From the article....
“Birth records in Hawaii haven’t dissuaded them.”
To my knowledge no birth records from Hawaii have ever beeen released.
The COLB that was posted on Obama’s website shows that Obama is the son of a non citizen father born in Hawaii. That in itself is prima Facia that he is not a NBC, however, if I recall correctly, the COLB was a fabrication posted on Obama’s website by some one other than an offical, and then adopted by Obama’s election team as real.
Canter’s statement above begs the question.....the Constitutional requirenment for Presidential eligibility is not mere citizenship, but a special quality of citizenship, one that encompasses the aspects of both jus solis and jus sanquines....that is birth on the soil to citizen parents.
Yes I’m talking about Natural Born Citizenship.....
We know that Obama fails the ju sanquines portion of Natural Born Citizenship because of his, as the COLB states, “african” father. It’s the elephant that is sitting in the middle of the parlor that the politicians and the media are struggling mightily to ignore. Sorry I see it despite their insistence of it’s non existence.
The question of whether Obama was indeed born in Hawaii, as he claims, to satisify the jus solis aspect of NBC is, at it stands, unproven, unless you accept the website posted COLB as genuine. In any case, Obama’s birthplace is a moot question given his father’s lack of American citizenship.
The American Kennel Club requires that a canines’ parents, both dog and bitch, be proven and documented individuals of a specific (the same) breed in order to be considered for competition in the doggy arena......
With his non-citizen father Obama is a mutt, and not eligible to be the Chief Executive of these here United States. It matters not if he was or wasn’t born in one of the 50 kennels that constitute the US of A. His father may be a Cocker Spaniel (Lady), but his father was a Tramp.....
To my knowledge no birth records from Hawaii have ever beeen released.
The COLB that was posted on Obama’s website shows that Obama is the son of a non citizen father born in Hawaii. That in itself is prima Facia that he is not a NBC, however, if I recall correctly, the COLB was a fabrication posted on Obama’s website by some one other than an offical, and then adopted by Obama’s election team as real.
Canter’s statement above begs the question.....the Constitutional requirenment for Presidential eligibility is not mere citizenship, but a special quality of citizenship, one that encompasses the aspects of both jus solis and jus sanquines....that is birth on the soil to citizen parents.
Yes I’m talking about Natural Born Citizenship.....
We know that Obama fails the ju sanquines portion of Natural Born Citizenship because of his, as the COLB states, “african” father. It’s the elephant that is sitting in the middle of the parlor that the politicians and the media are struggling mightily to ignore. Sorry I see it despite their insistence of it’s non existence.
The question of whether Obama was indeed born in Hawaii, as he claims, to satisify the jus solis aspect of NBC is, at it stands, unproven, unless you accept the website posted COLB as genuine. In any case, Obama’s birthplace is a moot question given his father’s lack of American citizenship.
The American Kennel Club requires that a canines’ parents, both dog and bitch, be proven and documented individuals of a specific (the same) breed in order to be considered for competition in the doggy arena......
With his non-citizen father Obama is a mutt, and not eligible to be the Chief Executive of these here United States. It matters not if he was or wasn’t born in one of the 50 kennels that constitute the US of A. His father may be a Cocker Spaniel (Lady), but his father was a Tramp.....
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.
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
Why is there no US Supreme Court decision stating that two American citizen parents are required in order to be a natural born citizen?
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.”
Why is there no US Supreme Court decision that differentiates between a natural born citizen and a citizen of the United States at Birth?
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?”