Update on Barack Obama's Birth Certificate Issue

Right Side News ^ | November 30, 2008

[Red Steel]

Citizenship Issue on MSNBC Hawaii Revised Statute 338-17.8 allows registration of birth in Hawaii for a child that was born outside of Hawaii to parents who, for a year preceding the childs birth, claimed Hawaii as their place of residence. The parents would be issued a Certification of Live Birth.

This is not proof of where the child was born. It only proves that the parents claimed Hawaii as their main place of residence for the prior year.

British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.

A natural born citizen, would not be a citizen of any other nation than the United States. That is what "natural born" means. By nature, the child, would be only a US citizen, because both of his parents were US citizens, and NO OTHER NATION, can by law claim him to be under their jurisdiction, at the moment of his birth. That was not the case with Obama. He was, by law, a Citizen of the United Kingdom, the moment he was born, and then, by law, he became a citizen of Kenya on Dec. 12, 1963.

For a more detailed explaination of natural born citizen, see my other related video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bp2kKN...

[Dscott_FR]

Thank you. I guess I’m not going anywhere....this stuff is addictive.

[JoanneSD]

That does not make sense.. we have anchor babies born every day that neither parents are americans, and the kid is a citizen...

[Diggity]

The burden of proof is on Obama to prove he is eligible.

http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin84.htm

“Now that Obama’s citizenship has been seriously questioned, the burden of proof rests squarely on his shoulders. The “burden of establishing a delegation of power to the United States * * * is upon those making the claim.” Bute v. Illinois, 333 U.S. 640, 653 (1948). And if each of the General Government’s powers must be proven (not simply presumed) to exist, then every requirement that the Constitution sets for any individual’s exercise of those powers must also be proven (not simply presumed) to be fully satisfied before that individual may exercise any of those powers. The Constitution’s command that “[n]o Person except a natural born Citizen * * * shall be eligible to the Office of President” is an absolute prohibition against the exercise of each and every Presidential power by certain unqualified individuals. Actually (not simply presumptively or speculatively) being “a natural born Citizen” is the condition precedent sine qua non for avoiding this prohibition. Therefore, anyone who claims eligibility for “the Office of President” must, when credibly challenged, establish his qualifications in this regard with sufficient evidence.”

[MHGinTN]

Barack Hussein Obama (if that is in fact his legal name) is applying for the job of President of MY REPUBLIC. I, as a member of We The People have a right to expect him to prodcue proof that he is in fact eligible by Constitutiopnal standard to be sworn in for the office. In this issue, it is upon the applicant to prove his eligibility. And just because Nancy Pelosi endorsed his application for election in each state does not stand as proof he is actually eligible.

[Diggity]

Dey ain’t Natural Born damn it.(g)

[Red Steel]

There are only two categories of US citizens, natural-born and naturalized. A citizen who has not been naturalized is by definition natural-born.

Then I ask you why did they 1898 Supreme Court state that Wong was a 'native born citizen' and not use the term 'natural born citizen' as it is written in the U.S. Constitution.

What's the difference between the two? And if you say they are one in the same cite your source - anyone?

U.S. v. WONG KIM ARK, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=CASE&court=US&vol=169&page=649

[CaribouCrossing]

I may be a “newbie” on this forum, but I’m over 50 years old and have lived long enough to know that when someone is hiding something, there is something to hide.

Your defense against being concerned about Obama’s lack of being forthcoming and truthful about his past and his associations is that WE, THE PEOPLE, of the United States of America have to PROVE that he is eligible. That’s bullcrap.

The highest office in our nation is the presidency. Anyone who wants to become our President and Commander in Chief ought to respect us and our military enough to be upfront and truthful. Obama has not done that.

The fact remains that Obama does NOT want to provide us with his b.c. nor his other records. Why, HawaiianGecko, do YOU believe that Obama is spending so much money and effort to conceal his birth certificate and his other records?

[jacquej]

Can you all help me out here?

Does anyone think the SCOTUS isn’t sharp enough to realize that an “anchor” baby could be elected President, even if his parents took him back to their foreign country for indoctrination & “education”?

Surely they are imaginative enough to ponder the chances of a “manchurian candidate” running for President!

[trumandogz]

In the early 1960’e my siblings who were between 6 and 10 had there own passports and until I was five traveled on my mom's passport. However, her passport had a picture of me and my BC from the US embassy.

Mother Obama could not have gotten Baby Obama into the USA without those papers.

[CaribouCrossing]

By the way, you might want to study up on “narcissim” and “Barack Obama”. It is not narcissistic to want to know everything about our so-called “president-elect”. Barack Obama is a walking, talking, extreme narcissist.

[wintertime]

We have had at least 172 precedents, 43 presidents & 43 vice presidents times two (winning and losing) that have never had to demonstrate their qualifications to suit you & your over inflated ego personally.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

And...everyone of those presidents and vice presidents has dozens upon dozens of witnesses to their newborn infancy. These relatives friends and neighbors knew the mother and father, could point to the home or hospital where this presidential candidate was born. Many attended the christenings. In many cases there are photos of the newborn.

So?...Where are the friends, relatives, photos, and neighbors of Obama who can witness that they visited his mother in the hospital and saw him swaddled in a receiving blanket in the newborn nursery? Where are the witnesses who can name his obstetrician? Who witnessed his coming home from the hospital. Who visited the new mother and baby after his birth?

Geeze! I am in my 60 and there are still many in my life that could tell you that they saw me in the newborn nursery and attended my christening.

Given the **GROSS** lack of person history, lack of friends, neighbors, and other witnesses, it is not at all unreasonable to ask Obama to present a birth certificate. It is **NOT** a burden to present a $10 document. It is **HIGHLY ** suspicious to have multiple law firms blocking its release.

[CaribouCrossing]

Here’s a bit of reading for your “not a newbie” on FR, but a newbie in Psychology 101.

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/the_enigma_of_obama.html

http://www.globalpolitician.com/25109-barack-obama-elections

http://www.investorsiraq.com/showthread.php?t=103109

[SatinDoll]

Where have you been for the last five months when these discussions have been raging on FreeRepublic and numerous other blogs?

If your parents are foreign nationals here legally when you’re born here, then you are a legal citizen. That is covered by the 14th Amendment.

The requirement to be President is that you be a “natural born” citizen. There are two criteria:

1. Your parents must be U.S. citizens;

2. You must be born within the United States or on U.S. territory.

The term natural-born citizen is to be found in Article II:

“No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”

On July 25th, 1787, John Jay wrote to George Washington, then Presiding Officer of the Constitutional Convention:

“Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American Army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.”

John Jay was the First Chief Justice of the United States and it was this letter that caused Clause 5 of Article II to exist. In this letter we can see that the term natural-born citizen was present prior to the writing of the Constitution.

The reason for excluding the U.S. born children of foreign nationals is because of split allegiences and that nations, such as Great Britain, claim the children of its citizens as being born British.

Senator Obama’s father was a British citizen, and Barack Hussein Obama II was registered as a British citizen at birth by his father!

[cynwoody]

Within the context of the original post he would be ruled out because his parents were aliens.

However, the original post was ruled garbage 110 years ago. See US v Wong Kim Ark.

[pissant]

Bullshit. You apply for the job, you are responsible for proving your credentials for the job.

[wintertime]

Rush Limbaugh two weeks ago said the personal attacks on BoB did not work and are not working
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

I listened to the same monologue.

But.....Asking for a birth certificate is not a personal attack. It is defending our Constitution.

[Red Steel]

Then I ask you why did they 1898 Supreme Court state that Wong was a 'native born citizen' and not use the term 'natural born citizen' as it is written in the U.S. Constitution.

What's the difference between the two? And if you say they are one in the same cite your source - anyone?

I'll answer my own question since no one took the bait. ;-)

The answer is under all of your noses. In Article two, section 1., of the U.S. Constitution it mentions two types of citizens. Verbatim, ..."a natural born citizen or a citizen of the United States"....

That's two distinct U.S. citizenships. Native born citizens are citizens of the United States but they are not natural born citizens as stated in the U.S. Constitution.

The third is a foreign citizen or national that becomes a U.S. citizen through the naturalization process.

[HawaiianGecko]

 "The fact remains that Obama does NOT want to provide us with his b.c. nor his other records".  Neither did President Bush.

"Why, HawaiianGecko, do YOU believe that Obama is spending so much money and effort to conceal his birth certificate and his other records?"  It simply doesn't matter why he's spending money, assuming he is.  It is not proof of anything, yet you infer it is.  But let's say you're right.  I'd bet my entire estate that if he whipped out a certified original of his birth certificate that you and the like minded on this thread would find reason to doubt it . 

That in my very humble opinion is why I would spend money to stay out of court and maybe it's his reasoning also.  I'm sure there are many reasons that are not as dubious as you tend to believe.  One, the guy's starting a new job and doesn't have time for this crap.

In fact I prefer he spends time keeping India & Pakistan from having a war.  I prefer he spends his time finishing up the job in Iraq.  I want him to figure out how to stabilize our economy and put it back on the track it was on a couple of years ago.  I want him to spend time listening to arguments for drilling oil off of our coasts and in Alaska so he'll change his mind.

I'm one of those evil people that believe attorneys are worth 100 times their weight in gold.  Keeping out of court is worth it at any cost.  Once you're there regardless of how trivial you may think the case, it costs you much more than the money you spend on lawyers.  The time lost on depositions of you and your highly paid staff is critical.  They work 16 hours per day on a lazy day and you simply cannot afford to have them dickin' around in a conference room not doing the job they were hired to do.  In my business, project completion times are critical.  If you miss them because your staff was being deposed, or you assign staff not nearly as qualified to do their job, you lose.  And that's just my business.  I'd hate to transpose something similar onto the administration tasked with keeping me, my four children, my eight grandchildren, all of my associates, employees, friends and fellow Americans safe and secure.

I've voted a straight GOP ticket all of my life, starting with Nixon, and I'm older than you newbie, for what that's worth.  I voted for McCain and my team lost.  Now I want Obama to succeed at this job.  Why?  I don't want the USA to fail just so I can gloat like a fool and say "I told you so."  Gloating is for losers. I have a business that needs to succeed and it depends on our economy doing well.  I don't make a dime from a bunch of heretics running around turning over rocks looking for airplane tickets to Nairobi in 1961.

In fact I hope Obama is wildly successful.  I don't think he will be, but I can hope.  What the heck to I care if he succeeds at developing electric cars for an overall cheaper price than internal combustion autos.  That would be just fine in my book.  If he can show me a way to get all green electricity to run my homes cheaper than the coal and nuclear plants supplying me a kilowatt for six cents... more power to him.  I don't believe he will, hence, I voted against him, but it doesn't make me want to wish the man bad luck, or make up a foolish story about him, or make me want to drag his butt through the court system when he's supposed to be doing the job the American public elected him to do.

I'm looking out for the good of my country!  Exactly what is it that you are trying to accomplish?

[MHGinTN]

Tripping over your Obama kneepads, eh?

[HawaiianGecko]

 "Here’s a bit of reading for your “not a newbie” on FR, but a newbie in Psychology 101."
That's kind of funny since I've was married to a PhD psychologist for 18 years and then an MD psychiatrist for another 10.  I'm a bit past Psych 101.