Obama is not a Native US Citizen

Bouvier's Law Dictionary ^ | 1928 | William Edward Saldwin

[bushpilot1]

Meandering through my 1928 Edition of Bouvier's Law Dictionary on page 833, Native, Native Citizen is defined:

Those born in a country, of parents who are citizens.

If Obama does not meet the standards of a native citizen how can he be a natural born citizen.

[Lmo56]

A natural born subject of Great Britain.can be a citizen of another country. Can a natural born citizen of the US be a citizen in another country? You miss the point. Since the NBC phrase has never been clarified by amendment or SCOTUS decision, it reverts to what the Founders meant.

A good example of this is District of Columbia v. Heller, which hinged on the meaning of "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." in the 2nd Amendment. So, the NBC phrase needs to be interpreted in light of what the Founders understood it to mean. At the time, a British natural-born subject held one allegiance and one allegiance only to a single sovreign - and he could never forswear that allegiance.

If [in the rarest of circumstances] he DID hold more than one allegiance [but was born in England] - he was a Denizen. A Denizen held almost all of the rights of a natural-born subject, except that of holding high office.

Same would have applied in the United States - citizen, but NOT natural-born [in the 1700's].

[danamco]

and which is why you continue to FAIL every time you birthers bring the issue up

Didn't you recently accuse me of name calling, huh???

[MHGinTN]

Check the Rules For Radicals list Rogers plays off of ... it’s the line about ‘ridicule’. Hypocrisy is the hallmark of these obamanoid scum.

[Red Steel]

it's just that the language has morphfed to define "native born" as born in the country, regardless of parental citizenship. But in Vattel, and the Supreme Court cases quoting or paraphrasing his definition, the two terms are joined by and "OR".

OK good.

In reflection, I see that in all SCOTUS cases they gave a good background on the subjects whether he was only a native or a natural born as with Ms. Elg in her 1939 case before they referred to her as a natural born citizen.

To cite a few cases...

In Perkins vs. Elg, They described Steinkauler as only to native-born. However, SCOTUS insured the readers that not only was Steinkauler born inside the US and that he had a US citizen father.

1952, Kawakita v. United States, they referred to him as native born, but moreover, described him as a duel citizen who took an oath of allegiance to the US while a minor, and a 14th Amendment citizen.

In 1898, Wong Ark was only described as a native born who had alien parents.

In 1952, Mandoli v. Acheson. Mandoli was described as only native born of duel citizenship who had un-naturalized parents.

In 1958, Perez v. Brownell, AG. Perez was only described as a native born who had Mexican born parents.

[Red Steel]

Gee Ms. Rogers, why is it none of these SCOTUS cases below never refer to these people as natural born US citizens, but in 1939, they refer to Ms. Elg as a natural born citizen?

1952, Kawakita v. United States, they referred to him as native born, but moreover, described him as a duel citizen who took an oath of allegiance to the US while a minor, and a 14th Amendment citizen.

In 1898, Wong Ark was only described as a native born who had alien parents.

In 1952, Mandoli v. Acheson. Mandoli was described as only native born of duel citizenship who had un-naturalized parents.

In 1958, Perez v. Brownell, AG. Perez was only described as a native born who had Mexican born parents.

[danamco]

Does Rush side with Obama? In the matter of Obama Sr & his effect on Jr’s candidacy, yes. So does Coulter. So does every state legislature. So does Congress.

No not every State legislature do. Are you aware how much Rush Limbaugh is paid???

And "presstitute" Coulter would never be able to promote her books on FAUX or getting the gig as guest paid contributor if she REALLY opened her mouth. Everyone of these slime-balls know very well that your dear leader is a NONE NBC, but they have been very effectively silenced like the Clintons and when your dear leader paid a "courtesy" visit to John Roberts on January 14, 2009 with no reporters present, resulting in that Roberts couldn't even perform the Oath swearing in without stammering after been thrown a curve-ball looking into the fraud's evil eyes. It's time you un-strap your knee-pads!!!

[danamco]

Earlier he was quoting Rush Limbaugh who also says that if you place a cow pasture in front of a liberal he will step in it EVERY time, fitting for Ms. Rogers even strapped in combat “knee-pads”!!!

[Red Steel]

Ms. Rogers also purports to be a mind reader of many conservative talking heads.

[Red Steel]

This is truly an amazing thread. The anti-birthers keep saying crap and then get it handed back to them again and again like a pie in the face.

And like a windup toy bumping into a wall, they do it over and over and over again.

And when Obama is finally discredited for the phony that he is, some distant historian will go over FR's countless threads to see the misinformation and disinformation efforts that had to be overcome. You're making history LJ. :-)

[little jeremiah]

No, just witnessing it!

[BP2]

> In the USA, Obama gets the same legal rights and protections that Charles Manson got.

No, Obama as the de facto Chief Executive has FAR MORE “legal rights and protections”.

Obama has the Justice Department and the US Attorneys Office at his disposal to “protect the office of the President,” regardless of how guilty he may be. And after observing Obama in action for nearly 16 months, it's safe to assume that he would undoubtedly have Holder and Napolitano invoke National Security to save Obama’s own sorry ass from his own lies if it came down to it. Charles Manson has no such executive power to abuse.

At the center of the Framer’s desire to place the unique “natural-born citizen” requirement for the President was Loyalty. There are 535 members of Congress and 9 Justices to disperse the Legitimate Power they wield for their branches of government. But there is only ONE President in the Executive Branch ... there damn well better not be ANY conflict (actual or implied) as to whom that one Executive owes his Loyalty!

The Framers all too well understood that even though they were all American citizens and severed themselves from the King on July 4, 1776, EVEN THEY had unbreakable ties as British Subjects, succinctly expressed in this excerpt from the “The Pamphleteer, Volume 2”:

This concept of nemo potest exuere patrium ("No man can renounce his own country") endured in the US even AFTER the Constitution was ratified, which is the reason the Framers inserted “or a Citizen of the United States at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution” as part of the Constitutional requirement for the POTUS in Art II, § 1, Clause 5.

The British used nemo potest exuere patrium to dragoon on the high seas as many as 10,000 Americans — deemed British deserters by the British Admiralty — and force these American sailors into British military service (more often jailed) before the War of 1812.

Indeed, even the United States government did not expressly claim that naturalization released a citizen from his or her former allegiance until 1848. A Declaration of the Prince Regent in 1813 rejected the idea that American naturalization laws had any force on the high seas. To recognize those statutes outside American territory "would nullify the jurisdiction of the British crown over its natural-born subjects."

Even the slightest judicial erosion of nemo potest exuere patrium did not occur until 1824 with Doe d. Thomas v. Acklam. However, nemo potest exuere patriam (or Indelibility) was established law in Great Britain until 1870, and in the United States until the Expatriation Act (1868) that declared "the right of expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all people, indispensable to the enjoyment of the rights of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." It's important to note however that the Expatriation Act is a Congressional Act, and obviously does not trump the US Constitution.

Additionally, in terms of how the Framers would have recognized Loyalty to the British Crown from a British Subject, Obama's loyalty to the Crown — whether or not Obama recognizes this loyalty — ENDURES THIS VERY MOMENT and for as long as Obama shall live.

[little jeremiah]

I wonder if that which you describe above had any bearing on the offensive behavior towards Queen Elizabeth when 0bama and his missus visited her.

I would assume that 0bama might have wanted to “show” that he wasn’t a “loyal” British citizen, if/when this becomes mainstream.

Just wondering.

[BP2]

Of ALL the sovereigns Obama has bowed to — even a freakin’ mayor — he did NOT bow to the one person you'd expect is most likely to ever be bowed to ... the Queen of England.

Accidental omission or purposeful?

It certainly does not match his behavior toward other Heads of State.

[little jeremiah]

At the time - and especially after witnessing his obsequious bowing and scraping to the Saudi king, and then other heads of state - I thought it to just mean a purposeful insult to our long time ally.

But it may have this other meaning as well. “I’m not a loyal British subject - see me diss the Queen!”

[lentulusgracchus]

Obama's loyalty to the Crown — whether or not Obama recognizes this loyalty — ENDURES THIS VERY MOMENT and for as long as Obama shall live.

Even allowing that Obama, arguendo, was born in Mombasa, Stanley and Barack Sr. were married in Hawaii; and since Senior was still married to a village Luo girl back home, then therefore his marriage to Stanley was a bigamous sham, null and void under U.S. law.

So Obama Sr. and Stanley were never married, and Obama was the child of one parent only.

[little jeremiah]

The question about the legality of 0bama Sr’s marriages to both Kezia and Stanley Ann are not, from what I’ve read, entirely settled issues. There is hearsay only in the case of Kezia (some quote about cattle and dowry); it seems some records might be able to be found in Kenya but no doubt at the risk of life and limb. In the case of SADO and 0bama Sr, there are the divorce records plus some kind of marriage record found in HI. Not the record itself but (can’t remember the right terminology) a record of a record. One of the researchers will know better.

0bama Sr’s first marriage to Kezia (if there was one) was a tribal/Muslim marriage with rules unknown to us. Muslim marriages allow 4 wives, Luo tribal laws IIRC do as well.

Would a tribal marriage count under US or HI law, especially since SADO and 0bama Sr appear to have married in HI and had a subsequent divorce. The question of why the divorce if they didn’t marry came up, then the record of a marriage was discovered. She didn’t ask any alimony, and obviously Sr wanted nothing to do with his offspring. So what was the purpose of the divorce, unless she wanted welfare benefits and/or to be free to re-marry.

[bushpilot1]

Wonder if Obama Sr. was under any written agreement regarding fraternization with the locals in Hawaii.

Someone was sponsoring him and there must rules for his conduct.

[lentulusgracchus]

Well, they didn't drop a hammer on him right away .... from the timeline I saw, Obama Babydaddy was in Hawaii another year or so after Baby Zero was born. Baby and Mama were, meanwhile, on the West Coast, Mama evidently staying there until Sr. left -- and apparently staying there only until Sr. was safely gone. She apparently didn't want to be around him any more. Must have been a rough wedding.

[lentulusgracchus]

You're right about the hearsay nature of many of the story elements, and people are lying all over the place. Including, I think, the paternal mother-in-law, who told people in a loud voice that she saw Baby Obama held aloft in a Mombasa delivery room. Ballocks -- sure she did, now that he's famous.

And damn Obama for hiding his records. He has no right to do that, when there is a question of a matter of law about his eligibility to the office he sought.

And damn the Pubbies -- for not standing up on any of this!

[bushpilot1]

This dictionary may be sending me messages..a few moments ago was fingering for the definition of wife..the first attempt opened to “shift marriage... A mock marriage.