primaries? The Republicans signing that resolution are giving the democrats a political out ... like the feckless pubbies seem to always do!
I don’t think a marriage license existed. It many now exist but it’s very odd that the divorce records were on file but no marriage license.
This is interesting, I guess this means Obama’s real father was American and not The Kenyan whose name he took.
Vital Records???
So, by her legalese speak, this could easily translate into a “vital record” that:
1. is not an actual birth certificate, but rather a signed affidavit by the mother.
2. Does not indicate a hospital or attending physician,
and/or
3. A birth registered in Hawaii, and under Hawaiian state law can meet the definition of an physical birth in the state.
Her statements could translate into any of the three possibilities above = major scandal
SHOW THE G.D. ORIGIGINAL “VITAL RECORDS”!!!!!
Mmmmmmm,,,sooooo,,,
Did Chiyome Fukino make the fake COLB that we saw or
just help?...
And Vice President.
ex animo
davidfarrar
The reality is that actual practice has made cases like Obama's natural born citizens. They don't have to be naturalized or go thru any other process except demonstrate that they were born in this country. The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) provides the conditions for citizenship. There is no distinction between native born and natural born in our existing laws, i.e., the are not two categories of citizens born under jus solis.
The US recognizes dual nationality. Any claims that Obama might have to UK citizenship do not affect his American citizenship, presuming he was born in Hawaii.
I have two questions.
First, who or what gives her the authority to declare Obama a natural-born citizen and other personal information?
Second, how is it that she seems to have a mystical grasp of what it means to be "natural-born", when the courts haven't agreed on it yet.
This smells. The libs are desperate.
Citizen - not natural born citizen
A senator has to be a citizen to hold office
A vice president or president has to be a natural born citizen. There is a difference.
The Wong case makes her a citizen, not a natural born citizen.
About...
http://investigatingobama.blogspot.com/2009/01/obama-divorce-papers-via-plainsradiocom.html
...RummyChick has the right idea. Even divorce papers do not necessarily prove that they were married in the first place. This family was part of the Communist network in America, which included experts in falsifying documents.
You may wish to listen to tonight’s “The Awakening,” where among others, James (Manufactured Crisis) Simpson and Sam Sewell explain.
It smells alright. This may be a bogus story. There is no official announcement on the web from Hawaii. All the blogs and web stories originate from ONE (1) story. No other news outlet in Hawaii had this story. One (1) reporter reported it's being reposted and quoted by (now) hundreds of others.
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.