Posted on 07/27/2009 7:03:39 PM PDT by pissant
“No conspiracy in 1961, just a mother wanting her baby to be an American citizen. Simple
More likely a grandmother wanting her grandchild to be a US Citizen.”
********************
Problem with this story is even if the birther stories were true, Obama would have been at the very least a resident legal alien. I don’t know of anyone who was raised in this country from infancy who couldn’t pass the citizenship test. So the Vast Conspiracy did all this - smuggling the infant Obama past Customs & Immigration, committing perjury, planting birth listings in the newspapers - just to avoid a test? Today they don’t even give the test to foreign=born adoptees anymore. Waste of time.
“Her statement is meaningless because Hawaiian law permitted almost anyone to declare a baby, a child or even themselves as Hawaiian born - even years after the supposed birth.”
***************
Why haven’t the birthers been able to bring forward even one person who is foreign-born but was issued a Hawaii COLB stating Hawaii as place of birth? Are they all part of the Vast Conspiracy?
How do ou know that?
there is an image of a COLB issued to a chinese born communist posted on the uh-oh thread with 8,000 posts. It has received a fair amount of attention here.
“there is an image of a COLB issued to a chinese born communist posted on the uh-oh thread with 8,000 posts. It has received a fair amount of attention here.”
******************
If you’re referring to Sun Yat-sen, he obtained, by perjured testimony, a Certificate (NOT Certification) of Hawaiian Birth from the Territory of Hawaii in 1904. This is not germane to the allegation that Hawaii would issue, AS POLICY, COLB’s to foreign-born which declare Hawaii as place of birth. If true, there would be many such persons. Where are they?
BTW, Sun Yat-sen was not a Communist. He co-founded the Kuomintang Party (Nationalist) Party, which was Chiang Kai-shek’s party. Sun Yat-sen was also a member of the Congregationalist Church.
LOL..priceless.
Yes, why bother with the Constitution, the law and the Courts? No reason to let the actual document be put forward, be examined by foresnic experts and weighed as actual evidence. Just let the doctor pronounce. It can be cited as binding precedent by the Supreme Court henceforward. Has this woman even read the Constitution?
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.