Replies

No Supreme Court decision, no law ever passed by Congress and no clause of the Constitution state there is no doubt that having two citizen parents and born in country is a natural born citizen.

So future zot, you admit the obvious that the 1898 Wong Kim Ark v. United States opinion did not make or create Ark into a natural born citizen.

And you obfuscate future Zot.

We do know that the SCOTUS opinion 1875, Minor v. Happersett stated with no doubt that having two parents and being born in country is a natural born citizen. We also do know in 1830 Hanks v. DuPont cited the same definition.

And in 1890, United States v. Ward cited de Vattel by name and having two citizen parents and born in country as being a natural born citizen.

Tsk tsk Obot.

So future zot, you admit the obvious that the 1898 Wong Kim Ark v. United States opinion did not make or create Ark into a natural born citizen.

And you obfuscate future Zot.

We do know that the SCOTUS opinion 1875, Minor v. Happersett stated with no doubt that having two parents and being born in country is a natural born citizen. We also do know in 1830 Hanks v. DuPont cited the same definition.

And in 1890, United States v. Ward cited de Vattel by name and having two citizen parents and born in country as being a natural born citizen.

Tsk tsk Obot.

Gee, isn’t it interesting then that with FIVE, count ‘em FIVE conservatives on the current US Supreme Court that they aren’t even interested in hearing oral arguments in ANY Obama eligibility appeal?
Not ONE single US Supreme Court Justice has asked Obama to submit a brief defending his eligibility to be President of the United States.
Whenever the Supreme Court is seriously considering granting a hearing to an appeal, they order the respondant (defendant) to submit a brief stating why the plaintiff’s case should not be heard. With Obama eligibility appeals, not one single brief has been ordered and Obama has submitted NO briefs on his own initiative.

“If Tea Party groups are to maximize their influence on policy, they must now begin the difficult task of disassociating themselves from cranks and conspiracy nuts. This includes 9/11 deniers, “birthers” who who insist Barack Obama was not born in the United States, and militia supporters espousing something vaguely close to armed rebellion.”—Karl Rove, The Wall Street Journal, February 17, 2010.

So which are you Red Steal, a “crank” or a “conspiracy nut?”

We see that miss jamese in addition to be a Holder paid enabler brigade, he’s found new sponsor!!!