The Obama Camp Tried to Delegitimize Natural Born Requirements Prior To Elections

timothybirdnow.com ^ | December 4, 2008 | Timothy Birdnow

[smokingfrog]

Obama’s “Cafeteria Constitutionalists” started years ago to try to to delegitimize the “American born President” provision of the Constitution. As the conclusion of this article states, “Can you say President Soros?”

Obama And The Three D’s: Deny, Delay Destroy

Barack Obama has successfully merged Chicago with Clinton-era politics. With that, we now have the Three D’s rearing their ugly heads again. For those of you who were in elementary school when Bill Clinton was president, the three D’s stood for `deny, delay, destroy`.

In this case, with regards to the whole Barack Obama birth certificate stall, the `destroy` part is in regards to the U.S. Constitution, and it takes time (deny and delay) to do this.

With that, meet Sarah P. Herlihy.

The natural born citizen requirement in Article II of the United States Constitution has been called the “stupidest provision“ in the Constitution, “undecidedly un-American,“ “blatantly discriminatory,“ and the “Constitution’s worst provision.“ Since Arnold Schwarzenegger’s victory in the California gubernatorial recall election of 2003, commentators and policy-makers have once again started to discuss whether Article II of the United States Constitution should be amended to render naturalized citizens eligible for the presidency. Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the Constitution defines the eligibility requirements for an individual to become president. Article II provides:

No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

[smokingfrog]

canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/6687

AMENDING THE NATURAL BORN CITIZEN REQUIREMENT: GLOBALIZATION AS THE IMPETUS AND THE OBSTACLE

According to Ms. Herlihy:
Ultimately, the emotional reasons to oppose a constitutional amend-ment abolishing the natural born citizen requirement for presidential eligi-bility will prevail over the rational reasons because the rational reasons derive, in large part, from the increase in globalization. The current Ameri-can perceptions about the effects of globalization and the misunderstand-ings about what globalization actually is will result in Americans deciding that naturalized citizens should not be president because this would, in effect, be promoting globalization. Although this argument is admittedly circular, because globalization is the thing that makes the need to abolish the requirement more and more persuasive, Americans’ subsequent percep-tions about globalization are the very things that will prevent Americans from embracing the idea of eliminating the natural born requirement. Logi-cal Americans are looking for a reason to ignore the rational reasons pro-moted by globalization so that they may vote based on their own emotions and instincts. Whether it is because of fear, racism, religious intolerance, or blind faith in the decisions of the Founding Fathers, Americans want to find a way to avoid changing the natural born citizen provision to allow natural-ized citizens to be eligible for the presidency. Ultimately, Americans will rely on the perceived negative effects of globalization, or rather their per-ceptions of globalization’s negative effects, to justify their decision to al-low emotion to prevail over reason.

[CaribouCrossing]

bookmark

[freedumb2003]

Every FReeper should Bk this one!

[TXLady]

Bookmark

[berdie]

later

[seastay]

These people are just plain evil, there is no other word for it. Where ever there is evil there are lies, such that what is being peddled here is the opposite function of what the US government and it’s leaders are chartered to do for its people. The one and only purpose for the government is to protect its people, and NOT to let its people be assimilated!

By setting a precedent that immigrants can rule office, and subsequent through the following amnesty plans, which will allows immigrants to vote for their agents in US offices, we are screwed as US citizens! The left is not just unpatriotic by pursing this globalization, but evil, by forcing US citizens to give up it infrastructure that was hard earned to others on the planet whom had nothing to do with the prosperity.

[arrogantsob]

Another instance of foreknowledge that this was a problem for Zero was the Senate Resolution intended to bless McCain by declaring him natural born and eligibile. It would have as much meaning legally as declaring day night. A RAT stooge had started this by filing suit claiming him to be ineligible like the idiot Donofrio. McCain simply went to court with his BC showing him born to American citizens. Those running the stooge knew this but it gave the the RATS the chance for the Senate manuver. But its real intent was in a provision McKaskell, Schumer and others tried to sneak in declaring naturalized citizens eligible.

Now why in the world would anything like that have been attempted?

[arrogantsob]

The American people love lies and lap them up like mothers’ milk begging for more.

[Ronzo]

Bookmark and bump...

Yeah, one thing for sure....Obama may or may not be a natural born citizen, but he's certainly a natural born liar....

[AprilfromTexas]

4later

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

For tomorrow.....

[Kevmo]

But its real intent was in a provision McKaskell, Schumer and others tried to sneak in declaring naturalized citizens eligible.
***Wasn’t Obama one of those others, or at least connected to the effort?

[Conscience of a Conservative]

I don't mean to rain on anyone's parade here, but this Sarah P. Herlihy connection is really weak. Kirkland & Ellis is a huge law firm (over 700 lawyers overall, with more than 600 in the Chicago office alone). Ms. Herlihy was in law school when she wrote the article, and was a law clerk for a Federal judge when the piece was finalized and published (so, at the very most, the only contact Ms. Herlihy might have had with the firm prior to the article being written/published would have been as a summer associate in 2004). Further, Ms. Herlihy works in the litigation group, while both of the firm's partners work in the firm's corporate group. Quite frankly, in a firm the size of K&E, the likelihood that a summer associate (or first-year associate) in the litigation group had any sort of working relationship with a senior partner in the corporate group is slim to none.

[BIGLOOK]

Will Obama swear to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States in good faith?

Or will his oath of office be a reflection of his bad faith.

Taqiyya

[Red_Devil 232]

110TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION

 

S. RES. __

 

Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.

 

_______________

 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

 

Mrs. MCCASKILL (for herself and Mr. LEAHY, Mr. OBAMA, Mr. COBURN, Mrs. CLINTON, and Mr. WEBB) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on

_______________

 

RESOLUTION

Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.

 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

 

Mrs. MCCASKILL (for herself and Mr. LEAHY, Mr. OBAMA, Mr. COBURN, Mrs. CLINTON, and Mr. WEBB) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on

_______________

 

RESOLUTION

Recognizing that John Sidney McCain, III, is a natural born citizen.

[SweetCaroline]

*

[TheCipher]

Not only that, Obama did a sneaky thing. He was a cosponsor of the resolution. He had this line inserted which was totally out of place within the context of the resolution since it was talking about John McCains specific circumstances

Whereas previous presidential candidates were born outside of the United States of America and were understood to be eligible to be President;"

This line wasn't needed if you read the rest of the resolution

Of course the resolution has no force of law but most of his blind followers wouldn't know the difference.

[Just mythoughts]

Whereas the term `natural born Citizen', as that term appears in Article II, Section 1, is not defined in the Constitution of the United States;

Who put these words in a non-binding resolution?

[nothingnew]

ping

[GiovannaNicoletta]

bookmark for later

[nominal]

It seems clear Obama knows he’s not a natural born citizen, and has taken the constitutional law track that, in his position, most obfuscates the issue by trying to imply natural born status, via claiming to be a “native” citizen.

http://yalelawjournal.org/2008/03/03/citizenship.html : Jill Pryor at yale examines the ambiguities involved with citizenship and the “unresolved” issues of the relativist interpretation of the natural born requirement. By using “native citizen” it seems he hopes the natural born status will be implied.

It’s clear the founders didn’t want “disloyal foreigners acquiring positions of power” to “bring with them, not only attachments to other countries, but ideas of government so distinct from ours that in every point of view they are dangerous.”

from http://www.fightthesmears.com/articles/5/birthcertificate :

“The truth is, Barack Obama was born in the state of Hawaii in 1961, a native citizen of the United States of America. “

Keywords are native citizen. It could be argued Obama took it upon himself (constitutional lawyer), by running for president, to re-interpret the constitution.

Ambiguities are brought about with -where- someone is born, rather than the real issue of -loyalty-. This is indicative of possible attempts to deceive.

If we follow the relativist interpretation to it’s logical conclusions, what would there to be to stop a Kim Jong-Il or Chavez could marry an american woman, have a child in a state, get the required papers then leave with the child for the next 20 some odd years, come back for the 14 required, and have the son or daughter be president?

At the moment, I don’t see any good reason to compromise, in any way, on this issue.

[Fred911]

[Doug TX]

bookmark

[Grampa Dave]

"Will Obama swear to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States in good faith?

Or will his oath of office be a reflection of his bad faith"

Thanks for your support of Just Move On. Now, Felipe de Jesus CALDERON Hinojosa & Schwarzenegger can run for US el presidente in 2112! They can run the pro Gay/Green Governator with the Presidente of Mexico for co el Presidentes of the 57 states.

With the voters in Mexico, South America, Canada, Europe, Iran and "new voters" in the Former USA, the Governator can be co presidente with the Mexican Presidente for life.

They will win by 200 million votes, and that settles that. No one will challenge either one including a lot of Freepers as they will fear riots if the constitution is considered. Just Move on to 2040.

[Uncle Chip]

Is it possible that the script for this usurper's rude awakening was written back in 1933 with the adoption of the 20th Amendment with these words: "if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified ...".

This amendment anticipated a time when a candidate would have been elected but "failed to qualify" for office. And what are the odds that just such a person would march around for months flaunting his disqualification in front of all of us after the election using the very title "the President elect".

It's just surreal. It's like he is daring us to do something about it.

[HighlyOpinionated]

Pingeth I this Posteth.

[CaribouCrossing]

“Every FReeper should Bk this one!”

Absolutely.

[CaribouCrossing]

“Yeah, one thing for sure....Obama may or may not be a natural born citizen, but he’s certainly a natural born liar....”

Only Obama and his cohorts know for sure. As for being a natural born liar? Obama has proved that to be true.

[CaribouCrossing]

Thank you for those links. Bookmarking them now.

[sneakers]

bookmarked

[arrogantsob]

I thought so but was not sure and have been put straight on this.

[arrogantsob]

Thanks.

[arrogantsob]

Apparently the dumbassed Senate doesn’t either.

[freedumb2003]

SOOOO stolen and will be used wantonly with NO attribution.

This is just a courtesy notice.

[Kevmo]

It could be argued Obama took it upon himself (constitutional lawyer), by running for president, to re-interpret the constitution. Ambiguities are brought about with -where- someone is born, rather than the real issue of -loyalty-. This is indicative of possible attempts to deceive.... At the moment, I don’t see any good reason to compromise, in any way, on this issue.
***Fascinating perspective. I see no good reason to comprimise either.

[nominal]

...”It’s just surreal. It’s like he is daring us to do something about it. “

I was thinking along the same lines. There is no way this is an accident. These are people who plan years ahead, consider every possible problem, and have multiple contingency plans for each. They knew, and did it anyways.

The tactic now seems to be for them to ignore, dismiss, and ridicule the more than sufficient reasons for an investigation of the kenya/islam issue, obfuscate the dual/triple citizenship natural born citizen -automatic- disqualification, and hope the problem goes away, or at least dragged out in the courts to the point where it’s forgotten or nullified.

There is a strong possibility for civil war in either eventuality, sworn in or disqualified.

this is the latest from the We the People Foundation on the status of the lawsuits, and their future plans. video of their national press club conference:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=6771521759788800576

I watched all ~2h30m of it, and I am at a loss for the moment. Options for recourse are few, to say the least.

[Fred911]

I put it out there to be stolen......gets around much quicker. I did a Nancy Pelosi photoshop a few years back and it is all over google images.....love it!

[papagall]

Seen this thread?

[noinfringers2]

The man is ignorant about what ‘ natural born’ signifys and the significance of the intent by the Founding Fathers. Their reasons then are just as valid today and even more important today when it is clear that Obama and his enablers have done so much to change what has been sacred over the years.