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

Skip to comments.

Tickerguy: 1, ObaBots: 0 (proof of LFBC fraud)
Market-Ticker ^ | 4/29/2011 | Karl Denninger

Posted on 04/30/2011 8:37:33 PM PDT by Triple

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 321-330 next last
To: Kansas58

“there is no “magic” in the words, “Natural Born Citizen”

That’s it. You are a MAROON! You don’t know WHAT THE HELL YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT.

There is MAGIC in those three words. It’s called the Constitution of the United States.

I hope no one pays attention to your post as it is disinformation at best, out right LIES at worst.

You sir, are TOTAL IGNORANCE ON DISPLAY


121 posted on 04/30/2011 10:41:01 PM PDT by faucetman (Just the facts ma'am, just the facts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

If not born on U.S. soil he is not a U.S. Citizen at all....


122 posted on 04/30/2011 10:41:53 PM PDT by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

John Bingham, “father of the 14th Amendment”, the abolitionist congressman from Ohio who prosecuted Lincoln’s assassins, reaffirmed the definition known to the framers, not once, but twice during Congressional discussions of Citizenship pertaining to the upcoming 14th Amendment and a 3rd time nearly 4 years after the 14th was adopted.

The House of Representatives definition for “natural born Citizen” was read into the Congressional Record during the Civil War, without contest!

“All from other lands, who by the terms of [congressional] laws and a compliance with their provisions become naturalized, are adopted citizens of the United States; all other persons born within the Republic, of parents owing allegiance to no other sovereignty, are natural born citizens. Gentleman can find no exception to this statement touching natural-born citizens except what is said in the Constitution relating to Indians.” (Cong. Globe, 37th, 2nd Sess., 1639 (1862)).

The House of Representatives definition for “natural born Citizen” was read into the Congressional Record after the Civil War, without contest!

“every human being born within the jurisdiction of the United States of parents not owing allegiance to any foreign sovereignty is, in the language of your Constitution itself, a natural born citizen.” (Cong. Globe, 39th, 1st Sess., 1291 (1866))”

No other Representative ever took issue with these words on the floor of the House. If you read the Congressional Globe to study these debates, you will see that many of the underlying issues were hotly contested. However, Bingham’s definition of “natural born citizen” (born of citizen parents in the sovereign territory of the U.S.) was never challenged on the floor of the House. Without a challenge on the definition, it appears the ALL where in agreement.


123 posted on 04/30/2011 10:42:22 PM PDT by abigailsmybaby ("To understan' the livin', you gotta commune wit' da dead." Minerva)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 114 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA
nonsense -— and since when do conservatives bow to foreign law?
124 posted on 04/30/2011 10:42:22 PM PDT by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: ltc8k6
Biden should run with it. He certainly wants the job, and it appears that he’s a shoe in since Zer0’s father was not a citizen.

Even Biden knows that minorities would hang him from a lamp post.

125 posted on 04/30/2011 10:42:35 PM PDT by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 118 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58
And, by the way, the entire world knew that Obama had a father who was NOT a United States Citizen.

It was not an issue in the campaign. No State challenged it.

Already answered the question to you.

Post 64.

Not your bogus “Natural Law” fantasies.

Again, already answered the question to you.

Only something that the people did NOT know, before Obama was elected, will even come close to harming Obama, at this point. Yes, that is a political, not a legal argument, but I make it in the hope it might persuade you to drop a stupid legal argument.

Now now I wouldn't be saying "stupid" after reading your recent posts.


And oh yeah, Denninger which this thread is about..he is correct. Obama's "new" Hawaiian COLB that he showed to the public is a forgery.

126 posted on 04/30/2011 10:42:55 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: rolling_stone
So what? That is just Hillary trying not to provide ammunition, now, against Obama.
127 posted on 04/30/2011 10:43:47 PM PDT by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 92 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58
“If Obama was born on US soil, or on a US ship or US plane or US territory, for that matter, Obama would be a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!”

I'm not doing your research for you, but being born on a U.S. Ship or plane doesn't give you ANY KIND of citizenship. You probably think being born in a U.S. embassy abroad make you a citizen. SORRY.

128 posted on 04/30/2011 10:44:37 PM PDT by faucetman (Just the facts ma'am, just the facts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA; Kansas58

I have literal first hand knowledge. I was born in Boston to an American citizen father and a Canadian citizen mother. I am not a natural born citizen. I cannot become president. I had a US Customs officer and a professor of law at Northeastern University tell me that 30 years ago.


129 posted on 04/30/2011 10:47:36 PM PDT by buccaneer81 (ECOMCON)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 94 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

You are wrong sir:

Here is the law, chapter and verse:

The U.S. Immigration Law that covers the issue of children born abroad to 1 citizen and 1 alien.

http://library.uwb.edu/guides/USimmigration/66%20stat%20163.pdf

the McCarran-Walter Act, the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952

Public law 82-414 Chapter 1 Section 301 (7)

This applies to Obozo (it was the law at the time of his birth), assuming he is the son of Barrack H. Obama, Sr. and that he was born abroad.

If born abroad with the stated father, he is not even a U.S. Citizen.....

If he was born in the U.S. he would be a citizen by birth, but not a “natural born” citizen.


130 posted on 04/30/2011 10:47:42 PM PDT by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: TheConservativeParty
Sorry, but there is no settled law that defines natural born citizen as being born to two American citizens on American soil. This has been tossed out by some as an indisputable given. It is not. Here is what Lawrence Tribe and Ted Olson wrote about McCain and Senate Resolution 511:

Tribe/Olson Opinion

We need to take the Obama case to the courts for final resolution, but the decision is not cut and tried.

131 posted on 04/30/2011 10:48:06 PM PDT by kabar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

“There is no magical meaning for “Natural Born Citizen” it just means that you were a citizen at birth.”

YOU ARE WRONG. The constitution is the SUPREME law of the land. You can’t just brush it aside and IGNORE it.


132 posted on 04/30/2011 10:48:44 PM PDT by faucetman (Just the facts ma'am, just the facts)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58
Denninger - "The smoking gun is that there are no chromatic artifacts in the Obama document, but the document is allegedly a color scan of an actual piece of paper, and we know it had to be a color scan because the background is allegedly color safety paper."

LoL. Gee why is that OBots? No color?? Do we have a composite image. Yes we do.

133 posted on 04/30/2011 10:49:29 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 127 | View Replies]

To: Master of Orion
So what? You can find lots of disagreement on many legal topics throughout history. That you can find a source that agrees with you means nothing.
Today?
There is NO CHANCE that we can remove Obama on this issue, unless we can show that he was NOT born on US Soil or under the Jurisdiction of the United States.
We can hurt Obama, politically, of course, by showing that he has not be honest, but -—

Obama always said his Father was from Kenya.

The Country voted for him, sadly.

The States and the Electoral College did not protest.

Congress accepted the Electoral College results.

The Chief Justice swore Obama in as POTUS!

Get real!

YOU LOST YOUR CASE IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION and in all the legal forums that matter.

Now, if we can prove he was not born in the United States, GREAT!

Save that?

All you have is the historical opinions of some, not all, of our founders. And we don't even know how the 14th Amendment effects eligibility for POTUS since no Court has ruled on the matter.

134 posted on 04/30/2011 10:49:52 PM PDT by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: Master of Orion
So what? You can find lots of disagreement on many legal topics throughout history. That you can find a source that agrees with you means nothing.
Today?
There is NO CHANCE that we can remove Obama on this issue, unless we can show that he was NOT born on US Soil or under the Jurisdiction of the United States.
We can hurt Obama, politically, of course, by showing that he has not be honest, but -—

Obama always said his Father was from Kenya.

The Country voted for him, sadly.

The States and the Electoral College did not protest.

Congress accepted the Electoral College results.

The Chief Justice swore Obama in as POTUS!

Get real!

YOU LOST YOUR CASE IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION and in all the legal forums that matter.

Now, if we can prove he was not born in the United States, GREAT!

Save that?

All you have is the historical opinions of some, not all, of our founders. And we don't even know how the 14th Amendment effects eligibility for POTUS since no Court has ruled on the matter.

135 posted on 04/30/2011 10:50:02 PM PDT by Kansas58
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: All

For all you folks who believe “citizen by birth” is the same thing as “natural born citizen”, I’m curious to know why you think the founders included the grandfather clause in the eligibility requirements. Seems rather redundant if your definition is correct. Yet the grandfather clause was joined to the natual born citizen clause by the word “or”, as if a person had to be one or the other to qualify. Please enlighten me.


136 posted on 04/30/2011 10:50:10 PM PDT by Jess79
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

Do you really think that if the shoe was on the other foot, if George Bush had this problem in his background, that the democrats would never use it against him?

Oh wait they did try it against McCain who did not have such a clear cut case of ineligibility as Obama does.

I assure you if any republican had this problem, if Jindal was in office right now, if Marco Rubio was in office and could not prove that their parents were citizens when they were born here, the democrats would be moving heaven and earth to remove them from office and discredit the republicans.

The let’s make nice, can’t everyone just get along, go along to get along republicans can’t seem to get the courage to do what is right and defend the Constitution. Every last one of the cowards needs to be given walking papers. Trump, either comes around and starts emphasizing these problems with this BC and the info on it or he’s part of the problem.

We need people in office willing to stand up for the Constitution. We don’t need people who believe they can take pieces of the Constitution they like and override the portions they don’t like. Also, anyone who enables them and provides them cover is no better than the usurpers.


137 posted on 04/30/2011 10:50:29 PM PDT by Waryone (RINOs, Elites, and Socialists - on the endangered list, soon to become extinct.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: Triple

So it looks as if the last digit of the number was added in.

The series:

151-61-10640
151-61-10641 <————
151-61-10642
151-61-10643
151-61-10644
151-61-10645
151-61-10646
151-61-10647
151-61-10648
151-61-10649

Any one of those could have been used, and had the last digit substituted.

Whose 1961 HI birth certificates have the real numbers in this series?


138 posted on 04/30/2011 10:50:56 PM PDT by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN
the pondscum floating out of Axelrod’s astroturf underwear.

Thank you, I really needed that laugh. You were made my evening with your prose. LMAO

139 posted on 04/30/2011 10:51:43 PM PDT by Texas Fossil (Government, even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 89 | View Replies]

To: Kansas58

Obama’s “new” COLB that he put on line is a forgery. You got a hiccup sport.


140 posted on 04/30/2011 10:51:53 PM PDT by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 135 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 101-120121-140141-160 ... 321-330 next 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