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

Skip to comments.

Who Is Behind Quashing the Birth Certificate Issue?
Canada Free Press ^ | 8/25/09 | Joan Swirsky

Posted on 08/25/2009 2:47:30 PM PDT by AJMCQ

Back in October of 2008, when the subject of Obama’s Constitutional eligibility to be president of the United States was just a blip on the radar screen of public awareness, I wrote an article about how easy it was to find my then -92-year-old mother’s birth certificate.

Frankly, I didn’t think finding my mother’s birth certificate was possible, given the fact that she had been born in a farmhouse in Storrs, CT, along with nine of her 10 siblings, to parents who didn’t speak English. Despairing that she would never be “qualified” to receive the care [in a nursing home} that she desperately needed, I set about to find the document, which I was sure had vanished in the unreliable record-keeping of 1913. When I called the third number, I explained to the woman who answered the phone that I was “asking something impossible.” I gave her my mother’s first name and her father’s last name. Within four minutes, she said, “Here it is!” When I expressed my amazement, the woman said: “That’s nothing…we’re routinely asked to find birth certificates from the 1800s, and we do that all the time!” Total time it took me to find my mother’s 1913, born-in-a-farmhouse birth certificate: 10 minutes!

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


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: birthcertificate; birthers; certifigate; constitutionalcrisis; usurper
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-81 last
To: LucyT; David; BP2; pissant; Fred Nerks; null and void; Red Steel; george76; patriot08; Calpernia; ..
Hawaii is abusing its "privacy statutes" as a fig leaf for its refusal to release the Obama records in the state's posession that you indicate.

The overarching constitutional question of whether or not Obama is a "natural born citizen" takes precedence over whatever privacy protection Obama may ordinarily enjoy under Hawaii law. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land (Art. VI, Par. 2) and Hawaiian statutes are inferior to it in instances like this when the results conflict. By refusing to release information bearing on Obama's constitutional eligibility, the relevant Hawaiian executive officials - from Gov. Lingle on down - are perjuring themselves, as they have sworn an oath to uphold that US Constitution. In addition, as LucyT pointed out, some of these these Hawaiian officials may be corrupt, which would be a crime as well.

51 posted on 08/26/2009 3:10:08 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: AJMCQ
It's not that it can't be found, assuming one exists *somewhere* in the world, but rather it's that he doesn't want it to be found.

Why?

That is the question.

52 posted on 08/26/2009 3:14:10 PM PDT by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LucyT; David; BP2; pissant; Fred Nerks; null and void; Red Steel; george76; patriot08; Calpernia; ..
Hawaii is abusing its "privacy statutes" as a fig leaf for its refusal to release the Obama records in the state's posession that you indicate.

The overarching constitutional question of whether or not Obama is a "natural born citizen" takes precedence over whatever privacy protection Obama may ordinarily enjoy under Hawaii law. The Constitution of the United States is the supreme law of the land (Art. VI, Par. 2) and Hawaiian statutes are inferior to it in instances like this when the results conflict. By refusing to release information bearing on Obama's constitutional eligibility, the relevant Hawaiian executive officials - from Gov. Lingle on down - are perjuring themselves, as they have sworn an oath to uphold that US Constitution. In addition, as LucyT pointed out, some of these these Hawaiian officials may be corrupt, which would be a crime as well.

53 posted on 08/26/2009 3:22:21 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: sourcery; AJMCQ; All
Extremism in the defense of the US Constitution is not crazy.

Nor is it a vice. (To more accurately paraphrase Barry Goldwater!)

Please see also my post # 51.

54 posted on 08/26/2009 3:28:45 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: LucyT

“...come to think of it, who exactly paid for his stint at the Harvard Law School? What role did Obama’s long-time friend, Khalid al-Mansour, a key advisor to a Saudi billionaire, play? Writer Kenneth Timmerman describes al-Mansour as “well known within the black community as a lawyer, an orthodox Muslim, a black nationalist, an author, an international deal-maker, an educator, and an outspoken enemy of Israel.” This is not to omit that al-Mansour was originally contacted to intervene with Harvard on Obama’s behalf by Percy Sutton, former Manhattan Borough President and the lawyer of Malcolm X. Ah…the tangled web of it all!...”


Khalid al-Mansour a.k.a. Don Warden
http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/obama_sutton_saudi/2008/09/...
...in the lengthy interview, al-Mansour confirmed that he frequently spoke on university campuses, including Columbia, where Percy Sutton suggested he met Obama in the late 1980s, and confirmed his close relationship with Prince Alwaleed....
...Although many Americans have never heard of Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour (his full name), he is well known within the black community as a lawyer, an orthodox Muslim, a black nationalist, an author, an international deal-maker, an educator, and an outspoken enemy of Israel....
...his writings and books are packed with anti-American rhetoric reminiscent of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama’s disgraced former pastor.... In a 1995 book, “The Lost Books of Africa Rediscovered,” he alleged that the United States was plotting genocide against black Americans.... The first “genocide against the black man began 300 years ago,” ... while a second “genocide” was on the way “to remove 15 million Black people, considered disposable, of no relevance, value or benefit to the American society.”..
In the 1960s,
...he was known as Donald Warden,when he founded the African American Association in the San Francisco Bay area,... According to the Social Activism Project at the University of California at Berkley, Warden, a.k.a. Khalid al-Mansour, was the mentor of Black Panther Party founder Huey Newton and his cohort, Bobby Seale....
Percy Sutton, a former lawyer for Malcolm X and a former business partner of al-Mansour,
...says he was raising money for Obama’s graduate school education, al-Mansour was representing top members of the Saudi Royal family seeking to do business and exert influence in the United States. In 1989, for example — just one year after Obama entered Harvard Law School — The Los Angeles Times revealed that al-Mansour had been advising Saudi billionaires Abdul Aziz and Khalid al-Ibrahim in their secret effort to acquire a major stake in prime oceanfront property in Marina del Rey, Calif., through “an elaborate network of corporate shells in California, the Caribbean and Europe.” ...

Video at the bottom : Percy Sutton Reveals Association Between Khalid al-Mansour and Obama at Age 25
http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/obama_sutton_saudi/2008/09/...

(2 dead links.)

Percy Sutton (Malcom X’s Lawyer) Says Barack Obama Knows And Was Financed By The Racist Radical Muslim And Saudi Advisor Dr. Khalid Al-Mansour, Part II

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MIVO8MZYXo8


55 posted on 08/26/2009 3:45:11 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (DON'T LIE TO ME!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93

Quote

“The citizenship of someone who has reached the point of running for president of the United States is not really an issue.”

Neil Abercrombie

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2278969/posts?page=227#227


56 posted on 08/26/2009 3:52:36 PM PDT by Fred Nerks (DON'T LIE TO ME!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

__________________________

Canada Free Press
JB Williams

http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12999

(snip)
Every member of the Supreme Court, every member of congress, every member of the Joint Chiefs, most members of the DOD, CIA, FBI, Secret Service and state run media, ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, PBS, NPR, MSNBC, Fox and print news, knows that Barack Hussein Obama does NOT meet Article II – Section I constitutional requirements for the office he holds. By his own biography, there is NO way he can pass the test. The hard evidence is so far beyond overwhelming, it is ridiculous.

(snip)
But not ONE member of America’s most powerful people will dare confront Obama and his anti-American cabal on the subject. The Constitution does NOT stand.

(snip)
Half of the people you expect to stop this insanity are quiet co-conspirators in the silent coup. The other half is paralyzed by fear, motivated only by political self-preservation.

(Snip)
Americans keep asking what they can do because they see that none of their leaders are doing anything to stop the demise of their beloved country. It’s the right question, because those leaders are NOT going to stop this thing.

(Snip)
WHO WILL SAVE FREEDOM?
A brave few… This is how it was in the beginning, how it has always been and how it will be.

(Snip)
DR. ORLY TAITZ, Phil Berg and Gary Kreep, ALL OF WHOM HAVE MADE DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION AND THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE A PERSONAL AMBITION, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CONSTITUTION LEADERSHIP.

(Snip)
A PRECIOUS FEW, BUT THEY EXIST… and the walls are indeed closing in on Obama and his evil cabal. IF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FAIL TO GET BEHIND THESE BRAVE FEW WHO ARE SEEKING PEACEFUL REDRESS, ALL THE PEACEFUL OPTIONS WILL EVAPORATE AS IF THEY NEVER EXISTED. WE WILL RETURN TO A PRE-1776 AMERICA OVERNIGHT..

Do YOU fear Obama?
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/12999

___________________________________

A precious few, indeed. Lets get behind those few brave patriots who are out there in the trenches every day working to prove Obama’s inelgibility:

REMEMBER ALINSKY’S ‘RULES FOR RADICALS:

Rule 5: Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon. It’s hard to counterattack ridicule, and it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage.

Rule 8: Keep the pressure on. Use different tactics and actions and use all events of the period for your purpose. “The major premise for tactics is the development of operations that will maintain a constant pressure upon the opposition. It is this that will cause the opposition to react to your advantage.”

Rule 11: Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, polarize it. Don’t try to attack abstract corporations or bureaucracies. Identify a responsible individual. Ignore attempts to shift or spread the blame.
“One of the criteria for picking the target is the target’s vulnerability ... the other important point in the choosing of a target is that it must be a personification, not something general and abstract.”
According to Alinsky, the organizer — especially a paid organizer from outside — must first overcome suspicion and establish credibility. Next the organizer must begin the task of agitating: rubbing resentments, fanning hostilities, and searching out controversy.

.

There are many lawyers and armchair quarterbacks out there who do nothing but sit around and bloviatate, tell us what great lawyers they are, what SHOULD be done- and attack Dr. Orly Taitz. If they are so great, why don’t they get out there and DO something? Where are their clients? Where are their lawsuits?
They condemn Dr. Orly for refusing other lawyer’s help. They laugh at her and ridicule her for her ‘mistakes’. Is it any wonder she refuses their help?

And maybe, just maybe, she doesn’t want another attorney in on her work because she fears him hogging the glory when the usuper is brought down- as the egocentric, bloviating Leo Denofrio would surely do. I don’t blame her one bit on this!
Dr. Orly has put her life’s blood into this fight. SHE HAS MADE DEFENDING THE CONSTITUTION AND THE AMERICAN WAY OF LIFE A PERSONAL AMBITION, IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CONSTITUTION LEADERSHIP FROM COWARDLY REPUBLICANS AND THE SCOTUS.

Dr. Orly is the ONLY one out there in the trenches EVERY day hitting Obama on multiple fronts and trying to bring him down. It is reported that she is more than $8,000 in debt from using her own funds for expenses in her flights across the U.S for interviews, speeches, serving papers and meeting with officials.
She has even gone to Isreal and Russia to spread the message about Obama’s inelgibility!

She states the case expertly, including the bc and natural born citizen aspect, when not abused by the U.S. state-controlled media. http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/132880

Sure, Dr. Orly makes mistakes. We all do. But Dr. Orly is no dummy. How many of us could go to a foreign country, learn 5 languages, establish a successful dental practice, a successful real estate business AND pass the California state bar- one of the hardest in the U.S. to pass?
She may be a ‘mail order’ attorney and not a Harvard lawyer, but she IS an attorney with all the rights and privilages of a Harvard lawyer nevertheless!
The point is; she has the passion, the zeal, the courage of her convictions and the love of America and its freedoms (unlike many of our ‘great’ attorneys and ‘patriots’ who criticize her) that will not let her give up!
She is exhausted. She is nervous. She is frustrated. It is reported that she gets by on 4-5 hours of sleep per night, and her family is very worried about her health- as well as her safety.
She makes mistakes. But she will NOT give up. She will keep on until she gets it right.
So let’s get behind this great little Russian refugee and great American patriot.
Stop tearing her apart. The Obots don’t need our help.
The obots are scared to death of this little lady and her determination. That’s why they come out in droves all over the net on forums, chat rooms and even the national news to attack and ridicule.

God bless this American patriot and keep her safe.

_____________________________


57 posted on 08/26/2009 4:21:14 PM PDT by patriot08
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks; LucyT; Calpernia; ml/nj; pissant; Candor7; george76; stockpirate; patriot08; ckilmer; ..
Yes, I've seen that quote from Abercrombie. When a congressperson expresses such disdain for the Constitution he is sworn to uphold, especially when he does so in possibly abetting the coverup of a crime, the country is deep trouble.
58 posted on 08/26/2009 4:35:48 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Spaulding

“Craig v. U.S. 2009 is a very clever attempt to force the court to state the definition of natural born citizen, and thus force them to look at Obama. I won’t try to explain it. Here is the pointer to Donofrio’s blog dealing with it. http://naturalborncitizen.wordpress.com/2009/08/24/craig-v-us-10th-circuit-court-of-appeals-held-08-05-2009-14th-amendment-native-born-citizens-have-no-constitutional-right-to-natural-born-citizen-status/

It was just settled a few weeks ago, and does appear to affirm that statute (laws) cannot make someone a natural born citizen, confirming the nonsense when someone invokes the 14th amendment or the 1790 Naturalization Act.”

********************

Crazy Leo is doing some Orly-esque spinning on Craig, but this is the essence of the case:

Craig was born in the U.S., which makes him, by ius solis, a common-law and CONSTITUTIONAL U.S. citizen.

He was born of two U.S. citizens, which makes him, by ius sanguinis, a STATUTORY U.S. citizen.

Therefore, Craig meets the extreme birther definition that “natural-born” = citizen by both ius solis AND ius sanguinis.

He sued in Federal court, asking to be declared a “natural-born” citizen.

The court dismissed his complaint, citing lack of court jurisdiction and lack of standing by the plaintiff.

The 10th circuit upheld the dismissal, adding that no person has the right to have his definition of “natural-born” enshrined by the courts.

The 10th circuit was basically upholding the precedent, begun when Melvin Belli’s 1964 lawsuit against Barry Goldwater got circular-filed, that courts will not hear a challenge of presidential eligibility based on one’s definition of “natural-born”. That’s what happened to Donofrio’s suit against Obama and Hollander’s and Robinson’s suit against McCain.

Which means, in essence, though not in those words, the 10th circuit upheld the definition which has been established by actual practice: “natural-born” = “citizen at birth”.

Which means that all the other lawsuits based on a definition of “natural-born” will almost certainly suffer the same fate. It’s always “possible” that a court in another circuit will take up a lawsuit and the Circuit Court of Appeals will uphold it, but only in the sense that it’s “possible” that a banjo-hitting shortstop will break Joe DiMaggio’s record.


59 posted on 08/26/2009 4:38:53 PM PDT by Redwood Bob (Peter Schiff for U.S. Senate 2010!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93

According to JimRob, there’s a database problem they’re working on. :’)

Thanks justiceseeker93.


60 posted on 08/26/2009 4:39:47 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/__Since Jan 3, 2004__Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks; null and void; stockpirate; george76; PhilDragoo; Candor7; BP2; MeekOneGOP; ...
Thanks, Fred Nerks.

“...come to think of it, who exactly paid for his stint at the Harvard Law School? What role did 0bama’s long-time friend, Khalid al-Mansour, a key advisor to a Saudi billionaire, play?

Writer Kenneth Timmerman describes al-Mansour as “well known within the black community as a lawyer, an orthodox Muslim, a black nationalist, an author, an international deal-maker, an educator, and an outspoken enemy of Israel.”

This is not to omit that al-Mansour was originally contacted to intervene with Harvard on 0bama’s behalf by Percy Sutton, former Manhattan Borough President and the lawyer of Malcolm X.

~ Ping to #55 for more.

.

61 posted on 08/26/2009 4:58:43 PM PDT by LucyT (0bama on cocaine: "Pot and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it." All wee weed-up.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: GBA
Obama is the NUT. It is nutty beyond belief to fight a suit about natural born status all the way to the Supreme Court! It is **irrational** to spend more than a million in attorney fees to prevent the release of documents Americans provide for simple admission to kindergarten.

Those defending the Constitution are asking a polite and rational question, “Mr. Obama, please prove that you are a natural born citizen.” As Obama’s unpopularity grows I expect the demand for him to prove his natural born status will grow.

If and when he is proven not to natural born, I hope conservatives will rub in the nose of Ann Coulter, Michael Medved, and the directors of Fox News.

62 posted on 08/26/2009 4:59:10 PM PDT by wintertime (People are not stupid! Good ideas win!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: AJMCQ
There's a lot of interesting stuff in this article.

as writer Chelsea Schilling has scrupulously documented, ¬†“the Federal Election Commission shows Obama’s campaign has made regular payments to Perkins Coie since Jan. 1, 2007—the month he formed a presidential exploratory committee and only weeks before he formally announced his candidacy for president—[and up to the present]—has paid Perkins Coie, a single law firm, $2.3 million…to crush eligibility lawsuits.”

63 posted on 08/26/2009 4:59:27 PM PDT by 2111USMC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Agreed. It’s possible to fault Orly Taitz for making small errors in spelling or in legal language and procedures

Small errors! Not properly serving the defendant in your case for 8 months is a "small error"!

64 posted on 08/26/2009 5:12:22 PM PDT by MilspecRob (Most people don't act stupid, they really are.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah; UCFRoadWarrior

Glenn Beck has scared me completely this week. I am calling senators and congressmen tomorrow and raising holy hell about commies in the white house. MY white house.

sheesh.


65 posted on 08/26/2009 5:45:20 PM PDT by bitt (“You can’t make a weak man strong by making a strong man weak.” (Abraham Lincoln))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Spaulding
Every Supreme court case in which natural-born citizenship is discussed affirms the definition, born of U.S. citizens on U.S. soil.

Unfortunately, there are no SCOTUS cases, to the best of my knowledge, which discuss the definition of "natural born citizen" as related to presidential qualifications. Some scholars contend that it means "born of US citizens," others that it means "born on U.S. soil," and still others that it means that both of these criteria have to be satisfied.

66 posted on 08/26/2009 5:45:46 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: AJMCQ; Fred Nerks; null and void; ml/nj; ExTexasRedhead; BP2; pissant; Dajjal; cripplecreek; ...
Unfortunately, the link to the originally posted article, written by Joan Swirsky on Canada Free Press, had been down at times. I just got to see the bulk of the article, and was kind of blown away by the section under "NOW WE KNOW WHY", as well as some of the material in subsequent sections. Please read it if you haven't already done so.
67 posted on 08/26/2009 6:05:35 PM PDT by justiceseeker93
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: unspun

can you point me to ‘investigating obama’?


68 posted on 08/26/2009 6:23:11 PM PDT by bitt (“You can’t make a weak man strong by making a strong man weak.” (Abraham Lincoln))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93

:’) Thanks j.


69 posted on 08/26/2009 6:37:45 PM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/__Since Jan 3, 2004__Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: AJMCQ

This is a must read. The ENTIRE article is a must read. thank you AND THANK YOU CANADA !


70 posted on 08/26/2009 6:59:21 PM PDT by Irish Eyes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bitt

Here you are:

http://investigatingobama.blogspot.com/


71 posted on 08/26/2009 8:08:00 PM PDT by unspun (PRAY & WORK FOR FREEDOM - investigatingobama.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: unspun

:)


72 posted on 08/26/2009 9:52:42 PM PDT by bitt (“You can’t make a weak man strong by making a strong man weak.” (Abraham Lincoln))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah
Perhaps, just maybe ? after Glen Beck digs more into Obama's back ground he might ( Serendipity ) uncover something that might bring him over to the " ( US Constitutionalists, not birthers ) " side and realize we were right all along...

73 posted on 08/27/2009 12:10:53 AM PDT by American Constitutionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: AJMCQ
I refuse to be called “ Birther “ ..... I am a American US Constitutionalist.
74 posted on 08/27/2009 12:11:58 AM PDT by American Constitutionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah
" He doesn’t get the BC issue, although I think he would if he had time to look more closely at it. "

Serendipity my friend, Serendipity...

You can bank on it, Obama has not covered all his paper trail and while someone is researching and looking in other areas of his life, they will find something that can help resolve the birth certificate issue.
75 posted on 08/27/2009 12:28:48 AM PDT by American Constitutionalist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: American Constitutionalist

Yep, birther is just meant to insult those that are concerned. A made up word just like homophobe is...meaningless....


76 posted on 08/27/2009 12:38:41 AM PDT by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: justiceseeker93
No Supreme court cases defining natural-born citizenship? We should probably start with Chief Justice John Marshall in The Venus, 12 U.S. 253:

“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives or indigenes are those born in the country of parents who are citizens. Society not being able to subsist and to perpetuate itself but by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights.” (natives and indigenes mean Marshall was refering to the French edition of Vattel; subsequent English translations used natural-born citizen - citizenship defined by nature and not by law.)

Then, if you are really interested, try Minor v. Happersett and Wong Kim Ark and Perkins v. Elg. There is even a case from 2001 in which the citizenship of parents is discussed with an uninformed Justice Ginsberg, but the full statement not repeated - just citizen parents, which alarmed her because her grandchildren were born in France and would not be eligible for president.

Then read John Bingham, co-author of the 14th amendment, speaking to a joint session of Congress in 1866:

“I find no fault with the introductory clause, which is simply declaratory of what is written in the Constitution, that every human being born with the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the languageof your Constitution itself, a natural-born citizen ...”

There are analysis by Joseph Story, by Alexander Hamilton, and a dozen other constitution scholars affirming this definition. The efforts to obfuscate this well understood concept, which predates Vattel’s Law of Nations by millenia, but which document John Marshall cites in his decision in The Venus will continue until the courts resolve Obama's eligibility, or until we lose our 1st amendment as well as Article II.

As our republic is being dismantled it will be essential for those of us who resist to understand that the public face chosen for this revolution is not eligible to be president. My suspicion is that those who chose Obama - the Shadow Government - have never had much regard for the constitution, and most have only read it with distain if at all. Quite a few in legal academia have written devious articles to provide cover for some of the misleading nonesense about the definition of natural-born, and to provide cover for McCain, who is not a natural-born citizen. (That is why McCain was supported by the state-run media; his presence on the ticket silenced republicans.)

I don’t dismiss the possibility that McCain, who has received significant support from Soros over the years may be a willing participant. Some evidence for that is the promotion by the Republican party of Bobby Jindal, neither of whose parents were citizens when Bobby was born, as a presidential candidate. I definitely prefer Jindal’s political views to Obama’s, but believe that protecting the Constitution is critical to the survival of our republic. If our courts don’t address Obama’s ineligibility, and you can be sure all the justices know who John Marshall is and understand the definition of natural-born citizen, precedence will establish that the citizenship of parents is no longer necessary, and the child of illegal alien terrorists, born on our soil, would be eligible to be president. Illegal aliens may well elect our next president anyway, and probably had no small role in electing this one.

No one in our legislature dared to ask about Obama’s eligibity as they were required by oath to do - to defend and protect the constitution, and Article II Section 1 is part of our constitution. The 10th Amendment is a memory and the 1st Amendment is about to follow.

Had only those in the media, including supposed conservatives, understood that if they did keep quiet, threatend or not, they would still lose their radio stations, income, and future - Mark Levin, Hannity, and even Rush, (since a few jokes about birth certificates is not the issue). The silly schoolyard name calling is sadly effective, and reflects the state of reasoned dialog, of education, on both sides. The Obama supporters don’t have reason on their side, but cleverly use Alinsky tools to silence questions. That can only succeed because so few Birthers understand the real issue - that Obama's father's citizenship disqualifies his son from our presidency. It is a mess, but it is a fact. The longer the courts or military put off forcing our supreme court to clarify the issue the worse matters become.

In case you are honestly inquiring about the reasoning behind and meaning of natural-born citizen here is a reference to one of the most clear analysis, written by Joseph Story in 1833 on Article II Section 1. Story assumes you know the Vattel definition of natural-born, and cites Vattel as a principle source, but he elucidates the reasons for the natural-born requirement for presidents:

http://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/print_documents/a2_1_5s2.html

77 posted on 08/27/2009 5:19:01 AM PDT by Spaulding
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: Jedidah
I don’t think Beck has looked as closely at the BC issue as we have because he’s spending his time uncovering the evil that’s already in office.

Perhaps. Or it may be that he and others are taking a different approach.

The BC issue has been shaped by obama supporters so that many who might otherwise pay attention ignore it all together.

Beck's expose is opening my eyes much wider than they were and showing me that obama and his regime are a very real and immediate, very clear and present danger. I believe what Beck is doing is not only far more effective in getting people's attention, but also lays the emotional groundwork for the BC issue to really catch fire.

It might be possible for many to be a bit outraged by the obama BC issue, but not have it rise much higher than that, sorta like the Clinton and Monica/lying under oath impeachment. Yeah, it was a big deal to me, but enough people looked at it as "hey, it's all about sex, so it's not that big of a deal and besides, the economy's good."

obama isn't Clinton and doesn't have a republican congress and a good economy like Clinton had. People might be a bit more willing to be outraged now with obama in ways they never would have been with Clinton.

78 posted on 08/27/2009 5:48:31 AM PDT by GBA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Fred Nerks

Odumbas* is no longer a Trojan horse. He is exposed and people are fighting back now.


79 posted on 08/27/2009 11:18:46 AM PDT by mojitojoe (Socialism is just the last “feel good” step on the path to Communism and its slavery. Lenin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: AJMCQ

obumpa


80 posted on 08/27/2009 8:09:21 PM PDT by Dajjal (Obama is an Ericksonian NLP hypnotist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TigersEye

For all the naysayers out there, let us remind them of how leftists hounded Bush for eight frigging years (nine if you count the 2000 campaign year) with the blatant LIE that he had been AWOL, all the while demanding “”proof”” of his whereabouts. Their lie was disproven many times over and yet still they persisted. The ONLY issue that Bush pushed that even remotely could be called radical by the leftist idiots was the Iraq war and the Saddam regime change, which had already, previously, been advocated by many or most well-known DemocRats ON RECORD and ON TAPE.

Big O has done more radical damage to this country in the first six months than Bush (or any other president) could even dream of doing. And now....all Zero has to do is produce this one document (the real one) to dispel these questions about his right and his eligibility to even BE destroying the country... and yet instead of doing so, he spends millions to keep it covered up.

The only question in everyone’s mind should be....
why? What IS he hidng?

Anyone who is not asking that question obviously has the same radical agenda in mind for this once great nation, and is therefore part of the problem, not part of the solution.

The communists have had their coup. This is war, folks. We just haven’t had the first “official” casualty yet.


81 posted on 09/03/2009 10:56:47 AM PDT by XenaLee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-81 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