Washington Times full-page ad: Stop The Charade

The Washington Times ^ | 07/23/2012 | Article 2 Super PAC

[TexasVoter]

This newspaper typically winds up on the desk of every lawmaker in Washington. Let's hope they read it.

[Doogle]

http://www.art2superpac.com/UserFiles/file/A18-WTNA07232012.pdf

[reagandemocrat]

Page 18?

Should be front page.

[Codeflier]

I encourage everyone to watch the selective service fraud video. That alone should be enough to send chills through you.

[dps.inspect]

Do I see a snowball at the top of the hill starting to roll...

[The Great RJ]

The response to this ..I can hear the crickets chirp. The Lame Stream Media will ignore this or at best brand it as the work of some birther nuts. The GOP court eunuchs will do the same. If this damning information were on a Republican President the impeachment would have already started and calls for resignation would be at fever pitch.

Remember the fable of the Emperor's new clothes and no one save a little kid had the guts to say the Emperor was actually nude? Obama's fraud is manifest for all who dare to see, but like most of the Emperor's subjects no one dares to recognize the truth.

[murron]

Call me a pessimist, but I see this going about as far as it’s gotten so far, which is nowhere. The Republicans don’t have the guts to follow through with any of this stuff, and I’m certainly not holding my breath that Romney will run with any of this. Even some in our own crowd don’t want to talk about it. And even if it is challenged, then what? It would probably end up in the laps of the Supreme Court, and I can pretty much guess what will happen there.

This will become a footnote in history that there was talk about Obama not being a natural born citizen and other mysteries surrounding his early life, and that will be about it. I hope I’m wrong.

[goodnesswins]

Yeah....I keep thinking about sending out an email WEEKLY....with a subject line that says “The Emperor has No Clothes”....to all my friends, family, etc.....and just see if anyone gets it....

[goodnesswins]

can you point to a link?

[TexasVoter]

I saw a survey (http://www.bluegrasspundit.com/2012/07/number-of-people-who-dont-believe-obama.html) that suggests that 45% of Americans either disbelieve or are unsure whether Obama was born in the US. This is an INCREASE since his alleged birth certificate was posted on the White House Website.

Members of Congress are waiting to hear from this many concerned citizens. They are elected officials. They will not take any risk toward a Congressional investigation until they feel that it is necessary for their reelection.

START HERE: http://www.art2superpac.com/contactcongress.html

[Codeflier]

Forgive the lack of html for the link (copy and paste)

www.youtube.com/watch?v=xbkPh6NXZ7A

[Lee'sGhost]

Amen.

[mouell]

I have always been confused with this line of logic. Believe me, I despise the man, but it is my understanding, that if his mother was an American citizen and he was born anywhere in the world, he is a ‘natural born’ American - no need to ‘naturalize’.

Let me explain. Both of my children were born in Greece - 82’ and 84’ respectively. I was working there for the American Embassy in Athens at the time for the Dept. of State. They were both born in a Greek Hospital, and we were living on the Greek economy. After they were born, we registered them with the Greek Government, then took all of the Greek paperwork to the embassy and obtained certificates titled ‘Birth of Americans citizens born abroad’. The children did not have to be ‘naturalized’ upon entry in the U.S. and had obtained their own U.S. passports, (even thought the pictures were of babies being held up. The reason we obtained their own passports was in the chance that we would have to evacuate a country - it was recommended that they each have their own passport rather than attaching to either parent). They were literally born natural Americans in Greece simply due to our citizen status. I do not believe that both parents have to be citizens, but just proof of one - in Obama’s case, it is his mother. If someone wants to explain, in practical terms, laws that state otherwize, I would be happy to hear them, but have believed that this is a line that has not merit from the get go. Natural born does not mean you have to actually be born on U.S. soil. John McCain was born in Panama while his father was in the navy and he was certified to be eligible. it simply means that you are an American at birth.

[Victor]

Ummmmm....I assume your spouse is also American...?

with Zero, the fact remains that his father was a British subject; both parents have to be citizens in order for their offspring to be NB.

[Mack the knife]

Believe me, I despise the man, but it is my understanding, that if his mother was an American citizen and he was born anywhere in the world, he is a ‘natural born’ American - no need to ‘naturalize’.

---

Perhaps you missed this post.
“The Constitution, Vattel, and ‘Natural Born Citizen’: What Our Framers Knew
American Clarion ^ | July 18, 2012 | Publius Huldah “

You can believe what you wish, but you should at least be aware of the the reasons why others have concluded that Obama is not a “natural born citizen”.

[rolling_stone]

wrong the statutory law in effect at time of Obamas supposed birth if it was out of the US required his mother (if married) to have 5 years residency after age 14 which she did not so both of his parents would have had to be US citizens for him to be a citizen at birth.

Natual born citizen is a requirement for President of the US and does not mean statutorily born a citizen at birth (until decided by the US Supreme Court which they are avoiding)

[norton]

"The Republicans don’t have the guts to follow through with any of this stuff..."

I sometimes wonder if the GOP opposition to us "birther" nuts has more to do with Marco Rubio than with lord Obama.

Can anyone here correct me when I opine that Rubio's parents' status at the time of his birth put him in approximately the same non-natural born citizen category as is lord Obama?

[rolling_stone]

per US State Department

7 FAM 1131.6-2 Eligibility for Presidency (TL:CON-68; 04-01-1998)

a. It has never been determined definitively by a court whether a person who acquired U.S. citizenship by birth abroad to U.S. citizens is a natural-born citizen within the meaning of Article II of the Constitution and, therefore, eligible for the Presidency.

b. Section 1, Article II, of the Constitution states, in relevant part that ―No Person except a natural born Citizen...shall be eligible for the Office of President.‖

c. The Constitution does not define "natural born". The ―Act to establish an Uniform Rule of Naturalization‖, enacted March 26, 1790, (1 Stat. 103,104) provided that, ―...the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born ... out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided that the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States

d. This statute is no longer operative, however, and its formula is not included in modern nationality statutes. In any event, the fact that someone is a natural born citizen pursuant to a statute does not necessarily imply that he or she is such a citizen for Constitutional purposes.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86757.pdf