Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Judge Malihi Rules Against Plaintiffs: Says Obama Born In Hawaii Therefore Natural Born Citizen
BirtherReport.com ^ | 2/3/2012 | Kevin Powell

Posted on 02/03/2012 2:19:38 PM PST by GregNH

We just spoke with plaintiff Kevin Powell and he reports Judge Malihi has ruled against the Plaintiffs and stated in his order that Obama was born in Hawaii and therefore Obama is a natural born Citizen.

(Excerpt) Read more at obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com ...


TOPICS: Government
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; certifigate; ga; georgia; malihi; naturalborncitizen; obama
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 451-500501-550551-600 ... 701-726 next last
To: Godebert

It’s probably that disbarred IDIOT “blade bryan” retreading again.


501 posted on 02/04/2012 8:40:31 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 483 | View Replies]

To: Harlan1196

Every Fogbutt troll starts their posts with “we conservatives” and “our conservative values.”

You remind me of someone. Hmmm...I don’t suppose you had a previous account here, did you? Remember lying is not a conservative value.

Of course I noticed that you stated:

“I understand the values I embrace daily”

What values are they exactly. You didn’t qualify what values you actually embrace daily.


502 posted on 02/04/2012 8:40:42 AM PST by Smokeyblue (Obama's got NBC problems and birth certificate problems - a bad case of Cluster F**ked.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 492 | View Replies]

To: GregNH; Seizethecarp; bluecat6; butterdezillion; Fred Nerks; Red Steel; fireman15; bushpilot1

I suspect the legal requirements regarding publication of notice of hearing regarding adoption varies among the states. Our family had an experience similar to yours. Because of the state’s privacy mandate re: minor children, absolutely nothing was allowed to be public. Only the biological father was deemed to have a right to knowledge and notification. That notification was done by certified letter from the Court - a 30-days notice of hearing. He was required to appear in person, to testify to the judge’s satisfaction that he believed the adoption was in the childrens’ best interest.

When the adoption was accomplished, three new birth certificates were generated by Court Order: one to be filed in the hearing file, and one to each of the local vital statistics records offices of the birth locations - the equivalent of the Hawaii Dept. of Health. As I recall, those local records offices were instructed by court order to destroy the ORIGINAL birth certificates, because legally, the new certificates literally became the ‘originals’. All of that to protect the privacy of the minor children. In the eyes of the law, the actual biological father did not, and never had existed in relation to the children. The adoptive father was not considered ‘adoptive’; he was considered THE actual biological father. This took place in New York State, in 1964.

Something that may be key in this scenario as a possibility regarding Barry/BHO,Sr/Stanley Ann in Nov-Dec 1971 Hawaii.
In that New York state procedure, the natural mother ‘procedurally’, became the adoptive parent of her own biological children, and had to consent to that fact. Strange. I don’t know why - PERHAPS going back to a wife being ‘chattel’ laws/mentality?
So - if Barry had been adopted by Soetoro in Indonesia [and all available evidence indicates he was] it’s possible that procedure would/might/could have been nullified before he was shipped back to Hawaii in 1971. It’s also possible an Indonesian adoption might not have been recognized by Hawaii; it’s also possible Hawaii never even knew of it] With New York State procedures as a possible guide to the scenario - my speculation would be that for whatever multitude of reasons, Stanley Ann decided to give him up - to send him to Hawaii for her parents to raise. That Gramps and Toot would have to become, at the least, his legal guardians [because they would need to be making decisions on his behalf - think, permission for any medical treatment, school attendance, field trips, etc]. Perhaps they actually adopted him, though the continued use of the name “Obama” would indicate not. Whatever, it’s clear that in Nov-Dec 1971, BHO Sr was a turd in the family’s punch bowl.

Even if it was just assigning legal guardianship to the grandparents, both of the parents would have to appear IN PERSON for the required hearing. NOTHING in the legal world is accomplished without a hearing. Considering BHO Sr’s touch-and-go financial situation, it’s logical to figure the grandparents paid for his trip and all it entailed - apt. rent, living expenses for the 2 months, etc.

I’ve no idea whether notices of hearings regarding guardianship appointments in over minor children were required by the state of Hawaii to be published. If it was required, there would be microfiche records at those local newspapers’ offices.

Have you ever thought about what a flow chart of all this info/unknowns/possible scenarios on Barry’s life would look like? If mounted, it would spread over acres of wall space - and would take teams of researchers to filter through and piece together. It amazes me how many of you dedicated FReepers seem able to keep it all right there at the junction of their brains and their fingertips on the keyboard. Me? I’ve got stacks of papers everywhere - and I mean EVERYWHERE - with color-coded little post-its helping me keep track of what’s what, and where. Do get intrigued by a fascinating mystery!


503 posted on 02/04/2012 8:43:00 AM PST by GGMac ((lesson learned re Obie: parse every sentence, every word, every gesture, every photo))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 445 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue
Aren’t we lucky to have Harlan1196 who signed up Jan. 28, 2012 explain conservative values to us?

Thank goodness he/she has arrived.

Just in time to discuss an eligibility thread! YAAH!

504 posted on 02/04/2012 8:43:17 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 490 | View Replies]

To: Harlan1196
No - I understood the argument, I just rejected it as the ramblings of an IT consultant playing Constitutional scholar. It is a compelling argument only to the true believers.

You have yet to demonstrate an understanding of anything, Least of all the topic being discussed.

Again, explain to me why Slaves and Indians were not citizens if the rule is simply being "born here." WHY DID THEY NOT FIT THE CRITERIA OF NATURAL BORN CITIZEN?

505 posted on 02/04/2012 8:47:04 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 496 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue
You honestly think that supporting the birthers is a conservative litmus test? That anyone disagreeing with you cannot possibly be a conservative? Wow - I certainly know that hubris is not a conservative value.
506 posted on 02/04/2012 8:47:19 AM PST by Harlan1196
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 502 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

“This is a common misunderstanding of the facts. “

I think you’ve succinctly described your own problem. You misunderstand that the decision by the Indiana Court in Ankeny and Malihi’s decision agree with the Constitution, the 14th amendment, and the majority in Wong Kim Ark. Outside materials don’t matter. The way the law is now, Obama is eligible. If you think the law is wrong, work in your state legislature and with your federal reps to amend the Constitution to define natural born citizen the way you’d like it to be.

Of course that could take years. If what you really want is to see Obama out of office, work to get someone else elected.


507 posted on 02/04/2012 8:48:16 AM PST by tablelamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 487 | View Replies]

To: tablelamp

tablelamp: “The answer isn’t in the courts. It’s time to change strategy or have Obama for another 4 years.”

At some point in history, it’s necessary to stand up for what is right and just - regardless of what “outcome” you are portending. Even if the challenge to Obama’s elgibility should continue well past his (god forbid) second term, it must none-the-less be pursued. At times, we must seek justice for the sake of justice alone...


508 posted on 02/04/2012 8:50:24 AM PST by visually_augmented (I was blind, but now I see)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 489 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp

Because slaves were property and not legally persons and Indians were born of independent nations and therefore not under the jurisdiction of the US government.

The simpler answer is that the founding fathers did not want slaves and Indians to be citizens.


509 posted on 02/04/2012 8:51:30 AM PST by Harlan1196
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 505 | View Replies]

To: Mr Rogers
When you learn to read, try again. Slaves were considered property, and the Indians were discussed in WKA:

So being "Property" and being "discussed in WKA" explains why they meet the requirements of having been "born here" but were not citizens?

I'm sorry, but that is just fluff and nonsense. "If they were "natural born" before the 14th amendment, then they were "natural born" after the 14th amendment. The Condition of being "natural born" cannot be changed by statute.

The only reasonable explanation is that neither Indians nor Slaves were considered "natural born citizens" prior to the 14th Amendment,(or after. Note use of the term "citizen" in the 14th amendment?) and Indians weren't considered "citizens" until after the Indian citizenship act of 1924.

510 posted on 02/04/2012 8:53:28 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 498 | View Replies]

To: fireman15

That was the exact case I was thinking about.

Many people are surprised to learn that the Washington courts are among the most corrupt in the country.


511 posted on 02/04/2012 8:54:54 AM PST by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: Harlan1196

You must have missed my question.

I’m curious have you had a previous account here?


512 posted on 02/04/2012 8:55:05 AM PST by Smokeyblue (Obama's got NBC problems and birth certificate problems - a bad case of Cluster F**ked.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 506 | View Replies]

To: Harlan1196
You honestly think that supporting the birthers is a conservative litmus test? That anyone disagreeing with you cannot possibly be a conservative? Wow - I certainly know that hubris is not a conservative value.

Oh, I do not believe such. I have argued with dozens of known conservatives. They have convinced me that Liberals do not have a corner on the stupid market. Sure, they can wax brilliantly on other issues, but on this particular issue, the claws come out and they simply spew the common misunderstanding. With Vehemence.

513 posted on 02/04/2012 8:57:49 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 506 | View Replies]

To: GregNH

and based on what vidence did he say Obama was born in the USA?

One of the pieces of evidence submittd was a clearly forged birth certificate

why would a US PRESIDENT give the public a forged document?


514 posted on 02/04/2012 8:59:34 AM PST by Mr. K (Physically unable to profreed <--- oops, see?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
Slaves and Indians were never legally considered natural born citizens before the 14th amendment. No one has ever stated that was the case. Slaves were legally stateless prior to the 14th amendment - now if the Constitution had been applied fairly then yes they would have been natural born citizens. But it wasn't.
515 posted on 02/04/2012 9:00:40 AM PST by Harlan1196
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 510 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

I am sorry but I feel no need to defend my beliefs to you. If you want to discuss the actual topic of discussion then fine. I refuse to respond to personal attacks - one of my values is “if you have nothing good to say than say nothing.”.


516 posted on 02/04/2012 9:03:42 AM PST by Harlan1196
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 512 | View Replies]

To: tablelamp
I think you’ve succinctly described your own problem. You misunderstand that the decision by the Indiana Court in Ankeny and Malihi’s decision agree with the Constitution, the 14th amendment, and the majority in Wong Kim Ark. Outside materials don’t matter. The way the law is now, Obama is eligible. If you think the law is wrong, work in your state legislature and with your federal reps to amend the Constitution to define natural born citizen the way you’d like it to be.

If the law is defined by Declarations of Judges, then your are correct. If the law is defined by the Intent of those who Wrote it, then you are WRONG.

Are we a nation that governs by the rule of Law or do we govern by the rule of Man?

517 posted on 02/04/2012 9:03:52 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 507 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
So what will you say when Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and a host of conservative judges “spew the common misunderstanding.”?

Because the future is pretty clear on this matter.

518 posted on 02/04/2012 9:06:14 AM PST by Harlan1196
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 513 | View Replies]

To: Harlan1196

Asking you if you’ve had a previous account here is forcing you to defend your beliefs and attacking you values? LOL

Since a simple yes or no would have sufficed I’ll take that as a yes.


519 posted on 02/04/2012 9:07:26 AM PST by Smokeyblue (Obama's got NBC problems and birth certificate problems - a bad case of Cluster F**ked.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 516 | View Replies]

To: Danae

One day 20 years from now, a shocking book will make tons of money exposing this shocking fraud. Americans will be stunned. “I had no idea!” they all will say.

Heavy sigh.


520 posted on 02/04/2012 9:12:58 AM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Smokeyblue

Sorry - misunderstood. No, I have never had another account her. Sorry for the confusion.


521 posted on 02/04/2012 9:16:10 AM PST by Harlan1196
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 519 | View Replies]

To: Harlan1196
Because slaves were property and not legally persons and Indians were born of independent nations and therefore not under the jurisdiction of the US government.

Why were the children of German citizens (who were also born of independent nations) not treated exactly like Indians? I would point out that Indians born *IN* American cities were excluded from citizenship, while Germans were not.

I will also point out that many slaves were manumitted and thereafter became citizens who could pass on their citizenship to their children.

The simpler answer is that the founding fathers did not want slaves and Indians to be citizens.

There were plenty of Black citizens during the Revolutionary war era. Crispus Attucks comes to mind.

No, that answer doesn't suffice. Why would Manumitted Slaves be able to obtain and pass on citizenship to their children, when those held in bondage could not?

Even after the slaves were freed, they were still not considered citizens until AFTER the 14th amendment granted them citizenship en masse. Indians were still a No-Go at this time.

There is something more going on here than a mere "born on the soil" requirement.

522 posted on 02/04/2012 9:19:49 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 509 | View Replies]

To: tablelamp
Barack Obama is a natural born citizen because he was born in Honolulu on Aug 4, 1961. Stipulated to by the plaintiffs in Georgia.

Wow, you signed up today to to post that crap?

You has a funny smell....

523 posted on 02/04/2012 9:19:58 AM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 473 | View Replies]

To: visually_augmented

“Even if the challenge to Obama’s elgibility should continue well past his (god forbid) second term, it must none-the-less be pursued.”

If someone else beats Obama on Nov 6th, concern about his eligibility will be forgotten. Look on the bright side, Malihi just declared Rubio, Jindal and Haley eligible. They’re the up and comers.


524 posted on 02/04/2012 9:20:46 AM PST by tablelamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 508 | View Replies]

To: GGMac

There is zero evidence he was legally adopted by Soetoro. What probably happened was that he was living as soetoros son while his mom was married to him. To go to the Indonesian school, he had to go as soetoro’s son and use his last name. My son for a while used his stepfather’s name. I think both bill Clinton and newt Gingrich did the same (and maybe eventually changed their name legally — something Obama obviously didn’t do).

However, I do not doubt he had / has an Indonesian passport. It may have been his first. He may have first traveled there on his mothers pass.


525 posted on 02/04/2012 9:23:01 AM PST by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 503 | View Replies]

To: Harlan1196
So what will you say when Roberts, Scalia, Thomas and a host of conservative judges “spew the common misunderstanding.”?

"There they go again..." -Ronald Reagan. You've heard of Roe v Wade. Do you agree with it?

Because the future is pretty clear on this matter.

So is the national debt. There is a reason our lack of understanding regarding the rule of law is converging with the train wreck of our financial collapse.

We had a good run, but we are listening to the Band on the Titanic right now.

I have to go. No more time for this nonsense.

526 posted on 02/04/2012 9:24:13 AM PST by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 518 | View Replies]

To: tablelamp
The answer isn’t in the courts. It’s time to change strategy or have Obama for another 4 years.

We appreciate your "concern"

527 posted on 02/04/2012 9:24:49 AM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 489 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Actually, Malihi based his decision on Jablonski’s ‘Motion To Dismiss’. Jablonski cites Ankeny v Daniels in it. Also there is a Jill Pryor connection to all of this.


528 posted on 02/04/2012 9:32:44 AM PST by Obama Exposer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Harlan1196
Do you really think Roberts would have sworn in a man he knew was not eligible?

It could have be Attila the Hun and Roberts would have sworn him in.

529 posted on 02/04/2012 9:38:16 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 443 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Ron

The Obama twits are coming out of the woodwork to gloat over another BS decision.


530 posted on 02/04/2012 9:40:54 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 523 | View Replies]

To: Obama Exposer

Yes, I noticed Pryor’s to rewrite history book cited by Malihi in footnote 1.


531 posted on 02/04/2012 9:46:49 AM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 528 | View Replies]

To: philman_36; Red Steel; LucyT
Fogbower Chancery reports that Obama has put one of the authors of a citation supporting his NBC status up to be in the 11th Circuit (covers GA)! :

quote

Even though I've never been in the “Judge Malihi is a closet birther or incompetent” camp, I decided to sus out some of the law review citations in footnote 4 of Judge Malihi’s decision, because judges can send subtle signals with their choice of citations.

There's nothing to report in that regard, as the decision cites respectable authority rather than neo-authoritarian claptrap.

But I did discover one “point of interest.” One of the cited articles was a student note written in 1988 by a woman who is now a lawyer in Atlanta, Jill Pryor. On January 5, a flock of news articles reported that Pryor would be the Obama administration's pick for a vacancy on the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit.

Coincidence? Womp, Womp, Womp!

Chancery

unquote

532 posted on 02/04/2012 9:48:22 AM PST by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 111 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Indeed...what is worse is the long time posters (the SP’s) who come here and gloat over the destruction of our Country.


533 posted on 02/04/2012 9:48:34 AM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 530 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Yes they are. I recognize a Fogbower who has arrived recently.


534 posted on 02/04/2012 9:49:34 AM PST by Obama Exposer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 530 | View Replies]

To: Harlan1196

What’s your Fogbow name, or are you one of Cass’s guys?


535 posted on 02/04/2012 9:54:50 AM PST by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 470 | View Replies]

To: DiogenesLamp
There is a reason our lack of understanding regarding the rule of law is converging with the train wreck of our financial collapse.

Well said, explains so much in such a succinct way.

Too bad the poster you're responding to won't get it.

536 posted on 02/04/2012 9:55:56 AM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 526 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

I want to be the one to write it.

Lord knows I already have all the research done, and have been fortunate enough to work with the best researchers on the internet, and one of the most brilliant literal legal minds of our generation in Donofrio, and some of the best critical thinkers.

We have fought the good fight. But until people WANT to recognize the simple facts about Natural Born Citizenship, they will stubbornly refuse to see the light, even as it burns their retinas...

Sigh. Pray for this nation.


537 posted on 02/04/2012 9:57:18 AM PST by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 520 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Yes they are. I recognize a Fogbower who has arrived recently.


538 posted on 02/04/2012 9:57:36 AM PST by Obama Exposer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 530 | View Replies]

To: Obama Exposer; Red Steel
Yes they are. I recognize a Fogbower who has arrived recently.

He's been zotted here once already but for some reason was allowed to come back. In fact I happily participated in the first one ;)

We'll see how long he lasts this time around...

539 posted on 02/04/2012 9:59:14 AM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 534 | View Replies]

To: Godebert

This treachery by Malihi was certainly a signal for obots both new and existing to crawl out of the woodwork. It’s like a cockroach festival.


540 posted on 02/04/2012 10:11:07 AM PST by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 483 | View Replies]

To: Greenperson

The liberals and progressives are freaking Morgana, and have been using the breath of the dragon for evil. I hope they all suffer Morgana’s fate.


541 posted on 02/04/2012 10:18:50 AM PST by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 323 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Well, his first one was brilliant. I have no idea if this is going to get appealed or not. I know there are other Super PAC’s out there ready to offer funding... but I don’t know if they have it in em to keep on keepin on.

I hope and pray they do.


542 posted on 02/04/2012 10:21:03 AM PST by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 284 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Ron

“I’m finding it very hard not to release a fuselage of cuss words right now, just damn...grrrrrr”

I know bro, I know. It is a tremendous burden morality.


543 posted on 02/04/2012 10:23:14 AM PST by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 280 | View Replies]

To: Mr. K

“based on what vidence did he say Obama was born in the USA?”
Irion and Hatfield conceded that he was born in Hawaii because the Minor 2 citizen parent theory is based on being born in the US.

“why would a US PRESIDENT give the public a forged document?”
Taitz’s expert didn’t explain very well what proved it was forged. Orly didn’t help with her “stamp stamp stamp”, whatever that was about. Looks like Malihi decided it’s real.


544 posted on 02/04/2012 10:25:23 AM PST by tablelamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 514 | View Replies]

To: Hang'emAll

I hate thinking revolutionary thoughts. I sincerely do. But the longer this goes on, the more I have to consider the possibility that civil war might be the eventual outcome. Not today, not tomorrow, but the seeds have been planted and the progressives are watering the garden and pulling any weed that get’s in their way.

It makes me sick.


545 posted on 02/04/2012 10:26:22 AM PST by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 282 | View Replies]

To: Yaelle

A few years ago it was stated in more than one thread on FR that Zero had never had a US passport until he was a Senator - IIRC a US Senator. Somehow that info was dug up. Researchers will know the details. So that means his entire life he was using passports of some other country or countries. Even as an adult when he went to Pakistan.


546 posted on 02/04/2012 10:33:15 AM PST by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 525 | View Replies]

To: Danae
LOL...actually I meant to use the word barrage but I goofed. I was fuming when I posted and still am for that matter..

Surprised I haven't been whipped by the FR grammar police yet ;)

547 posted on 02/04/2012 10:33:24 AM PST by Las Vegas Ron (Rush Limbaugh = the Beethoven of talk radio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 543 | View Replies]

To: Las Vegas Ron

“Surprised I haven’t been whipped by the FR grammar police yet ;)”

I am surprised I have not been spanked myself. I have used strategically placed asterisks, but it doesn’t take a genius to figure out what I was saying. I think the Mods know we are just that disappointed. They’re cutting us some slack.


548 posted on 02/04/2012 10:36:45 AM PST by Danae (Anailnathrach ortha bhais beatha do cheal deanaimha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 547 | View Replies]

To: Danae

And it will be 100% their fault.


549 posted on 02/04/2012 10:37:43 AM PST by little jeremiah (We will have to go through hell to get out of hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies]

To: David

>>...A person born outside the United States is born under the sovereignty of some other state which would then have jurisdiction to dictate his acts. A person born inside the United States is subject, at birth only to the sovereignty of the United States....<<

Again, that flies in the face of simple common sense and I gave two *very common* examples where a child born inside the US is subject to two (or more) sovereign nations depending on parental citizenship. Two couples I know would tell you and the S.C. to go pound sand as their children (all born within the US) were born with dual citizenship and dual national allegiances as both fathers are foreign citizens. The US does not have sole claim to those kids and those kids can (and do) eagerly claim their foreign citizenship as well as their US citizenship. I fail to see how something this simple completely escapes those in black-robes who “think they know better”.

So, the founding fathers sought to best assure the integrity and allegiance of a presidential candidate using the common-sense answer to the following common-sense question: A child born in the US of two US citizens forms a birth allegiance to the US and what other country? Answer: None.

That later courts have ginned up a non-common-sense alternate definition of NBC does not in any way remove the risk the founding fathers clearly sought to avoid.

Like I said, the courts can define terms that defy common sense. They can say that Obama has no birth allegiance to Kenya *legally* and that’s fine. But that does not address the dangers the founders wished to avoid. The founding fathers wanted to avoid, “matters of the heart” (IIRC) — emotional allegiances formed at birth — that might cloud or affect presidential decisions. A legal definition may stop some civil or criminal action, but it does nothing to address emotional bonds. Yet again: common sense, in spite of any legalistic, court ruling that defies it.

Like Wickard v. Fillburn which ruled that a farmer growing crops for his own use affects commerce between the states because he won’t need to purchase any, the mental gymnastics required to arrive at that decision, and the presidential eligibility decision are (imho) quite similar. Only an over-educated, hyper-rhetorical, legalistic mind could fool itself into jumping through those hoops.

To allow yourself the intellectual dishonesty needed to willingly accept either of those decisions (and countless similar others) in now way makes them correct. They are erroneous based on simple common-sense and we have no feasible recourse to correct it. There are too many apathetic, complacent citizens who accept that the courts are infallible and are a superior, rather than co-equal, branch of govt.

I can’t state it any clearer. All I can do is try to explain the common-sense point of view to someone. If I fail to communicate it clear enough, then that’s all I can do. I can’t “understand” it for them too.


550 posted on 02/04/2012 10:39:35 AM PST by jaydee770
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 293 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 451-500501-550551-600 ... 701-726 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson