Posted on 09/06/2008 4:38:21 PM PDT by STE=Q
Worse scandals than not being Eligible??? lmao
Yeah, who cares if he’s NOT AMERICAN when we know a friend of his did something bad 30 years ago.
Damn, now I’ve heard it all!!
“Pay not attention to that man behind the curtain”.
Unfortunately, there are far too many with “ostrich syndrome” who would rather bash McCain over immigration.
It seems the politics of character assassination is preferable to disqualifying him forever.
STE=Q-The long anecdote doesn’t help but this is a matter concerning the future of our nation.
Many claim to care about American Tradition and Values. Holding people accountable has become an after thought in this party, especially the opposition
IF McCain/Palin lose it will be due to the (R)’s inability to enforce the laws of this country in regards to elections.
“If you cannot back up some supposed statement of fact you ought not to make it.”
Do you know what the word ‘supposed’ means?
Its a synonym for ‘alleged.’
Please look them up it may clear your misunderstanding about me having to back something up.
For update on Obama’s {ALLEGED} fake ‘certificate of live birth’ hit the link below:
http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2008/07/atlas-exclusive.html
If you have any questions you can contact the forensic expert that made the finding.
In the meantime I would like to see an original copy of Obama’s birth certificate.
Thanks for your post.
STE=Q
Worry not Chicken Little. The sky won’t fall on McCain/Palin since the lawsuit Obama was served is brought forth by a Dem.
A Hillary supporting Dem. who is bitter and carrying the water.
Let’s wait and see.
My interpretation of the term "naturally born" is that he was either born in our country or one of his parents is an American citizen. We know his mother is an American, therefore, it does not matter where in the world he was born. Someone please tell me where I am wrong.
Nor would I ever consider being one because I live in the People's Republic of Maryland. I am a contrarian by nature.
“Holding people accountable has become an after thought in this party, especially the opposition”
What gets me is the attitude people have about our leaders.
THEY ARE OUR SERVANTS; NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
In fact, McCain called himself a ‘servant’ in his speech the other day!
Thanks for your post!
STE=Q
“Worry not Chicken Little. The sky won’t fall on McCain/Palin since the lawsuit Obama was served is brought forth by a Dem.”
That doesn’t mean the left won’t point to the ‘mean-spirited’ posts on FR & trash us, regardless of who brought the suit. If it’s a Dem bringing the suit, let’s let them run with it & take up the issue when we have proof.
‘Chicken Little’? No, merely prudent. :-)
“I was born our of wedlock, but I am not a Dem.”
then you get no extra points from dems. That’s all I was suggesting.
You are probably right. On the other hand, I never really wanted points from the Dems.
But its real mission is to radicalize American youth and use them to bring about “social change” through threats, pressure, tension and confrontation - the tactics used by the father of community organizing, Saul ‘The Red’
Alinsky.
You got it!
It’s just a lot for the average American to absorb.
He(she)has to get it in bits and peaces.
Obama and his’ buddies have big plans for America.
God help us if he is elected!
Thanks for the post!
STE=Q
Interesting article here, and some interesting responses. Thought you might want to ponder them all...
Wouldn't it be poetic justice if Obama himself was disqualified on a technicality (not a natural born citizen)!
“Yeah, as a pro, pro, pro death person he would be ashamed that his mother didn’t abort him.”
Well, that would be ‘different’ because it was HIS life!
Good one!
Thanks for the post!
STE=Q
Frankly it's more effort than it's worth given that I'm pretty sure Obama doesn't actually remember being born, let alone in which building.
In other news:
In Which Hospital Was Obama Born?
BTW, are you still insisting that 16 is a binary number?
“Wouldn’t it be poetic justice if Obama himself was disqualified on a technicality”
It sure would!
STE=Q
Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution:
“Clause 5: Qualifications for office
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.”
Natural born means born on US soil... whether here or overseas... it must be US territory. Since osama was not alive and a US citizen at the time that this Constitution was "adopted", if he was not born in the USA, then he is not eligible to run for the office of President. This is not New Jersey and this document means exactly what it says.
This is from wiki:
"It is thought the origin of the natural-born citizen clause can be traced to a letter of July 25, 1787 from John Jay (who had been born in New York City) to George Washington (who had been born in Virginia), presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention. John Jay wrote: "Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Commander in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen."
"There was no debate, and this qualification for the office of the Presidency was introduced by the drafting Committee of Eleven, and then adopted without discussion by the Constitutional Convention. (43 of the 55 delegates had been born in the Thirteen Colonies, and the others had been born on British-occupied soil: Ireland, England, Scotland, and the British West Indies."
LLS
Since my post, I decided to also look in Wikipedia and you may be right. What I found, though, was this:
“Montana v. Kennedy, 366 U.S. 308 (1961): A person born in 1906, whose mother was a native-born citizen of the United States and whose father was a foreign citizen, who was born overseas and then moved to the United States, was not a citizen of the United States by birth.”
Maybe he really was born in Kenya.
If he was born in a hospital in Hawaii, he should be able to provide the hospital’s birth certificate, i.e. the one with the footprints.
You are fully entitled to your interpretation.
You might even be right on parts of it. The big underlying issue is that the term 'natural born citizen' does not have an actual current legal definition.
US law provides citizenship under a wide range of conditions, some of which have changed over time. But it is mute on 'natural born' citizenship.
The closest Congress ever came to defining it was in 1790 when children born overseas to TWO American citizens counted as 'natural born citizens'.
This law was surpassed by a 1795 law that dropped any reference to 'natural born citizen'. More recently children born of one US citizen overseas have been specifically denyed even citizenship, let alone being regarded as a 'natural born citizen'.
When Obama was born, the rule was having a foreign parent and being born in that parents country made you a citizen of that country, unless you made a positive effort to assert your US citizenship upon achieving majority.
So if he was born in Kenya, and Stanley Ann was married to Barrak, Sr., he's a Kenyan.
To the best of my knowledge, no record of his mother being married exists, except Obama saying they were married on Maui (Which BTW would be invalid because Barrak, Sr. was already married to another woman back in Kenya)
The same law says that if he was born in Kenyan, and Stanley Ann wasn't married, he's an American.
Except, due to her age, Stanley Ann could not possibly meet the residency requirements, so Barrack would have the citizenship of wherever he was born.
Except the law has since been changed, and under the new law, he could be an American bastard.
Except it isn't at all clear that the new law is retroactive.
In any event merely being a citizen doesn't suffice as a qualification to be President.
You have to be a 'natural born citizen'.
No legal definition of that term has existed since 1790.
There is a lively debate going on right now about the exact definition of 'natural born citizen'. The two schools of thought are jus sanguinus and jus soli, the rule of blood, and the rule of soil respectively.
Under jus sanguinus any child of Americans (or some say an American) regardless of the location of birth is a 'natural born citizen'.
Under jus soli any child born on US soil is a 'natural born citizen'.
My belief is that the Founding Fathers intended that no one would hold that office that might have a hint of divided loyalties. For me, having a single American parent is too low a bar. Being an anchor baby is too low a bar.
I favor a rule that says to qualify for holding the office of the president one must have TWO American citizen parents AND be born in the United States or the District of Columbia. (If I though I could get away with it I'd also require spending at least half the time between age 6 and 21 be spent being raised in the good old USofA)
But that's just me. Until Congress and the Courts agree on a legal definition, what you and I say is meaningless.
I saw a blog today that said Obama and the DNC were served, on the lawsuit regarding birth certificate on 9/5/08. However it has never been on the network news that I know of...??
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.