Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

FEC joins call to throw out suit against Obama (Berg's challenge of BHO's citizenship)
The Morning Call (Allentown, PA) ^ | 10/22/08 | Kevin Amerman

Posted on 10/23/2008 7:18:55 AM PDT by Born Conservative

The Federal Election Commission has joined Barack Obama and the Democratic National Committee in asking a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit filed by a Montgomery County attorney seeking Obama's ouster from the November ballot.

Philip Berg, who claims the Illinois senator was born in Kenya and can't run for president because he isn't a natural-born U.S. citizen, has no standing to make the claim, according to the FEC.

The motion, filed Tuesday in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia, echoes one filed last month by Obama and the DNC that states Berg hasn't demonstrated how he personally would suffer even if his ''ridiculous and patently false'' claims were true.

(Excerpt) Read more at mcall.com ...


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News; Politics/Elections; US: Hawaii; US: Pennsylvania
KEYWORDS: antichrist; bc; berg; bergvobama; birthcertificate; certifigate; fec; lawsuit; marines; obama; obamatruthfile; philipberg
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-237 next last
To: BenLurkin

Who the h*ll is the FEC to butt into this? Are they Obama shills working with ACORN.

The good news is his suit is starting to be taken seriously. It is on the radar now. I hope his pappy was not that Frank scumbag pedophile pervert guy. I am quite sure he was born in Kenya but what if that Frank guy was the father?

We need to file it in the other 48 states to go with Berg and the brave guy in WA.

Is it 48 other states or 56? I think our overlor and Big Brother want to be said it was 58 states.


51 posted on 10/23/2008 7:48:57 AM PDT by Frantzie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Brian S. Fitzgerald

Wrong....This remains news until Obama produces a birth certificate...

Who do you favor in this election?? Be truthful....


52 posted on 10/23/2008 7:49:05 AM PDT by Boonie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Constitutionalist Conservative

This news source is misreporting the facts according to someone I just spoke to at the FEC. They did not join the Obama campaign or the DNC in asking for a dismissal as the article claims. They simply said that they do not have standing being that they were listed as a defendant. They made no claim as to Berg’s standing in the case.


53 posted on 10/23/2008 7:49:49 AM PDT by TheBigIf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: G.Mason

You’ll find this common amongst those who ascribe to the leftist ideology -

if the rules don’t provide the desired social outcomes, the rules are wrong and must be ignored. Social outcomes trump the rule of law in every case (in their ideology).


54 posted on 10/23/2008 7:49:58 AM PDT by MrB (0bama supporters: What's the attraction? The Marxism or the Infanticide?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Starboard

There would be NO problem with standing if this action were taken by the United States Department of Justice.

But, given the hate in the Obamanation for the Bush administration, imagine what would happen if the government stepped in. Never happen.

I frankly do not see any reason for denying standing to a citizen asking for enforcement of constitutional requirements and the verification thereof BEFORE the election. The harm comes in potentially wasting a vote on an ineligible candidate. It seems obvious as sunshine to me.


55 posted on 10/23/2008 7:50:02 AM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: G.Mason
Obviously we are getting a lesson on what happens when a country is no longer a nation of laws.

Apparently Bush does not give a hoot.

"The executive Power shall be vested in a President of the United States of America."

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

"...he may require the Opinion, in writing, of the principal Officer in each of the executive Departments, upon any subject relating to the Duties of their respective Offices,..."

The Federal Election Commission is an arm of the President who "anoints" the six member commission. Of the democrats, Bush should of just selected the 3 most conservatives dems/Repubs he could find. Of course he could care less since he has shown himself to be a domestically impotent, incompetent, milquetoast. Bush's commission is sure doing a bang up job tracking Obama's cash.
56 posted on 10/23/2008 7:50:17 AM PDT by rollo tomasi (Working hard to pay for deadbeats and corrupt politicians.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CT-Freeper

If the plaintiff doesn’t have standing as a voting citizen, and the FEC doesn’t have standing, then who does? Somebody HAS to have standing for this constitutional issue. I think Obama would argue that no person or government body has standing so that his citizenship can’t be questioned.


57 posted on 10/23/2008 7:51:06 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio
4. A little rope-a-dope to keep the Republicans focused on this issue only to release a birth certificate right before the election.

But that won't CUT it, because of dual citizenship according to Michelle Ma Bell!!!

58 posted on 10/23/2008 7:51:40 AM PDT by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Born Conservative
“The Federal Election Commission has joined Barack Obama and the Democratic National Committee in asking a federal judge to dismiss a lawsuit....”

Why?? Is such action part of the federal law which charters the FEC?? or even implied??

There must be some merit to the case if there are so many groups entering the litigation on Obama’s side.

59 posted on 10/23/2008 7:53:30 AM PDT by elpadre (nation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
SCOTUS, here we come........

They sided with ACORN's criminal voter registrations in Ohio, hmmm!!!

60 posted on 10/23/2008 7:53:46 AM PDT by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

or Davis is the father...maybe he is listed on the birth certificate.

Maybe He was born in Hawaii, is eligible, but davis is the father.

There is some reason why he isn’t producing it. If no father was listed this would not be a big deal but if Davis was listed..it would be.

All kinds of speculation taking place and so many possible reasons....


61 posted on 10/23/2008 7:53:47 AM PDT by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: offduty

Excellent point. Because Berg donated to Hillary the Obama fraud harmed him. Berg has standing.

Here is what I think will be Obama’s defense.

1. Yes I was born in Kenya.
2. The embarrassing part is this Frank Davis pedophile/marxist/sex pervert is my real dad and he was an American so I Obama am an American.

Now the question is how do we prove who the dad is? Both men are dead? DNA from a family member in Kenya?

What a mess. The FEC will not touch this nor will the Supreme Court or Congress???


62 posted on 10/23/2008 7:54:09 AM PDT by Frantzie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: MarkT
What standing does the FEC have to intervene? I thought they are supposed to be neutral insofar as partisan politics is concerned and rule on whether a candidate follwed the rules in campagin finance.

BINGO!!!

Nothing on their site shows that they are mandated to enforce the Constitutional requirements for POTUS. Their sole task is about financing!

63 posted on 10/23/2008 7:54:24 AM PDT by Roccus (POLITICIAN.....................A four letter word spelled with ten letters.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: danamco
So WHO (We the American people?) have standing when it comes to that WE are "hiring" our President, hmmm???

We are voting for a person who can send our sons and daughters off to war and make decisions that effect our national safety and well-being. Every American has standing in this regard. Is it unreasonable to expect that someone seeking the presidency should therefore provide evidence of their ability to satisfy a few simple requirements for such high office? The willingness to look the other way with Obama has reached ridiculous proportions.

64 posted on 10/23/2008 7:54:26 AM PDT by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: CT-Freeper
Not that I agree at all with the FEC, but standing is quite an important element of a lawsuit, according to the Rules of Civil Procedure.

True. But under what bizarre theory of "standind" does ANY US citizen not have standing to challenge the legal qualification of a candidate for presidency.

I'm not a lawyer (though I am the Pro Se Defendant from Hell with plenty of battle scars to prove it). But as I understand it, to have standing you have to show that you have a direct interest in the matter before the court, and that you stand to suffer damages.

I would argue that any US citizen meets that standard. Clearly, having a president in office who is not Constitutionally qualified damages every US citizen.

That said, I am not taking a position here on whether or not Obama is, in fact, a natural-born US citizen (although I do have my suspicions).

65 posted on 10/23/2008 7:55:24 AM PDT by Maceman (If you're not getting a tax cut, you're getting a pay cut.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: CT-Freeper

the Constitution does not give standing to a private citizen? I don’t know, just asking!


66 posted on 10/23/2008 7:55:55 AM PDT by elpadre (nation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: rollo tomasi
Yes ... The "Compasionate Conservative".

A pox on all their houses!

67 posted on 10/23/2008 7:55:55 AM PDT by G.Mason (Duty, Honor, Country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: TheBigIf

Whoever I spoke to on the phone at the FEC lied to me. Here is their court filing for dismissal claiming that Berg has no standing.

http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/pennsylvania/paedce/2:2008cv04083/281573/24/

I am calling back.

In Washington (202) 694-1000


68 posted on 10/23/2008 7:56:15 AM PDT by TheBigIf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
::::sigh:::: This is never going to go anywhere. Even if Obama were born outside the U.S., that does not mean he isn't a citizen. And the BS about his mom only being 18 when she gave birth to him so she does not meet some criteria about living in the U.S. for a certain period of time is stupid as well.

This guy is only succeeding in looking like a lunatic,

So why did Obama post a patently fake birth certificate to the web?

69 posted on 10/23/2008 7:57:04 AM PDT by LoneRangerMassachusetts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
The harm comes in potentially wasting a vote on an ineligible candidate.

A most excellent point and very well put. Wasn't the Dem cry "make every vote count"?

70 posted on 10/23/2008 7:59:29 AM PDT by Starboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: MarkT
What standing does the FEC have to intervene? I thought they are supposed to be neutral insofar as partisan politics is concerned and rule on whether a candidate follwed the rules in campagin finance.

Berg named them as a defendant, so they had to respond. Basically, the FEC is claiming they have no authority or duty to investigate Obama's eligibility; and they do have a point. Berg was just coving all the bases because if he did not include the FEC, the Democrat party and Obama would have claimed that Berg did not include the FEC as a required party to the suit, which would have caused further delays.

71 posted on 10/23/2008 7:59:39 AM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: CT-Freeper
"Not that I agree at all with the FEC, but standing is quite an important element of a lawsuit, according to the Rules of Civil Procedure."

So who WOULD have standing? ACORN? NOBODY? If Sarkozy decided he's like to be simultaneously President of France and the US, WHO would "have standing" to challenge that?

You lawyers can't explain anything.

72 posted on 10/23/2008 8:01:34 AM PDT by cookcounty (Sarah and Todd Palin : They're more like us than we are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LoneRangerMassachusetts
So why did Obama post a patently fake birth certificate to the web?

Don't know and don't care. Doesn't change the fact that he would still be a citizen of the U.S.

The only thing that would carry any weight as regards his citizenship is if someone could product evidence that Obama, as an adult, renounced his citizenship. There's not even been a whisper of such a thing.

This is a silly waste of time and only makes this guy (and others like him) look like they are a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic. Better to concentrate on things that can actually get some traction, such as Obama's 'share the wealth' statement.

73 posted on 10/23/2008 8:04:07 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall cause you to vote against the Democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: danamco; lafroste; Constitutionalist Conservative; RC2; antiRepublicrat
I don't know who would have standing. Saying that any voting citizen would have standing, because this deals with an election, may hold water. However, nobody is really directly harmed by Obama's running for President.

There are three requirements for standing: Injury, causation, and redressability.

Injury: The plaintiff must have suffered or imminently will suffer injury - an invasion of a legally protected interest which is concrete and particularized. The injury must be actual or imminent, distinct and palpable, not abstract. This injury could be economic as well as non-economic.

Causation: There must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of, so that the injury is fairly traceable to the challenged action of the defendant and not the result of the independent action of some third party who is not before the court.

Redressability: It must be likely, as opposed to merely speculative, that a favorable court decision will redress the injury.

See: Wikipedia's Discussion on Standing

74 posted on 10/23/2008 8:04:22 AM PDT by CT-Freeper (Said the frequently disappointed but ever optimistic Mets fan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
And the BS about his mom only being 18 when she gave birth to him so she does not meet some criteria about living in the U.S. for a certain period of time is stupid as well.

It might sounds stupid to you, but those were the facts at that time, unfortunately for him!

Dallas Cowboys can't change the rules in the middle of the game when they are 4 touchdowns down!!

That is the reason we have reviews rules there!!!

75 posted on 10/23/2008 8:04:45 AM PDT by danamco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Born Conservative
Seems to me that it's a basic function of the FEC to make sure that a candidate for president meets all the constitutional criteria to serve.

But as usual, the laws are for Republicans.
76 posted on 10/23/2008 8:06:34 AM PDT by Antoninus (If you're bashing McCain/Palin at this point, you're helping Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Valentine
Do you imagine that all "citizens" are eligible to become President?

LOL Please copy and paste where I ever said that. Oh, that's right, you can't. I never said such a thing.

You'll find out that you must be a "natural born citizen" which means that you have to meet certain standards of birth and parentage.

Indeed. And Obama was born of a natural born U.S. citizen mother who had not renounced her citizenship, which makes him a 'natural born citizen' even if he were born outside the U.S.

Good grief.

77 posted on 10/23/2008 8:07:56 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall cause you to vote against the Democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Born Conservative
Let's call the FEC at (800) 424-9530. Or the FEC Press Office at (202) 694-1220.

Lots of good information on their website ( http://www.fec.gov/ ) Unfortunately, no email addresses.

"The six Commissioners, no more than three of whom may represent the same political party, are appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. The Commissioners serve full time and are responsible for administering and enforcing the Federal Election Campaign Act. They generally meet twice a week, once in closed session to discuss matters that, by law, must remain confidential, and once in a meeting open to the public. At these meetings, they formulate policy and vote on significant legal and administrative matters."

78 posted on 10/23/2008 8:08:26 AM PDT by BAW (Proud member of the vast right wing conspiracy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CT-Freeper

The voter or campaign contributer in an election is by definition subject to “injury”, like participation in any contest. But if the rules of the contest are violated, an injury to the process has occured.


79 posted on 10/23/2008 8:08:30 AM PDT by Brian S. Fitzgerald
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: offduty

I am seeing Scotus and potus in some responses.
Could you tell me what these mean?


80 posted on 10/23/2008 8:08:48 AM PDT by Exmachina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: TheBigIf

WELL...isn’t THAT interesting....FEC lied to you....and probably are fronting for Obama too.....how special. This election is CRAZEEEEE.


81 posted on 10/23/2008 8:10:19 AM PDT by goodnesswins (Socialism is great until you run out of someone else's money (M. Thatcher))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Seems to me that it's a basic function of the FEC to make sure that a candidate for president meets all the constitutional criteria to serve.

Nope, and Secretary of States don't normally care about eligibility either. They assume the Party takes care of that matter.

82 posted on 10/23/2008 8:10:23 AM PDT by Brian S. Fitzgerald
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: danamco
It might sounds stupid to you, but those were the facts at that time, unfortunately for him!

Oh puhleeze. No court in the land, even the most conservative, would say an individual is not a natural born citizen who just happened to be born outside the U.S. to a mother who is a natural born citizen. This is grasping at straws and completely silly.

Rather than look like a bunch of lunatics, you'd think people who call themselves conservatives would prefer to spend their efforts on things that can actually have an impact on this election - such as sharing the truth about Obama's positions on the issues.

83 posted on 10/23/2008 8:10:46 AM PDT by MEGoody (Ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall cause you to vote against the Democrats.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody
And the BS about his mom only being 18 when she gave birth to him so she does not meet some criteria about living in the U.S. for a certain period of time is stupid as well.

Actually, his argument states that in 1961, she did not meet the requirements. I have been unable to verify this, but the courts should hear all the available evidence and straighten it out there.

After all, it's what the Courts are there for.

Obama could easily clear this up. He doesn't and hasn't.

Sometimes, when there is smoke, there is indeed fire. It'd be a good idea to check wouldn't it?

84 posted on 10/23/2008 8:11:19 AM PDT by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: CT-Freeper
However, nobody is really directly harmed by Obama's running for President.

In politics -- you only hurt the ones you love.

From Wikipedia entry on Matricide:

Known or Suspected Matricides

85 posted on 10/23/2008 8:11:26 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: BAW

Alright the person I talked to at the FEC corrected herself and actually agreed with my complaint about their position.

The FEC does claim that they are not responsible for oversight on this issue but they also did go even further in their motion taking the side of the Obama campaign and the DNC. I told the woman that if they do not have responsibility for oversight in regards to the complaint by berg then why are they also taking sides in the case as well??? She admitted that was a somewhat problematic position.

I told her that in a time when there is possible election fraud going that it is very bad press for the FEC which is supposed to be bi-partisan to be taking sides on whether or not fraud is being committed in regards to the elegibility of a presidential candidate. And that to make statements that a United States citizen has no standing to know the truth in this regard looks very very bad for the FEC.

Action must be taken to investigate the FEC in this regard. It is outrageous, imo.


86 posted on 10/23/2008 8:11:45 AM PDT by TheBigIf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: CT-Freeper
Not that I agree at all with the FEC, but standing is quite an important element of a lawsuit, according to the Rules of Civil Procedure.

You raise an interesting point. Who, then, would have standing for such a challenge, and when could the challenge be raised? Do we have to wait until he has won the election before a voter has standing to challenge Obama's meeting Constitutional requirements for the office?

If so, then what would the relief be? President Biden?

87 posted on 10/23/2008 8:12:39 AM PDT by Yo-Yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: CT-Freeper
However, nobody is really directly harmed by Obama's running for President.

True, nobody is really directly harmed by Obama's running for President.
However, if elected, 300,000,000 Americans would be directly harmed by his violating the Constitution and taking office. The harm will be in undermining the veracity of the Constitution, which outlines and protects our Civil Liberties and constitutes the Government which we have elected.
88 posted on 10/23/2008 8:13:30 AM PDT by TexasGreg ("Democrats Piss Me Off")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: TheBigIf
This news source is misreporting the facts according to someone I just spoke to at the FEC. They did not join the Obama campaign or the DNC in asking for a dismissal as the article claims. They simply said that they do not have standing being that they were listed as a defendant. They made no claim as to Berg’s standing in the case.

Is that all? This is a very big if, if the FEC is neutral, since it nullifies the point of the story, and turns this thread upside down. Am I right? I admit I know jack about this item.

89 posted on 10/23/2008 8:14:44 AM PDT by Skid Marx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: TheBigIf

Good points — teh FEC did more than beg “not my job” — they took a side.


90 posted on 10/23/2008 8:16:27 AM PDT by bvw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: Born Conservative
Berg had filed against the FEC on his last filings and all this is the FEC’s reply which was posted Tuesday on some thread. This is not Obama’s filing unless I have missed something. So Obama’s campaign did not file in a timely fashion and thus did not answer the complaint. It would seem the failure to reply is an admission that the claims are true.

If an individual is sued and doesn't respond, does the plaintiff not win by default? Maybe if the media won't cover this it is time to start asking the question why no answer was filed in every comment we leave on other websites.

91 posted on 10/23/2008 8:18:30 AM PDT by nclaurel (No white flags from America in Iraq--hear that Biden!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TexasGreg
I haven't read Berg's actual complaint to see what he is challenging.

Obama’s qualification to run for President?
Obama’s qualification to be President?

You can't challenge the latter yet, because Obama is not yet President (or even President-elect).

Correct me if I am wrong - I don't know if there are any rules laid down, either in the Constitution or otherwise, as to who may seek the office of President (run for President), the Constitution only sets out requirements of eligibility to be President.

Do you have to be eligible to be President in order to run for President? Could somebody who is going to turn 35 years old the day before inauguration run for President, as he would be 34 during his campaign and election?

92 posted on 10/23/2008 8:21:52 AM PDT by CT-Freeper (Said the frequently disappointed but ever optimistic Mets fan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: All

The U.S. has been bought - committees have been bought - governing parties and candidates have been bought.

We are a nation up for auction.


93 posted on 10/23/2008 8:22:14 AM PDT by imintrouble
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody

I’ve never understood people who agree that Obama’s campaign has posted forged government documents as though they were real, and don’t care.


94 posted on 10/23/2008 8:24:39 AM PDT by TennesseeProfessor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Arthur Wildfire! March

Thanks for the ping!


95 posted on 10/23/2008 8:26:18 AM PDT by Alamo-Girl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Maceman

Which way would your suspicions run?

I really can’t figure out why he just doesn’t submit his Birth Certificate. Shouldn’t they check that before he begins running? Isn’t there ANY kind of paperwork to fill out before you begin running for office? Why does everything in this country require paperwork except this?

Confused in California


96 posted on 10/23/2008 8:29:28 AM PDT by The Californian
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: cookcounty

They make rules up to fit the situation.

LLS


97 posted on 10/23/2008 8:30:15 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (GOD, Country, Family... except when it comes to dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: imintrouble

For the FEC to take a side in this case and claim that United States citizens have no right to know whether or not fraud is being committed in regards to the elegibility of a candidate is outrageous.

I asked a FEC employee on the phone if I had the right to question the elegibility of another citizen to vote in the election and she Yes and that they would investigate it if I made a complaint.

So then I asked why the FEC was claiming that a United States citizen had no right and/or standing to do the same for a candidate and she had no answer and was moreso in agreement to it not sounding so good.


98 posted on 10/23/2008 8:30:18 AM PDT by TheBigIf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: Born Conservative

Ping!!


99 posted on 10/23/2008 8:30:19 AM PDT by justlittleoleme
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MEGoody

Apparently you can’t write OR read.

I already posted YOUR words in italics in my original post: “Even if Obama were born outside the U.S., that does not mean he isn’t a citizen.”

Of course it does not MEAN he isn’t a citizen. One has nothing to do with the other. Some people born outside the United States become citizens through a naturalization process. Others, like John McCain are US citizens by birth. So what?

And now we come to you next uninformed and dummass statement: “And Obama was born of a natural born U.S. citizen mother who had not renounced her citizenship, which makes him a ‘natural born citizen’ even if he were born outside the U.S.”

Please bone up on your stuff before mouthing off what you clearly don’t know jack about. The only way a child born overseas gets a clear “natural born” status is if BOTH parents are Citizens. If one is NOT (as was the case with young Barack) a whole other set of laws comes into play, and the laws in effect at the time of Barack’s birth, if it took place outside the United States, would not permit his natural born citizenship.

if you doubt that, get advice from someone who actually knows something about the subject, and stop relying on your own imaginings.


100 posted on 10/23/2008 8:32:15 AM PDT by John Valentine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-237 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson