Posted on 06/01/2011 9:28:46 AM PDT by Hotlanta Mike
I don’t know how many times I’ve had this dialogue over the past couple of years, but it seems those who make it often pride themselves on their ability to type, regardless of the content of their thoughts. I participate in many discussions in which the Natural Born Citizen requirement of Article II is deceptively convoluted to the point that it is, supposedly, rendered meaningless. However, nothing could be further from the truth. The problem is, if one is not armed with the facts, it might prove difficult for these flawed arguments to be refuted.
(Excerpt) Read more at canadafreepress.com ...
The first and most obvious division of the people is into aliens and natural-born subjects. Natural-born subjects are such as are born within the dominions of the crown of England, that is, within the ligeance, or as it is generally called, the allegiance of the king; and aliens, such as are born out of it. (emphasis added)In the five volume Founders' Constitution, which is a collection of documents which bear on the history of the Constitution and Constitutional Law published by the University of Chicago in 1986, this quote from Blackstone is the first one they give in their examination of "Citizenship" in connection with Article I, Section 8, Clause 4.
ML/NJ
0’Bs father was a British subject, therefore he is NOT legal, gets your facts straight. This B.C. issue is just a diverson.
i don’t know the truth. i don’t have the answers.
but i’ve been reading here for years. Little Jeremiah, ml/nj, Butterdezillion, Bluecat6, Hotlanta Mike, Satindoll, are NOT “nutjobs”.
...yet if what they seem to say is true, there IS a fraud and conspiracy of epic proportions.
and, there IS a lot of evidence, that they are correct. sure, each item might be coincidence, or explained other ways. but missing divoce docs, kindergarden records, passport records, thinks in Obama’s OWN words that are provably not true (like his father left them? when he remain in Hawaii and they didn’t?), and hundreds of other items, i’ve read here over the years.
and EVIDENCE of a coverup, is itself significant.
the changes in laws, the hiding of records from a President who claims “transparency”... i’ve read thousands of pages here. and saved hundreds on my computer.
...and yes, i still think the Selective Service form is a forgery. (Debbie Schussel did GREAT research.) the COLB and LFBC have the WRONG age for his father, according to the STATE DEPARTMENT records from that year. the “non curving letters, the signatures of different pixel sizes, etc.
and, the Connecticut SSN, that NO one has explained.
...if even ONE item cannot be explained by other than fraud and forgery, then unlikely as it seems, there IS a conspiracy. but it doesn’t require the straw man numbers you give.
in order for evil to flourish, it is only necessary for good men to do... nothing.
And you know barry bassturd’s father was a British subject how? By taking his word for it, or believing the fraudulent ‘releases’ not one of which has been specifically vouched for by the state of Hawaii? ... So far, there isn’t a credible means to know whom was the bastard’s father. But we’re working on it, despite state of Hawaii obstructionism ... they will not be the crux of final proof of barry bassturd’s natality anyway.
My old memory goes even further back, to the early sixties! And I still remember ‘When Burnam Woods to Duncenane removes ...’ and ‘W’an that Aprilla with his sured soata hath bathed every vane in ...’
My old memory goes even further back, to the early sixties! And I still remember ‘When Burnham Woods to Duncenane removes ...’ and ‘W’an that Aprilla with his sured soata hath bathed every vane in ...’
you are correct. Barack Obama Sr was a British citizen, even according to Snopes.
but, it is possible, that he was NOT the biological Father of Obama.
if he has nothing to hid, he should be “transparent” as he promised, and release ALL original records. including college transcripts, where he got his scholarships from, etc.
The democrats and a few republican’ts have been trying for more than a decade to change the Constitutional requirement for eligibility. I suspect that democrats saw Barry as their way to change the requirement by default, not realizing then that he was more than just not Constitutionally qualified but a complete fraud! His citizenship with Indonesia could be a duisqualifier, if he used it to game the college tuition and fees system. His possible Kenyan birth (not likely, but remotely possible) would instantly stamp him ineligible, and his criminal misuse of social security numbers and false claim to selective service, all these would be sufficient to nullify his bastard ass. But in so doing the democrap party takes a huge hit with him, so they are bound by tooth and nail to continue protecting his criminal ass until they can no longer hide his worthless self for fear of being exposed as the anti-Americans they really are.
And to quote the Eagles paraphrasing Beowulf:
“They stab it with their steely knives
But they just can’t kill the beast.”
“Little Jeremiah, ml/nj, Butterdezillion, Bluecat6, Hotlanta Mike, Satindoll, are NOT “nutjobs”.”
Either they are nuts, or 99% of the rest of the world is nuts. When every state, every member of Congress and every court disagrees with your interpretation of the Constitution, then you are probably a nut.
You can find a congressman who worries about Guam capsizing, but you cannot find one who says Obama’s father prevents him from being a NBC.
Hotel California! ... seems so accurate now, for those poor sould trapped in leftafornia unable to sell their million dollar three bedroom bungaloes and move to a red state.
‘And the droot of March hath perced to the rota ...’
According to Vattel and “the Law of Nations” #217 - McCain is a natural born citizen.
According to many a birther who likes to quote a mistranslation - McCain is not a natural born citizen.
Yet when asked about Vattel and his book - birthers like to engage in the historic fallacy that his book was “the blueprint for our Constitution”.
It would be funny if it were not so sad and sordid.
Quite correct, if you mean biological father. But then without genetic testing we don't know who anyone's biodad is. Not Obama's, not McCain's, not Sarah Palin's, not mine, not yours.
Legal father is quite another kettle of fish. AFAIK, Obama's mom was married to Obama Sr. at the time of his birth. This makes Senior the father as far as the law is concerned. Biological facts are quite irrelevant.
I have seen no proof that “natural born citizen” was not used by the founders as an alternate way of saying “native born citizen.”
We have zero documentation of how the wording wound up as it did. This portion of the Constitution seems to have been voted in with almost no discussion.
By what documentation do you KNOW barry bassturd’s father was married to his mother when he was born? There is a divorce decree, but no marriage cert. A divorce decree comes at a popint in time much later than barry’s birth, so you can’t say for sure that barry had a father married to his mother when he was born.
One is either born, and via that natural act, has citizenship under natural law - and is thus a “natural born citizen” - or one must go through a legal process to confer what nature did not - they mus be “natural-IZED” into citizenship.
There are only two ways of becoming a U.S. citizen - and it makes sense to me that there are correspondingly two types of citizens of these United States - those who are natural born citizens - and those who had to be natural-IZED.
Watch the video by Pixel Patriot and become enlightened...
Explosive Video: The brilliant “natural born Citizen” researcher Pixel Patriot now has an official home on the Internet hosting his numerous essays on the Obama eligibility issue. Pixel Patriot just published his blog’s debut post on recent news regarding 2011 presidential candidate Andy Martin, FOIA requester Chris Strunk, Donald Trump, LTC Terry Lakin, Karl Rove, including details on Sun Yat-sen, Raila Odinga and of course the true definition of “natural born Citizen.” Please watch the video before reading.
http://obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com/2011/04/eligibility-expose-constitutional.html
Have you seen documentation of marriage for McCain’s parents, or Palin’s parents, or GWB’s parents? Or any other public figure you might care to name.
I haven’t. Such documentation has never even been suggested as necessary, AFAIK.
What I think most amazing is how people will repeatedly post the claim that a “natural born citizen” must be born in the country to two citizens, as if this claim is an undisputed fact.
I’m perfectly willing to agree that the issue has never been definitively settled, due to a failure by the Court to rule on the issue. My reading of the various Court decisions that bear on the case lead me to have a real good idea that if the Court were to rule it would agree with you and me.
But I still don’t post my opinion as if it were a fact.
I strongly suspect that if the Court were to rule agreeing with us, a lot of these fanatics on the issue would still refuse to accept the Court’s ruling as valid.
The whole thing reminds me of the “Why doth treason never prosper?” quote.
Even if the birthers are right legally and constitutionally, they have no mechanism by which they can impose their (correct) opinion on the rest of the country. So what is the point of agitating on the issue? Spend your efforts on defeating his reelection campaign.
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.