Skip to comments.4 Supreme Court Cases define "natural born citizen"
Posted on 01/10/2010 6:03:15 PM PST by STE=Q
Oct. 18, 2009) The Post & Email has in several articles mentioned that the Supreme Court of the United States has given the definition of what a natural born citizen is. Since being a natural born citizen is an objective qualification and requirement of office for the U.S. President, it is important for all U.S. Citizens to understand what this term means.
Lets cut through all the opinion and speculation, all the he says, she says, fluff, and go right to the irrefutable, constitutional authority on all terms and phrases mentioned in the U.S. Constitution: the Supreme Court of the United States.
First, let me note that there are 4 such cases which speak of the notion of natural born citizenship.
(Excerpt) Read more at thepostemail.com ...
Sham wow -- all of that and yet they can't understand Justice Marshall's words in the Venus decision. Go figure.
To what purpose? Just in case your child is the one of 300,000,000 who runs for president or vice president once every four years?
Please note the reason, the supposed ONLY reason the documents have to be hunted down, etc. is that the person who is supposed to qualify under the Constitution is not as forthcoming with his documentation as any kindergarden student in the US must be to be enrolled.
If not for that resistance to releasing records which simply could not have all been lost by accident, this would be a piece of cake.
In order to get a job in the area I live, in the field in which I work, (Nothing that special, no security clearance, and not handling vast sums of money), you have to undergo drug testing, provide proof of citizenship, undergo a background check, driver's license check, and even a credit check. Now, none of us have the 'football' within a few dozens of feet, nor the authority to release nuclear weapons and utilize them, but the guy who won't show his records does. If that does not give you at least a twinge of concern, considering this was to be the administration of "transparency", I do not know what would short of DEFCON 1.
Even more dangerous however, is the blatant disregard for the Constiutional bounds of the Federal Government, by this same person, a pattern of behaviour which indicates complete disregard for the foundations of this nation, and the nation itself.
As for the documentation not costing much, let's say it only costs 10 dollars, on average to get all this through per child. (When the filing of birth certificates, and keeping those records already exists, along with records of paternity, maternity, etc.) the expense would fall upon the taxpayer, and at 10 dollars a head, the expense would have been three billion dollars for the existing pool of people in the US. Versus twenty bucks a head for the twenty odd candidates to produce their documents every four years.
No brainer, if you ask me. Considering that the candidates already spend from tens to hundreds of millions of dollars campaigning, even if it cost them a few hundred dollars to prove that they qualified, the insignificance of that sum compared to the cost of preemptively certifying everyone pretty much spells it out.
Obama's records exist, but they have been ordered sealed. Don't you even wonder why???
How many times have we all been told the old canard "You shouldn't object if you have nothing to hide.", or words to that effect?
Ergo, Obama has something to hide.
Unless he claimed foreign citizenship in order to obtain a scholarship, in which case he would have forfeited his US Citizenship.
Admissions and Financial aid records would shed light on this facet of the discussion.
Maybe someone can help me out here, (I still have my original draft card somewhere, and I remember the AuH2O bumper stickers), but is failure to register for Selective Service a felony? If so, that raises a few questions, too.
Early on, Obama allegedly would not release his original records to avoid "embarassment". The question is, just how deep would that run?
Is the birth father listed as other than B.O. Sr?, Is his mother listed as "unwed", or words to that effect?, Or was the BC issued by a foreign government and thus he'd be subject to the embarassment of being disqualified after a very slick campaign?
We don't know,
One good thing has come of all this, and that is the intrusion of doubt into the matrix of Hope and Change. Those who will take the time to think critically are no longer buying Obama's blather at face value, even many of those who supported him.
I think it was Debbie Schlussel (sp?) that wrote extensively on Obama’s Selective Service registration and showed that the application submitted by Obama was most likely a fraud. And, yes, not registering is a felony.
If Obama claimed to be a foreigner in financial aid or scholarship applications then that’s probably another felony right there. However, unless he freely and intentionally renounced his U.S. citizenship (which I can’t imagine was the case, since he kept living in the U.S. and presumably dud not register as a resident alien, not to mention the fact that he purported to be a citizen by registering to vote and running for office, it would be very unlikely that courts would declare him to have renounced his citizenship. I think that if he was born in Hawaii then he’s still a citizen today, but that if he was born abroad then he likely has never been a U.S. citizen (unless he was naturalized at some point and there exists a conspiracy of absurd proportions).
If Obama was born in Hawaii, what could his long-form birth certificate say that makes him refuse to provide it? I have no idea, since even if it said that his real father was Malcolm X or his birthname was Charles Manson Dunham it wouldn’t be as bad as having people speculate that he’s not even a U.S. citizen.
While we’re considering conspiracy theories, we should keep in mind that if Obama was born in Kenya but his biological father was not Obama, Sr. but a U.S. citizen, then he would be a U.S. citizen at birth. Obama’s past is so unclear that such possibility cannot be ignored.
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.