Posted on 12/13/2009 7:34:16 PM PST by SeekAndFind
Yep. And it provided that children born out of wedlock to BO SR and non- British mother, outside of of the Empire, were not British citizens.
You are a maroon.
What? You you use a Bugs Bunny insult on me, and don't jump straight to "OBot" "Troll" or "Traitor"? Maybe there hope for you.
Doesn't it give you any doubt, even a small nagging, doubt at the back of your mind, that we are discussing statutory British law? Does the United States Constitution really place the determination of just who is a natural born American in the hands of foreign powers?
By that logic, if BO's daddy was from a nation that denies citizenship to kids born abroad to a foreign mother, such as say, Japan, then BO (Benjiro Okada?)would not be a dual citizen, and could be President.
Blacks voted for Obama because he is black, sounds like “Black Tribalism” to me.
Me thinks not either. :)
I want reparations for the cost of the slaves they freed from Great Grandpa’s plantation. They’d probably classify it as antique farm equipment and only give me pennies on the dollar. < / Sarcasm >
Ogabe admits he’s a dual born citizen and you go to bat for him saying he isn’t? That sez it all Obot.
The Natural Born Citizen requirement is in the Constitution for national security reasons. Period. People don’t have a right to the office. Not even Natural Born Citizens.
I take it you’re an hysterical Obama rumpswab because you’re not a natural born citizen yourself? That’s what I thought.
So no one, not even Natural Born Citizens, as defined by Electric Graffiti, can be President?
The Natural Born Citizen requirement is in the Constitution for national security reasons. Period.
You ought to read up on some history someday. The Founding Fathers, born and bred English Subjects, all still rebelled against England. The also allowed any citizen of the United States when the Constitution was adopted, even if they had just gotten off the boat, to be President. Art. 2 Section 1.
How does that square with your "national security reasons"?
It doesn't.
The requirement that a President be either present in the United States, in 1787, or natural born, has to do with the English Civil War(s) of the 1640s.
The Framers saw what they did through the prism of the English Civil War. They wanted to rid them selves of the Monarchy, while avoiding three things that happened when the English overthrew Charles I.
The first thing, was the successful rebel armies did not stop at defeating the King, but led by their leading general, Oliver Cromwell, overthrew Parliament and set up a military dictatorship. We came a lot closer to that than most realize -- fortunately George Washington did not want to be dictator, and faced down those of his his officers who were openly contemplating disposing of the Continental Congress at the end of the Revolutionary War. After getting his officers to back down, Washington surrendered his commission to the Continental Congress.
The Framers, having dodged the first bullet, made sure that the Constitution divided the military, so that the President commanded it, and Congress held the purse strings, so neither could use the armed forces to pull a Cromwell.
The second thing was that that established English society was, for a time, overthrown by the middle and lower class. The framers provided that both the Senate, and the Electors who chose the President, would be chosen by State Legislatures, and not by the public at large. This was very intentionally done to give men of property disproportionate influence in the United States government.
The third thing was that, after more than a decade in exile, Charles I's boy, Charles Stuart, reclaimed the throne as Charles II, and had most all of the men who had over thrown his father executed, many by being hung, drawn and quartered as traitors (think the last five minutes of Braveheart).
The 13 former colonies were a mess in 1787, and the Loyalists, although beaten, were far from out. No one former colony could have reverted to British rule without being invaded by its neighbors. But what if the new, (at this time still proposed) United States government was taken over by Loyalists? Worse, what if George III sent a son over to lead the Loyalists, and that son became President?
Such a Princeling could have offered a lot, economically. Loans, an end to the trade barriers put in place when the 13 states ceased being British colonies, protection by the Royal Navy, bribes, and a guarantee of future peace. The Founding fathers didn't know, in 1787, that the French Revolution was about to come along and tie up the British Army and Royal Navy, for a quarter of a century.
Is all of that far fetched? In hindsight, yes, George III did not have a son with a tenth of the talent it would taken to pull off such a feat. But the Framers, mindful of how the Englishmen who had set up their republic had lived to see their entrails pulled out of the bodies by the restored Charles II, were taking no chances. So they flatly forbade any foreign born person, not already present, from ever being President, and placed lesser restrictions on them becoming Senators (nine years) and Representatives (seven years).
Given all that, the "natural born" requirement of the Constitution is not meant to be some paper work trap, but rather a requirement that the President be an American from birth. John McCain, born in Panama, to two American Citizens, and BO, born to an American mother in the State of Hawaii, both meet the requirement.
I take it you’re an hysterical Obama rumpswab because you’re not a natural born citizen yourself? That’s what I thought.
Well, I am both an American, and a Texan.
“Blazing Saddles” flashback?
Which he was.
O Sr. wives in another country were immaterial. They were wed and divorced in America. The divorce proceeding is legal evidence of a legal marriage.
Had Sr's other wives had any standing in law in our country, the marriage would have been annulled.
I didn't read past your claim that the Natural Born Citizen requirement in Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution was not a national security issue. It's such an absurd statement only a non-natural born 'citizen' Obot could have uttered something so ridiculus. The founders put those REQUIREMENTS TO ELIGIBILITY in the Constitution as a suggestion. Right? *bong hit* They really didn't mean it. After all, The Constitution is a living and breathing document. 'Is' doesn't really mean 'is' /s
On July 25, 1787, John Jay wrote to George Washington, a delegate to the Constitutional Convention:
"Permit me to hint, whether it would not be wise & seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in chief of the american army shall not be given to, nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen."
US Constitution (adopted September 17, 1787) Article II, Section 1, Clause 5
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.
From Joesph Story:
§ 1473. It is indispensable, too, that the president should be a natural born citizen of the United States; or a citizen at the adoption of the constitution, and for fourteen years before his election.
This permission of a naturalized citizen to become president is an exception from the great fundamental policy of all governments, to exclude foreign influence from their executive councils and duties. It was doubtless introduced (for it has now become by lapse of time merely nominal, and will soon become wholly extinct) out of respect to those distinguished revolutionary patriots, who were born in a foreign land, and yet had entitled themselves to high honours in their adopted country.
A positive exclusion of them from the office would have been unjust to their merits, and painful to their sensibilities. But the general propriety of the exclusion of foreigners, in common cases, will scarcely be doubted by any sound statesman. It cuts off all chances for ambitious foreigners, who might otherwise be intriguing for the office; and interposes a barrier against those corrupt interferences of foreign governments in executive elections, which have inflicted the most serious evils upon the elective monarchies of Europe. Germany, Poland, and even the pontificate of Rome, are sad, but instructive examples of the enduring mischiefs arising from this source. [Source]
Background of this racist, alien-hating, homophobe. From Wiki:
Joseph Story (September 18, 1779 – September 10, 1845) was an American lawyer and jurist who served on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1811 to 1845.
He is most remembered today for his opinions in Martin v. Hunter's Lessee and The Amistad, along with his magisterial Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, first published in 1833. Dominating the field in the 19th century, this work is one of the chief cornerstones of early American jurisprudence.
It is the first comprehensive treatise ever written on the U.S. Constitution, and remains a great source of historical information of the formation and early struggles to define the American republic.
Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows that the natural born citizen requirement was for national security. There is no other reason to include it as a requirement for eligibility.
Article 2 Section 1 Clause 5 of the US Constitution requires the President to be a natural born citizen.
This is an attribute only available at birth.
Whether a person (who admits having been) born subject to the laws of a foreign power can become Commander In Chief of the US armed forces is a genuine and necessary question of law, not a conspiracy theory.
POTUS REQUIREMENTS ARE NATIONAL SECURITY MEASURES.
The Constitutional requirements to be POTUS are not rights, they are national security measures. Even natural born citizens who fail to meet the other requirements cannot be President. For example, a 33-year-old natural born citizen cannot be President. But 35-year-old men have no more rights than 33-year-old men. Understand? Requirements are not rights.
Leo C. Donofrio, Citizen Attorney http://naturalborncitizen.worpdress.com/
I’m just tired of being politically correct. When I speak my mind I’m called a racist, might as well wiz on the bastigs a little.
The last thing anyone wants is for “white tribalism” to get riled up.
You know how those whites are.
Oh, you know me to not be a natural born citizen? Gee, I'll have to ask my family why they went to all the trouble of getting a fake, long form, typed with an old fashioned ribbon type writer, birth certificate showing I was born at the Baptist Hospital in San Antonio, Texas.
/sarcasm
The point, which I know you, a dyed in the wool (polyester leisure suit?) Birther, will never get, is that no one, but the most blazing eyed, Obama hating fanatics, thinks that a person born to an American mother, in one of the several states, is also so clearly, and unarguably an "ambitious foreigner(s), who might otherwise be intriguing for the office" and hence excluded from the Presidency under Art. II. Is Obama an American hating Lefty who is at best indifferent to, and at worst hostile to, our national security? I think so. But we had something called an election, and he won.
Oh, and if you had taken the time to read, with understanding, the source you quoted, you would see that it exactly supports my point, not yours. It says that Art. II. interposes a barrier against those corrupt interferences of foreign governments in executive elections, which have inflicted the most serious evils upon the elective monarchies of Europe. Germany, Poland, and even the pontificate of Rome. In other words, the purpose of requiring citizenship from birth is to keep foreign governments from sending foreign guys here to run for President. It is not to keep someone born here from running for President.
Again, I know I won't convince you. You will continue to believe that you are a brave (insert your gender here), upholding our rights by publicly asserting an unwanted truth, and suffering the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune because of it. Fine. The world needs keyboard commandos too.
But Freepers who want to actually do something, I mean something constructive for conservatism, and not destructive, like helping BO and the MSM smear conservatives as paranoid cry babies, need to get involved. Who is your Republican Precinct Chair? Who is the County Chair? Who is charge of the Ballot Security Committee for your County?
Find out. Run for some party office, especially if there is vacancy, or the incumbent is useless. Get trained as a poll watcher, then take a day off work to monitor early voting. Volunteer to work as a poll watcher on election day. Find out who is in charge of signs, or block walking, and volunteer for that. And if nobody is in charge, then appoint yourself and get some help. Get a stack of voter registration cards, and make sure right thinking people are registered to vote. Check at Church, or the VFW Hall, for elderly folks who need help getting a mail in ballot, or a ride to the polls.
All of that helps. Spinning conspiracy theories, and waiting and hoping for day the Supreme Court, or John Wayne, or Batman comes along, grabs BO by the collar and says "You aren't President" then drags him off to Kenya, doesn't help anyone but BO.
Well, we all know Matthews is a “tootsie”.
Really? So married Brits, Canadians and Aussies can dissolve their marriages, and make them just go away, by setting foot here in the US? They are free to enter into legally valid marriages here, notwithstanding the fact that they are already married? I must have been fishing the day they taught that at law school.
The divorce proceeding is legal evidence of a legal marriage. Certainly. Just like a forged promissory note is legal evidence of a legal debt... before it is established that the promissory note was in fact forged.
Had Sr's other wives had any standing in law in our country, the marriage would have been annulled Can you post a PDF of the return of service of citation, showing that the other wives were made a part of the divorce? No? If you had been BO Sr's lawyer, would you have advised him to inform the Court that the marriage should be annulled, as he had committed bigamy by attempting to marry an American woman?
Sometimes a party stipulates to the existence of a marriage for fear of criminal prosecution if he does not. In Texas we have common law marriage. Back when I did family law, I had more than one guy come in who was being sued for divorce, who told me he wasn't married, he just had a girl friend. Does she have any kids that aren't yours? I would ask. Yes. Did you ever file your income tax return as a married couple, so that you could claim her kids were part of your household, and get earned income credit money back from the IRS? Yes.
I would then have a talk with my client about how holding yourself out as a married couple, such as by filing a joint tax return, was an element of a common law marriage, and that the joint tax return was evidence of a common law marriage. And about how if I was able to prove, at some expense, that there was no common law marriage, I would also be be proving that my client had committed Federal income tax fraud, by swearing that he was married when he filed his tax return. Is that how he wanted to proceed, or, upon reflection, did my client think that maybe had had a common law marriage after all, and was OK with getting a divorce?
I never had one ask me to contest the issue of marriage in court.
What others would have or could have done is immaterial. Promissory notes and Texas common law marriages are immaterial.
The matter at hand is what SHE choose to do, which was to force the State to recognize the marriage as legal by petitioning the State to grant the divorce.
1) Natural Born Citizen REQUIREMENT FOR ELIGIBILITY was put in the Constitution for national security reasons. To prevent possible foreign influences with OUR COMMANDER IN CHIEF. As if that needs to be said.
2) Ogabe, under his own admission, was a DUAL BORN CITIZEN.
This is from Barry's own State Dept.:
"The U.S. Government recognizes that dual nationality exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. citizens may conflict with U.S. law, and dual nationality may limit U.S. Government efforts to assist citizens abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person's allegiance. "Source
Do you think the language would have been stronger if they thought that a dual national [In Barry's case a quad-national] would ever become Commander and chief of our Armed Forces? /sarc
3) Since we have NO RECORDS of any kind to establish where he was born, it's quite possible he may not even be a citizen. Unless he was naturalized later on.
4) What we know is that Barry Soetoro is not a Natural Born Citizen, PERIOD. As required for eligibility under the SUPREME LAW OF THE LAND. What we don't know is whether or not he's an illegal alien, what his legal name is, who paid for his schooling, was he a foreign national when he attended college, on and on.
America we have nothing to worry about really. To clear up any uncertainty and fear the American people may have had about the background of the Commander in Chief, Obama provided the media, the courts, and anyone who inquired all his missing records /suckers
1 Certified copy of original birth certificate
2 Columbia University transcripts
3 Columbia thesis paper
4 Campaign donor analysis requested by 7 major watchdog groups
5 Harvard University transcripts
6 Illinois State Senate records
7 Illinois State Senate schedule
8 Law practice client list and billing records/summary
9 Locations and names of all half-siblings and step-mother
10 Medical records (only the one page summary released so far)
11 Occidental College Transcripts
12 Parent’s marriage Certificate
13 Record of baptism
14 Selective Service registration records
15 Schedules for trips outside of the United States before 2007
16 Passport records for all passports
17 Scholarly articles
18 SAT and LSAT test scores
19 Access to his grandmother in Kenya
20 List of all campaign workers that are lobbyists
21 Punahou grade school records
22 Noelani Kindergarten records are oddly missing from the the State of Hawaii Department of Education.
Obama was 'reared' by communists like Frank Marshall Davis. Most of the people he's decided to associate with are anti-American marxists, muslims, communists, and terrorists.
Obama is a NATIONAL SECURITY THREAT. He is both a 'foreign' and 'domestic' enemy of the Constitution.
Obama appreciates your efforts in supporting his USURPATION and destruction of America. Carrying on O'rumpswab /s
Vattel in Bk 1 Sec 212, states the following.
§ 212. Citizens and natives.
"The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.
The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it.
The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born.
I say, that, in order to be of the country,it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country."
Is there any question why the founders put the Natural Born Citizen requirement clause in the Constitution?
Texans don't toss monkey doodle.
Boy, your sure showed me, by using the mighty power of CAPS LOCK, your arguments become irrefutable.
Go ahead, indulge in your fantasy that you are doing something besides wasting band width, and boosting BO, with your Birtherism Bravo Sierra. Dream up some explanation for why Ted Olson, Andrew McCarthy, Free Republic's Congressman Billy Bob, and all the millions of other Republican lawyers in the country have called BS on Birtherism, leaving the likes of Orly Taitz to carry your banner into court. Feel a tingle run down your leg as you visualize the uniformed Secret Service officers stacking BO and Michelle's stuff on the curb on Pennsylvania Avenue just as soon as Birtherism prevails, and they are kicked out of the White House.
Meantime, in the real world, we have an election coming up in 322 days. Freepers who want to make a difference will get involved in that election.
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.