Skip to comments.Obama Signed Resolution Describing Him As Ineligible
Posted on 12/08/2009 6:22:12 PM PST by blueyon
This is an oldie, but it needs to be revisited, since the Obots still argue that Obama is eligible to serve as Commander-in-Chief.
On April 10, 2008, Sens. Patrick Leahy (D-VT) and Claire McCaskill (D-MO) introduced a resolution expressing the sense of the U.S. Senate that presidential candidate Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) was a 'natural born Citizen,' as specified in the Constitution and eligible to run for president. Sen. McCaskill knew Obama was not a U.S. Citizen, thats why she introduced this bill -- dressing it up to look like it was in Sen. John McCain's cause.
It was during the bill's hearing that Sen. Patrick Leahy, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, made the following statement:
"Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind that Senator McCain is a natural born citizen," said Leahy. "I expect that this will be a unanimous resolution of the Senate."
At a Judiciary Committee hearing on April 3, Leahy asked Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, himself a former Federal judge, if he had doubts that McCain was eligible to serve as President.
"My assumption and my understanding is that if you are born of American parents, you are naturally a natural-born American citizen," Chertoff replied.
"That is mine, too," said Leahy.
What's interesting here is that Sen. Leahy, the Chairman of the Senate Judiciary, confirms that a "natural born" citizen is the child of American citizen parents.
Parents -- that's two. That's BOTH parents.
Every time the words, "citizen" and "parent," are used by Sen. Leahy and Sec. Chertoff, the plural case, "citizens" and "parents," is used. The plural case is the operative case.
(Excerpt) Read more at theobamafile.com ...
Direct link to the Obama File site: May need to scroll down to see story
I did not read the entire article, only the excerpt.
>> Leahy: “Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind ...”
That doesn’t mean there’s doubt to the contrary - though, we could speculate there might be.
Personally I believe that’s right.
However, I also believe that there is not one Federal Agency, nor one State Agency, nor any Federal or State court, nor any National Party that believes the same.
Nor do any of them want the job to be the gate keeper on this issue.
I’m also beginning to believe the USSC feels the same.
“The Constitution? That’s just words and stuff!”
All three branches of US government
Not a debatable proposition.
However, the assumption that this is the only way one can be a "natural-born citizen" is supported by neither the discussion quoted nor the facts of the case. The other way is to be born on the territory of the US, to anyone other than diplomats of a foreign power.
I believe at least two previous American presidents would not have been qualified had this criteria been applied.
“Leahy: Because he was born to American citizens, there is no doubt in my mind ...”
Leahy is an idiot x10.
My brother was born in Germany while my parents were stationed there. No doubt my brother was an American citizen being he was born to two American citizens, huh? That must explain why my father had to sign a waiver for my brother when he hit 18 so that he would not be drafted into the German military........ =.=
I’m assuming the Leahy quotes in the excerpt reflect the intent of the article. If this is the case, it doesn’t address the situation where it’s not the case both parents are American citizens - one of the arguments made against Obama’s eligibility.
It’s odd that a waiver was required to prevent the Germans from drafting your brother.
You are right, Garfield knew this would be an issue so he kept the fact that his father was a British subject from Canada secret until after his presidency.
The aforementioned resolution affirmed that McCain (whose situation was identical to your brother's) [born on foreign soil to citizen parentS in US military service] IS a natural born US citizen.
So is your brother -- no matter what the Germans think or claim...
Of course you are right. Thank you for pointing this out. I misspoke, so to speak.
Regardless of the legality, isn’t is just *weird* to have a President who had a non-American parent?
“what does that make young Barry?”
A citizen of Great Britain....and a fag.
Makes no difference, he’s a b*stard coming or going, IMO.
Fair dinkum, Fred.
Is there not an understanding among countries that if their nationals give birth overseas, that the baby will be recognized as a national of the parent’s country?
By that I mean, if a French couple takes a vacation to the U.S. and the mother is seven months pregnant, and she delivers prematurely on American soil, we recognize the child as French and the couple may return back to France with the child, after certain documented verification of course to guard against child stealing and the like.
But we do let the French parents return home with the child.
Should this not also apply to illegal alien parents? If Mexico will accept the child as Mexican, which they will, why not deport the parents with their children?
Of course I’m touching upon the issue of “anchor baby” status and the wording of the U.S. Constitution.
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.