Skip to comments.Arrested Theresa Cao talks about her outburst during the reading of the US Constitution...Video
Posted on 01/07/2011 11:40:45 AM PST by Hotlanta Mike
Video: The arrested 'Birther' Theresa Cao and an attorney named Billy discuss her outburst during the Congressional reading of the United States Constitution on 1/6/2011. Billy the attorney explains what a "natural born Citizen" IS. Her interview is embedded below the outburst heard around the world...2 bonus links below video...
(Excerpt) Read more at obamareleaseyourrecords.blogspot.com ...
She’s pimping for World Net Daily. Explains a lot.
I admire her courage - she was only saying what everyone was thinking.
The irony of being arrested for saying something inappropriate during a reading of the Constitution.
Cato’s blog has been around for some time. She is pretty legit as far as the birther movement goes. She is a constitutionalist.
I am thinking she set back the cause with her outburst and gave more credibility to the socialists who behave similarly.
Theresa Cao’s website might have some good information worth checking out.
A more perfect summary could not have been made. Kudos.
Well, we can fold our hands and wait the four years - that is what 0bama is counting on, or we can follow the lead of our forefathers and raise hell - I choose that latter.
well... they hadn't gotten around to reading the "freedom of speech" part (bill of rights) when she had her outburst
Apparently, they never did :(
You are pimping for Obama which explains a lot.
I hate Code Pink and I hate this outburst.
Don’t mind unfurling a sign but yelling out is disrespectful to the reading of the constitution.
Guess they didn’t care for that “free speech” thingy.
The First Amendment does not give us the right to speak wherever and whenever we want. While I share (to some extent) her doubts about Obama’s birthplace, she did not have the right to interrupt a session of Congress with her outburst. Her message was not inappropriate, but the manner, time and place in which she delivered it was.
What if every visitor decided to yell out things during the reading? How about the protestors who interrupted Palin and McCain's speeches at the RNC? What if a bunch of gay marriage advocates show up in your church and start shouting homosexualist, anti-Christian slogans, during the entire service? Is all that speech protected by the First Amendment?
If a lefty had interrupted the reading shouting some left wing comment, I think nearly everyone here would support her arrest. We should be consistent. Of course, civil disobedience is a legitmate form of activism, but one should expect to be arrested if one engages in it.
I agree with your statement, but this was not the time and place to arrest someone. Maybe kick her out.
I would not support their arrest. And especially not if she was reciting the Constitution. I would always give more leeway for idiocacy at a political event, then some nonpolitical private event.
Fair enough, kicking her out would be an option, as well. She didn’t sound like the type that would go quietly, though. :)
Just to clarify, IMHO, it is fine to admire her for what she did, but criticizing her arrest as somehow “violating her First Amendment rights” makes no sense to me.
“Shes pimping for World Net Daily. Explains a lot.”
I like WND.
I’m sorry you don’t .............
Maybe so. And while I appreciate her passion and agree with her message, her methods make her look like a crank who is no saner than Cindy Sheehan.
If I cared, I'd say, "Really? How so?"
But I don't. So all I'll say is, "P!$$ off."
Oh....and by the by...who did you vote for in the 2008 presidential election?
She gets my vote to be in F.R.’s Hall of Fame!
She had the guts to tell 535 critters what we all know!!
That the usurper is NOT a NBC, and they need to know that clearly, and she did express it clearly to the whole world!!!
Is the usurper disrespectful, hmmm???
She did NOT address the birthplace, she commented on the NBC issue. She's been in front of the W.H. for a long time with her message!!!
What and where would be a more appropriate place to tell the truth???
The are any number of appropriate places to tell the truth. The steps of the Captitol, calling a talk show, Free Republic or any other forum, etc., etc..
You just can’t yell things out in the middle of a session of Congress, and not expect to be arrested. Again, it is fine to argue that she did a good thing, but it was pretty clearly an illegal thing, and the arrest was valid.
You are very lucky you are there. If not my fists would be making coward Sam Roberts even bloodier.
I have no problem whatsoever at someone speaking out, wherever it may be. From phone-in town hall meetings, to politicians taking tunnels to get to congress so they won’t have to walk passed constituents, it is getting to be impossible to get ones point across to a representative. I think the time has come to let them know, in whatever non-violent way, that they WILL listen, whether they want to or not. If a few scary situations develop, so be it. Most politicians live in their little bubbles, away from real life, so from time to time, let’s poke those bubbles a bit, just so they don’t forget that we’re here, and we’re watching..... :)
Oh...now there's a really intelligent, adult response.
I'll send you my address if you'd like to 'discuss' this in person.
Look, the whole point is (now that I've decided to care just a little bit) that you automatically jump ugly on me and insult me for no reason other than I have offended some sort of sacred cow of yours. I return the vitriol and you suggest doing violence on me? Nice. Not very mature is it?
Suffice to say, you aren't worth my time to type anymore responses.
You just cant yell things out in the middle of a session of Congress, and not expect to be arrested. Again, it is fine to argue that she did a good thing, but it was pretty clearly an illegal thing, and the arrest was valid.
Joe Wilson - “You lie”. I didn’t see him get arrested during the State of the Union address.
By the way, it appears she actually walks the walk...
We think that people like you are a major part of the problem.WTFU.
Well at least she didn’t shoot people from the gallery, like some Left Wing radicals did, whom were pardoned by Bill “the bent one” Clinton.
IMO ignoring or usurping the Constitution as Congress—and the Courts-and the Executive have done for decades while an ignorant and apathetic people pass the bowl around and sing the na na song is disrespectful.
More likely that she is a well-meaning useful idiot, and WorldNetDaily is trying to make a living. WND targets the irate, not those particularly interested in the Constitution, or they would quote our framers rather than try to follow in the footsteps of the National Enquirer.
In all the words I've seen attributed to, or about Ms. Cao, I have not seen Chief Justice John Marshall quoted:
The natives or indigenes (natural born citizens in English translations; Marshall cited the original French Vattel “Law of Nations”) are those born in the country of parents who are citizens.”
Cao or WND didn't cite the originator of the 14th Amendment, Congressman John Bingham who said:
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 .
Neither Cao nor WND cite Chief Justice Morrison Waite whose statement accompanies the annotated Constitution in the National Archives:
“The Constitution does not, in words, say who shall be natural-born citizens. Resort must be had elsewhere to ascertain that. At common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives, or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners.”
Ms. Cao, and Dr. Lakin are genuinely concerned, but sadly misinformed. The misdirection is almost certainly by design, as Leo Donofrio understood two years ago. This is just what ineligible President Chester Arthur did. He always had a birth certificate, but was born, like Obama, to a British subject father, who finally naturalized when Chester was 14. So Arthur concealed his birth certificate, and was aided by a journalist who kept the midirection alive by writing a book and numerous articles questioning Chester's birthplace, just like WND, Dr. Lakin's legal team, and Ms. Cao. WND put signs on highways, all ignoring the Constitution. (The signs should have asked "Dreams from a Citizen Father?") Chester was born in New Hampshire, just as Barack was probably born in Hawaii. But Obama's birthplace is secondary. Being born to a non-citizen father disqualifies Barack and every legislator knows it. Remember, every Senator signed Senate Res 511 in Apr 2008 in which Pat Leahy agreed with Michael Chertoff who said:
My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen, Chertoff replied. That is mine, too, said Leahy."
The issue is the Constitution. There is no doubt because Obama told us that he was born a British subject because his father was a British subject. As Chief Justice Waite told us, the definition comes from our common law, just like most definitions of terms used in the Constitution. The Constitution is not a legal dictionary. It is normal that terms not be defined in the Constitution. Because "felonies" are not defined in the Constitution do we not have a Constitutional basis for prosecution? Obama counts on our ignorance. He never said he was a natural born citizen. He said “I am a native born citizen of the U.S.” Obama is a 14th Amendment citizen. As Wong Kim Ark affirmed, being born on our soil of non-citizen parents establishes citizenship - not natural born citizenship, and they are not equivalent. WKA cites Morrison Waite's definition repeated above for who are natural born citizens. Being born a citizen by nature means, as Bingham pointed out, being born of parents whose sole allegiance is to our nation. Obama Sr. is why John Jay and George Washington decided, in one of the latests revisions of the Constitution, to require citizen parents.
I say, under the circumstances, desperate times require desperate measures. Two and a half years into this nightmare and nowhere close to resolution, getting detained for yelling out the truth for all to hear is a small price to pay.
I don’t believe a single opportunity should pass w/o someone speaking (or yelling) out the truth on this issue. Being called a “Kook” is a given...F’em!
Thanks Theresa! You go girl!
Respect for the Constitution, Boehner and "birthers"
This Thursday was the day dedicated to reading the Constitution - at least some historical passages outdated - in Congress, an idea of newcomers from the Republican majority in the House. The Democrats, not to be outdone in patriotism, quickly joined in the reading became an act of "bipartisanship."
First flaw: the activist "Birth" which, in the public gallery, shouted at the reading of a condition of eligibility for the presidency - to be born a citizen (do) American (only). "Unless Obama!" She says. John Boehner, the new Republican chairman of the House, when asked about it said that "the State of Hawaii said that Obama was born there, and that's enough." Yet he refuses to reject the initiative of the twelve elected officials who have filed a law which is concerned about the citizenship of the president: "It's not my place to tell them what to believe," said the leader Republican prosecutor's speech the Republican establishment that makes the nationality of the president a matter of "belief" and not facts.
Second flaw: the constitutional blunder two elected Republican Pete Sessions and Mike Fitzpatrick, who voted without having previously taken an oath. The reason for their distraction? Can not be created: they were holding a fundraiser at election time when all their colleagues lent oath to officially open the new parliamentary session.
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.