Posted on 03/21/2009 9:58:28 AM PDT by Uncle Sham
The twentieth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution contains what might be the key to unlocking the mystery of Barrack Obama’s long-form birth certificate. It reads as follows:
”1. The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January, and the terms of Senators and Representatives at noon on the 3d day of January, of the years in which such terms would have ended if this article had not been ratified; and the terms of their successors shall then begin.
2. The Congress shall assemble at least once in every year, and such meeting shall begin at noon on the 3d day of January, unless they shall by law appoint a different day.
3. If, at the time fixed for the beginning of the term of the President, the President elect shall have died, the Vice President elect shall become President. If a President shall not have been chosen before the time fixed for the beginning of his term, or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify, then the Vice President elect shall act as President until a President shall have qualified; and the Congress may by law provide for the case wherein neither a President elect nor a Vice President elect shall have qualified, declaring who shall then act as President, or the manner in which one who is to act shall be selected, and such person shall act accordingly until a President or Vice President shall have qualified.
4. The Congress may by law provide for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the House of Representatives may choose a President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them, and for the case of the death of any of the persons from whom the Senate may choose a Vice President whenever the right of choice shall have devolved upon them.
5. Sections 1 and 2 shall take effect on the 15th day of October following the ratification of this article.
6. This article shall be inoperative unless it shall have been ratified as an amendment to the Constitution by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States within seven years from the date of its submission.”
The portion in bold stating “or if the President elect shall have failed to qualify” in section three is particularly interesting in that it plainly seems to infer that a “qualification” of some sort must be made in order to serve as President. This is further enforced with the passage at the end of section three where it plainly states "until a President or Vice President shall have qualified." Certainly, one cannot argue that it does not require a qualification process for one to “qualify”. To infer that the lack of a “specified” qualification process means that stated eligibility “qualifications” for the office of president can be ignored is fallacious. The wording of this passage in the twentieth amendment clearly infers that a qualification is required, regardless of how this is done. There is only one set of qualifications listed anywhere in the Constitution that are not health related and they are listed in Article two, section one.
” No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.”
To satisfy meeting the requirement of the twentieth amendment to “qualify”, a president elect must present evidence that he meets it’s requirements for eligibility to serve. This means that a proper birth certificate HAD to be presented by the president elect in order to serve as president. If this was done, where is that certificate and to whom was it presented? If this was done, why would we not have the right to verify and inspect it under the freedom of information act?
If it was NOT done, then under the provisions of the twentieth amendment, Barrack Obama has “failed to qualify” and should not be serving as president of the United States of America.
Cannot anyone view his birth certificate or do you have to prove you have a right to do so?
Hawaii did and does issue a "Certification of Foreign Birth" that says on the certificate that it can't be used as evidence of citizenship.
Thanks for signing up today in order to post this crap.
HI birth certificates had no space on them for “religion”.
(Probably mentioned already)
You should spend about 2 weeks reading up on FR and all your questions (that anyone knows the answers to) would be answered. That is, if you really want to know, and aren’t here to support 0bama.
“But as another poster said, he had to prove it to someone at some time, and if that person passed him with a phony document we would never know it with all this secrecy.”
This is logical, but it is false. It turns out that, while there are qualifications to be president, there is no person or office specically charged with verifying this information. That’s the loophole that Obama crawled through. In each state, all a candidate had to do was sign a paper saying they were qualified. They didn’t have to prove it. That’s why that Roger Calderon guy (self-admittedly born and raised abroad) was on the ballot in many states.
Seems that since I thanked this poster (Aroostok Republican) for “bumping” this thread and thus allowing others to be made aware of it, he/she has left. I think their job is to muddy the waters on any issue discussed so that others will tire of trying to negotiate the relevant postings.
“If yu think the CLB is more or less accurate, though perhaps incomplete, then there is nothing in the long form BC that could make him not a natural born citizen. “
The long form contains information which could be used to verify the authenticity of the computer image of his short form. Specifically, the hospital he was born in, the doctor who delivered him, etc. That information is NOT on a short form. And no objective sources have seen the actual short form.
The bottom line: we have no idea if the computer image is of a real piece of paper, and even if so, we have no idea if that real piece of paper is genuine not forged. Finally, we can’t find out by other means, because the short form does not contain any specific info which can be verified.
How interesting to see you again on these threads, james - just when Aroostok Republican shows up, too!
Anyway, you are lying when you say that “The Director of the Hawaii State Health Department and the Hawaii State Registrar of Records have already held a press conference with the media to announce that they DID in fact “peek” to use your word, at Obama’s original, vault copy, long form birth certificate.”
What the article you linked to actually said is this, and anyone without moral blinders on will realize that the very careful wording actually says nothing at all what you have said. They only say that they have “seen and verified” that the State “has” 0bama’s original birth certificate. They do NOT say that they have seen the certificate itself, nor is there any hint or reference as to what is on that certificate.
From your link:
_________________
“There have been numerous requests for Sen. Barack Hussein Obama’s official birth certificate. State law (Hawai‘i Revised Statutes §338-18) prohibits the release of a certified birth certificate to persons who do not have a tangible interest in the vital record,” DOH Director Dr. Chiyome Fukino said.
Fukino said she and the registrar of vital statistics, Alvin Onaka, have personally verified that the health department holds Obama’s original birth certificate.
“Therefore, I as Director of Health for the State of Hawai‘i, along with the Registrar of Vital Statistics who has statutory authority to oversee and maintain these type of vital records, have personally seen and verified that the Hawai‘i State Department of Health has Sen. Obama’s original birth certificate on record in accordance with state policies and procedures,” Fukino said.
I would say that since there is a chain of command established both in the twentieth, and twenty fifth amendments as well as in U.S. code 3USC19, that those parties in the line of command must be shown that they themselves are NOT obligated to step forth and serve as president. The twentieth amendment places this burden upon the "president elect" to show that he is qualified. The states requiring this is not needed as the twentieth amendment DEMANDS it to be done.
Hawaii has a very restrictive law on who gets access to birth certificates. This link shows the Hawaii Law 338-18. In brief, access is restricted to the person, relatives, legal guardians or representatives, specified legal situations such as divorce cases, and through a court order.
I am sure that AR was tasked with coming to FR and trotting out his little comments, realized he was in over his head, and has since asked his supervisor for a different task/website to troll.
I just hope that this thread was able to shoot down some of their straw man arguments and give hope to those who want to find out the truth and do the right thing for our descendants.
“Cannot anyone view his birth certificate or do you have to prove you have a right to do so?”
You have to be the person in question, or a close relative. And due to HIPPA laws, the hospital (if there is one) can’t confirm or deny his birth, and the Governor, Sec of State, Director of Records - no one - can speak to the issue themelves. All they can say is “there is one on file”.
The only non-relative way to get the information is through a court order.
But I read an article recently - someone sued, through the Freedom of Information Act, to see Obama’s Occidental College records (they wanted to see if he had applied or received funding as a “foreign student”). As I understand it, with a court case like that, the college must turn over the info. So what did they do? The first thing Occidental did was to contact Obama to cue them in, so they could do something to stop it.
“The twentieth amendment places this burden upon the “president elect” to show that he is qualified. The states requiring this is not needed as the twentieth amendment DEMANDS it to be done.”
Okay, I’m not as up on the Constitution as you guys are - so you’re saying that the 20 amendment demands that the PE prove the s/he is eligible? ......... But but but... does it say TO WHOM they are to show they are eligible?
It seems the way it has been being done is similar to if you were starting college. And they said you have to be 18, you had to have taken 2 years of French, and you had to have a 1400 on your SATs. They say “sign this paper which certifies you have met these qualifications” - and they do no checking. But you are considered to have “proven” it, because you signed a paper - in essence - vetting yourself.
Yeah, thanks troll.
I think people did a fine job destroying the 0-team very weak arguments!
“What I don’t understand, however, is that we know his mother was an American citizen. According to federal law, aren’t children of American citizens considered natural born citizens if born in another country?”
Not true if one parent was not a US citizen. Here is from the Department of State.
Birth Abroad to One Citizen and One Alien Parent in Wedlock: A child born abroad to one U.S. citizen parent and one alien parent acquires U.S. citizenship at birth under Section 301(g) INA provided the citizen parent was physically present in the U.S. for the time period required by the law applicable at the time of the child’s birth. (For birth on or after November 14, 1986, a period of five years physical presence, two after the age of fourteen is required. For birth between December 24, 1952 and November 13, 1986, a period of ten years, five after the age of fourteen are required for physical presence in the U.S. to transmit U.S. citizenship to the child.
She did not live in the US for 5 years after the age of 14 before he was born. If he was born overseas, not only would he not have “natural born” citizenship, he would not have US citizenship.
Bump... bump... bump and BUMP!! Hmmmmmmm???????
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.