Posted on 02/17/2011 8:31:53 PM PST by dalight
Drudge has linked this story from World Net Daily that notes the odd decision by the Supreme Court to hold a new “conference” on Obama’s eligibility to hold the presidency.
Let’s research WHY the court could be compelled to do this.
It MUST have something to do with the fact that Obama has no birth certificate on file in the Hawaiian Hall of Records with the name “Barack Hussein Obama” on it — since his original Hawaiian birth certificate with that name was sealed in the 1970s when he was adopted in Indonesia by Lolo Soetoro, his stepfather. At the time of adoption, a child’s original birth certificate is sealed away and replaced in the Hall of Records by a new birth certificate that bears the adopted parents’ names and the child’s new name, if a new name is given.
This is what happened to Obama, when he was renamed “Soetobakh” by his mother and stepfather at the time of adoption.
(Excerpt) Read more at hillbuzz.org ...
His real name is MuBarak...
There you go.
Paid for oil money, no less.
Will the Anti-Christ have a birth certificate??
I think the author meant "Soebarkah."
Google it an you will find a bunch of hits.
Just like the Global Warming Hoax, telling the truth on this issue is a nuclear hit for any politician. However, people confronted with this problem do what they can, force the issue by making it necessary to follow the law in the next cycle. However, just think, any Court or Prosecuting Attorney that cares can force this issue, how did Senator Ryan's messy divorce details become a matter of public necessity?
However, ultimately, reason and evidence prevails just as it did in the Global Warming situation, which is why a growing number of people smell smoke in this issue and at some point when the public generally accepts that this is another hoax like Global Warming, "Katie bar the doors!"
You misconstrue my point, PNSN. I was somewhat jokingly offering a new tack for his supporters. Because his background is so murky and there is such weak evidence about his parentage, they could use this clause to argue he was left in swaddling clothes on a doorstep somewhere (ie, “found”) and is thereby a NBC. I thought that would be a funny new approach for the leftist kooks to take. I wasn’t offering it as a serious defense of NBC.
Did O’Reilly do any research as to why Hussein Obama has spent $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ dollars in lawyer fees to keep his alleged legal BC under wraps?
You know I tried to go back in the record and find my own posts on this subject and it isn't easy, or I am missing something. It would be really great if a member could create listing of their own posts only, even better if this could be a text file, and if we could bound a search with a date range. Perhaps this is possible but I haven't figured it out.
Just because it isn't in this publication doesn't mean its not in another. I posted on this issue years ago and wasted about an hour trying to get back to the record but gave up in despair because I have been too chatty and going through 2 years of my posts was beyond the time I had available. If you know of a better way to comb through past posts, I am open to it because I cited the source and provided quotes.
Don’t forget Levin. He is wel versed when it comes to the constitution but practically mocks the issue. Boortz used to but when Neal the squeal couldn’t find it Boortz finally decided something isn’t right.
Savage, as much as some despise him has long called him an imposter. Bill Cunningham has talked the issue many times.
They are a lot of scaredy cats IMO . I haven’t seen Canada Free Press mention it recently either. wonder if the zero’s thugs got to them when he was in Canada .
There are some really good posts in this thread, but this isn't one of them. No one cares if he is a Citizen except those who want to confuse the issue. They care if he is eligible to be the President.
Ultimately, this is where the "Emperor has no Cloths" issue comes in. Pretty much a working majority knows this is the problem, but it seems like petty hair splitting to those who have the power to act.
Yet, the wisdom of the requirement, which was questioned at the time when folks decided to not make a big issue of this, has been proven time and time again as Americans wonder if Obama has the interests of the US in mind. Yet now they (Congress, Courts, Politicians) are caught with being afraid to admit they have known this problem existed since before the election. Citizen action and action in the states ultimately will press this to the forefront and remove any political cover for those who are pushing this fairy tale and put heat on those who are attempting desperately to ignore it.
Thanks!
His mother was American.
“Closer inspection reveals that any child under the age of 18 could be adopted and receive their certificate decades later without ever stepping foot on Hawaiian soil.”
With actual place of birth noted.
“Since we know the 14th Amendment in no way changed the definition of “Natural Born Citizen”, we must turn our attention to other definitions commonly accepted in 1787. The mere mention of this phrase is somewhat difficult to pinpoint, even at the time of the Convention. “
No it is not.
“The Constitution nowhere defines the meaning of these words, either by way of inclusion or of exclusion, except insofar as this is done by the affirmative declaration that “all persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States.” In this as in other respects, it must be interpreted in the light of the common law, the principles and history of which were familiarly known to the framers of the Constitution...
...It thus clearly appears that, by the law of England for the last three centuries, beginning before the settlement of this country and continuing to the present day, aliens, while residing in the dominions possessed by the Crown of England, were within the allegiance, the obedience, the faith or loyalty, the protection, the power, the jurisdiction of the English Sovereign, and therefore every child born in England of alien parents was a natural-born subject unless the child of an ambassador or other diplomatic agent of a foreign State or of an alien enemy in hostile occupation of the place where the child was born.
III. The same rule was in force in all the English Colonies upon this continent down to the time of the Declaration of Independence, and in the United States afterwards, and continued to prevail under the Constitution as originally established....
-——he actually has something in common with Gerald Ford——
This is a very fallacious argument.
The situations are not the same. Ford used his adoptive and legal name.
Barry Soetero chose not to use his adoptive name but to dredge up his birth name. He has lived a lie his entire adult life. His marriage is invalid, his kids names are invalid, he is screwed.
All the documents he signed are using a fictitious name and identity are null and void.
(if that is what really happened)
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.