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

Skip to comments.

Georgia Obama Ballot Challenge Update: Petition for Writ of Certiorari Filed With (SCOTUS)
BirtherReport.com ^ | July 4, 2012 | Van R. Irion & J. Mark Hatfield

Posted on 07/04/2012 9:09:26 PM PDT by Seizethecarp

Powell-Swensson-Welden v Obama, Petition for Writ of Certiorari, US Supreme Court 6-28-2012

QUESTIONS PRESENTED FOR REVIEW

Question #1: Does the right to associate force states to accept any candidate from political parties for presentation on state primary ballots when such a candidate does not meet the minimum legal qualifications for the office sought, thereby negating state election laws and state control of elections?

Question #2: Are all individuals born on U.S. soil Article II “natural born citizens,” regardless of the citizenship of their parents?

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


TOPICS: Conspiracy; Government; Politics
KEYWORDS: naturalborncitizen; obama; scotus
If the Supremes have been waiting for "the right case" to rule on the definition of natural born citizen, this could be it! Or not...
1 posted on 07/04/2012 9:09:33 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LucyT; Brown Deer; null and void; melancholy; Red Steel; circumbendibus; Kenny Bunk

Ping to GA ballot challenge going to SCOTUS...


2 posted on 07/04/2012 9:11:59 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Sure would be nice, but, we have Roberts to screw us over, pardon m language, so we would be screwed anyway.


3 posted on 07/04/2012 9:12:52 PM PDT by vpintheak (Occupy your Brain!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vpintheak
Roberts knew that a remedy for bad legislation was readily available to “we the people” in four months.

Roberts might object to a situation where there is no remedy for state citizens to object to ineligible national party candidates. If there are five votes to declare Barry NBC assuming a US birth regardless of his alleged Kenyan father, better to have a ruling now and have done with it so Rubios and Jindal and potential backers know where they stand.

SCOTUS knows that Barry could be out in four months and the easy way out is to evade until then.

If Arpaio comes out on July 17 with proof Barry's HI BC is forged, or proof he was born outside the US, then a hearing on his eligibility could become moot if the evidence is strong, and America would have a whole different constitutional crisis!

4 posted on 07/04/2012 9:23:10 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
Question #2: Are all individuals born on U.S. soil Article II “natural born citizens,” regardless of the citizenship of their parents?

That's a question that the US courts and their judges do not honestly answer despite numerous Supreme Court cases that give them the natural born citizen definition based on natural law.

5 posted on 07/04/2012 9:32:30 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
and America would have a whole different constitutional crisis!

Bring it on. Obama is a walking Constitutional crisis. A "crises" that boots him out early is fine and I'm sure with most of us. And no, Hillary or any other Dem candidate could not save the Dem party from destruction in November.

6 posted on 07/04/2012 9:39:25 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

crises = crisis


7 posted on 07/04/2012 9:42:04 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Question #2 - this morning on Washington Journal, two callers each asked about this. The first was during a segment with the president of the Heritage Foundation who smiled and told the caller that anyone born here is a NBC as the Founders intended it. (!)

The host looked relieved, and later during the next guest segment, a second man called in about the same thing and how the parents had to be citizens also, and this time the host cut him off, saying “the previous guest already addressed that.”

Wow. Cspan really didn’t want those callers (but I’m glad they got through anyway :-)


8 posted on 07/04/2012 9:48:32 PM PDT by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

If Arpaio releases incontrovertible evidence of 0bamao NOT beinf a citize, and therefore not truly a legitimate president, what effect on legislation signed and what effect on the whole of the demoncrat party?
I would expect a full court press to silence Arpaio and a desire to get 0bamao out of town by January if that came to pass.


9 posted on 07/04/2012 9:56:49 PM PDT by Thumper1960 (A modern so-called "Conservative" is a shadow of a wisp of a vertebrate human being.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

Doesn’t matter at all.

We are no longer a contitutional republic, and there is no constitution.


10 posted on 07/04/2012 9:56:49 PM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

It is very inconvenient for “we the people” for SCOTUS to blow town all summer when constitutional ballot issues are pending...but very convenient for evasion of “political issues” that might “damage the reputation of the court.”


11 posted on 07/04/2012 9:58:42 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: llandres

The president of the Heritage Foundation said that!?!

Good LORD!!!!

Are his children being threatened as well????
I thought we could trust the Heritage Foundation!


12 posted on 07/04/2012 9:59:06 PM PDT by Mortrey (Impeach President Soros)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Mortrey

GOPe wants Rubio...


13 posted on 07/04/2012 10:04:31 PM PDT by Seizethecarp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

We should be so lucky. Why don’t I feel more optimistic about this? I was crushed when Breitbart died (and I do NOT think it was natural causes).


14 posted on 07/04/2012 10:11:39 PM PDT by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
but very convenient for evasion of “political issues” that might “damage the reputation of the court.”

And whose opinion does that idiot and high schooler John Roberts hold in deep reverence?

Gee I wonder if it is the New York Slimes? The Washington ConPost? the DC liberal cocktail crowd? Likely all of the above. Puke.

15 posted on 07/04/2012 10:17:17 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Mortrey

I thought so, too, but was thoroughly unimpressed with this doofus. Can’t send you a link on this phone (don’t know how :-) but if you go on cspan’s site, check their schedule for the 4th on Washington Journal and you should be able to watch online.

If you do, let me know what you think (his segment is about 40 min.).


16 posted on 07/04/2012 10:22:03 PM PDT by llandres (Forget the "New America" - restore the original one!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: llandres
The president of the Heritage Foundation who smiled and told the caller that anyone born here is a NBC as the Founders intended it. (!)


The Heritage Foundation is out on a liberal lunch break on the issue of the NBC clause. Because a few years ago, there was a natural born citizen clause section in their book the Heritage Guide to the Constitution, which was written by James C. Ho, a whiny liberal who thought that Arnold Schwarzenegger could be president.

17 posted on 07/04/2012 10:33:02 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
>"proof Barry's HI BC is forged,"

Bare naked eyeballing the big numbers on it shows evidence of tampering aka FORGERY!

18 posted on 07/04/2012 10:54:35 PM PDT by rawcatslyentist ("Behold, I am against you, O arrogant one," Jeremiah 50:31)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Mortrey

I think Mark Levin has said the same...


19 posted on 07/04/2012 10:54:52 PM PDT by goodnesswins (What has happened to America?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp; Berlin_Freeper; Hotlanta Mike; Silentgypsy; repubmom; HANG THE EXPENSE; Nepeta; ...


GA ballot challenge going to SCOTUS...
20 posted on 07/04/2012 11:19:14 PM PDT by Brown Deer (Pray for 0bama. Psalm 109:8)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Brown Deer

Thanks for the ping.


21 posted on 07/05/2012 12:40:23 AM PDT by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp; Brown Deer
"GOPe wants Rubio..."

I realize that's a possibility, but I suspect that neither he nor Jindal nor Haley will be the VP pick, talk about "thoroughly vetting" Rubio notwithstanding. I am convinced that millions, possibly tens of millions of conservative voters are perfectly aware of the two-citizen parent requirement for NBC and will vote 3rd Party or write-in a candidate in the event that the GOP pick for VP is ineligible. I'm one of them, and it's pretty much the only thing that would prompt me to do so, barring Romney (meh) getting caught with either a live boy or a dead girl between now and 06 November.

One of his own sons made a crack about "Obama"'s eligibility for pete's sake, though he was brought back in line quickly. I could be utterly wrong on this, but it wouldn't surprise me at all to learn that there are enough conservatives out there who care enough about this issue that Romney would be defeated in a close election if the constitutionalist vote were to be lost by bringing aboard an ineligible candidate. I don't think he'll risk it.

Of course, if the fix is in anyway, and Romney is supposed to "go down in the 11th," well then we're already in the Globalist Hurt Locker with no foreseeable realistic way out any time soon. At least not without major convulsions.

Domo for the Ping, BD.

22 posted on 07/05/2012 1:23:43 AM PDT by Flotsam_Jetsome (If America were a car, the "Check President" light would be on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
"And no, Hillary or any other Dem candidate could not save the Dem party from destruction in November."

This "Hillary will swoop in and is a much more formidable foe than Bamster" line of reasoning has always annoyed me. If Barry were to be incontrovertibly outed as an ineligible fraud, Hillary and a whole lot of others would be lucky to keep their own necks out of the noose, and certainly she wouln't be able to effectively aspire to the Executive.

If the eligibility fraud issue were come to a head, the least of our worries would be whether or not Hillary is a threat. It (the undeniable exposure of the usurpation) could bring down the government entire; at least all of it that had or has responsibility for oversight and protection against infiltration and treason.

Hillary is probably also up to her eyeballs in Fast and Furious, which would just be rancid icing on the treasonous cake.

23 posted on 07/05/2012 2:03:38 AM PDT by Flotsam_Jetsome (If America were a car, the "Check President" light would be on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Thumper1960

I suspect we would hear the phrase “good faith” ad nauseum.


24 posted on 07/05/2012 2:30:42 AM PDT by skr (May God confound the enemy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Flotsam_Jetsome
Let's talk of eligibility.

Juan Mc C was born on Panamanian soil. Not NBC.

Mutt's daddy was born in Mexico. Again Not NBC.

Coincidence? Hardly!

This is proof of the communist infiltration at the highest levels of the GOP. To run 2 candidates that are ineligible against another ineligible candidate.

Meet the new Boss.

25 posted on 07/05/2012 2:37:20 AM PDT by rawcatslyentist ("Behold, I am against you, O arrogant one," Jeremiah 50:31)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist
If Mitt's daddy and mommy were citizens when Mitt was born what's the problem?

.

26 posted on 07/05/2012 2:59:40 AM PDT by Elle Bee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
Don’t give up

.

27 posted on 07/05/2012 3:02:01 AM PDT by Elle Bee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chris37
...”Doesn’t matter at all.

We are no longer a contitutional republic, and there is no constitution”...

I agree with you..It looks as though the Supreme Court Justice might have submitted to some kind of coercion in the gigantic, life changing healthcare bill decision. The US will go into a darkness of life not experienced here before which much of the communist world has known and other nations will follow. Our forefathers gave us the chance to try individual freedom and rule by the people and it worked for 200 plus years. Then, the world became very jealous and envious of our success and the wealth which followed..They desired to steal it and, further more, some of our own saw the benefit of using those same ugly human traits to grab personal power for themselves through dividing us from one another through unconstitutional acts. Now, we are in a shambles, facing drought and God only knows what else. Our media is largely to blame for our dilemma..They are beyond corruption at this point. Who believes them??? We are drug infested and my belief is that the drugs are used everywhere..In government, in church, in school, and in families. Many drugs effect the frontal lobes of the brain where logic and reason reside. It is unthinkable that, say, Supreme Court Justices, other kinds of judges and lawmakers and officials might be subjected to such drug use, but they are just men and women like everyone else. I imagine if we could know the truth we would be VERY afraid. This is what a Godless society looks like and we haven't seen anything yet.

28 posted on 07/05/2012 3:03:05 AM PDT by jazzlite (esat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Elle Bee
what's the problem?

The problem is the GOP forced 2 candidates with eligibility problems upon US at the same time as the DNC did.

They are in bed with each other, and we the people pay the motel bill!

29 posted on 07/05/2012 3:35:51 AM PDT by rawcatslyentist ("Behold, I am against you, O arrogant one," Jeremiah 50:31)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
If the Supremes have been waiting for "the right case" to rule on the definition of natural born citizen, this could be it! Or not...

And the Roberts ruling will go something like: The Constitution clearly prohibits someone like Obama from being President, but my last ruling allows such non-citizens to be President as long as enough citizens pay the penalties taxes to cover the mafeasance. If it was a normal citizen, he or she would have to pay his/her own penalties taxes , but when it comes to the Federal Government, it is the citizens' duty to pay for the crimes being committed against the People.

30 posted on 07/05/2012 3:57:42 AM PDT by trebb ("If a man will not work, he should not eat" From 2 Thes 3)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist; Elle Bee
"If Mitt's daddy and mommy were citizens when Mitt was born what's the problem?"

This:

"Let's talk of eligibility.

Juan Mc C was born on Panamanian soil. Not NBC."

This is based on a strict reading of Minor vs Happerset. Two citizen parents and born on sovereign US soil, so far so good. However, didn't Corsi document in his book that Juan was born on the base at Colon? If true then McLame would have met both criteria.

"Mutt's daddy was born in Mexico. Again Not NBC."

I've seen no evidence (or even suspicion) that Mittens was born anywhere other than in the US nor anything to sustantiate that his father was not at least a citizen at the time of Willard's birth, although George Romney ran into some eligibility flak during his failed presidential look-see, and would've likely faced more, had his try lasted longer. Like him or not, Mitt is constitutionally qualified unless demonstrably proven otherwise, and this is under a strict interpretation via MvH.

"Coincidence? Hardly!"

It does seem a stretch that so many candidates with questionable constitutional bona fides would all end up in the mix within a two-election window.

Hmmmmm

31 posted on 07/05/2012 4:05:32 AM PDT by Flotsam_Jetsome (If America were a car, the "Check President" light would be on.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
If the Supremes have been waiting for "the right case" to rule on the definition of natural born citizen, this could be it! Or not...

As recent events once again demonstrate, the Supreme Court is f***ed up. I would not be wanting anything to go before them until we get the loons off the court.

32 posted on 07/05/2012 6:12:57 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel
That's a question that the US courts and their judges do not honestly answer despite numerous Supreme Court cases that give them the natural born citizen definition based on natural law.

That is the major problem with our courts. They are not aware of the relationship between natural law and a natural citizen. This is a forgotten area of law. Today's judges are only concerned with what some previous court has ruled. Original intent is not even on their radar.

33 posted on 07/05/2012 6:16:19 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mortrey
The president of the Heritage Foundation said that!?!

Are his children being threatened as well???? I thought we could trust the Heritage Foundation!

A lot of people have grown up learning that fallacy, and don't actually know the truth. The merely repeat what they've heard. The fallacy that just being born here makes you a "natural" citizen started with Wong Kim Ark. (Which did not use the term "natural born citizen.")

34 posted on 07/05/2012 6:20:32 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp

I’ve so much confidence in the USSC to do the right thing...


35 posted on 07/05/2012 6:24:27 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist
Juan Mc C was born on Panamanian soil. Not NBC.

No he was not. I have researched this to a reasonable extent and John McCain was born on the U.S. Navy base in Panama, not in Colon. That accusation about him being born in Colon is due to a FAKE McCain birth certificate (cobbled together by some @sshole) claiming such. Please stop repeating this FALSE claim.

Mutt's daddy was born in Mexico. Again Not NBC.

To two American Citizens, which therefore makes George Romney an American citizen, and it makes Mitt Romney the child of two American citizens. Again, Stop with the CRAP!

Coincidence? Hardly!

This is proof of the communist infiltration at the highest levels of the GOP. To run 2 candidates that are ineligible against another ineligible candidate.

Meet the new Boss.

You may want to see a conspiracy behind everything, but there are those of us that Automatically classify any suggestion of a conspiracy as Nut-Burger territory. Now you have two incorrect "facts" upon which you are basing your conspiracy, so you either need to retract your theory, or get some correct facts to back it up.

I'm not saying that there aren't communist minded people attempting to influence American Politics. There are, and they do it overtly. Most of them live in Hollywood and New York. The Selection of McCain and Romney was not the result of some secret conspiracy, it's the result of the other candidates being even worse in some manner or the other. (Except perhaps for the double dealing in Virginia. I think the Virginia Republican party STOLE the election in Virginia for Romney, which had a subsequent domino effect on other states.)

36 posted on 07/05/2012 6:31:36 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist
McCain, for whom I voted with my nose held was born in a US Military hospital in the US interest zone of the Panama canal

a stretch but his father an, admiral and his mother were both certainly US citizens

As I again hold my nose, I am prepared to vote for Mitt who was born in the US of two US citizen parents

each GOP candidate released all of their supporting documentation ... Obama - not so much

.

37 posted on 07/05/2012 6:37:18 AM PDT by Elle Bee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist
The problem is the GOP forced 2 candidates with eligibility problems upon US at the same time as the DNC did.

No they didn't. I distinctly remember everything that happened in the Primary election of 2008. Campaigning started in early 2007, and we had a pack of bad candidates. Fred Thompson was the only decent candidate we had, but he didn't bother getting into the race until after everyone else had been campaigning for months. Even then, he didn't put as much effort into it as everyone else already had. I got the impression that he was wanting to be Coronated or something. Everyone else had already secured promises to vote for them by the time Fred got into the race, and there simply weren't enough uncommitted people remaining to give him much support.

Of the remaining candidates, none of them had a widespread national following. They were all regional and niche candidates. Had we picked ANY of the remaining candidates, we would have lost by an even WIDER margin.

I was not happy with John McCain, but of the players on the field, he was the only one that stood any chance of winning at all. I voted for him in the Primary and the General because EVERY BODY ELSE SUCKED WORSE!!!!!!

38 posted on 07/05/2012 6:42:46 AM PDT by DiogenesLamp (Partus Sequitur Patrem)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel; LucyT; Fred Nerks; Brown Deer
Question #2: Are all individuals born on U.S. soil Article II “natural born citizens,” regardless of the citizenship of their parents?

That's a question that the US courts and their judges do not honestly answer despite numerous Supreme Court cases that give them the natural born citizen definition based on natural law.

That's delusional. The current state of the law is that a person born in the US is Natural Born for purposes of Article II Section 1--you may not like it but that is the current legal rule under the U S Constitution.

What "numerous Supreme Court cases" give a different definition? Miner? The "we hold that . . . " language is mostly dicta--the plaintiff was born in the US so she was a citizen no matter where her parents were citizens--addition of citizen parentage was irrelevant; and the holding is not relevant to the Article II Sec. 1 issue because the argument was not over the eligibility of the plaintiff to hold the office of President.

And, why should citizenship of the parents make a difference? From our point of view, Rubio would make a great President committed to American Constitutional principles of government and the Judeo Christian ethic as a basis for our legal system. And frankly, I think there is a reasonable probability that Zero will ultimately be found to have been born to a multi generational US Citizen father and thus eligible under any any theoretical argument you might want to make about the relevance of citizen parentage.

The reason why place of birth is important is because the government and the head of state of the place a person is born has the power under international law to assert certain kinds of control over the person throughout the course of their life.

A good example is US tax policy. A German national; successful businessman who has earned billions of dollars of income throughout his life; born in the US in 1946 because his father was a prominent anti-Nazi businessman who was significant in connection with post war reconstruction efforts--the father and mother in New York for several weeks in connection with post war financing plans when the birth occurred; the US Government position is that he was liable for US Federal Income Tax on all of his billions of dollars of income throughout his life.

There is further documentary record that kind of issue was the exact reason for use of the NBC term in the Constitution by the founders.

An easy decision for the Court on this issue and correct on the applicable Constitutional legal principles.

Making this argument a centerpiece of our legal effort has hurt our case badly.

An effective lawyer for our side, making the record before the ALJ, would have focused on the place of birth issue. We have rules about evidence--what facts and sources can used to create an evidentary record before a Court or Administration Law Judge.

Whatever the ALJ might rule, the clear evidence is that the image of a Hawaii birth certificate furnished to support the born in Hawaii argument is not a true copy of a certificate of Hawaii birth records but is instead a fraud. That record can be made sufficiently clear to stand up on appeal.

Thus there is only one class of admissible evidence of the place of birth. Statements against interest are admissible as evidence, either because they are not defined as hearsay or because they come in as exceptions to the hearsay rule depending on the status of the person making such statements as a party or interested witness or other factors defined by local law; and further depending on local law as to definition.

Over the years, there is a pretty clear record of statements by Zero that he was born in Kenya. A number of people heard him make those statements--in political coffee hours; in one on one coversation; in public speeches; and he is responsible for publications which attribute the fact of his birth in Kenya to him.

The only legal evidence on the question of where he was born are his own statements against interest.

Now I tend to doubt that he was born in Kenya. But a legal record on appeal on this basis would ultimately put the burden of proof on the question of his place of birth on Zero--in order to defend his eligibility to hold the office, he would need to appear and prove that he was in fact born in the United States which I also tend to doubt that he can do.

In short, effective legal work on this case should have been the key to our success.

39 posted on 07/05/2012 8:28:07 AM PDT by David
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Seizethecarp
SCOTUS knows that Barry could be out in four months and the easy way out is to evade until then.

Will they seize the moment to slay this beast, or will they slay the Constitution?

Given their recent track record, it could go either way.

*sigh*

40 posted on 07/05/2012 8:32:38 AM PDT by null and void (Day 1261 of our ObamaVacation from reality - Heroes aren't made Frank, they're cornered...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: jazzlite

I agree with everything you’ve said in your excellent post, but one line in particular stands out-

“Now, we are in a shambles, facing drought and God only knows what else.”

I believe I know what we are facing.

That is the Devil and his Horde, and I do mean that literally. I have learned what communism is. It is relentless Evil. It never stops planning, disguising, entrenching, organizing and executing.

While we sleep, it marches endlessly against us.

I believe that the only people who are not engaged in The March of Hell are those who believe in Jesus Christ, and I mean genuinely believe in Him, not just go to church on Sunday and live otherwise Monday-Saturday.

If a person believes that he/ she must account for the contents of their life upon death, then that person’s conscience will not allow them to march in such a fashion.

I believe we have reached the point where only Jesus Christ can save us, and I mean that literally as well.


41 posted on 07/05/2012 8:41:44 AM PDT by chris37 (Heartless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: David
That's delusional. The current state of the law is that a person born in the US is Natural Born for purposes of Article II Section 1--you may not like it but that is the current legal rule under the U S Constitution.

Oh, the Indiana state Ankeny opinion elevated over the Supreme Court, yes I got it. The current state of law have forsaken original intent. That's not delusional that's a fact. They just make it up as they go or go quack some other erroneous ruling, but that floats both political parties boat so who cares.

The Venus, 12 U.S. (8 Cranch)

Inglis v. Sailors’ Snug Harbor, (1830)

Shanks v. Dupont, 28 U.S. (1830)

Dred Scott v. Sandford, (1857)

Slaughter-House Cases, (1872)

Minor v. Happersett, (1875)

Elk v. Wilkins, (1884)

United States v. Ward (1890)

Perkins v. Elg, (1939)

Schneider v. Rusk, (1964)

The Supreme Court opinions above whether they are holdings, dicta, or conclusions, taken in totality, make a pretty powerful case, but we know the contemporary courts are blind and mute to them.

Judges today rather act in specious ways promoting administrative and lower court cases to protect Obama, and that's not much difference the way John Roberts did with ObamaCare. It sure floated Roberts' boat.

And, why should citizenship of the parents make a difference? From our point of view, Rubio would make a great President committed to American Constitutional principles of government

American Constitutional principles of government? The man who is obsessed with making illegal aliens legal. The man who is obsessed in pushing his Dream Act. Back in the day, they would have called this a foreign evasion. His "principles" are foreign and counter to the natural born citizen clause's original purpose preventing foreign allegiances.

The reason why place of birth is important is because the government and the head of state of the place a person is born has the power under international law to assert certain kinds of control over the person throughout the course of their life.

When a person is born in a foreign country but has foreign parents does that make him a Natural Born citizen of the country that he was born in, or is he a Natural Born citizen of his parents home country? So you can be a Natural Born citizen of two or more countries at once? It must only be an American thang to have it both and many ways so forget natural law.

The Supreme Court has said people having duel citizenship have an obligation and rights of nationality to both countries. See Kawakita v. US, 1952:

"The concept of dual citizenship recognizes that a person may have and exercise rights of nationality in two countries and be subject to the responsibilities of both."

Would Kawakita under the language and intent of the Constitution's Natural Born citizen clause make him eligible for president? So what is the purpose of the NBC clause to the courts? Does the clause have any meaning to you or to these contemporary courts?

A good example is US tax policy. A German national; successful businessman who has earned billions of dollars of income throughout his life; born in the US in 1946 because his father was a prominent anti-Nazi businessman who was significant in connection with post war reconstruction efforts--the father and mother in New York for several weeks in connection with post war financing plans when the birth occurred; the US Government position is that he was liable for US Federal Income Tax on all of his billions of dollars of income throughout his life.

I see courts follow the billions $$. The guy is liable to both countries Germany and US which bring up the next point.

A better example. I have a neighbor who said that his son who is an American citizen, and has American parents, but was born in Germany. The son was called by Germany to duty to do compulsory German military service while he resided in the United States. And I've pointed out in Kawakita v. US 1952, he has a responsibility to Germany. So does that make him a Natural Born citizen of Germany or of the United States? The intent and meaning behind the NBC clause is to prevent to prevent split allegiances for US presidents, but today however, that has been relegated without amendment to the dustbin of history.

Making this argument a centerpiece of our legal effort has hurt our case badly.

I don't make it the centerpiece of the legal argument in current climate of the US judiciary since they go with the winds of political expediency. However, that does not mean I won't point out this obvious folly. I'm not going to remain silent about it. I agree with you that getting Obama on fraud and being born elsewhere leaves little else for the courts to hide behind while they currently protect him.

42 posted on 07/05/2012 10:52:18 AM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Have you seen this thread? Many interesting comments. Looks to me as though Roberts is a closeted perv.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2902707/posts


43 posted on 07/05/2012 3:02:08 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Red Steel

Oh, and this one, too.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2902835/posts?page=53


44 posted on 07/05/2012 3:04:04 PM PDT by little jeremiah
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

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