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: 1926
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
#1. To: James Deffenbach (#0)
Disingenuous Obammaphile K00K! Poor Omessiah..must obey the law...&^% when he's really above the law...Hypocrisy!! KOO00K!!! Shi11LL!!!@@@ OK now that you've drug the disingenuous ElPee scum through the house, will you clean up after? LOL.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace ALAS, BABYLON
As Chico (Freddie Prinze) used to say, "It's not my chob, man!"
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. LUCY Law Enforcement Against Prohibition You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace ALAS, BABYLON
She is one of those people who will go to her death defending the indefensible so long as the indefensible is a member of the right gang (and she doesn't even realize that he is just a bit player in THE gang).
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. That dumb b*tch needs a 7 iron wrapped around her pin head.
They've certainly had enough time to 'manufacture one' by now.
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.
Join 2x4 Tuesdays & protect your RKBA. Yes. There isn't a smidgeon of hoax here, as there is with McCain Rocks aka Bush Fan. These fools would honor Barry if he ordered their house razed. It is some sort of intoxication with Barry's embodiment of 50 years of leftist wet dreams. It's gonna be a long 8 years, but there are things that even Chairman Barry won't be able to control. This is a sizable country, and there are large western areas that are not only predominently white, but gun toting to boot. Lots of space to hole up in.
“Of two evils, choose neither”. Charles H. Spurgeon
I think she needs a good rest at Whispering Pines Home for the Criminally Insane. It must be a crime to be as crazy as she sounds.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. 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. I would be more inclined to bet on it than against it. Obama appears to have a big dose of megalomania like Napoleon and Hitler.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Good post Old Fud.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. James... I resist using obscene language thus can say nothing about the trash in question.
Yeah--I was being nice asking if she was that naive and gullible.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. ****SIGH**** Let it go Moonbats...let is go...
You should PING scrapper2 to that post...she likes to be offended.
It's a pretty dispicable exercise writing about someone cross board, btw.
Are you dumb asses who believe wild conspiracies with no evidence as dumb as you appear? Extremely likely.
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.
Savage made a point of saying that you can bet your bottom dollar on it. I heard that segment, randge. With him saying false flags are coming, and Glenn Beck discussing FEMA camps, the big, ball of poop is gaining steam - which is just fine with me. I feel exceptionally well (thank god) and I'm capable of fighting the Beast when it attacks. In ten years from now, not so much :)
Savage is discussing false flags?
Seriously, were you butt raped by a gang of feral priests when you were young ???
Bot bump
You Obamabots should all ask your hero to produce that instead of taking up for him keeping it hidden. You have to know that there is something worth hiding for someone to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to hide a document that they could produce and (maybe) end the controversy for much less than a hundred dollars. Some hero you have there, lefty.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. KMA. I will post whatever I want to post about anyone I choose to post it about. She made herself a target posting stupid stuff about how terrible everyone is being to her Obamasiah.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Amyone who believes that that there is nothing wrong with someone would spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to hide a document which he could easily produce for less than a hundred, and which would prove that he was actually born in this country (if he was), ain't all there. I used to think you had some sense but seeing you take up for Obama the way you do I have reassessed that idea. And if you think an Obamabot thinking I am "dumb" is going to bother me you are even crazier than you sound when you are defending the indefensible.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. If there had been a question about Bush's birth certificate, would you have said, "let it go"?
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.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. 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. Damn frigging hit and run roach came through the door again. SMASH!! Bye now. Law Enforcement Against Prohibition You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace ALAS, BABYLON
That's the wrong question to ask. First off, I have no question about Obama's birth certificate. And had I, the statements of Hawaiian officials laid those to rest last Summer. Secondly, the correct question to ask is WHY hasn't the BC ever been an issue before?
Do you really believe that William Wallace said that?
Horsehit. His garandma never so claimed. An interviewer claimed that his Grandma so claimed. Anyway...feel free to wax eloquently about how Obama could have been born on Augist 4th, 1961 in Kenya and had his birth registered two business days later in the State of Hawaii. Thanks in advance.
You are such a MAAAAN...not only did you pick on a girl you did so where she could not respond. Yowzah what musckles you have...
You lost the argument there. NOt that there was an argument. He produced a COLB last year and it was verified as authentic by Hawaii.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. -Lord Acton James Deffenbach is a Moonbat -war
Many people do. A lot of them are in the military, It's perfectly legitimate for those being commanded to know the qualifications of their commander. the statements of Hawaiian officials laid those to rest last Summer. So we're to believe undocumented claims because government officials say so? Did you support the Iraq invasion because people in the government just said so? Getting a job at McDonald's requires more documentation than Obama's been willing to provide in the face of these unanswered questions.
What Obama provided wouldn't be enough to get Hawaiian citizenship by Hawaiian law as he didn't produce a Certificate of Live Birth.
And "war" loves communists and thinks illegal aliens are just as good for president as actual Americans. If you think that you calling me a "moonbat" bothers me you are crazier than I thought you were. And no one from Hawaii laid anything to rest and they didn't with that photoshop pos they put on the internet either. That is NOT a long form birth certificate but then you already know that. You are like lucysmom trying to defend the indefensible. As for whether she can post here or not I would assume she can if she chooses to. Not that she would find many "like minded" people here because there don't seem to be many socialists and communists on this board.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Yowzah what musckles you have... You are such a MORRRRRRRRROOOOOOOOOONNNNNNN. "Pick on a girl"? You make it sound like I actually hit her or something. I posted her own stupid words! If that is "picking on a girl" so be it. As for whether or not she can respond that is not up to me. She can probably register and respond as much as she wants here OR she can bitch and whine all she wants to where she is. But none of that will change her words and her defense of the indefensible (making her a lot like you).
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. #5. To: James Deffenbach (#0) (Edited) That dumb b*tch needs a 7 iron wrapped around her pin head. Rotara posted on 2009-03-03 22:02:14 ET Reply Trace Private Reply You disagreed with this poster's sentiments where?
YOu have absolutely no station to determine what I love or don't love. I've probably created more wealth in 1 week than you have in a lifetime.
Now I am responsible for things other people post? And Obama can't be bothered to show his long form birth certificate to serve in the highest elected office the country has? I had to show one to get a freakin' passport! Why is he so much better than other Americans? Or is he just that much better to you clowns who worship at the Obamasiah's altar?
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Who said anything about money? You sound like Badeye bragging about $#it.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. You have probably created and posted more bs in a week than a show dog could jump over in a month. And why are you bragging about what you may, or may not, have done? You know nothing about me other than the fact that I don't much care for the guy you seem so enthralled with, the one who can't be bothered to respond to legitimate questions about where he was actually born. He seems to be a lot like Clinton and thinks that the office of President is his by right.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. You RESPONDED to that post saying that she was CRIMINALLY INSANE which in and of itself is an insane response.
I'm not enthralled with Obama. He is what we have which is infinitely better than what we had.
She seems to be way around the bend to me. I call 'em as I see 'em. If you don't like it that's just too bad I guess.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. No, he isn't. He's worse. They get worse with every election. People who have their eyes open know that. Only dimwitted, tv-addled ninnies think they get better.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Now that is some good Klinton-speak right there. He must be a lawyer.
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition You think the people of this country exist to provide you with position. I think your position exists to provide those people with freedom.~~William Wallace ALAS, BABYLON
You are insane to believe so. Then again you're a birther which is the greatest Moonbat issue to come down the pike since the Clinton Death List and "We Blowed Up The WTC". Booosh squandered a path to semi-fiscal responsibility...he was asleep at just about every switch for which he had responsibility. In the history of this republic his only rival for incompetence is Buchanon. You have 0 foundation upon which to base that statement about Obama - especially less than 60 days into his term.
Not a lawyer, a euridite.
Said the "man" who believes that a plot was hatched 48 years ago to cover up Obama's true birth and citizenship and continues on to this day at all levels of government... Excuse me if you rate -273 Kelvin on the credibility scale.
I think he used the term "Reichstag fire." "False flag" is not in these folks' dictionary. It's evident that there is a commie-izzy camp and an anti-commie-izzy camp. Weiner belongs to the latter. It seems to me that the latter are really pro-USA both in sentiment and interest. The interest being that the US is the hand that feeds izzy, and that it is not wise to bite it. I do not trust any of them, however. They're all working for the same clique. I am struck by Weiner's vehemence, and I believe that he may well believe the things he says himself.
Join 2x4 Tuesdays & protect your RKBA. There is no doubt in my mind that if I were allowed five Obama, on the other hand, is much brighter than Shrub, he can work a real crowd.
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
He revs up the rubes. I find him tedious, especially when he's got his megaphone on telling us what "we've gotta do."
Join 2x4 Tuesdays & protect your RKBA. There is no such requirement to be natural born. Children born on US soil of non-citizen immigrants are natural born.
The bland face of evil And I'm here to help!
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
Yet you take a guy like Mikey Weiner, a Jew espousing the tenets of National Socialism [borders, language, culture] warning of a Reichstag fire seriously... This same guy claimed that Clinton was going to declare martial law and not leave office...
The democrats should do something about that. Yes, blast those infernal democrats, letting this nonsense slide!
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
Well yeah, that is some fine Klintonian alright. I guess it is required in his circles.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Yeah, the sob just wants to continue Bush's stupid bailout policies and widen the wars we are involved in. Some hero you have there, ya moron. And the presidents get worse every election. Your hero is not going to break that pattern.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. No sensible person would give a $#it how they "rate" with you. I assure you it won't keep me awake at night.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. The problem is, JD, "sensible" to you means believing that a conspiracty was hatched 48 years ago...yada yada yada...
And "sensible" to you seems to be droning like your daddy, Badeye, about money. Mr. "I've probably created more wealth in 1 week than you have in a lifetime" ah. Bite me.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. It is all of no use, James. You may struggle as you might, you'll make no headway with Lord Kelvin Erudite.
Join 2x4 Tuesdays & protect your RKBA. You may struggle as you might, you'll make no headway with Lord Kelvin Erudite. LOL! I already knew he was pretty much a hopeless case having read much of his fawning over the black prince on LP. Hard to believe he brought it here.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Lord, how we struggle with these refugees. Join 2x4 Tuesdays & protect your RKBA. 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.
LOL! Another socialist, a woman named Emma Lazarus, wrote that inscription. I am afraid the politicians took that to heart a bit too literally. Nothing wrong with helping the people you can, as an individual, but a countries immigration policy should not be based on a poem no matter how pretty or well intentioned the author might be.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. LOL That one there isn't worth the time.
That's why I only gave him/her a few sentences. ; )
Nope. I am 100% correct. You cannot distinguish between a person born in the US of immigrants versus those born of native born or naturalized. The plain language of the 14th mendment states what? All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. It does not separate those who are born in to classes of citizens based upon simple parentage. Obama was born in Hawaii...he was not the child of a diplomat and therefore immune from US law.
Nope.
The 14th amendment has nothing to do with eligibility for president. That eligibility is stated in Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution.
Well that's just a plain stupid statement given that it defines federal citizenship.
Feel free to show where in Article II your specific definition of "natural born" is found. Thanks.
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.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. I've seen tyhat fish before. First off, there is not Federal Common law found in the USCON. Secondly, thoise quotes pre-date the 14th which defined citizen at birth. Thirdly, those are opinions NOT law.
Sorry to break it to you. Obama fooled ya. Here's the legal work that the Framers referenced when writing the Constitution, The Law Of Nations by Vattel: MOONBAT
Feel free to cite where so referenced, thanks... Feel equally free to explaio the plain language of 14A...
"Federal" citizenship is also the device used to keep you a slave to the IRS and the Social Insecurity system. Are you sure you want to argue in favor of it? Regardless, the 14th amendment has nothing to do with eligibility for president.
BTW, you do understand that "Law of Nations" is, in fact, not law?
WRONG. Your argument comes dow to this...you acccept an extra-constitutional defintition of citizen but will not accept the one that is in the USCON. It's a very transparent argument.
Who has the trademark on this? I want to use it...
Different argument.
It wasn't defined because ALL of the Framers knew what a natural born citizen was based upon their common legal education. Their point of reference was Vattel's legal work cited above. As Justice Scalia cited Vattel in a recent 2nd Amendment ruling just two years ago (see footnote 10), Vattel is still considered an authoritative legal source.
I understand far more than you appear to understand the basic history of the formation of Consitutional thought. Vattel's definition of the term "natural born citizen" is the basis for the Framers' use of the phrase. They all knew what a natural born citizen is, which is why they felt no need to define it in the Constitution. They assumed that a literate population wouldn't need to have their hands held to define everything. I guess they assumed wrong. The Law of Nations and The Constitution ...Emmerich de Vattel's text, "The Law of Nations" was crucial in shaping American thinking about the nature of constitutions. To this day, Great Britain does not have a written constitution, but instead a collection of laws, customs, and institutions, which can be changed by either the Parliament or the monarchy, or by the ``Venetian'' financiers who are the real power over the British Empire. Consequently, the British constitution remains to this day little more than a mask for the arbitrary power of the oligarchy. The only place of appeal which the American colonists had for unjust laws was to the King's Privy Council. Attempts by the colonists to argue that actions by the British Monarchy and Parliament were unlawful or unconstitutional would be stymied, if they stayed within this legal framework which was essentially arbitrary. Although Vattel praised the British constitution for providing a degree of freedom and lawfulness not seen in most of the German states, his principles of constitutional law were entirely different from the British constitutional arrangements. Consequently, the American colonists attacked the foundation of the King and Parliament's power, by demanding that Vattel's principles of constitutional law be the basis for interpreting the British constitution. American writers quoted {The Law of Nations} on constitutional law, almost immediately after the book's publication. In 1764, James Otis of Massachusetts argued, in one of the leading pamphlets of the day, ``The Rights of the British Colonies Asserted and Proved,'' that the colonial charters were constitutional arrangements. He then quoted Vattel, that the right to establish a constitution lies with the nation as a whole, and the Parliament lacked the right to change the fundamental principles of the British Constitution. Boston revolutionary leader Samuel Adams wrote in 1772, ``Vattel tells us plainly and without hesitation, that `the supreme legislative cannot change the constitution,' `that their authority does not extend so far,' and `that they ought to consider the fundamental laws as sacred, if the nation has not, in very express terms, given them power to change them.'" In a debate with the Colonial Governor of Massachusetts, in 1773, John Adams quoted Vattel that the parliament does not have the power to change the constitution. The adoption of a constitution, by the Constitutional Congress in 1787, based on Leibnizian principles rather than British legal doctrine, was certainly not inevitable. However, British legal experts such as Blackstone, who argued that the Parliament and King could change the constitution, were increasingly recognized by the Americans as proponents of arbitrary power. The early revolutionary leaders' emphasis on Vattel as the authority on constitutional law, with his conception that a nation must choose the best constitution to ensure its perfection and happiness, had very fortunate consequences for the United States and the world, when the U.S. Constitution was later written, as we will see below.
There is no trademark. It's free for whomever wants to use it.
You brought it up. The 14th amendment has nothing to do with presidential eligibility.
Ping...
Wise move. My assumption is that if someone has a microphone and access to the ears of millions of people via the mass media, they're completely bought and paid for.
If you keep repeating it do you hope that it will morph into the truth? Your argument is in response to the question "What constitutes a 'natural born citizen'?" and your counter claim to the 14th amendment definition of "citizen" is to say that it doesn't apply to...wait for it...the definition of a citizen. Your argument fails the most basic test of logic.
Since you keep bringing up the 14th amendment, here's what the Father of the 14th amendment, John Bingham, had to say about citizenship: Even by Bingham's understanding, Obama's not a natural born citizen.
"Not owing foreign allegience" is a reference to the diplomatic reference in the amedment. Nice try...
Originally, in post 59 of this thread, you stated, "There is no such requirement to be natural born." As you were utterly uninformed about that simple and provable requirement, your opinion is obviously of little worth on this matter. As James Madison said: "History records that the money changers have used every form of abuse, intrigue, deceit, and violent means possible to maintain their control over governments by controlling money and its issuance." Oops. Your boy Obama is just another in a line of usurping agents for the Bankster class.
Can yuou cite the debate at Annapolis in which this requirement was put into operation?
A reference to parentage not the progeny.
Try Philly instead. It predated Annapolis: "One important reason why the delegates chose to meet in Carpenters Hall, was that the building also housed the Library Company of Philadelphia. The librarian reported that Vattel was one of the main sources consulted by the delegates during the First Continental Congress, which met from Sept. 5 to Oct. 26, 1774. Charles W.F. Dumas, an ardent supporter of the American cause, printed an edition of The Law of Nations in 1774, with his own notes illustrating how the book applied to the American situation. In 1770, Dumas had met Franklin in Holland, and was one of Franklin's key collaborators in his European diplomacy. He sent three copies to Franklin, instructing him to send one to Harvard University, and to put one in the Philadelphia library. Franklin sent Dumas a letter, Dec. 9, 1775, thanking him for the gift. Franklin stated, "I am much obliged by the kind present you have made us of your edition of Vattel. It came to us in good season, when the circumstances of a rising state make it necessary frequently to consult the law of nations. Accordingly, that copy which I kept, has been continually in the hands of the members of our congress, now sitting ... ." link But tell us again how there is no Constitutional requirement that a president has to be natural born citizen. That's your best gag yet.
Incorrect. You made a simple declarative statement that had no basis in reality.
NEOCOMMIE clinton knee padder libturd. It's debatable, but it appears to make the NEOCONS look tame once in it's element.
The Neolibs will get a pass for the barbarities of their frontmen. All of the Neos and their employers should be put on the next bus to Saturn and allow humanity to evolve peacefully.
If the NEOS and the CFR aren't eradicated there is absolutely zero 'hope'. I'd start with the CFR myself but I won't split hairs. I realize there's .003 of hope now but that's still a shot. ;-)
.003 is better than zero.
No, just the INTENT of the founders. But then the intent of the lawmakers has nothing to do with anything so long as idiots can defend a usurper who isn't fit to untie the shoelaces of the founders.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. 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.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. You bet it is ! That right there is 'HOPE' baby !!
Right on.
Hey Cyni. Seems that some people love their Obamasiah so much that they are beyond reason and the simple words of the founders who clearly stated their intent as to who was eligible to be president. And it couldn't be some foreigner who had ties and allegiances to another/other countries.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Anyone who believes that Obama was born in in Kenya is a Moonbat. So to answer your question...if the shoe fits...
I am 100% correct with that declarative.
U.S. v. WONG KIM ARK, 169 U.S. 649 (1898)
There is no consitutional common law.
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.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. For a moment I stipulate to your argument. You still cannot explain away 14...
Your declarative statement is moonbatty.
Explain U.S. v. WONG KIM ARK to me. Did it find that Wong Kim Ark was a natural born citizen? Nope.
A quick look at the lifestyles of Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and the fact that Wes Pruden and Joe Farah are both gainsfully employed tells me that...
BS! Seventh Amendment In Suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury, shall be otherwise re-examined in any Court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. Looks like the first sentence and the last two words of the seventh amendment refute your claim.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Yep and it's inaanity to say that "it" did not.
Yea so? Where in Article III is it so recognized...?
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.
"...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? Your answer is not substantive and does not address the questions I raised. I post them to you again and ask, one more time, are you honest enough to ask yourself those questions and tell anyone why they should believe Obama is what he (and you apparently) claim he is?
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Where in Article III is it so recognized...? Just posted it to point out, once again, that you were wrong in what you were claiming. I suspect you must be used to that.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. 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.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Again, you're incorrect. The ruling found that Wong Kim Ark was a citizen, not a natural born citizen. The ruling also made a distinction between citizens and natural born citizens. From YOUR link: "Considering the circumstances surrounding the framing of the constitution, I submit that it is unreasonable to conclude that 'natural born citizen' applied to everybody born within the geographical tract known as the United States, irrespective of circumstances; and that the children of foreigners, happening to be born to them while passing through the country, whether of royal parentage or not, or whether of the Mongolian, Malay, or other race, were eligible to the presidency, while children of our citizens, born abroad, were not." Epic fail on your part.
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.
You're quotiong Fuller's dissent. That would be the side that lost. Epic fail on your part.
Uh, no...you're relying on the description of a translation of what Obama's grandma said...
Common law is not constutional law, doof, was the point.
I realize it's the minority opinion. My point was to emphasize that even the majority opinion didn't find him to be a natural born citizen. They did find him to be a citizen. The truly ironic thing about this is that the IRS, the most tyrannical part of this usurping government, also trivializes the meaning of the term "natural born citizen" on a regular basis: http://www.irs.gov/irb/2007-14_IRB/ar16.html Congrats. How's the dark side?
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.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. It seems you need to further your education beyond calling people "doof" when you are proven wrong. Doesn't speak well of you. But then, most of us probably don't expect much from Obamabots. I expect the same from them as I did the Bushbots. In both cases their hero can do no wrong, at least not in their deluded minds.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. And I am sure that you, being the wise Obamabot that you are, know the translation was wrong OR that his old granny in Kenya hates him and is trying to do whatever she can to mess up his gravy train.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Your Ark link states that at times Constitutional law must be interpreted through common law. That was the majority opinion.
It's not an "opinion" it's a dissent. My point was to emphasize that even the majority opinion didn't find him to be a natural born citizen. And that ppoint is incorrect. Read the decision. The USCON establishes two classes of US citizenship...natural born and naturalized.
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.
Not "must"... "The interpretation of the constitution of the United States is necessarily influenced by the fact that its provisions are framed in the language of the English common law, and are to be read in the light of its history." In other words "can"... That said...it was also said: "In Smith v. Alabama, Mr. Justice Matthews, delivering the judgment of the court, said: 'There is no common law of the United States, in the sense of a national customary law, distinct from the common law of England as adopted by the several states each for itself, applied as its local law, and subject to such alteration as may be provided by its own statutes." Meaning, given statutes and laws that the common law is not precedent.
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...
Here's the majority ruling. There's nothing about 'natural born citizen' in their findings: The evident intention, and the necessary effect, of the submission of this case to the decision of the court upon the facts agreed by the parties, were to present for determination the single question, stated at the beginning of this opinion, namely, whether a child born in the United States, of parents of Chinese descent, who, at the time of his birth, are subjects of the emperor of China, but have a permanent domicile and residence in the United States, and are there carrying on business, and are not employed in any diplomatic or official capacity under the emperor of China, becomes at the time of his birth a citizen of the United States. For the reasons above stated, this court is of opinion that the question must be answered in the affirmative. The USCON establishes two classes of US citizenship...natural born and naturalized. There's three classes: citizen, natural born citizen and naturalized citizen. Obama was born a citizen, not a natural born citizen as he was born with dual-nationality. That dual-nationality thing is what the Framers were trying to avoid. Were they alive today, they'd start a revolution all over again due to a dual-citizen having been selected by the Banking powers to be President.
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.
Not if he was not born in America. His mother could not have passed her citizenship on to him under the law as it existed at that time. I know now they claim that every wetback who has been in the country two minutes and gives birth has given birth to an American but I don't believe that either. The women who are here illegally are subject to the laws of their home country and only subject to this one to the extent that they can be, and should be, deported.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. From your link: In Minor v. Happersett, Chief Justice Waite, when construing, in behalf of the court, the very provision of the fourteenth amendment now in question, said: 'The constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that.' And he proceeded to resort to the common law as an aid in the construction of this provision. 21 Wall. 167.
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?
You miss my point. Obama was born in Hawaii. The people telling you that he wasn't born in the US are the usual Jews, globalists and other disinfo artists that wish to always throw us off by injecting fruitless arguments into the mix. Obama was born an American citizen. He's not a natural born citizen.
The common law is used as an interpretive tool and not as a substitute for law or precedent and will be used only to clarify statuatory ambiguity. There is no constitutional common law.
That's an absurdi statement. Again...you are either natural born or you are 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.
And his relatives in Kenya were all lying? Do they all hate him and want to mess up his gravy train? If that is the case I can't say I blame them much because he doesn't even care about his own brother (half brother) who lives on something like a dollar a day. But do you know that his grandmother was lying or that she was misquoted? I don't know that. By the way, I forgot to ask--have YOU seen his long form birth certificate that he has kept well hidden from everyone else? The one he is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep hidden? If he was actually born in Hawaii why wouldn't he just produce that instead of going to all that expense? Does that make sense to you or does it make more sense to believe that he is hiding something?
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. 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.
Incorrect. Natural born citizens are citizens born on American soil of two citizen parents. Naturalized citizens are foreign nationals that become US citizens. Citizens are those born with one parent of American citizenship. There are millions of people not eligible to be be president. Obama's one of 'em.
No, but media Jews lie all the time and fool other people into lying.
Aye yi yi...we can go back and forth on this forever. Two classes: Naturl born or naturalzied. PERIOD.
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'm neither natural born nor was I naturalized. So I must be the third class, like Obama. Neither he nor I are eligible to be prez.
I don't know why he's hiding it. At this point, it doesn't matter if he hides it or not because he's already admitted that he's not a natural born citizen. Rather than try to follow a bunch of media Jews down a rabbit hole, just follow the known facts.
And his relatives in Kenya were all lying? Do they all hate him and want to mess up his gravy train? If that is the case I can't say I blame them much because he doesn't even care about his own brother (half brother) who lives on something like a dollar a day. But do you know that his grandmother was lying or that she was misquoted? I don't know that. By the way, I forgot to ask--have YOU seen his long form birth certificate that he has kept well hidden from everyone else? The one he is spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep hidden? If he was actually born in Hawaii why wouldn't he just produce that instead of going to all that expense? Does that make sense to you or does it make more sense to believe that he is hiding something? OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL: More military officers demand eligibility proof OBAMA WATCH CENTRAL More military officers demand eligibility proof Plaintiff: 'In the worst case … it's going to be revolution in the streets' Posted: March 02, 2009 8:18 pm Eastern By Bob Unruh © 2009 WorldNetDaily Military officers from the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines are working with California attorney Orly Taitz and her Defend Our Freedoms Foundation, citing a legal right established in British common law nearly 800 years ago and recognized by the U.S. Founding Fathers to demand documentation that may prove – or disprove – Barack Obama's eligibility to be president. Taitz told WND today she has mailed to U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder a request that he "relate Quo Warranto on Barack Hussein Obama II to test his title to president before the Supreme Court." The lengthy legal phrase essentially means an explanation is being demanded for what authority Obama is using to act as president. An online constitutional resource says Quo Warranto "affords the only judicial remedy for violations of the Constitution by public officials and agents." ............
From the WND link: Other challenges have focused on Obama's citizenship through his father, a Kenyan subject to the jurisdiction of the United Kingdom at the time of his birth, thus making him a dual citizen. The cases contend the framers of the Constitution excluded dual citizens from qualifying as natural born. That's the winnable route.
The simple question I want answered is WHY would anyone who was actually born in this country, which is what Obama and his supporters claim, NOT PRODUCE THE PROOF WHICH COULD BE DONE FOR LESS THAN A HUNDRED DOLLARS? Instead of doing that he has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on high priced shysters to hide his long form birth certificate. I don't claim to be all that smart but I believe that anyone who is that desperate to hide something has something pretty serious to hide.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. You're natural born.
Doof...let's make this simple...you are claiming that Obama was born in Kenya...his Mom then hopped a pland, snuck kinto a hospital as if he were born there, had the birth registered in Hawaii via the hospital and then reported in a local paper? Have i got it?
I made no such claim.
Obama provided a HAwaii COLB that Hawaii has said is valid. Stop promioting the lie that he hasn't provided anything.
What I am promoting is the truth that he has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep his LONG FORM BIRTH CERTIFICATE HIDDEN. That is the same bc that us lowly peons have to provide if we want something like a passport. But your hero doesn't have to show one to prove he is eligible to hold the highest office the country has to offer? If he truly is an American citizen and he was actually born in Hawaii why wouldn't he produce the long form bc? Would YOU spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to keep yours hidden if there was some controversy about where you were born and you were running for a public office? And why is he spending all that money if he has nothing to hide? Do you remember the sob talking about "transparency"? Your hero is just another politician and isn't worth the air he is taking up. I have asked you over and over why your hero won't produce that long form birth certificate, why he spends all that money to keep it hidden. One more non responsive, bs post from you and you can talk to yourself as far as I am concerned.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Who are you to tell me my status? You didn't even know that there was a natural born clause in the Constitution.
I WAS REFERRING To PARENTAGE.
I'm the euridite.
Document even one cent. Thanks...
#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. There is no such requirement to be natural born. Children born on US soil of non-citizen immigrants are natural born. war posted on 2009-03-04 21:23:53 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
THIS is from the article that was posted on LP, an article favorable to your hero. The White House regards the claims as an irritant and is not responding to questions about them, but lawyers for the Democratic National Committee and Mr Obama himself have spent considerable time and money combating a steady supply of lawsuits at every court level up to the Supreme Court. The exact cost to Mr Obama himself is not known. WHY would they spend "considerable time and money" fighting the production of the document which would either prove he was born in Hawaii or prove that he wasn't? It would take almost no time and very little money to end the controversy, yet your hero refuses to do that. How much is "considerable time and money"? You should know since you claim to be rich. Would it be, in your opinion, far more than the cost of producing the damned document? Or is that beyond your limited ability to grasp? This will be my last post to you since you are non responsive and always answer with bs. Adios.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. It's the principle of the thing.
... now with Solium™!
Indeed.
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.
Yes, he's the reaching-downer-to-the-downtrodden or something. But he has an odd way of showing it here to us poor slobs. Would this be a good time to call attention to jewish dualism vs. celtic trios?
... now with Solium™!
It always is. And never about the money or power--ALWAYS THE PRINCIPLE.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Seriously, were you butt raped by a gang of feral priests when you were young ??? No I wasn't an alter boy.
Yes would have sufficed.
Amyone who believes that that there is nothing wrong with someone would spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to hide a document which he could easily produce for less than a hundred, and which would prove that he was actually born in this country (if he was), ain't all there. Your hundreds of thousands of dollars figure is pulled out of your ass. And he released his certificate of live birth and the fruit cakes are still coming out of the wood work.
You need to learn something and learn it quickly. He didn't release a "certificate of live birth". He released a "certification of live birth". See at the top of the page? It says, in plain English, "certification of live birth": According to the State of Hawaii, what he released isn't enough to even prove that he's a native of Hawaii: The primary documents used to show you are of age and a qualified native Hawaiian are: In order to process your application, DHHL utilizes information that is found only on the original Certificate of Live Birth, which is either black or green. This is a more complete record of your birth than the Certification of Live Birth (a computer-generated printout). Submitting the original Certificate of Live Birth will save you time and money since the computer-generated Certification requires additional verification by DHHL. the fruit cakes are still coming out of the wood work. The fruitcakes are the ones that can't accept the simple reality that Obama has NEVER released his Certificate of Live Birth but merely his Certification of Live Birth, two entirely different animals under Hawaiian law.
The White House regards the claims as an irritant and is not responding to questions about them, but lawyers for the Democratic National Committee and Mr Obama himself have spent considerable time and money combating a steady supply of lawsuits at every court level up to the Supreme Court. The exact cost to Mr Obama himself is not known. You are, or seem to be, retarded. Exactly what would constitute "considerable time and money" for someone who has access to millions of dollars? And a Hawaii COLB doesn't mean a lot but then maybe you don't know that. It doesn't list a lot of information that is contained on the long form birth certificate. And anyone can Photoshop just about any document which is what it appears they did with even the limited pos they foisted off on gullible people like you.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. C'mon..that was funny...
It's hard to tell funny from serious anymore. I checked this morning. Obama's still not eligible to be president.
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.
I checked again this morning. He IS POTUS.
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.
So Bush was also a legit prez in your mind?
he was elected under the procedures set forth in the USCON, i.e., the Electoral College, and which the SCOTUS made painfully clear that my vote and your vote not only mean squar but that we don't have a right to vote for POTUS anyway..
It's easy. Jus sanguinis applies only when a child is born overseas and only then in determining US citizenship. The flaw in your [il]logic is that the US recognizes British jus sanguinis citizenship over its own law. The US, in fact, does not. The US could care less if the chil;d of a non-diplomat has a right to dual citizenship. US citizenship cannot be "watered down" via jus sanguinis if a child is born jus soli. The US does not bifurcate children born on its soil as "ciziten" and "natural born" citizen. And you do not see "three types". You see the estblishment of two. Natural born post-bellum and citizen ab initio bellum.
My point exactly. Thanks for playing and I hope you enjoy the Obamatoon.
INA: ACT 301 - NATIONALS AND CITIZENS OF THE UNITED STATES AT BIRTH Sec. 301. [8 U.S.C. 1401] The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth: (a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof; (b) a person born in the United States to a member of an Indian, Eskimo, Aleutian, or other aboriginal tribe: Provided, That the granting of citizenship under this subsection shall not in any manner impair or otherwise affect the right of such person to tribal or other property; (c) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents both of whom are citizens of the United States and one of whom has had a residence in the United States or one of its outlying possessions, prior to the birth of such person; (d) a person born outside of the United States and its outlying possessions of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year prior to the birth of such person, and the other of whom is a national, but not a citizen of the United States; (e) a person born in an outlying possession of the United States of parents one of whom is a citizen of the United States who has been physically present in the United States or one of its outlying possessions for a continuous period of one year at any time prior to the birth of such person; (f) a person of unknown parentage found in the United States while under the age of five years, until shown, prior to his attaining the age of twenty-one years, not to have been born in the United States; ``snip~ Show me where the above law distinguishes between "citizen": and "natural born" citizen. Thanks in advance.
Wha...huh? I'd love to call thatg circular reasoning but I see no reasoning apparent.
Some things are just none of your business unless the person wishes to tell you. lucysmom posted on 2009-03-03 16:03:16 ET Reply Trace lucysmom is delusional. That's my contribution to this thread.
_________________________________________________________________________ The bar for you exists in a perpetually low state anyway.
There is none thus the 14th amendment.
From your first site. Note the plural: By birth, either within the territory of the United States or to U.S. citizen parents.... BTW, as an aside, there's a legal distinction between citizen and subject. British rules regarding natural born subjects don't follow into natural born citizen for one very good reason: subjects never become king.
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.
And she is an Obamabot but I guess that might go along with being delusional.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Yea...there are instances when a child is born in circumstances outside of the first clause above, i.e., non jus oli, so if that be the case then citizenship might only be ocnferred if both parents are citizens. Obama was born within the territory of the US so it doesn't matter.
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.
Oops. British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5): "Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth.”
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.”
You don't know what you think you know. You were just shown the law. You were just shown that there is no legal distinction made between "citizen at birth" and "natural born citizen". Henceforth, if and should should you choose to continue to promote that canard then you are doing so from a position of knowing the truth yet willfully choosing to contravene it.
So you're agreeing with me now or shooting yourself in the foot?
Feel free to wax elqoently how British law trumps US law in the US. Thanks...
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.
As you appear to push the interests of one man over that of the law and the rest of the country, I'd say the same about you. You're a partisan. I'm not.
From US COde: Sec. 301. [8 U.S.C. 1401] The following shall be nationals and citizens of the United States at birth: (a) a person born in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof;
Chuckles...yet here I am the one quoting US law while you quote British law. Citye the US law that makes British law supreme. I'll wait. You're a partisan. I'm not. Suuure...
Cite the appropiate Title, Chapter and Section of the US Code that supprts that legal decision. I'll wait.
a. U.S. nationals and citizens may possess dual or multiple nationality and owe allegiance to one or several foreign states. They may even have identified themselves more closely with the foreign state than with the United States, thereby calling into question the propriety of extending protection to them. Since each country establishes its own law of nationality, dual nationality cannot be eliminated, may result in confusion, and could complicate the ability of the U.S. Government to protect its nationals/citizens. b. The United States has no special arrangements with individual countries to “permit” dual nationality. U.S. Government policy toward dual nationality is the same regardless of other nationalities involved. c. While a person who has dual or multiple nationality resides in the United States, the right of the United States to claim his or her allegiance is held to be paramount of the right of the other countries of which he or she may be a national. Conversely, while a person who has dual nationality resides abroad in a foreign country of which he or she also is a national, the right of that country to claim his or her allegiance is paramount to that of the United States... 7 FAM 1111.4 Dual or Multiple Nationality (TL:CON-64; 11-30-95)
Because Obama by line of his father was subject to British law until the early 80's. That alone should be the 2x4 that would wake up anyone that doesn't have a hardon for Obama/Dems. Suuure... Spoken like a partisan. I despise The Feds and their toady political parties. Haven't you figured that out yet?
And yet you've shown no US law that states or recognizes citizenship jus soli as being inferior to the jus sanguinis citizenship laws of another country. ON the other hand, I have provided to you US law which clearly shows that the US does not recognize jus sanguinis citizenship as rendering moot the fact of natural born citizenship to anyone born jus soli. IN other words, you lost about several posts ago and won't admit it.
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.
You missed this: "While a person who has dual or multiple nationality resides in the United States, the right of the United States to claim his or her allegiance is held to be paramount of the right of the other countries of which he or she may be a national."
"While a person who has dual or multiple nationality resides in the United States, the right of the United States to claim his or her allegiance is held to be paramount of the right of the other countries of which he or she may be a national." Wha...huh? From my previous post: ON the other hand, I have provided to you US law which clearly shows that the US does not recognize jus sanguinis citizenship as rendering moot the fact of natural born citizenship to anyone born jus soli. war posted on 2009-03-06 13:22:47 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
Nope. Just the law as is applicable to support your argument will suffice. But thanks for offering.
My point was that regardless of what's said, US law tacitly recognizes dual citizenship by virtue of that paragraph.
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.
Actually, what the US recognizes, op cit, is that its declarations of citizenship are superior to any foreign claims thereof or do you need the word "paramout" defined for you?
So you're agreeing that Obama was born a dual citizen? If so, why does the Constitution (the law) make a distinction between natural born citizens, citizens and naturalized citizens?
PART of the law is the US Constitution. Part of the law is also what Congress legislates Articlke VI USCON This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding. it's up to him to prove that he is what he claims One must "prove" only what the law compels him to prove or, absent any law, what those, e.g. a judge, acting legally under the color of law compel one to do. Obama has not been so compelled and for good reason; that good reason is that there is no reason...
I haven't seen the actual British law. So I have no idea. And it's irrelevant anyway. He IS a natural born citizen. If so, why does the Constitution (the law) make a distinction between natural born citizens, citizens and naturalized citizens? Asked and answered.
British Nationality Act of 1948 (Part II, Section 5 b): Citizenship by descent. 5.—(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a person born after the commencement of this Act shall be a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies by descent if his father is a citizen of the United Kingdom and Colonies at the time of the birth: (b) that person's birth having occurred in a place in a foreign country other than a place such as is mentioned in the last foregoing paragraph, the birth is registered at a United Kingdom consulate within one year of its occurrence, or, with the permission of the Secretary of State ~snip~ Do you have any proof that Obama's birth was registered at a British consulate within one year of his birth?
Obama admits he was born with dual nationality. Are you saying Obama's wrong about his citizenship? BTW, was McCain a natural born citizen?
If he was actually boron on base yes. If not...no. His BC claims that he was born on base. Obama admits he was born with dual nationality. As if I'd take your word for it. How many laws do you need to see or do you just enjoy being pummelled?
You're parsing it incorrectly: "that person's birth having occurred in a place in a foreign country other than a place such as is mentioned in the last foregoing paragraph, the birth is registered at a United Kingdom consulate within one year of its occurrence" Kenya was a Brit colony, not "other".
"That person" is Obama...or do you not understand what "citizen by descent" means?
Incorrect. His BC says he was born in Colon Hospital in the city of Colon (rather apt for the asshole).
Ack. I was thinking Sr., not Jr.
Interesting...thought that he was born on base but registered the birth at the hospital. No?
LOL! What is it about the letters R and D that make idol worshippers out of the delusional folks amongst us?
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Dude...no worries...I have to stop and read and re-read because I get confused too... IN RE: MCCain...I recall what it was now...Jus sanguinis provision of US xitizenship that makes him natural born. Also, and IIRC, there was some sort of registry of births that was kept rather than BC's issued at the installation. For some reason, McCain's birth doesn't appear in that registry which is what caused the controversy. The law is probably vaguer in McCain's case than it is in Obama's the pplication thereof to the latter I believe is very clear cut.
Wherein this whole exchange have I argued or advocated from any standing other than what i could support with the law?
This goes to a larger point that's probably more valid than what we've been arguing: I think that the powers-that-be put up two borderline ineligible candidates of the usual narcissistic tendencies. It's lose- lose for us and win-win for the powers-that-be while us proles dicker about whoever won the mudwrestling match. It's one step from McCain/Obama to putting someone even worse into office down the road. That's their endgame.
Again, larger point: we can argue back and forth all day long but there is no specific law regarding what either of us is arguing. There's case examples, opinion, court briefs, etc. In the end, this is new ground. The powers that be love this shit.
I work the opposite. If I see an R or a D, I assume they're a bought and paid for whore. I had brief hope for Ron Paul....
Well...when you remove the debate from the law to the what we end up with in office we're all arguing about a different pizza pie altogether...
I have always liked Ron. I can be disappointed in someone sometimes but that doesn't automatically make me dislike them. In my opinion they probably threatened Ron's family because I don't think he would have backed down if they had only threatened him. I realize that my opinion may not be correct and I certainly have no proof but I believe Ron knows that bad things happen to people who make life unpleasant for the wrong crowd.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. What law? The only law that there is to reference is the Constitution. If two reasonably intelligent people like us can't come to an agreement, you can bet your bippy that stuffed suit dipshits will never figure it out. Hence two ineligibles like Obama/McCain are put on display for a population that thinks American Idol is entertaining.
All Ron needed to do is to say, "My family's been threatened."
The proof of that is that they get worse with every election. I thought the country had scraped the bottom of the barrel with Clinton but then we got Bush. He found a shovel and started digging the hole deeper. And in less than two months the Obamasiah is proving to be worse than Bush.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. We'll end up with Dracula after Obama.
LOL! The problem is that there probably won't be anything much left in four years with that scumbag doing the bidding of his masters (the bankers--they own him just like they did Bush and Clinton--McCain too for that matter but he just gets to be one whore out of 100 in the Senate).
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. So in retrospect, voting for Obama would have been the correct thing to do, if not exactly for the same reasons core Duh Duh Duh democrats have in mind? I'm all for wrecking the system, but not giving it away piecemeal to DC/London/Wall St insiders.
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
I wouldn't have any problem with "wrecking the system" but I am afraid the front men who are put up for the gullible sheeple to vote for (or against) are intent on wrecking America. And America is not "the system" I want to see wrecked.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Americans aren't a system, we're people, just people. In the meantime, can you help me line up some investors to help make my dream of adapting The Great Gatsby into a musical ice-skating show a reality?
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
You should just put an ad in a little free paper and the investors should flock to you. How could a great idea like that fail? >(;^[}
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. Wouldn't the Clintons be perfect as Tom and Daisy? And who knows, maybe they could pick up some endorsement deals along the way.
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
If you can get some Chinese investors I am sure the Clintons would be glad to star in your production.
Liberty is not a means to a higher political end. It is itself the highest political end. I'll start making phone calls.
The ultimate effect of shielding men from the effects of folly, is to fill the world with fools. - Herbert Spencer
Pick one. But I mistook "ineligible" in your post for "unqualified".
Gotham Stakes at Aqueduct today. Race 9 Mr. Fantasy #5 to win. Exacta 5-6 (Haynesfield) Trifecta 5-6-7 (Imperial Council) Wish me luck. I'm running up to the simulcasting facility shortly. I think post time is 4:18 p.m. local
Thanks...interesting sequence...ironic, I should say... OTB here I come...
Oh well. Exciting race. I Want Revenge opened it up down the stretch for the impressive win. I backed up my win bet with a show bet (Mr. Fantasy) and have a ticket to cash next time I hit the track. My $60 ($40W/$20S) got me back $30 - $3.00 on the show.
Lucysmom: 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.
/ end of ~~~~byeltsonesque styled response 
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
#2. To: IndieTX (#1)
OK now that you've drug the disingenuous ElPee scum through the house, will you clean up after? LOL.
Lord Acton
#3. To: James Deffenbach (#2)
SMOM FER.
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
#4. To: IndieTX (#3)
Lord Acton
#5. To: James Deffenbach (#0)
(Edited)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams 
#6. To: James Deffenbach (#0)
(Edited)
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.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#7. To: James Deffenbach (#0)
www.righttokeepandbeararms.com
#8. To: James Deffenbach (#0)
Is lucysmom As Gullible and Naive as her posts indicate? Could it be possible?
#9. To: Old Fud (#8)
Obots Seeking Change
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#10. To: Rotara (#5)
That dumb b*tch needs a 7 iron wrapped around her pin head.
Lord Acton
#11. To: randge (#7)
The Savage brought this topic up this evening.
Lord Acton
#12. To: James Deffenbach (#10)
she's a lunatic
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#13. To: Old Fud (#8)
Lord Acton
#14. To: All (#12)
Poor little Lucy..
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#15. To: James Deffenbach (#10)
I think she needs a good rest at Whispering Pines Home for the Criminally Insane. It must be a crime to be as crazy as she sounds.
#16. To: Cynicom (#15)
Lord Acton
#17. To: James Deffenbach (#0)
His long form birth certificate, which could be produced
#18. To: Rotara (#5)
That dumb b*tch needs a 7 iron wrapped around her pin head.
#19. To: James Deffenbach, lucysmom (#0)
#20. To: James Deffenbach, all (#0)
#21. To: randge, James Deffenbach (#7)
(Edited)
The Savage brought this topic up this evening.
#22. To: randge (#7)
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.
#23. To: Jethro Tull, randge (#22)
With him saying false flags are coming...
#24. To: Rhino369 (#20)
Are you dumb asses who believe wild conspiracies with no evidence as dumb as you appear? Extremely likely.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#25. To: Jethro Tull (#22)
With him saying false flags are coming, and Glenn Beck discussing FEMA camps, the big, ball of poop is gaining steam - which is just fine with me.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#26. To: war (#17)
Let it go Moonbats...let is go...
Lord Acton
#27. To: war (#19)
It's a pretty dispicable exercise writing about someone cross board, btw.
Lord Acton
#28. To: Rhino369 (#20)
Are you dumb asses who believe wild conspiracies with no evidence as dumb as you appear? Extremely likely.
Lord Acton
#29. To: war (#17)
Let it go Moonbats...let is go...
#30. To: bluegrass (#21)
Lord Acton
#31. To: James Deffenbach (#30)
#32. To: Rhino369, ALL (#20)
Are you dumb asses who believe wild conspiracies with no evidence as dumb as you appear
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
#33. To: bluegrass (#29)
#34. To: IndieTX (#32)
#35. To: James Deffenbach (#30)
If he was born in Kenya, as his Kenyan grandmother and some of his other relatives there claim
#36. To: James Deffenbach, lucysmom (#27)
KMA. I will post whatever I want to post about anyone I choose to post it about. She made herself a target posting stupid stuff about how terrible everyone is being to her Obamasiah.
#37. To: James Deffenbach (#26)
You Obamabots
#38. To: James Deffenbach (#28)
#39. To: war (#33)
(Edited)
I have no question about Obama's birth certificate.
#40. To: war (#37)
He produced a COLB
#41. To: war (#38)
Lord Acton
#42. To: war (#36)
You are such a MAAAAN...not only did you pick on a girl you did so where she could not respond.
Lord Acton
#43. To: James Deffenbach, Rotara (#42)
"Pick on a girl"? You make it sound like I actually hit her or something.
#44. To: James Deffenbach (#41)
#45. To: war, Rotara (#43)
Lord Acton
#46. To: war (#44)
Lord Acton
#47. To: war (#44)
I've probably created more wealth in 1 week than you have in a lifetime.
Lord Acton
#48. To: James Deffenbach (#45)
#49. To: James Deffenbach (#47)
#50. To: war (#48)
You RESPONDED to that post saying that she was CRIMINALLY INSANE which in and of itself is an insane response.
Lord Acton
#51. To: war (#49)
I'm not enthralled with Obama. He is what we have which is infinitely better than what we had.
Lord Acton
#52. To: James Deffenbach, all (#51)
(Edited)
I'm not enthralled with Obama. He is what we have which is infinitely better than what we had.
"Corporation: An entity created for the legal protection of its human parasites, whose sole purpose is profit and self-perpetuation." ~~ IndieTx
#53. To: James Deffenbach (#51)
He's worse.
#54. To: IndieTX (#52)
Now that is some good Klinton-speak right there. He must be a lawyer.
#55. To: James Deffenbach (#50)
She seems to be way around the bend to me.
#56. To: Jethro Tull, James Deffenbach, bluegrass (#22)
With him saying false flags are coming,
www.righttokeepandbeararms.com
#57. To: war (#49)
(Edited)
I'm not enthralled with Obama. He is what we have which is infinitely better than what we had.
minutes seconds with FmrPrez-noHerbertJr it would end with my being dragged away in less than peaceful repose.
#58. To: Dakmar (#57)
he can work a real crowd.
www.righttokeepandbeararms.com
#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.
#60. To: randge (#58)
I find him tedious, especially when he's got his megaphone on telling us what "we've gotta do."
#61. To: randge (#58)
I find him tedious, especially when he's got his megaphone on telling us what "we've gotta do."
#62. To: war (#61)
#63. To: IndieTX (#52)
Now that is some good Klinton-speak right there. He must be a lawyer.
Lord Acton
#64. To: war (#53)
You have 0 foundation upon which to base that statement about Obama - especially less than 60 days into his term.
Lord Acton
#65. To: war (#55)
Excuse me if you rate -273 Kelvin on the credibility scale.
Lord Acton
#66. To: James Deffenbach (#65)
No sensible person would give a $#it how they "rate" with you.
#67. To: war (#66)
Lord Acton
#68. To: James Deffenbach (#67)
www.righttokeepandbeararms.com
#69. To: randge (#68)
It is all of no use, James.
Lord Acton
#70. To: James Deffenbach (#69)
I already knew he was pretty much a hopeless case having read much of his fawning over the black prince on LP. Hard to believe he brought it here.
www.righttokeepandbeararms.com
#71. To: war, Jethro Tull, James Deffenbach, randge (#59)
There is no such requirement to be natural born.
#72. To: randge (#70)
Lord, how we struggle with these refugees.
Lord Acton
#73. To: bluegrass (#71)
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#74. To: Rotara (#73)
#75. To: bluegrass (#71)
Either way, you're incorrect.
#76. To: bluegrass (#71)
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.
#77. To: war (#75)
The plain language of the 14th mendment states what?
#78. To: bluegrass (#77)
The 14th amendment has nothing to do with eligibility for president.
#79. To: bluegrass (#77)
That eligibility is stated in Article 2, Section 1 of the Constitution.
#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.
Lord Acton
#81. To: James Deffenbach (#80)
#82. To: war (#76)
(Edited)
§ 212. Citizens and natives. The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.
If you prefer the Cult of Obama to the law, just say so. Bushbots always preferred the Cult of Bush to the law also. A pox on all of your houses.
#83. To: James Deffenbach (#80)
And since he was most likely born in Kenya...
#84. To: bluegrass (#82)
#85. To: war (#78)
Well that's just a plain stupid statement given that it defines federal citizenship.
#86. To: bluegrass (#82)
#87. To: bluegrass (#85)
Regardless, the 14th amendment has nothing to do with eligibility for president.
#88. To: bluegrass (#85)
#89. To: bluegrass (#85)
"Federal" citizenship is also the device used to keep you a slave to the IRS and the Social Insecurity system. Are you sure you want to argue in favor of it?
#90. To: war (#79)
Feel free to show where in Article II your specific definition of "natural born" is found.
#91. To: war (#86)
(Edited)
BTW, you do understand that "Law of Nations" is, in fact, not law?
#92. To: war (#88)
#93. To: war (#89)
Different argument.
#94. To: James Deffenbach (#82)
#95. To: randge (#56)
I do not trust any of them, however.
#96. To: bluegrass (#93)
You brought it up. The 14th amendment has nothing to do with presidential eligibility.
#97. To: war, randge, James Deffenbach, Jethro Tull, christine, Cynicom (#96)
[I] find no fault with the introductory clause [S 61 Bill], which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that 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... http://www.1 4thamendment.us/articles/anchor_babies_unconstitutionality.html
#98. To: bluegrass (#97)
#99. To: war (#98)
#100. To: bluegrass (#90)
It wasn't defined because ALL of the Framers knew what a natural born citizen was based upon their common legal education.
#101. To: bluegrass (#99)
Originally, in post 59 of this thread, you stated, "There is no such requirement to be natural born."
#102. To: war (#100)
#103. To: war (#101)
#104. To: bluegrass (#82)
If you prefer the Cult of Obama to the law, just say so. Bushbots always preferred the Cult of Bush to the law also. A pox on all of your houses.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#105. To: Rotara (#104)
#106. To: bluegrass (#105)
All of the Neos and their employers should be put on the next bus to Saturn and allow humanity to evolve peacefully.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#107. To: Rotara (#106)
#108. To: war (#81)
Thirdly, those are opinions NOT law.
Lord Acton
#109. To: war (#83)
MOONBAT
Lord Acton
#110. To: bluegrass (#107)
.003 is better than zero.
"If you love wealth more than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, depart from us in peace. We ask not your counsel nor your arms. Crouch down and lick the hand that feeds you. May your chains rest lightly upon you and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen.”—Samuel Adams
#111. To: James Deffenbach (#109)
And I am out of patience trying to teach you.
#112. To: Cynicom (#111)
Lord Acton
#113. To: James Deffenbach (#109)
That the best you can do?
#114. To: bluegrass (#103)
Incorrect.
#115. To: bluegrass (#103)
that had no basis in reality.
#116. To: James Deffenbach (#108)
No, just the INTENT of the founders.
#117. To: war (#113)
Anyone who believes that Obama was born in in Kenya is a Moonbat.
Lord Acton
#118. To: James Deffenbach (#108)
But then the intent of the lawmakers has nothing to do with anything...
#119. To: war (#114)
#120. To: war (#115)
#121. To: James Deffenbach (#117)
Apparently there are a great number of "moonbats"
#122. To: war (#116)
There is no consitutional common law.
Lord Acton
#123. To: bluegrass (#120)
Did it find that Wong Kim Ark was a natural born citizen?
#124. To: James Deffenbach (#122)
In Suits at common law...
#125. To: James Deffenbach (#117)
#126. To: war (#121)
Lord Acton
#127. To: war (#124)
Yea so?
Lord Acton
#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.
Lord Acton
#129. To: war (#123)
#130. To: James Deffenbach (#128)
#131. To: bluegrass (#129)
#132. To: James Deffenbach (#128)
According to some sources even his own grandmother
#133. To: James Deffenbach (#127)
Just posted it to point out, once again...
#134. To: war (#131)
#135. To: bluegrass (#130)
Those sources are people like Jerome Corsi. Corsi is an old school B'nai B'rith operative.
Lord Acton
#136. To: war (#133)
Lord Acton
#137. To: war (#132)
Uh, no...you're relying on the description of a translation of what Obama's grandma said...
Lord Acton
#138. To: war (#133)
Common law is not constutional law...
#139. To: bluegrass (#134)
I realize it's the minority opinion.
#140. To: James Deffenbach (#135)
#141. To: bluegrass (#138)
Your Ark link states that at times Constitutional law must be interpreted through common law.
#142. To: bluegrass (#140)
He's not a natural born citizen as he was born a dual-citizen. End of story.
#143. To: war (#139)
#144. To: war (#142)
Obama is natural born.
#145. To: bluegrass (#140)
Obama was born an American citizen
Lord Acton
#146. To: war (#141)
Not "must"...
#147. To: bluegrass (#144)
You can't be natural born if one of your parents is a citizen of another country.
#148. To: James Deffenbach (#145)
#149. To: bluegrass (#146)
#150. To: bluegrass (#148)
Obama was born an American citizen. He's not a natural born citizen.
#151. To: war (#147)
Again...there are two classes of US citizens...natural born or naturalized.
#152. To: bluegrass (#148)
(Edited)
Obama was born in Hawaii. The people telling you that he wasn't born in the US are the usual Jews, globalists and other disinfo artists that wish to always throw us off by injecting fruitless arguments into the mix.
Lord Acton
#153. To: bluegrass (#151)
citizen
#154. To: war (#150)
#155. To: James Deffenbach (#152)
nd his relatives in Kenya were all lying?
#156. To: bluegrass (#154)
#157. To: war (#153)
#158. To: war (#156)
#159. To: James Deffenbach (#152)
If he was actually born in Hawaii why wouldn't he just produce that instead of going to all that expense? Does that make sense to you or does it make more sense to believe that he is hiding something?
#160. To: James Deffenbach, bluegrass (#152)
Obama was born in Hawaii. The people telling you that he wasn't born in the US are the usual Jews, globalists and other disinfo artists that wish to always throw us off by injecting fruitless arguments into the mix.
#161. To: TwentyTwelve, James Deffenbach (#160)
#162. To: TwentyTwelve (#160)
(Edited)
Lord Acton
#163. To: bluegrass (#151)
I was born a citizen of the US and a citizen of Ireland.
#164. To: James Deffenbach (#152)
And his relatives in Kenya were all lying?
#165. To: bluegrass (#157)
A while ago you were claiming that there was no 'natural born citizen' clause in the US Constitution.
#166. To: James Deffenbach (#162)
#167. To: war (#166)
Lord Acton
#168. To: war (#165)
I made no such claim.
#169. To: war (#163)
You're natural born.
#170. To: bluegrass (#168)
#171. To: bluegrass (#169)
Who are you to tell me my status?
#172. To: James Deffenbach (#167)
What I am promoting is the truth that he has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars
#173. To: bluegrass (#169)
#174. To: war (#172)
Lord Acton
#175. To: James Deffenbach (#152)
If he was actually born in Hawaii why wouldn't he just produce that instead of going to all that expense?
#176. To: war, Prefrontal Vortex (#171)
I'm the euridite.
#177. To: war (#170)
I WAS REFERRING To PARENTAGE.
#178. To: bluegrass (#176)
Indeed.
#179. To: Prefrontal Vortex (#175)
It's the principle of the thing.
Lord Acton
#180. To: Prefrontal Vortex (#178)
Would this be a good time to call attention to jewish dualism vs. celtic trios?
#181. To: Rotara (#24)
#182. To: IndieTX (#32)
#183. To: James Deffenbach (#28)
#184. To: Rhino369 (#183)
(Edited)
he released his certificate of live birth...
Applying for Hawaiian Home Lands
#185. To: Rhino369 (#183)
THIS is from the article that was posted on LP, an article favorable to your hero.
Lord Acton
#186. To: bluegrass (#176)
#187. To: war (#186)
#188. To: bluegrass (#177)
By his parentage, Bracko isn't eligible to be president. That's the point.
#189. To: bluegrass (#187)
I checked this morning. Obama's still not eligible to be president.
#190. To: war (#188)
What LAW of the US says that a "natural born" citizen is one of two US citizens?
#191. To: war (#189)
He IS POTUS.
#192. To: bluegrass (#191)
So Bush was also a legit prez in your mind?
#193. To: bluegrass (#190)
Show me the law. I see three types of citizens in the Constitution.
#194. To: war (#192)
which the SCOTUS made painfully clear that my vote and your vote not only mean squar but that we don't have a right to vote for POTUS anyway..
#195. To: bluegrass (#190)
#196. To: bluegrass (#194)
#197. To: James Deffenbach (#0)
I believe that Obama advocates transparency in government, not in revealing personal information to all comers.
"This man is Jesus,” shouted one man, spilling his Guinness as Barack Obama began his inaugural address. “When will he come to Kenya to save us?”
-Schweizerische Schuetzenzeitung (Swiss Shooting Federation) April, 1941
#198. To: X-15 (#197)
#199. To: bluegrass (#190)
Show me the relevant data from the era when the US Constitution was written that defined a natural born citizen
#200. To: war (#193)
Citizenship is one of the most coveted gifts that the U.S. government can bestow, and the most important immigration benefit that USCIS can grant. Most people become U.S. citizens in one of two ways:
#201. To: war (#199)
There is none...
#202. To: X-15 (#197)
lucysmom is delusional. That's my contribution to this thread.
Lord Acton
#203. To: bluegrass (#200)
By birth, either within the territory of the United States or to U.S. citizen parents....
#204. To: bluegrass (#201)
You mean minus the common understanding of the day?
#205. To: war (#204)
#206. To: war (#204)
#207. To: bluegrass (#201)
I know I'm not natural born and I've known it my whole life.
#208. To: bluegrass (#206)
#209. To: bluegrass (#205)
#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.
#213. To: war (#211)
I can only conclude that you have no interest in the promoting the truth.
#214. To: bluegrass (#212)
#215. To: bluegrass (#213)
As you appear to push the interests of one man over that of the law and the rest of the country, I'd say the same about you.
#216. To: bluegrass (#212)
He was a dual citizen at birth, not a natural born citizen.
#217. To: war (#214)
#218. To: war (#215)
yet here I am the one quoting US law while you quote British law.
#219. To: bluegrass (#218)
Because Obama by line of his father was subject to British law until the early 80's.
#220. To: war (#216)
Cite the appropiate Title, Chapter and Section of the US Code that supprts that legal decision.
#221. To: war (#219)
#222. To: bluegrass (#221)
You missed this:
#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?
#224. To: war (#222)
Wha...huh?
#225. To: war (#223)
Just the law as is applicable to support your argument will suffice.
#226. To: bluegrass (#224)
My point was that regardless of what's said, US law tacitly recognizes dual citizenship by virtue of that paragraph.
#227. To: war (#226)
#228. To: bluegrass (#225)
The law is the US Constitution.
#229. To: bluegrass (#227)
So you're agreeing that Obama was born a dual citizen?
#230. To: bluegrass (#205)
#231. To: war (#229)
#232. To: bluegrass (#231)
BTW, was McCain a natural born citizen?
#233. To: war (#230)
Do you have any proof that Obama's birth was registered at a British consulate within one year of his birth?
#234. To: bluegrass (#233)
Kenya was a Brit colony, not "other".
#235. To: war (#232)
His BC claims that he was born on base.
#236. To: war (#234)
#237. To: bluegrass (#235)
Incorrect...
#238. To: bluegrass (#225)
But please, knock yourself out and act like the Bushbots did when confronted with questions about their magical chimp.
Lord Acton
#239. To: bluegrass (#236)
Ack. I was thinking Sr., not Jr.
#240. To: James Deffenbach (#238)
What is it about the letters R and D that make idol worshippers out of the delusional folks amongst us?
#241. To: war (#239)
The law is probably vaguer in McCain's case than it is in Obama's the pplication thereof to the latter I believe is very clear cut.
#242. To: war (#240)
Wherein this whole exchange have I argued or advocated from any standing other than what i could support with the law?
#243. To: James Deffenbach (#238)
What is it about the letters R and D that make idol worshippers out of the delusional folks amongst us?
#244. To: bluegrass (#241)
#245. To: bluegrass (#243)
Lord Acton
#246. To: war (#244)
when you remove the debate from the law
#247. To: James Deffenbach (#245)
#248. To: bluegrass (#241)
It's one step from McCain/Obama to putting someone even worse into office down the road.
Lord Acton
#249. To: James Deffenbach (#248)
#250. To: bluegrass (#249)
Lord Acton
#251. To: James Deffenbach (#250)
#252. To: Dakmar (#251)
Lord Acton
#253. To: James Deffenbach (#252)
#254. To: Dakmar (#253)
Lord Acton
#255. To: James Deffenbach (#254)
#256. To: Dakmar (#255)
Lord Acton
#257. To: James Deffenbach (#256)
#258. To: bluegrass (#246)
What law?
#259. To: war (#258)
#260. To: Fred Mertz (#259)
#261. To: war (#260)
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest