Posted on 01/23/2011 8:14:05 AM PST by milwguy
Edited on 01/23/2011 9:13:29 AM PST by Admin Moderator. [history]
The new Republican House majority leader says he doesn't think questions about President Barack Obama's citizenship should play a role in the discussion of policy matters.
Two years into the Obama administration, so-called birthers continue to argue that Obama isn't a natural-born citizen and that he hasn't proved he's constitutionally qualified to be president. Birth records in Hawaii haven't dissuaded them.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
I believe you are completely correct. 2012 tells the tale.
No; I hadn’t seen the post you cited. Thank you!! That is some fascinating and extraordinary information. I’m on the busy side now, but I’m planning to review it carefully at first opportunity. Wow—I get the feeling Obama’s house of cards is in a slow-motion fall. It may yet take a while, but we’ll get there. Obama’s lies will be exposed.
rhetorical question n. A question to which no answer is expected, often used for rhetorical effect.
Why do you continue to ask rhetorical questions?
You sound like Jan.
I am impressed.
Nah. You are redundant.
Cantor, you’re a sucker and a useful idiot.
I may not be from Missouri, but I need proof.
For an honest citizen, to prove it would be entirely simple.
Email Cantor and ask him to please provide proof for the rest of us.
“Where in the Constitution does it say that two American citizen parents are required in order to be a natural born citizen? Which Article, which Section, which clause?”
The term Natural Born Citizen is the requirement for Presidential eligibility and an NBC is by it’s own definition “born in country to two citizen parents. It is a unique term with relevence in reference to the Presidency only, and has no impact in any other area of US Law.
The definition of is......is.
**********************
“Where in the US Code of Laws does it say that two American citizen parents are required in order to be a natural born citizen.”
Where does it say anything about NBC except that it is a Presidental eligibility requirement? The Constitution is not a dictionary.....Because you are ignorant of the references such as Law of Nations which the Founders used in writing the Constitution does not change their clear meaning and intent in their use of the term NBC ....or did you think the term just appeared out of thin air, and the Founders intended that future Americans should define the term to a contempory meaning...LOLOLOLOLOLOL.....
BTW where does it say NBC does not mean two citizen parents as understood by jurists in the 18tn century? Please cite the Article etc......LOLOLOLOLOL
**************************
“Why did the Indiana Court of Appeals rule just the opposite with specific regard to Barack Obama’s eligibility to receive Indiana’s Electoral College votes: “Based on the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 of the Constitution and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.”
—Ankeny et. al. v The Governor of Indiana, Mitch Daniels”
The Ankeny case is one you love to mis cite.... sorry pal the case is not about defining the term NBC. That it incorrectly defined the term NBC in the main body of the decision (which it corrected in the footnotes as you are well aware of) while ruling on the Governors responsiblities in certifying election results is unfortunate and consigns this decision to the dustbins of juris prudence.....again LOLOLOLOL
***********************************
Why is there no US Supreme Court decision stating that two American citizen parents are required in order to be a natural born citizen?
This one is easy! Because until Obama, all Presidents, other than those grandfathered in at the start of the Nation, met the definition of NBC and there has been no reason to rule on requirements met! FOOL! LOLOLOL.
************************************
Why does the current US Code of Laws define a “Citizen of the United States at Birth” as someone born within the United States of American and subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”
Seems right to me.....question.... what does that have to do with the term NATURAL BORN CITIZEN? Being a “Citizen at birth” is not the Constitutional requirement....being a Natural Born Citizen is....
Answer.... Nothing they are two different things........( While an NBC is a born citizen a born citizen may or may not be an NBC....depends upon the parents citizenship statis....) Do you have a problem with complex ideas/thoughts?
********************************
Why is there no US Supreme Court decision that differentiates between a natural born citizen and a citizen of the United States at Birth?
The term NBC has been defined by various courts throughout our nations history as.... “born in country to two citizen parents,” while deciding other questions of citizenship....
Until Obama there has not been a reason to apply the standard of NBC as it relates to the Presidency! You have a learning disability right?
****************************************
Why has the current Supreme Court rejected hearing any of twelve Obama Eligibility Appeals that have reached the High Court and rejected them all without even one word of comment other than “Denied?”
The US Supreme Court is a Court of Judicial Review and hears very few of the cases filed before it.
The very nature of a sitting President installed despite being Constitutionally eligible constitutes a Constitutional Crisis that will have represussions in the future years of our Nation. It is no wonder that the Court is choosing the case it will hear carefully......only 12? Don’t worry there are still a bunch in the pipeline.....I’m sure one with the brief the Court wants to see will eventually be brought forward......Good thing this isn’t the Catholic Church....Questions of Catholic Canon Law take Centuries to decide......LOLOLOLOL.....
Really Jamsee boy you should be ashamed of bringing the same weak sh*t up on every NBC thread.
Oh well, its good to see you made it through the New Years celebtration and that your eyes are still brown......
Don’t waste either your, mine or other FReepers time in replying with any more of your lame drivel......thanks in advance....
About Obama or the moon being made out of green cheese?
I was infuriated when a read a previous synopsis of Cantor’s replies. However in reading the transcript of the interview, I’ve gleaned what I believe to be a strategy (I hope) Cantor’s replies.
He states Obama is a citizen. He does not venture into the Natural Born = gray area.
People have read Obama’s book or if they did not read the book, they are aware of Obama’s narrative. The truth of having a foreign father was right in front of EVERYBODY. Another truth in front of us all - Obama was adopted by Lolo Soetoro.
Cantor’s reply keeps the discussion on citizen v. natural born in the mainstream news. As the American public become more educated on the issue, other questions will emerge.
These questions are going to have to be placed often in the MSM, such as “ why is Obama spending so much rather than just showing his BC”, “why did he executive order all of his records sealed”.
The only way to force the MSM to cover any of these questions is to continually be engaging more people through blogs, political forums, facebook, etc. and develop a groundswell. This groundswell needs to encourage or force Issa to investigate Obama.
I would doubt that the vast majority of Obama’s voters give a darn about “rule of law” and “Natural Born” in regards to the Constitution. I have heard the lack of regard with my own ears from those who voted for Obama.
They do not think it is fair just because he has a foreign Dad “ he could not pick his father”. To Obama voters the Constitution is a merely an outline. a pattern to be adjusted. The young voters do not understand or believe in American exceptionalism. They - studies have proved - are guided by emotions.
If Obama is to be discredited or replaced without the country apart at the seams, it must be gradual.
Probably what would PO many of Obama’s supporters would be admittance to college on foreign student status which many of us suspect.
Cantor laid the groundwork with “he is a citizen”. I suspect many others will begin to state without malice in reference to Obama, “he is a citizen”.
As much as I would like to march in and arrest Obama’s arse, place him and Pelosi in Larkin’s cell, and release Larkin, it would not be the best thing for this country.
I would agree with what you said if, instead of allowing we weren’t ‘crazy’, Cantor had said we have legitimate questions. He just doesn’t seem all that concerned with us or our issues. He is DC Old Guard. I only wish there was some way to clean house, and start over with TEA party leaders. I guess we’ll have to wait until 2012.
Anyway, thanks for your thoughts. You are more optimistic than I am. Maybe if we bombard Cantor’s office with complaints, he’ll change his tune.
“... going after Clinton didn’t get us anywhere - only got Clinton sympathy and made us look petty.”
Agree.
There needs to be a groundswell of Americans shouting from the rooftops questions concerning Obama. It cannot be “a group of white Republicans in Congress” going after Obama. The Obama voters are emotional the “ganging on Obama” will pull them from the now apathetic stance into full support mode. The unmasking of Obama needs to be gradual and probably with information he has not given us....his college records - foreign student status?.
“...I don’t think the native-born rule even means anything today. I went to college at a large school and believe me, being born in this country sure as hell did not mean people supported it.”
Agree.
I have heard with my own ears by many students say, “he could not pick his father, it is not his fault”.
In addition, globalism or global gov’t is not a bad thing among the youth. “It is necessary to solve problems, that no one country can address” seems to be a common belief among the many college students with whom I have engaged in conversation.
I too hope I am correct.
I do believe we need to bombard the legislators but we also FIRST hit our state lawmakers and parties to require ALL Presidential primary candidates submit a notarized paper trail (similar to obtaining a DL) before being on ANY ballot.
We have learned that waiting until the primaries are over is too late. People are too invested (emotional) in their candidate to accept the candidate not being placed on the ballot. The eligibilty needs to be done early and along every step of the way.
Also, the moderate Democrats and Independents need to become educated through these discussions and begin to question, demand, and hold accountable Pelosi and all the others involved.
I really think the interviewer was taken aback. The MSM wants the Republicans to go after Obama the way we did Clinton....look at how little policy followed. The Clinton Impeachment neutered the Republicans. The liberals would love for the Birth Certificate question to distract the Republicans in Congress from repeal of Obamacare, investigations, etc.
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.