See other Editorial Articles
Title: Is lucysmom As Gullible and Naive as her posts indicate? Could it be possible?
Source:
LP
URL Source: http://libertypost.org/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=257643#C32
Published: Mar 3, 2009
Author: me
Post Date: 2009-03-03 16:27:49 by James Deffenbach
Keywords: None
Views: 2414
Comments: 261
There is a bit of hypocrisy going on here. This kind of abuse of the court system is rightly condemned by conservatives when the target of the suits are corporations but now applauded when the target is an individual. Any looney tune can file a suit and issue a subpoena requesting any personal information he desires (you don't even need a lawyer to do it) and the target is forced to respond. It could even happen to you. IMHO, there is something obscene about demanding the scope of personal information that these suits are after. The "birthers" demand the right to poke through the details of Obama's early life longing for anything to use against him. They are using the court system to harass and hound while wrapping them selves in the noble cloak of patriotism. They make the word dirty. lucysmom posted on 2009-03-03 10:40:46 ET Reply Trace
Poster Comment: The "birthers" are merely asking for actual PROOF that Obama is in fact an AMERICAN. His long form birth certificate, which could be produced at almost no cost, could confirm that he is or prove that he is not. Why is he and the DNC spending huge sums of money to keep it hidden if it actually proves that he is a citizen? I suspect that it proves the opposite for there would be no other reason not to disclose it.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 223.
#7. To: James Deffenbach (#0)
The Savage brought this topic up this evening. He has a hard on about it and just won't quit. Thought that he had dropped this after the mis-Inauguration, but I really think that he's serious about his non- native birth. He spent a lot of time drawing parallels between O and Mussolini, and had the megaphone out (OBAMA HAS CREATED THE MOST CORRUPT ADMINISTRATION IN THE HISTORY OF THE UNITED STATES). He also said tonight that 'Bama will create his own brownshirts, and that he and Emanuel will create a Reichtags fire offering them the opportunity to round up dissidents. Savage made a point of saying that you can bet your bottom dollar on it.
He has a hard on about it and just won't quit. Thought that he had dropped this after the mis- Inauguration, but I really think that he's serious about his non- native birth... Obama isn't eligible to be prez for one reason alone: he's not a natural born citizen due to his father's Kenyan/British citzenship. Anyone like Savage or Corsi that injects the "he wasn't born on American soil" is throwing a needless diversion into the mix. Philip Berg pushed the 'was he born in Hawaii?' case and utterly ignored Obama's dual citizenship. Berg, Savage and Corsi are all old-school Zionists that would love to bury any speculation about dual citizenship.
If he was born in Kenya, as his Kenyan grandmother and some of his other relatives there claim, that alone would disqualify him because his mother could not have passed on her American citizenship to him under the law as it existed at that time. Here is a "birth certificate" that is just as good as the one they Photoshopped and claimed that it proved he was born in Hawaii.
I believe that he was born in Hawaii. That being said, his father's foreign citizenship immediately makes him ineligible to be president as a natural born citizen is someone born on American soil of two citizen parents. Obama doesn't fit the bill and he knows it.
There is no such requirement to be natural born. Children born on US soil of non-citizen immigrants are natural born.
I can only assume ignorance or trollery on your part. Either way, you're incorrect. You know full well that of two requirements to be president, one of them is that he be a natural born citzen. Children born on US soil of non-citizen immigrants are natural born. Natural born citizens, according to the understanding of the men that wrote the Constitution, are those people born on US soil of two US citizen parents. That ain't Barack.
For whatever it's worth: Natural-Born Citizen Defined by P.A. Madison One universal point most all early publicists agreed on was natural-born citizen must mean one who is a citizen by no act of law. If a person owes their citizenship to some act of law (naturalization for example), they cannot be considered a natural-born citizen. This leads us to defining natural-born citizen under the laws of nature - laws the founders recognized and embraced. Under the laws of nature, every child born requires no act of law to establish the fact the child inherits through nature his/her father’s citizenship as well as his name (or even his property) through birth. This law of nature is also recognized by law of nations. Sen. Howard said the citizenship clause under the Fourteenth Amendment was by virtue of “natural law and national law.” The advantages of Natural Law is competing allegiances between nations are avoided, or at least with those nations whose custom is to not make citizens of other countries citizens without their consent. Any alternations or conflicts due to a child’s natural citizenship are strictly a creature of local municipal law. In the year 1866, the United States for the first time adopted a local municipal law under Sec. 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes that read: “All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citizens of the United States.” Rep. Bingham commenting on Section 1992 said it means “every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866)) Bingham subscribed to the same view as most everyone in Congress at the time that in order to be born a citizen of the United States one must be born within the allegiance of the Nation. Bingham had explained that to be born within the allegiance of the United States the parents, or more precisely, the father, must not owe allegiance to some other foreign sovereignty (remember the U.S. abandoned England’s “natural allegiance” doctrine). This of course, explains why emphasis of not owing allegiance to anyone else was the affect of being subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Secretary of State Bayard ruled under Section 1992 of U.S. Revised Statutes in 1885 that although Richard Greisser was born in the United States, his father at the time of his birth was a subject of Germany, and thus, Richard Greisser could not be a citizen of the United States. Furthermore, it was held his father was not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States under the Fourteenth Amendment. The constitutional requirement for the President of the United States to be a natural-born citizen had one purpose according to St. George Tucker: Additionally, Charles Pinckney in 1800 said the presidential eligibility clause was designed “to insure … attachment to the country.” What better way to insure attachment to the country then to require the President to have inherited his American citizenship through his American father and not through a foreign father. Any child can be born anywhere in the country and removed by their father to be raised in his native country. The risks would be for the child to return in later life to reside in this country bringing with him foreign influences and intrigues. Therefore, we can say with confidence that a natural-born citizen of the United States means those persons born whose father the United States already has an established jurisdiction over, i.e., born to father’s who are themselves citizens of the United States. A person who had been born under a double allegiance cannot be said to be a natural-born citizen of the United States because such status is not recognized (only in fiction of law). A child born to an American mother and alien father could be said to be a citizen of the United States by some affirmative act of law but never entitled to be a natural-born citizen because through laws of nature the child inherits the condition of their father. UPDATE: I came across this interesting speech by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Langdon Cheves, in February of 1814: The children have a natural attachment to the society in which they are born: being obliged to acknowledge the protection it has granted to their fathers, they are obliged to it in a great measure for their birth and education. … We have just observed that they have a right to enter into the society of which their fathers were members. But every man born free, the son of a citizen, arrived at years of discretion, may examine whether it be convenient for him to join in the society for which he was destined by his birth.Cheves is obviously drawing on the works of Emer de Vattel, Law of Nations. Not something you would expect from the Speaker of the House of a Nation that supposedly adopted England’s common law. UPDATE II: Rep. A. Smyth (VA), House of Representatives, December 1820: When we apply the term “citizens” to the inhabitants of States, it means those who are members of the political community. The civil law determined the condition of the son by that of the father. A man whose father was not a citizen was allowed to be a perpetual inhabitant, but not a citizen, unless citizenship was conferred on him. Savage v. Umphries (TX) 118 S. W. 893, 909: I highlighted/bolded the parts of this that say citizenship is transferred from the FATHER because the Obamasiah's alleged father was a Kenyan, not an American. And since he was most likely born in Kenya to a mother who could not, under the laws current at that time, transfer her citizenship, it seems that Obama is not eligible to be President.
MOONBAT
That the best you can do? I could call you much worse than that and I am sure a lot of people have but then I realize you are misguided and someone who prefers not to know when it comes to your Obamasiah. And I am out of patience trying to teach you.
Anyone who believes that Obama was born in in Kenya is a Moonbat. So to answer your question...if the shoe fits...
Apparently there are a great number of "moonbats" because there are a lot of people who have questions about where your Obamasiah was born. And he REFUSES to produce the long form birth certificate that might clear it up--are you honest enough to ask yourself why anyone would spend hundreds of thousands, if not millions, to keep something like that hidden? Most of us have to produce that to get a passport, yet Obama doesn't have to produce one to prove he is eligible to hold the highest elected office the country has to offer? And you think there is nothing wrong with that picture? If you can't see it there is no help for you and a "moonbat" would be a credit to you. Common amoebas would be a credit to anyone that stupid.
JD- The source of the "Obama was born in Kenya" story is the Democratic Party. Recall that Philip Berg is the one that pushed that lawsuit. The story exists as a ruse to hide the fact that Obama isn't a natural born citizen by virtue of his father's citizenship. The Dem ops are hoping that the general population will get disgusted with those of us that question Obama's eligibility by lumping all of into the crazy camp due to the "Obama was born in Kenya" story when the Dems are the ones that started it. Remember Lenin's rule: Control the opposition by leading it.
The Dem ops are hoping that the general population will get disgusted with those of us that question Obama's eligibility by lumping all of into the crazy camp due to the "Obama was born in Kenya" story when the Dems are the ones that started it. Remember Lenin's rule: Control the opposition by leading it. According to some sources even his own grandmother--the one in Kenya and just another one he would throw under the bus if it suited his purposes (like he did the "typical white person" who raised his ungrateful ass), said he was born in Kenya. And so did some half brothers or sisters if I recall correctly.
Those sources are people like Jerome Corsi. Corsi is an old school B'nai B'rith operative. The unassailable fact is that Obama isn't natural born due to his father's citizenship.
The unassailable fact is that Obama isn't natural born due to his father's citizenship. The truth is the truth no matter who tells it. But of course I take your point about how he isn't a citizen because his father was a citizen of Kenya and subject to British rule and his mother could not legally pass on her citizenship to him under the laws as they existed at that time.
Obama was born an American citizen as well as being born a British/Kenyan citizen. He's not a natural born citizen as he was born a dual-citizen. End of story. All of the froo-froo about where he was born is chaff thrown up by the usual suspects to throw us off. The chaff is working, sadly.
All fairy tales end. Obama is natural born. He was either that or naturalized. Can you show that he was naturalized? It's a relatively simple exercise...
You can't be natural born if one of your parents is a citizen of another country. I'm not natural born as my mother was an Irish citizen when I was born. Obama knows good and goddam well he's not natural born either. That's why he's done his best to stonewall anyone that wishes to see his records.
Again...there are two classes of US citizens...natural born or naturalized. END OF STORY. not natural born as my mother was an Irish citizen when I was born. When were you naturalized?
Then why did the Framers make reference to THREE classes: citizen, natural born citizen and naturalized citizen? When were you naturalized? I was born a citizen of the US and a citizen of Ireland. I'm not natural born but I'm a citizen. I don't need to be naturalized.
Actually, the distinction that they made was "citizen...AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION..."...meaning that there was no such thing as a US citizen PRIOR to the USCON. Seeing has how none of them are no longer alive, that clause is meaningless.
A while ago you were claiming that there was no 'natural born citizen' clause in the US Constitution. Now you're agreeing with me by saying there is a distinction after all. You're a waste of time.
I made no such claim.
I WAS REFERRING To PARENTAGE.
By his parentage, Bracko isn't eligible to be president. That's the point. As you're so euridite, maybe you're just too smart for me.
And your point is incorrect. What LAW of the US says that a "natural born" citizen is one of two US citizens? Not what philosophy. Not what some guy blogs about 16thh century philosophy but what LAW? The actual LAW of the US is that there are two classes of citizens: NATURAL BORN or NATURALIZED. Period.
Show me the relevant data from the era when the US Constitution was written that defined a natural born citizen. Now show me when that definition changed in our era. The actual LAW of the US is that there are two classes of citizens: NATURAL BORN or NATURALIZED Show me the law. I see three types of citizens in the Constitution.
There is none thus the 14th amendment.
You mean minus the common understanding of the day? If true, why hasn't this been an issue before? I know I'm not natural born and I've known it my whole life.
Common understanding of the day being similar to pre-quickening abortion being legal as a common understanding of the day as well? That asked...still doesn't matter. There is no constitutional common law.
United States v. Rhodes, 27 Fed. Cas. 785 (1866). ”All persons born in the allegiance of the king are natural born subjects, and all persons born in the allegiance of the United States are natural born citizens. Birth and allegiance go together. Such is the rule of the common law, and it is the common law of this country, as well..…since as before the Revolution." There are two exceptions, and only two, to the universality of its application. The children of ambassadors are in theory born in the allegiance of the powers the ambassadors represent, and slaves, in legal contemplation, are property, and not persons. 2 Kent, Comm. 1; Calvin’s Case, 7 Coke, 1; 1 Bl. Comm. 366; Lynch v. Clarke, 1 Sand. Ch. 583.”
So you're agreeing with me now or shooting yourself in the foot?
As Obama was born both a British subject and an American citizen, I don't see how he could ever be considered natural born. There are many natural born fools that would make the argument that he is a natural born citizen, however.
He was born subject to the jurisdiction of the US. I don't see how he could ever be considered natural born. IN response to your own challenge, you've been provided the law that clearly shows that he is, I can only conclude that you have no interest in the promoting the truth.
By Obama's own admission: Since Sen. Obama has neither renounced his U.S. citizenship nor sworn an oath of allegiance to Kenya, his Kenyan citizenship automatically expired on Aug. 4,1982.” You can't have it both ways. Sorry. He was a dual citizen at birth, not a natural born citizen.
Cite the appropiate Title, Chapter and Section of the US Code that supprts that legal decision. I'll wait.
LOL! Are you also looking for chapter and verse from a court that it's daytime when the sun shines? Do you need someone to show you how to wipe your bum too? You're a riot.
Nope. Just the law as is applicable to support your argument will suffice. But thanks for offering.
#225. To: war (#223)
The law is the US Constitution. As Obama's using technicalities to fend off questions (much like the Bush administration did), it's up to him to prove that he is what he claims to be rather than hide behind other lawyers. But please, knock yourself out and act like the Bushbots did when confronted with questions about their magical chimp.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#21. To: randge, James Deffenbach (#7)
(Edited)
The Savage brought this topic up this evening.
#30. To: bluegrass (#21)
#31. To: James Deffenbach (#30)
#59. To: bluegrass (#31)
That being said, his father's foreign citizenship immediately makes him ineligible to be president as a natural born citizen is someone born on American soil of two citizen parents. Obama doesn't fit the bill and he knows it.
#71. To: war, Jethro Tull, James Deffenbach, randge (#59)
There is no such requirement to be natural born.
#80. To: bluegrass (#71)
(Edited)
http://federalistblog.us/2008/11/natural- born_citizen_defined.html That provision in the constitution which requires that the president shall be a native-born citizen (unless he were a citizen of the United States when the constitution was adopted,) is a happy means of security against foreign influence, which, wherever it is capable of being exerted, is to he dreaded more than the plague. The admission of foreigners into our councils, consequently, cannot be too much guarded against; their total exclusion from a station to which foreign nations have been accustomed to, attach ideas of sovereign power, sacredness of character, and hereditary right, is a measure of the most consummate policy and wisdom. … The title of king, prince, emperor, or czar, without the smallest addition to his powers, would have rendered him a member of the fraternity of crowned heads: their common cause has more than once threatened the desolation of Europe. To have added a member to this sacred family in America, would have invited and perpetuated among us all the evils of Pandora’s Box.
#83. To: James Deffenbach (#80)
And since he was most likely born in Kenya...
#109. To: war (#83)
MOONBAT
#113. To: James Deffenbach (#109)
That the best you can do?
#117. To: war (#113)
Anyone who believes that Obama was born in in Kenya is a Moonbat.
#125. To: James Deffenbach (#117)
#128. To: bluegrass (#125)
The source of the "Obama was born in Kenya" story is the Democratic Party. Recall that Philip Berg is the one that pushed that lawsuit. The story exists as a ruse to hide the fact that Obama isn't a natural born citizen by virtue of his father's citizenship.
#130. To: James Deffenbach (#128)
#135. To: bluegrass (#130)
Those sources are people like Jerome Corsi. Corsi is an old school B'nai B'rith operative.
#140. To: James Deffenbach (#135)
#142. To: bluegrass (#140)
He's not a natural born citizen as he was born a dual-citizen. End of story.
#144. To: war (#142)
Obama is natural born.
#147. To: bluegrass (#144)
You can't be natural born if one of your parents is a citizen of another country.
#151. To: war (#147)
Again...there are two classes of US citizens...natural born or naturalized.
#153. To: bluegrass (#151)
citizen
#157. To: war (#153)
#165. To: bluegrass (#157)
A while ago you were claiming that there was no 'natural born citizen' clause in the US Constitution.
#168. To: war (#165)
I made no such claim.
#170. To: bluegrass (#168)
#177. To: war (#170)
I WAS REFERRING To PARENTAGE.
#188. To: bluegrass (#177)
By his parentage, Bracko isn't eligible to be president. That's the point.
#190. To: war (#188)
What LAW of the US says that a "natural born" citizen is one of two US citizens?
#199. To: bluegrass (#190)
Show me the relevant data from the era when the US Constitution was written that defined a natural born citizen
#201. To: war (#199)
There is none...
#204. To: bluegrass (#201)
You mean minus the common understanding of the day?
#206. To: war (#204)
#208. To: bluegrass (#206)
#210. To: war (#208)
#211. To: bluegrass (#210)
As Obama was born both a British subject and an American citizen
#212. To: war (#211)
He was born subject to the jurisdiction of the US.
“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.
#216. To: bluegrass (#212)
He was a dual citizen at birth, not a natural born citizen.
#220. To: war (#216)
Cite the appropiate Title, Chapter and Section of the US Code that supprts that legal decision.
#223. To: bluegrass (#220)
Are you also looking for chapter and verse from a court that it's daytime when the sun shines? Do you need someone to show you how to wipe your bum too?
Replies to Comment # 223. Just the law as is applicable to support your argument will suffice.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 223.