Skip to comments.Obama's Eligibility Diversion
Posted on 02/14/2012 3:17:10 AM PST by Flotsam_Jetsome
Having followed the Obama "natural born" citizenship quandary since its inception, I had always viewed the controversy over Obama's birthplace and other records as a diversion from the real issue: Obama's dual citizenship precluded his constitutional eligibility. My position was also influenced by my desire to elevate discussion on the inextricably related issue of birthright citizenship as a key component in effective immigration reform. Birthright citizenship is the practice of conferring U.S. citizenship to every baby born on U.S. soil, regardless of the nationality, domicile, or legal status of its parents. The practice, seen by many as an illegal immigration magnet, also often results in the dilemma of double allegiance, a "supra-citizen" status held by millions of Americans. Although the State Department rarely enforces its policies discouraging dual citizenship, it does recognize its security clearance implications. And the department confirmed that Obama was born a dual citizen.
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/02/obamas_eligibility_diversion.html#ixzz1mLwFXoEP
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
How do you know that Obama had US passport in 1981? Where is the evidence? There is none. It is your speculation that he travelled using US passport.
School records from Indonesia list Barry as Indonesian citizen. We also know that his name was erased from his mother’s US passport. How do you know that he did not use Indonesian passport?
I don’t think the bigamy changes anything. IF BO Senior was his biological father, it doesn’t matter whether they were married or not . . . whether he was a bastard . . . or illegitimate or whatever they called them back in the 1960’s. It just says two parents who are citizens, doesn’t matter their marital status. BHO Senior was still not an American citizen.
Wrong. At the time, Pakistan was allied with the US (and India was regarded as Soviet-leaning). Pakistan was safer for Americans then than it is now.
Occidental is not that big a college and it seems very strange that no one seems to remember him.
Obama seems to have a past that is largely a fabrication.
His commie background is more covered up than fabricated. The MSM refuses investigate it diligently, because they know its proper exposure would sink him. It will be interesting to see what Andrew Breitbart has.
How about You? Here is some truth.
“Because birthers would rather hold onto an attractive lie than be confronted with the truth?”
That one gets my vote.
This picture should be on billboards with the Heading “Are you a taxpayer?”
In 04 my Mom called me, she lives in South Florida with all other retired Mom’s, and asked me about the upcoming election. She is a died in the wool democrat. I said “Mom, Bush is left of JFK.” And went down the list....needless to say she is now a registered republican.
There is a picture of Zippo at Occi floating around somewhere. There is also a 999 social security number attached to him out there as well. Those were given to foriegn students receiving FA.
At this point, I don’t feel ANY revelations about Baraq would really affect his 2012 campaign.
This election will be about givers vs. takers. Can’t see the takers caring one whit if Baraq was a registered Communist and was on the payroll of the USSR in the 80s, or anything similar.
Using the “original intent” of the founders, IMO was to prevent a dual citizen from becoming CIC. If Barry is not a dual citizen under the BNA of 1948 which would explicitly exclude him from being a UK subject if he was illegitimate, then there would be no dual citizenship and no conflict with the founders intent.
Using “strict construction” of the Minor case NBC definition of "parents who are citizens" it could be inferred that SCOTUS could rule against Barry for having a non-US citizen sperm donor not legally married to his mother. But I would expect SCOTUS to go with original intent and not strict construction.
IMO, there is no on-point SCOTUS case matching the fact pattern of Barry's alleged birth circumstances and nationality of parents, especially since mothers were allowed to retain their own citizenship beginning in 1922 if they legally married an alien, which was not the case when MvH or WKA were decided.
The entire US legal and congressional establishment chose to nullify any insinuation that Barry was not NBC provided he was born in HI by virtue of his US citizen mother, analogous to a jury nullification of a law that the jury doesn't agree should be applied on a particular case. IMO, all federal courts, including SCOTUS would give Barry a Mulligan and declare him NBC...provided he was born on US soil.
Back to the thread.
. . . . Check out # 31 .
Thank you for the reply. I think I like the “strict construction” sperm donor scenario and rule against him the best. What a mess.
“2. INS makes distinction between a native-born and a natural-born citizen. How do you explain that?”
Barry and his campaign lie all day every day! Back in 2008, Barry was running on the narrative of “the improbable love” between his two parents made possible by the civil rights movement and Selma and other lies. It was crucial for his parents to actually BE married for this romantic narrative to resonate with the black community and liberals, despite the Ayers facilitated admission by Barry in Dreams that he wasn't sure his parents, actually were married.
IMO Barry's campaign decided that it was more valuable for his parents to be married and in love than it was risky for Barry to expose himself to charges that he was not NBC. So far this strategy has worked perfectly.
Yes, INS does make a distinction between native-born and NBC and nothing I have written contradicts that, or shouldn't.
Unfortunately for Barry, his behavior betrays consciousness of guilt that he was NOT born in the USA, and Sheriff Joe Arpaio could yet Barry removed from office if it can be proved that Barry knew he was not born in the USA and hid it.
Just posted a similar thought...
I for one, am truly shocked...
Attacking me isn't the answer.
I did not say even once that 0bama had a U.S. passport. I pointed out that the birther’s concocted reason for him needing an OTHER THAN U.S. passport is an easily debunked LIE.
Now why do birthers, three years after the fact, still go around believing easily debunked LIES!?!?!!?
Because rabid birther attack dogs are scicked on anyone who dares to mention the truth?
Because birthers are stupid?
Because they are uninformed?
Because birther sources lie to them?
Because they would rather believe an easily debunked lie than be confronted with the truth?
Attacking me isn't the answer.
Apparently other than that, you don't have an answer.
Are you incurious why obvious and blatant lies are still passed around like baseball cards among birhters?
I am curious.
I find it quite curious.
Are they just stupid, or attempting to discredit the movement by pretending to be stupid?
Seeings as how the most ludicrous racist and untruthful statements of anyone purporting to be a birthers are all held sacrosanct and the wagons circled around them by birthers - I would say that birthers are particularly vulnerable to such false flag operations.
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.