He's part black.
Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.
Posted on 11/08/2010 5:11:53 PM PST by RobinMasters
Sorry, but you're wrong on both accounts. Indonesia law makes adopted children up to age 5 automatic citizens of Indonesia. As for your second point, not all persons born in the United States automatically become U.S. citizens.
Yes, adopted children become automatic citizens, but they don’t acquire that ciizenship at the moment of BIRTH. That’s what I’m saying.
He's part black.
It doesn't exactly matter. Do you have a point??
I do. Even if he was adopted by his Indonesian stepfather, I don’t think that would negate his U.S. citizenship. He wasn’t of an age to renounce it and I think that if he was a citizen at birth, then he maintained it by returning to the United States as a minor.
The law in effect at the time Obama would have been adopted would not have precluded him from denouncing U.S. citizenship (providing he ever had it). Indonesian law didn't recognize dual citizenship, so it's within reason to think that Obama considered himself to be an Indonesian citizen. We know there's a school record from Indonesia that lists him as an Indonesian citizen, so the best available evidence tells us he was an Indonesian citizen. What we don't have is evidence of U.S. citizenship being restored afterwards.
He was what, five? I don’t think minors can renounce their citizenship. Where’s the evidence that he renounced his citizenship anyway? Leaving the country for a few years to attend school in Indonesia is not even close to prima facie evidence that he renounced his citizenship.
It might be interesting to see his school transcripts from his prep school in Hawaii or Occidental College or Columbia University, to see if any of them listed him as a foreign student or gave him financial aid earmarked for foreign students only.
I’m sure he got plenty of aid because of his racial background. I doubt he needed any additional foreign aid. Doesn’t pretty much every university out there reserve a specific percentage of internal grants and scholarships for minority students only? I know mine did.
More patently jackass mandates from the tyrannical, corrupt "men in black."
Yup, a worldwide joke on the stupidity of the abominable Americans. Kenyan, and Muslim, and a documented, certifiable America hater. And orgasmic, ecstatic thoughts of Him just run a thrill up the legs of the sniveling abominable American.
It is clear that in this country, we have now become encumbered with a thoroughly corrupt, deceitful, amoral, tyrannical leadership. Only the people acting in a mass unrelenting movement can correct the situation, and blood will flow before any correction can be achieved.
In the final analysis the “men in black” seem to rule the US. Are they subjected to checks and balances?
First, we don't know what citizenship little Barry had. There's no, how do you say it, prima facie evidence of his citizenship. Second, U.S. law at the time little Barry would have been adopted did NOT preclude minors from renouncing their citizenship.
Leaving the country for a few years to attend school in Indonesia is not even close to prima facie evidence that he renounced his citizenship.
Doesn't matter. The best available evidence from that time period says Obama was an Indonesian citizen. Indonesia doesn't allow dual citizenship, so we have to assume that Obama thought of himself as an Indonesian citizen only. On his return to the United States, we have no evidence that he restored or reapplied for U.S. citizenship.
Oh, I think the birth notices printed in the Honolulu papers are pretty strong prima facie evidence that Barry was born in Hawaii. So is the COLB. If he was born in Hawaii then he's a citizen. It doesn't matter that he lived in Indonesia. You're not going to convince anyone outside of the birther crew that five or si year old Barry renounced his citizenship to a consular officer, and it's clear that the parents cannot renounce citizenship on behalf of the minor.
Second, U.S. law at the time little Barry would have been adopted did NOT preclude minors from renouncing their citizenship.
I think I'm going to need a source for this claim, especially considering this:
This is right from the State Dept website:
"F. RENUNCIATION FOR MINOR CHILDREN
Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship. "
You're saying that little Barry convinced a U.S. diplomatic officer that he fully understood the nature and consequences of renunciation? Because parents cannot renounce it on behalf of their minor children. You're grasping at straws.
Ummmm, none of the birth announcements actually say he was born in Hawaii. Sorry, at best it proves a date of birth, gender, father and a permanent mailing address.
So is the COLB.
A legitimate hard copy of a COLB would be prima facie evidence if presented in a court of law, but despite several opportunities, it has NEVER been presented.
If he was born in Hawaii then he's a citizen.
He might be a 14th amendment citizen, but not a natural born citizen, which is the actual requirement to hold the office of POTUS.
It doesn't matter that he lived in Indonesia.
It's not a simple matter of JUST living in Indonesia, but possibly being adopted and AUTOMATICALLY becoming an Indonesian citizen.
You're not going to convince anyone outside of the birther crew that five or si year old Barry renounced his citizenship to a consular officer, and it's clear that the parents cannot renounce citizenship on behalf of the minor.
I repeat. The BEST evidence available for this time period in Barry's life says he was an Indonesian citizen. The burden would be on him to prove that he ever had U.S. citizenship and regained or retained it. So far, no evidence has been presented.
This is right from the State Dept website:
There's no doubt that the current laws are more protective of children's citizenship than they were when Obama would have been adopted. The law was different then. It was changed in 1986. This means that up to his adulthood, Obama may have considered himself to be an Indonesian citizen.
I just sent the following to my State Senator. No sense sending it to my Dem State Rep because she’s been term limited and will be gone come January.>>>
Most people assume that Barack Obama had been vetted before he was able to run for President. Guess what?
A congressional document posted on the Internet confirms no one – not Congress, not the states and not election officials – bothered to check Barack Obama’s eligibility to be president, and that status remains undocumented to this day.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=225561
And since the Federal government failed to vet Obama, maybe the states should do their job for them. Missouri must pass a law that would require that all candidates meet the eligibility requirements before being placed on the ballot. That means presidential candidates must present an official certified birth certificate to each political party in the state. You had to provide a birth certificate in order to run for the MO Senate so why shouldn’t presidential candidates do likewise?
#####
You may consider writing to your state legislators also.
Hey doc!
If it takes a law (statute, amendment) to make you a citizen, you are not a “natural born” citizen.
It’s that simple.
A “natural born” citizen” just is.
If it takes a law (statute, amendment) to make you a citizen, you are not a “natural born” citizen.
It’s that simple.
A “natural born” citizen” just is.
Hi Beckwith. It isn't that simple.
The 14th amendment is not just a statute, it's part of our Constitution. It was added in 1868. Opinions about what it should take to be considered a "natural born" citizen are fine. If you want to prevent people born in the United States to non-citizen parents from being eligible for the Presidency, then pass a Constitutional amendment repealing that part of the 14th. To imply that an amendment means nothing is incorrect. Your argument seems to boil down to knowing a natural-born citizen when you see one, and that doesn't really have any basis in law.
"Those born in the United States are uncontroversially natural born citizens."
I don't see any conditions in that sentence Beckwith, and no cites follow it, because it's understood by the general legal community to be true.
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.