My final thought on the birther issue

Red State ^ | February 14, 2010 | Erick Erickson

[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.

[Jude in WV]

great post!

[rxsid]

"Obama is hiding many things; we’re all certain of that."

No doubt about that!

HOW CAN A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN'S STATUS BE "GOVERNED" BY GREAT BRITAIN?

 

“When Barack Obama Jr. was born on Aug. 4,1961, in Honolulu, Kenya was a British colony, still part of the United Kingdom’s dwindling empire. As a Kenyan native, Barack Obama Sr. was a British subject whose citizenship status was governed by The British Nationality Act of 1948. That same act governed the status of Obama Sr.‘s children.

http://fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate.html

 

It can't. Of course not. Yet, right there, on his campaign web site F.T.S., it's stated that a foreign government "governed" Barry from birth and the reason it did, was that Barry inherited that foreign citizenship by way of his foreign national father (no matter where he was born).
How, then, could he possibly be a "Natural Born Citizen" of the U.S.?
Barry Soetoro, the divided citizen at birth!

http://www.jeffersonsrebels.blogspot.com

 

Furthermore:  Hawaii's Territorial Law, Chapter 57 - "VITAL STATISTICS, I", shown beginning pg 23 of 29, (the law in effect in 1961) allowed baby's born anywhere in the world to be eligible to apply for a Hawaii birth certificate. That is how a foreign born baby could get a HI BC on record, which in turn generates the "birth announcements" in the newspapers.

[rxsid]

"Or maybe President Obama was born in Hawaii and the announcement was placed in those papers in the usual course of their business of placing such announcements in their paper......oh wait, that’s what happaned."

Or maybe he was not born in HI, obtained a HI birth certificate via the very loose Hawaiian Territorial Law, Chapter 57 - "VITAL STATISTICS, I", shown beginning pg 23 of 29, (the law in effect in 1961). That is how a foreign born baby could get a HI BC on record, which in turn generates the "birth announcements" in the newspapers.

Oh, and welcome to FR (Since 2010-02-12).

[pissant]

Is that you, Ericka?

[Fred Nerks]

It’s more than my imagination can conjure up, a woman has a child in Hawaii when she’s not even in the State.

[Gene Eric]

>> President Obama is our lawfully elected President ... a position entrusted to him by 69,456,897 voting Americans, or 52.9% of the popular vote.

This is pathetic rationale. Regardless of Obama’s eligibility, just because someone is trusted by the majority does not automatically liberate that someone from the constraints of law.

The absence of neutrality on this issue is bizarre.

[Red Steel]

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.

No, elected BUT that does not make him legitimate under the law if he obtained the office under false pretenses.

[rxsid]

>> President Obama is our lawfully elected President ... a position entrusted to him by 69,456,897 voting Americans, or 52.9% of the popular vote.

This is pathetic rationale. Regardless of Obama’s eligibility, just because someone is trusted by the majority does not automatically liberate that someone from the constraints of law."

Exactly. He's trying to make the argument that our government, our very Constitution (& laws), are built upon mob rule.

Well, seeing what's going on in this country since Mr. untouchable was selected, with the way our so called Congress has been acting...perhaps we really have devolved into mob rule.

[Gene Eric]

>> He’s trying to make the argument that our government, our very Constitution (& laws), are built upon mob rule.

LOL, you said it better.

>> perhaps we really have devolved into mob rule.

The future guarantees forms of discouragement and encouragement, but when I think about Christ and the Constitution, I’m confident Liberty will prevail regardless of how.

[STARWISE]

Interesting .. thanks.

[Red Steel]

Gullible they are.

[Red Steel]

If Abercrombie is elected [GOV] we need to keep an eye on him ‘cuz he could really fix this whole BC issue.

That's what I expect from this creep.

[rxsid]

"The future guarantees forms of discouragement and encouragement, but when I think about Christ and the Constitution, I’m confident Liberty will prevail regardless of how."

Couldn't agree with you more. The light will shine upon the truth, eventually. Sometimes, it just requires patience, persistence and perseverance. Oh yeah, and an awakening by enough people.

[JimRed]

But I always agree with him that this issue should be dropped.

Publicly dropped, but privately pursued. Keep digging quietly until the reason for his resistance to being documented is discovered.

[jersey117]

he is not now nor will he ever be my president.

Mine neither.

[jersey117]

Try getting a driver’s license with two old newpaper clippings.

LOL. Come to think of it, I bet zero doesn't even have a driver's license. The only thing I've ever seen him drive is a golf cart.

[FTJM]

By his rationale, Gore had no right to sue in the 2000 election.