Posted on 12/03/2008 8:14:35 AM PST by Scythian
This birth certificate issue has been going on for some time now and for those hoping for some kind of dramatic outcome you are in for another big disappointment.
First, there is always the chance that there is a valid birth certificate proving Obama to be a US citizen.
Second, enough time has passed such that the Obama cult has manufactured and installed a phony certificate that will re-route us back up to option 1 above, he will have a valid certificate. Who do you think works in these kinds of government offices? They're all democrats.
Third, no court is going to force Obama to prove himself to be a citizen, the burden is on those making the accusation that he is not a citizen. A criminal doesn't have to prove he didn't commit a crime, the state has to prove that he did.
=================================
Flame on, and sorry for the Vanity, but this is driving me nutz, this issue gets my hopes up but then common sense dashes my hope on the rocks, and this now is a daily occurrence. You are going to find a valid certificate at the end of this road if you are lucky enough to get a judge to demand it, and that is very unlikely, whether the certificate be real or phony it won't matter, and will never be able to proven either way.
is scotus definition of NBC makes obama eligible, and his BC (confirmed valid by Hawaii), then there is no damage whatsoever to BHO.
***You need to work on your writing. It looks like your sentences were cut off. Please elucidate.
the real damage will be to the BC movement. next time we start to challenge his policies and programs, we shall be reminded of this.
***Why would zer0bama spend a cool $Million just to discredit BC movement? If that’s the game, the supreme court will be calling his judgement into question because a legitimate constitutional issue has been raised. So his trap should have been set long ago.
Then we are talking about both a civil matter that he prove his elibility as is his burden and a criminal matter related to forgery and who knows how many more charges that could follow.
Thanks for replying. After viewing a few of your posts I can now safely ignore them. Please consider taking a writing class while you are consulting local lawyers.
Here's my basic premise behind the delay, secrecy and distortion.
Win the nomination - check
Win the general election - check
Be elected in Electoral College - pending, but so far a certainty
Be inaugurated - future, but so far a certainty
After Barry Soetoro has been inagurated:
Then let it be found out that he is ineligible. The democRAT controlled House of Representatives declines to impeach him, or the senate refuses to convict.
There are riots and general mayhem. Martial Law is talked about, but the constitutional convention is proposed to quell the violence.
Some background on 1787. In May 1786, Charles Pinckney of South Carolina proposed that Congress revise the Articles of Confederation.
Article 13 Declares that the Articles are perpetual, and can only be altered by approval of Congress with ratification by all the state legislatures.
The states' representatives to the Constitutional Convention in Philadelphia were only authorized to amend the Articles of Confederation, the representatives held secret, closed-door sessions and wrote a new constitution.
So..... such a thing is not without precedent.
Signed up today just to play CoLB Troll?
We're already in shiite hole, so why not. We have nothing lose as we have just about lost our country and Constitution to race-baiting thugs and media quislings. It's not like the white race and America can possibly be smeared anymore than it already has. I mean, if there was ever a time to act and fight the liberals it would be right before going over the cliff into oblivion.
So do I. But Denofrio's claims regarding natural born citizenship are laughable.
Or, his father, from Africa, knowing limited English, filling out paper work at the hospital, didn't understand the proper American racial classification terms and just filled out what he thought was appropriate.
LOL! Back to square #1. I think that’s called circular reasoning.
Perhaps this can help you: http://federalistblog.us/2008/11/natural-born_citizen_defined.html
Perhaps this can help you: http://federalistblog.us/2008/11/natural-born_citizen_defined.html
Obama is not the President.
He is not even yet elected by the electoral college.
The SCOTUS is within their right to subpoena Obama’s original birth records whether he is President of the United States, or President of his local rotary club.
Let's hope that they do so if necessary to uncover the facts regarding his natural born citizenship status.
I wouldn’t place any faith in the Electoral College to do the right thing. Here’s an example. In this article, the author received a response from an EC who gave no thought whatsoever to her constitutional duty. I tried to post it as its own thread but it is from NewsWithViews, which apparently is not welcome on FR.
THAT DÉJÀ VU FEELING
By Lynn Stuter
December 2, 2008
NewsWithViews.com
http://www.newswithviews.com/Stuter/stuter132.htm
An estimated 67,000,000 Americans, we are told, voted for Barack Hussein Obama on November 4, 2008. A landslide we are told; a mandate for change we are told.
The total population of the United States, according to the 2008 U.S. Census bureau estimates, is approximately 306,000,000. When we compare the number of votes for Obama to the total population, the percent who voted for Obama is 21.9%; hardly a mandate for change; certainly not a mandate for change of the type Comrade Obama has in mind.
In total, an estimated 130,000,000 Americans voted; 42.5% of the total population; more an indication of the apathy that leads to the loss of freedom and destruction of any nation.
Barack Hussein Obama is now, at every opportunity, appearing before the cameras from behind a podium on which appears a sign, The Office of President-Elect.
Never heard of the Office of President-Elect before; must be something new. The truth is that this is just another ploy to make Americans believe the election is over. It is far from over.
Barack Hussein Obama does not become President-Elect Obama until the Electoral College meets and votes on December 15, 2008.
More and more Americans are becoming concerned by the fact that Barack Hussein Obama may not be eligible to the office of president. More and more articles are appearing on internet sites concerning this issue. While the mainstream media continually and erroneously refers to the fraudulent document released by the Obama camp as a birth certificate and tries to play down the growing concerns with fluff pieces like the one done by Pete Williams of NBC, the fact still remains that Obama has yet to prove his eligibility. Causing further concern is a Hawaiian law that allows for the issuing of birth certificates to individuals who are foreign nationals:
[§338-17.8] Certificates for children born out of State. (a) Upon application of an adult or the legal parents of a minor child, the director of health shall issue a birth certificate for such adult or minor, provided that proof has been submitted to the director of health that the legal parents of such individual while living without the Territory or State of Hawaii had declared the Territory or State of Hawaii as their legal residence for at least one year immediately preceding the birth or adoption of such child.
On October 31, 2008, Dr Chiyome Fukino, Department of Health, Hawaii, issued a press release in which she stated, in part:
Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawaii, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawaii State Department of Health has Sen. Obamas original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures.
On October 31, 2008, the Associated Press reported the following:
Health Department Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said Friday she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama’s original birth certificate.
Notice that neither the actual press release nor the Associated Press article state that Obama was born in Hawaii or that he is an American by birth; both items were left to the reader to assume: if there is a birth certificate on file with the State of Hawaii then Obama must be a natural born citizen. That, however, is not an assumption that should be made, considering §338-17.8 of the Hawaii Revised Statutes.
After my last article, I received a couple of responses that bear mention. One response stated the FBI has a file on Barack Obama that proves he is not an American citizen; the other stated that an individual employed by the Hawaii Department of Health came forward, after the non-answer press release of Dr Chiyome Fukino, and stated that there were two pieces of paper in the file holding Obamas birth certificate; that the second piece of paper states Obama was born in Kenya. It is doubtful the FBI would be willing to turn over their file on Obama; and thus far the State of Hawaii has steadfastly refused to give audience to Obamas vault copy Hawaii birth certificate. Thus neither claim can be substantiated.
Not only has Barack Hussein Obama not produced his vault copy Hawaii birth certificate but the legitimacy of his selective service registration has now come into question. At the aforementioned link, Debbie Schlussel explains why Obamas selective service registration documents are bogus. According to an article written by Linda Bentley of the Sonoran News,
Failure for men to register with Selective Services before turning 26, even if not prosecuted, will render them ineligible for student financial aid, U.S. citizenship, federal job training, jobs in the executive branch of the federal government and the U.S. Postal Service.
Advertisement
On December 1st and 3rd, a full page Open Letter to Barack Hussein Obama, written by Bob Schulz of We the People Foundation, is scheduled to be published in the Chicago Tribune. The open letter makes apparent the constitutional crisis and chaos that will ensue if this matter is not resolved before January 20, 2009,
1 - You (referring to Barack Obama) would always be viewed by many Americans as a poseur - a usurper.
2 - As a usurper, you would be unable to take the required Oath or Affirmation on January 20 without committing the crime of perjury or false swearing, for being ineligible you cannot faithfully execute the Office of the President of the United States.
3 - You would be entitled to no allegiance, obedience or support from the People.
4 - The Armed Forces would be under no legal obligation to remain obedient to you.
5 - No civilian in the Executive Branch would be required to obey any of your proclamations, Executive Orders or directives, as such orders would be legally void.
6 - Your appointments of Judges to the Supreme Court would be void.
7 - Congress would not be able to pass any needed legislation because it would not be able to acquire the signature of a bona fide President.
8 - Congress would be unable to remove you, a usurper, from the Office of the President on Impeachment, inviting certain political chaos including a potential for armed conflicts within the General Government or among the States and the People to effect the removal of such a usurper.
Meanwhile, the United States Justice Foundation has thrown down the gauntlet so to speak; they pledge to file lawsuit after lawsuit challenging Obamas authority if Obamas eligibility to the office of president is not cleared up before January 20, 2009. The United States Justice Foundation has also filed a lawsuit in California on behalf of Alan Keyes, Wiley S. Drake and Markham Robinson of the American Independent Party concerning Obamas eligibility to the office of president. The lawsuit seeks to bar the meeting of the Electoral College in California on December 15, 2008, until said time as Obamas eligibility to the office of president is proven.
In a full page ad, appearing in the Washington Times on November 17, 2008, Phillip Berg, the Pennsylvania attorney whose case now stands before the U.S. Supreme Court, states,
Electors are sworn to uphold it (the Constitution) with their vote on December 15th in the Electoral College. But they must first know for sure that the candidates meet the Constitutional requirements for the office of President beginning with being a natural born citizen.
An article appeared on WorldNetDaily.com on November 24, 2008 entitled, Proofin the Prez: Whos in Charge. According to this article and Herb Titus, constitutional attorney,it is the duty of the electors to investigate the citizenship issue.
With that in mind, and believing that I should do everything within my power to see the question of Obamas eligibility to the office of president was addressed, I researched and put together a seven page, well-documented paper, complete with clickable links, outlining the problems and the questions concerning Obamas eligibility to the office of president. I sent the document to my electors whose names I obtained from the Secretary of States office. I included a cover letter in which I stated,
A growing number of American citizens are questioning whether president-elect Barack Hussein Obama is eligible to the office of president. The controversy could be cleared up by Barack Obama producing his legal birth certificate. To date he has refused to do so.
So far several suits have been dismissed nation-wide not on merit but because the court ruled the person or persons did not have standing to bring the suit; they could not show they were damaged by his election.
I am requesting that you examine closely the information provided below before you vote on December 15, 2008. If, after being elected president, Barack Hussein Obama is found to be, in fact, ineligible, the constitutional crisis will be far reaching.
The first duty of every Elector is to the Constitution.
The next morning, I received the following response from one of the Electors:
I have put you on my spam service. I will NO longer accept mail from you. I have signed an affadavit that I will vote for my parties candidate. You are asking me to go against this affadavit which not only would cause a large monetary fine but would go against the promise I made in Person to well over 1000 people.
In asking me to go against my written pledge which our state requires you areencourage me to do an illegal thing.
Most of all, I think that President-elect Obama is one of the best things to ever happen to our country. As a life long Democrat and a bi racial son who was killed in action as a soldier; it is my HONOR to cast my electoral vote for him.
As a Christian I ask you not to attempt to correspond now or in the future.
This is exactly as received, name redacted. I, of course, did not respond. My e-mail to this Elector was intended to educate her; either she would choose to be educated or she would choose not to be educated; arguing with her would be of little benefit.
This individual stated her reasons for voting for Barack Hussein Obama. She
1. thinks that President-elect Obama is one of the best things to ever happen to our country;
2. is a life-long Democrat; and
3. had a bi-racial son who was killed in action as a soldier.
Not one mention of her duty to uphold the Constitution of the United States of America.
As a matter of interest, I researched Washington State law concerning Electors and their pledges. RCW 29A.56.320 states, in part:
Each presidential elector shall execute and file with the secretary of state a pledge that, as an elector, he or she will vote for the candidates nominated by that party.
In the matter of a presidential election, the U.S. Constitution trumps state laws and requirements. That the State of Washington requires this Elector to vote for Obama, irrespective of the fact that he may not be eligible to the office of president, violates the U.S. Constitution. Bluntly speaking, the State of Washington cannot require, nor can a political party require, an Elector to vote for someone whose nomination by their party violates the United States Constitution.
RCW 29A.56.340 makes the authority of the U.S. Constitution over the state constitution or laws apparent:
When all of the electors have appeared and the vacancies have been filled they shall constitute the college of electors of the state of Washington, and shall proceed to perform the duties required of them by the Constitution and laws of the United States.
Despite this Electors pledge, her first duty is to the U.S. Constitution.
For someone who obviously voted for Obama, believing he would end the illegal invasion of Iraq, one has to wonder what her reaction was to the news that Barack Obama plans to retain Bushs Secretary of Defense, Bob Gates, as his Secretary of Defense.
And so it is with the incoming (maybe) Obama Administration. People are watching on a daily basis as Obamathe man of changeappoints more and more Washington insiders and former Clinton cabinet members, aides, etc, to his administration, not to mention Bob Gates as his Secretary of Defense.
The old adage the more things change, the more they stay the same comes to mind.
One has to wonder at what point will the Obama supporters get the déjà vu feeling theyve been deceived by a master manipulator, a smooth talking con man, who is already reneging on campaign promises he knew he couldnt keep but that sounded good in the name of change.
As a no-name, not-important citizen of these United Statesone of those little people Obama pledged, time and again, to fight forI add my voice to that of thousands of other Americans: Barack Hussein Obama, if you have nothing to hide, produce your birth certificate!
© 2008 Lynn M. Stuter - All Rights Reserved
E-mail This Page
Sign Up For Free E-Mail Alerts
Activist and researcher, Stuter has spent the last fifteen years researching systems theory and systems philosophy with a particular emphasis on education as it pertains to achieving the sustainable global environment. She home schooled two daughters. She has worked with legislators, both state and federal, on issues pertaining to systems governance, the sustainable global environment and education reform. She networks nationwide with other researchers and a growing body of citizens concerned with the transformation of our nation from a Constitutional Republic to a participatory democracy. She has traveled the United States and lived overseas.
Web site: www.learn-usa.com
E-Mail: lmstuter@learn-usa.com
I’ve read that before. That doesn’t trump current law as posted in #174, it is simply an opinion piece relating law at the time of writing to British Common Law. What is in #174 is current US citizenship definitions, as authorized Article 1, section 8 of the US Constitution authorizing congress to define those standards. We are bound by that, not British Common Law.
Then you won’t mind showing us—from the thread and article I linked to—where he’s in error. ... We’ll wait for you to read the pertinent data instead of just popping off from your n00b mouth.
Regardless of skin color, he would have been made a laughing stock 30+ years ago, if he had tried this stunt with his lack of experience and tons of questions about his past.
You forgot to call him a CoLB troll.
Yes, and it was re-written in 1834, and in 1852, and in 1896, and in 1908, etc.
But each time it has been re-done it has defined a natural born citizen as one that was born to a natural born citizen even on foreign soil.
The 1952 act, which would have covered Obama at the time of his birth, says the same.
Was his mother a Natural Born citizen? Yes.
Then Barack Obama is a Natural Born citizen, whether born in Hawaii, Kenya or on the Moon.
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.