President Obama Needs to Prove His Constitutional Eligibility to Be Commander-in-Chief

American Thinker ^ | April 08, 2010 | Terrence Lakin, MD

[El Gato]

Not for much longer I'm thinking.

Perhaps, but the trial should be interesting. Should it not? Or even more interesting would be withdrawal of the orders, and no new orders issued directing him to do anything, since he would disobey those as well. But if the orders are withdrawn, there is still the "contempt of officials" charge, which would need to not be made as threatened.

Those actions alone would tell us that something stinks.

[Canadian Outrage]

good answer. Court martial him and then for discovery, Obama HAS to produce the real thing!! Won’t happen tho. We are at a million and counting. Of course this phony, self aggrandizing, self loving creep doesn’t care - he’s swimming in tax payer money and thinks he can do anything. Just wait until God Himself brings him down. It will be a mighty fall you can be sure. CO

[Canadian Outrage]

Your post #141 - shows just how low you really are. Again, your pathetic. CO

[El Gato]

And CBS had a whole story on how George Bush didn't show up for his Air Guard duties. The obvious conclusion is that George Bush was a deserter.

The difference being that the CBS story was denigrating Bush, while the Narobi story was celebrating Obama's status as US Senator who was a native of Kenya. .

It could still be wrong of course, but there was no motive to falisify the information.

[Canadian Outrage]

You are a pest on any thread to do with this subject which tells me that you are a hired hack. You don’t have a single argument that makes a lick of sense. You really should be ignored. I will from now on, hope the others do also. Talk to yourself hack. CO

[El Gato]

Really? Tell that to people like Michael New and Ehren Watada.

We were advised that there was no guarantee the Court Martial will agree with you, and we were counseled to be FReaking sure that the order was illegal before disobeying it. But if one believed the order was illegal, then one not only could disobey it, one was bound to do so.

[El Gato]

I did not swear to support and defend and interpret the Constitution, that last part is the responsibility of others

How can you defend or uphold it without "interpreting it?" Letting others tell you what it means is just another form of "I was just obeying orders".

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

(I really need a ping list for questions such as this-maybe one day.)

I ran across this picture today. I have not seen it before. Does anyone know who the man on the far left is?

[MilspecRob]

I should say most rational people accept it as synonymous. That would exclude a lot of the people around here.

I concur.

[stephenjohnbanker]

“Does anyone know who the man on the far left is? “

The President of Zamunda?

[Fred Nerks]

That man on the left has been identified as Malik Abongo Obama, the eldest son of Kezia, to the best of my knowledge.

[rodguy911]

Good post,after searching this stuff out for some time now I see zero as totally Manchurian and basically a working guy who has been bought and paid for to create as much chaos and destruction of the country as possible in the 4 years he will be in office.

He could have been primed from many years and quite possibly before 1992.

Its indeed possible that Soros, the Russians and some Mideastern interests are all involved.

[rxsid]

Yes, indeed. And great follow-up analogy!

[El Gato]

Then would it be safe to assume that you support Ehren Watada and Michael New?

They made their determination. They turned out to be wrong, as determined by a Court. (Although Watada probably went in intending such challenge, while New did not get in the situtation which prompted his challenge until he has been in for some time).

This L/C accpets that a Court will decide if he is correct or wrong in his determination.

[Canadian Outrage]

Your an A$$hole to talk to conservativegramma like that. Shows you for what you are. You have no legitimacy here. CO

[Canadian Outrage]

You could NEVER LYAO as you would disappear. CO

[babygene]

I guess you can not read. The person I was responding to suggested “birthers” had it wrong... I am a birther.

[El Gato]

In only one case was the question of natural born citizenship raised, the Ark decision. There the justices determined that Ark was a citizen by birth, which most people accept is synonymous with natural-born citizen.

"Most people" believe a lot of things that are wrong. And the Court did not call Ark a natural born citizen. That was not at issue, only if he was a citizen. The only sort of case where "natural born" could be at issue is a Presidential eligibility case. (Or a VP one of course). There has never been such a case heard by the Supreme Court.

But I see you continue to assume your conclusion that "citizen at birth" means "natural born". Even the Surpeme disagrees with that. In some cases "citizen at birht" may be a naturalized citizen. In fact all persons born outside the US, but "citizens" at birth under statute law are "naturalized", for the power of defining a rule of naturalization is the only power Congress has over citizenship.

[MHGinTN]

Oh my! Didn’t you notice that the asshat NS has placed himself in the position of being the rational voiuce, that anyone not in agreement with his obamnoid sycophancy is not rational? Now you’ve done it! You’ll be branded irrational byt the little demigod, NS, and his bottom feeding followers will chide you too.

[Forty-Niner]

The result of the Nuremburg trials post WWII requires Military Officers to question the illegal orders of their superiors. ( This is codifoed in the UCMJ) Obama has been illegaly installed as the CIC, and LtCol is correct in questioning Obama’s right to Command.....