Posted on 02/15/2010 2:06:27 AM PST by FTJM
A lot of you have asked if I’ve gotten any more emails. Below the fold, a compilation of emails that have come in. But above the fold, my final word.
Based on the facts, it is very clear that President Obama is our lawfully elected President and the Office of President of the United States of America requires that though we may disagree with him and oppose him, we recognize and respect his position as President — a position entrusted to him by 69,456,897 voting Americans, or 52.9% of the popular vote.
As early at 1350, the British Parliament approved statutes recognizing the rule of jus sanguinis, under which citizens may pass their citizenship by descent to their children at birth, regardless of place. Similarly, in the its first naturalization statute, Congress declared that ‘the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond the sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens.’ 1 Stat. 104 (1790) . . . . Notwithstanding the Supreme Court’s discussion in Wong Kim Ark (1898), a majority of commentators today argue that the Presidential Eligibility Clause incorporates both the common-law and English statutory principles, and that therefore, Michigan Governor George Romney, who was born to American parents outside of the United States, was eligible to seek the Presidency in 1968.
Meese, Edward, Heritage Guide to the Constitution, p. 190 (2005).
Even were the American public to fall under the belief that Barack Obama was born in a foreign country and 49 years ago his associates fabricated a narrative, a birth record, and placed birth announcements in both the Honolulu Advertiser and the Star Bulletin on August 4, 1961, to ensure that 49 years later he could become President of the United States, it is undisputed that Barack Obama’s mother is and has always been an American citizen. Therefore Barack Obama is and has always been an American citizen.
The leaps of logic and reason to arrive at such a conspiracy are unbefitting the credibility of anyone and not worthy of further discussion. Notwithstanding the same, no American should ever sanction what would amount to a judicial coup — the removal of the President of the United States after 52.9% of the American public instructed their Electoral College representatives to place their votes for him. The time to even be willing to entertain these issues from those who claim a conspiracy has long past.
A conservative movement worthy of leading this nation must be willing to cast aside those who, for whatever reason, cannot and will not be persuaded that the President is our legitimately, constitutionally elected President.
Umm - when you put a piece of paper in a scanner, it is flattened out - the fold lines disappear.
Horse pucky!
No, but if Obama, Jr. was born on U.S. soil, he is a natural-born U.S. Citizen, and satisfies that qualification for POTUS, unless his parents were here in an official diplomatic role for a foreign country or as members of an occupying force.
Like it or not, that's the way it is in America today, and no court will touch the issue of interpreting the term "Natural Born Citizen" as written in the Constitution. There will be no de Vatellian emanation of a penumbra -- because citizenship issues are delegated to Congress, and the Court therefore "lacks power."
As Justice Scalia wrote, with Justice Thomas concurring:
"I remain of the view that the Court lacks power to provide relief of the sort requested in this suit— namely, conferral of citizenship on a basis other than that prescribed by Congress. See Miller v. Albright, 523 U. S. 420, 452 (1998) (SCALIA, J., concurring in judgment).
Nguyen & Boulais v. INS, (2001) (SCALIA, J., with THOMAS, C., concurring in judgment).
"The complaint must be dismissed because the Court has no power to provide the relief requested: conferral of citizenship on a basis other than that prescribed by Congress.
"The Constitution “contemplates two sources of citizenship, and two only: birth and naturalization.” United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U. S. 649, 702 (1898). Under the Fourteenth Amendment, “[e]very person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, becomes at once a citizen of the United States, and needs no naturalization.”
(Miller v. Albright, 523 U. S. 420, 452 (1998) (SCALIA, J., with THOMAS, C., concurring in judgment).
Flame away. I have better things to do right now.
Unfortunately this is something we'll never know. Fraudulent ballots compliments of ACORN likely number in the millions.
Erickson's stand basically states that we should just “trust” Obama in regards to his past. To question him is “just crazy”, as defined by the LEFT. Using that same logic, we should trust Obama in regards to his stated agenda as POTUS. He is not a Socialist and is not raising taxes on anyone but those who make over $250,000 a year. To questions him is “just crazy” too.
We've seen deception by leaders in the Socialist movement before (and the media covering up), the most recent example being John and Elizabeth Edwards. The point that Erickson has now taken this stance, using some lame logic taken directly from Bill O’Reilly (the newspaper announcements of birth), should make us all question whether Erickson understands the issue or if he is actually an example of what Ziegler referred to.
I agree that many birthers are not racists, but there are also sites and individuals that are blatantly racist, anti-semitic and generally toxic that support the birther issue, and/or attach themselves to the tea party movement.
Here's an example of one them at Breitbart's Big Government site, and how the media uses people such as this to paint the tea party.
You think if one would be willing to give the “last word” on a subject, they’d at least be remotely familiar with the subject matter.
My final thought on Redstate:
What’s Redstate, and who cares?
Well, maybe that was two thoughts...
Re: Is Connecticut close to some of the schools Obama supposedly attended?
Dead-center between Columbia College and Harvard Law School.
And still, the Obama document cover up continues.
re: Your post 103
You are conflating citizenship with eligibility. They are not the same.
It then draws a line at never-resident fathers. An odd place to draw the line if the intent were elsewhere.
And to think that you waited a whole month since 2010-1-08 in order to make that stupid remark!!!
Good Point.
Any evidence that zer0 lived there (CT)?
No.
Definitely an understatement.
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.