Posted on 01/22/2009 12:00:43 PM PST by real_patriotic_american
However, do we know what others where missing? If a whole block where missing, including these, but other unrelated cases, it could simply be a matter of a block where taken down to be updated.
Bump.. I’ll apologize in advance for any names you are called.. many people are very emotionally attached to their positions on this.
Too many weird “coincidences” for me. Perhaps they tried to pull a fast one, and realized that too many were watching too closely for them to get away with it...
Regardless, as I said there are too many “coincidences”. I was watching some Crime TV Show a while back, and the detective made a comment while investigating a murder, he said “There are no coincidences in a Murder Investigation”. Well, I’m inclined to think the same way about all of these, uh, happenings...
It all stinks to high heaven and doesn’t bode well for our Country at all, IMHO. I think we’re in a LOT of trouble with this Administration.
That’s the real kicker isn’t it? It was SO important to get it word for word correct, but other parts of the Constitution aren’t relevant enough to even get DISCUSSED in the Supreme Court, they can’t even let the lawyers present their cases, or just take a stand and say SOMETHING about these cases. I know it’s the procedure, but there is something really wrong with cases being denied hearing at the Supreme Court. It is the last hope for people in situations that reach SCOTUS, and for them to deny things without comment seems rather wrong — especially as the people deserve to know what the court is doing because they are supposed to be accountable to the PUBLIC. If you’re going to deny hearing a case and it’s reached that level, then at least give the public a reason for not hearing it (if it won’t affect national security or a case in progress)! It just seems like basic common sense, and the least the court could do to assure that the public is more informed, and so we can “check and balance” them at least during public discourse and such.
I’m with you and agree. Standby, I’ll PING you another thread.
My opinion (and I’m sure that I’m correct) is that Obama’s original birth certificate, which he has hidden, will prove that Obama was born a British citizen and/or born in Kenya. Eitherway, ruling him ineligible to serve as President. I’m also thinking BOTH!
Most certainly cannot. Here’s some passing thoughts that will maybe help:
Wong Kim Ark - passed 5-4
Laws regarding citizenship are essential to sovereignty.
The Wong Kim Ark/Justice Gray decision was based on the completely incorrect premise that the Fourteenth Amendment, among other things, was based upon or predicated upon adopting the British common law system of feudal subjectship.
British common law concerning subjects is based on a doctrine of a never ending allegiance by birth to the feudal system, monarchy, and kings and queens.
A feudal doctrine and monarchy are both completely contradictory to a republic and a free people like that of the United States of America.
America rejects this feudal doctrine, and is clearly seen in the Declaration of Independence, in the Constitution where there are no subjects, only citizens, the 14th amendment, and a myriad of other very obvious things, like wars.
Gray is so bad with this he doesn’t even explain how or why he jumps back and forth between “subjects” and citizens, nor does he mention, even in passing implications, a recognition of the difference between a monarchy and a republic. In fact, it seems beyond Grays’ ability to see what a huge mistake that is, which means he is either incompetent, or trying very hard to accomplish some other objective, and willing to push British law to do it, because it certainly isn’t reflected in his writing, and America certainly is not Britain.
Strongly suggest you read Chief Justice Fullers’ dissent.
It’s contrary to Minor v Happersett, one of the first cases mentioned by Gray, among a great deal of other non-British stuff.
Incidental, but relevant with respect to Obama: Wong Kim Arks’ parents were permanent residents.
Wong Kim Ark was a permanent resident.
As weak as that case clearly is, they still did not rule Wong Kim Ark a natural born citizen.
It looks like the Supreme Court operates very slowly and systematically, and so it appears that they are slowly and systematically dispensing with all these cases. It will take time, but at some point in the future, there will be no more there...
It does seem that very wild and implausible theories are brought forth regarding these issues...
The issue will NOT go away. All it takes is for one court to subpoena Obama’s original birth certificate (and then enforce the subpoena).
You said — “The issue will NOT go away. All it takes is for one court to subpoena Obama’s original birth certificate (and then enforce the subpoena).”
Oh..., as I’ve said before, it’s obvious that this “issue” won’t go away. I think that there will always be a group that keeps this issue alive. But, it won’t be significant in terms of causing anything to happen with the Obama Administration and the courts will keep doing the same thing that they’ve been doing. Nothing much will happen (just like the track record up to now), and the “issue” will go on and on and on.
I’m willing to bet it will be an issue even when Obama starts building his Presidential library, too...
Obama loses either way! Either he is removed from Office for not being a natural born citizen OR he loses to Schwarzenegger in 2012.... That’s Arnold with Palin.
You said — “Obama loses either way! Either he is removed from Office for not being a natural born citizen OR he loses to Schwarzenegger in 2012.... That’s Arnold with Palin.”
Obama may lose in any case, just on the basis of his normal Presidential behavior and the way the economy goes. That’s a good possibility.
But, as far as Arnold Schwarzenegger is concerned, there *is* evidence already out there that *can disqualify* him under the Constitutional provisions for holding office. Just because no one could “produce evidence” against Obama does not mean that with *evidence against Schwarzenegger* that he can run for office of President.
As far as who will be running (who else, that is) and if they will beat Obama, I can’t say at this time. It’s too much speculation to really say for sure...
Thank you.
And the laws regarding citizenship in this country are made by Congress. And none of the laws currently on the books define three classes of citizenship. Neither, for that matter, does the Constituiton.
In fact, it seems beyond Grays’ ability to see what a huge mistake that is, which means he is either incompetent, or trying very hard to accomplish some other objective, and willing to push British law to do it, because it certainly isn’t reflected in his writing, and America certainly is not Britain.
Or he just happens to disagree with you.
Strongly suggest you read Chief Justice Fullers’ dissent.
I have. A dissent is just that, a dissent. A disagreement with the majority opinion. And the majority in the Ark case concluded that citizenship by birth is bestowed upon people born here, regardless of the citizenship of their parents.
That should read "if SCOTUS rules the way we think it should."
I feel your pain. However, this is a gap in the Constitution through which this preposterous fraud has already driven his semi. It has only surfaced peripherally in the past, so there is no case law, just the bald words of the Constitution, which doesn't assign any responsibility for enforcing the rule, nor does it prescribe a mechanism for fixing it, should "it" (whatever "it" may be) occur.
The Supremes are saying, in effect, that "certifying eligibility for office is not our job," but giving no clue as to whose it should be. Obama needs to do nothing. The burden is on us, and I suppose we'll keep trying to get this on the docket.
Meanwhile. the motto of the new administration ought to be,
ARNOLD isn’t a “Natural Born” Citizen either!
You said — ARNOLD isn’t a “Natural Born” Citizen either!
—
I think I just said that, above...
But, as far as Arnold Schwarzenegger is concerned, there *is* evidence already out there that *can disqualify* him under the Constitutional provisions for holding office. Just because no one could “produce evidence” against Obama does not mean that with *evidence against Schwarzenegger* that he can run for office of President.
Arnold could run if the CFR, Bilderbergers and Tri-Lats are behind him, and he will win.
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.